Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Chapt16.12 Limits of distance that light can travel and be seen; Experiment ; recent asteroid and Russian meteor #1244 New Physics #1364 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Feb 20, 2013 9:43 PM
Alright, I am worried that I will not get back to New Physics and where I left off with rest-mass, spin, and magnetic monopoles being only attractive force not repelling. So I will interrupt with the Atom Totality before I reach page 1300. I wanted to make clear that astronomy in the past has done a very poor job of recognizing that lightwaves from stars, their intensity or luminosity or magnitude, whichever concept you want to use, that distance takes a toll on light waves and that if the star or galaxy is far enough away, there is no chance of seeing them, no matter what the power of the telescope or equipment you use.
So my point is that if the Observable Universe is taken to be 14 billion years old, that only a fraction of of the galaxies from Earth can and will be seen and a large fraction never able to be physically seen, simply because the light from those galaxies, no matter if they are the brightest galaxies of all, will be able to travel the distance without being dissipated.
So we have two major limitations in astronomy, and this is what angers me in that astronomers are ignorant of these two limitations.
(1) galaxies have an upper limit of how powerful they are as a shining body (2) the most powerful shining galaxy/galaxies light have an upper limit of distance
So let me give a analogy to what that says. If we have 3 AA batteries in any type of flashlight you want to build, whether laser or some other, there is a distance from that flashlight for which a person cannot see the flashlight anymore, because of dissipation of the lightwaves.
Now in Halliday & Resnick, Fundamentals of Physics, 3rd edition, 1988, they discuss this on page 852 with the equation I = P/4pi(r^2), which is basically the intensity is an inverse square law.
Now astronomers talk about luminosity and about magnitude, where luminosity has no distance factor but magnitude has a distance factor.
The point I am making is that astronomy has failed to recognize that at a certain distance we no longer can see galaxies, no matter how powerful they are. Because there is a limitation on how powerful they are and a limitation of traversing Space and still be coherent enough so that someone at a far away distance can know it is there.
So what that means is that the mapping of galaxies by Juric or Jarrett or many others, that they never used these physical limitations and blithely assumed that stars and galaxies at a distance of infinity can be spotted, analyzed and mapped.
So what I want to do is find what that upper limit of distance and the upper limit of a galactic luminosity is. So that if the Maxwell Equations are taken as the axioms over all of Physics, then the upper limit of galactic luminosity is a laser star filled galaxy-- a quasar to be more exact. In other words our richest laser star laden galaxy is the upper limit of luminosity, or if I am wrong, perhaps a supernova is the upper limit. And the upper limit of distance, I suspect is 1/4 the distance of 14 billion light years.
So that all those mappings of galaxies have to stop at a distance of 3.5 billion light years.
Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from search-engine- bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen here: