Dear El Enrrabadore-mor:

"El Enrrabadore-mor" wrote in
message ...

"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" escreveu na
mensagem ...
....
Put the theory written on paper aside.
Look only for real world experiments.

They are only experiments if Nature is
challeged / queried.

Does Hubble red shift (the expansion of
the Universe) hold as a good Nature
challenge? For instance.

Sure. Comparisons of intensity, duration of events, subtended
size (over some very limited distance), agree with redshift as a
measure of distance. Temperature of the CMBR at various ages
agrees with expansion.

Real oddball is the "aged" objects close to the CMBR, but that
will be for another lifetime to work out. I suspect it is due to
the very hot CMBR increasing stellar temperatures by 2000 to
3000K (and hence aging rates), just as temperature speeds up a
chemical reaction.

We compare observation to what it would take local events to look
like that.

If you're in trouble to find where the absolute
frame of reference is, call me and I'll tell you.

We've got 100+ years of experimental results,
and we have moved more than 946 billion
miles in that time. "Here and now" does not
really work as an "absolute frame".

So I am calling you.

Take Pioneer 11, for example.
Pioneer 11 experienced, during almost ten
years, a perfect constant acceleration (a
perfect straight line) directed towards the Sun,

Don't get hung up on "perfect", "straight line", or "constant".
The error bars do not support any of those. Sunward, constant to
within our ability to measure, OK.

whose mearured acceleration is exatly the
acceleration of Hubble constant.

It isn't. It at least has the wrong sign.

Hubble constant is an acceleration,

No, it is not. It is a rate of change of "dimension"... it is
1/t. Distance factors out.

since it's a velocity taken per a distance
(Megaparcec). So that, we know that during
the time it takes for light to travel that
distance (1 Mpc) the velocity of celestial
bodies increase 85 m/s - we have a "dv".
So the time it takes for light to travel the
distance of 1 Mpc can be calculated - it will
be our "dt". dv / dt = 85m/s / 1Mpc = Pioneer
11 acceleration.
It's a perfect match.

It is *not* perfect.

Don't tell me it was blueshift.
I know it was blueshift.
What else could it be?

Thrust of Mankind's first photonic drive, powered by the RTGs.
Radiated out of the heat exchanger that "keeps the electronics
cool" under a constant power draw. Always pointed away from the
Sun.

I don't know why people hang their entire belief system on a
probe that has fairly well understood *problems* in design.
Casinni has travelled some of the same "turf", and showed none of
the requisite signs. It was designed without those suspected
problems.

David A. Smith