ubject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/5/03 11:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: jmc6b.370678$o%2.166753@sccrnsc02

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...

I believe there is an absolute reference frame with every intuitive bone
in my
body.

With this sentence, you have issued a statement of unshakeable faith, not of
science. Every statement that follows this in your essay is a statement of
religious fanaticism, not science.

It is impossible to argue with a religious fanatic.

Minor Crank

DWH says: I am currently an agnostic but the universe is such a miraculous
place, who knows?
Relativists are more deserving of your comments. Galaxies are routinely
separating from each other at many times the speed of light and Ia supernova
observations have proved it conclusively. If that doesn't kick Einstein and
relativity into a cocked hat, nothing does!

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...

Galaxies are routinely
separating from each other at many times the speed of light and Ia
supernova
observations have proved it conclusively.

Please cite an example of a galaxy that is moving away from us at many times
the speed of light.

Minor Crank

Subject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/6/03 10:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: 9nm6b.275990$cF.85874@rwcrnsc53

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...

Galaxies are routinely
separating from each other at many times the speed of light and Ia
supernova
observations have proved it conclusively.

Please cite an example of a galaxy that is moving away from us at many times
the speed of light.

Minor Crank

DWH says: HST DFN&S found 1500 galaxies in each field originally, with most
exceeding light speed up to 5.8 times.
I'll answer your previous question here as well. The rise time of the light
curves of red shifted IaSne are the best standard candles for speed ever
discovered. The rise time varies exactly with the speed and they have found
them out to z = 1.7 Please see Ned Wrights' tutorial. Thats where I get most of
my information.

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...
Subject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/6/03 10:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: 9nm6b.275990$cF.85874@rwcrnsc53

Please cite an example of a galaxy that is moving away from us at many
times
the speed of light.

Minor Crank

DWH says: HST DFN&S found 1500 galaxies in each field originally, with
most
exceeding light speed up to 5.8 times.

How can the Hubble Deep Field photos have shown galaxies whose speed of
recession from us exceeds light speed.

Show your calculations. How did you compute their rate of recession? The
Hubble itself, with its relatively modest aperture, is incapable of having
obtained the necessary spectroscopic data on any galaxy within the Deep
Field photos.

I'll answer your previous question here as well. The rise time of the
light
curves of red shifted IaSne are the best standard candles for speed ever
discovered. The rise time varies exactly with the speed and they have
found
them out to z = 1.7 Please see Ned Wrights' tutorial. Thats where I get
most of
my information.

Please show us your calculation that establishes that z = 1.7 corresponds to
a rate of recession that is faster than light.

Minor Crank

Subject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/6/03 12:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: ESn6b.376646$uu5.71769@sccrnsc04

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...
Subject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/6/03 10:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: 9nm6b.275990$cF.85874@rwcrnsc53

Please cite an example of a galaxy that is moving away from us at many
times
the speed of light.

Minor Crank

DWH says: HST DFN&S found 1500 galaxies in each field originally, with
most
exceeding light speed up to 5.8 times.

How can the Hubble Deep Field photos have shown galaxies whose speed of
recession from us exceeds light speed.

DWH says: I have gone to quite some length to explain this in the theory and I
don't know if I can make it any clearer. The photons, at the instant of their
emission, behave as if the galaxy was dead stopped and proceed to our telescope
at 300M kps.

Show your calculations. How did you compute their rate of recession? The
Hubble itself, with its relatively modest aperture, is incapable of having
obtained the necessary spectroscopic data on any galaxy within the Deep
Field photos.

DWH says: You are mistaken there my friend. The spectropic data including red
shift, for all 3,000 galixies in both fields is on the HST website.
Furthermore, one year ago, HST revisited DFS for 10 hours and discovered 6,000
galaxies in the same field with the new ACS camera.

I'll answer your previous question here as well. The rise time of the
light
curves of red shifted IaSne are the best standard candles for speed ever
discovered. The rise time varies exactly with the speed and they have
found
them out to z = 1.7 Please see Ned Wrights' tutorial. Thats where I get
most of
my information.

Please show us your calculation that establishes that z = 1.7 corresponds to
a rate of recession that is faster than light.

DWH says: I haven't calculated anything. The "z" numbers are the percentage of
light speed. A "z" of 1.7 means 170% of the speed of light. Arent you a little
embarrassed to speak so authoritatively to me and have your naivete hang out so
blatently?
Minor Crank

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...

Subject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/6/03 12:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: ESn6b.376646$uu5.71769@sccrnsc04

How can the Hubble Deep Field photos have shown galaxies whose speed of
recession from us exceeds light speed.

DWH says: I have gone to quite some length to explain this in the theory
and I
don't know if I can make it any clearer. The photons, at the instant of
their
emission, behave as if the galaxy was dead stopped and proceed to our
telescope
at 300M kps.

Do I read you correctly here? Three hundred -million- kilometers per second?

Show your calculations. How did you compute their rate of recession? The
Hubble itself, with its relatively modest aperture, is incapable of
having
obtained the necessary spectroscopic data on any galaxy within the Deep
Field photos.

DWH says: You are mistaken there my friend. The spectropic data including
red
shift, for all 3,000 galixies in both fields is on the HST website.

I am sorry, you are wrong there. The Hubble, with its modest 60 inch
aperture, is totally incapable of gathering the necessary spectroscopic
information from the galaxies in the deep field. By spectroscopic, I mean
using a diffraction grating to spread the light out from a galaxy into a
spectrum.

Please provide a link to the page on the HST website where you claim that
they give -spectral- information.

Furthermore, one year ago, HST revisited DFS for 10 hours and discovered
6,000
galaxies in the same field with the new ACS camera.

But they did not obtain -spectral- information with the Advanced Camera for
Surveys.

They -did- get approximate color information by photographing the field
through different colored filters, but that is most definitely not the same
thing as getting a spectrum.

Please show us your calculation that establishes that z = 1.7 corresponds
to
a rate of recession that is faster than light.

DWH says: I haven't calculated anything. The "z" numbers are the
percentage of
light speed. A "z" of 1.7 means 170% of the speed of light.

No, it is only at LOW REDSHIFT that z may be approximated by the formula
z = v/c
This approximate formula is reasonably accurate only for z 0.1

At relativistic velocities, z = sqrt((c+v)/(c-v)) - 1

Arent you a little
embarrassed to speak so authoritatively to me and have your naivete hang
out so
blatently?

No. With simple questions, I have repeatedly caused you to display your deep
ignorance.

If you can't get even the simple questions right, how can you expect to
handle the grand questions of the universe?

Please donate the $100 to the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation.

Minor Crank

"Minor Crank" wrote in message
news:uur6b.280087$Oz4.74145@rwcrnsc54...

They -did- get approximate color information by photographing the field
through different colored filters, but that is most definitely not the
same
thing as getting a spectrum.

Small correction: The HST Imaging Spectrograph has been used for -bright-
objects in the Deep Field images such as QSO J2233-606 in the HDF South
image.

But study of the faint galaxies in the HDF images requires big light buckets
in the 8 to 10 meter class such as the Keck or Gemini scopes.

Here is a link to various ground-based observations.
http://www.astro.yale.edu/DEPT/resea.../ze32abst.html
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9612239
http://www.aas.org/publications/baas...as201/1222.htm

Minor Crank

Dwhig wrote some real bull****...

trying reading... D. W. Hogg Distance Measures in Cosmology... it's on
line...
then you'll know what red shift and z really mean...or any other
reference book on astronomy. where did you ever get the idea that
z=1.7 meant 1.7 times the speed of light.. thats about the stupidest
thing i've ever heard.
billy bob

Date: 9/6/03 4:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: uur6b.280087$Oz4.74145@rwcrnsc54

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...

Subject: $100 reward
From: "Minor Crank"
Date: 9/6/03 12:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: ESn6b.376646$uu5.71769@sccrnsc04

How can the Hubble Deep Field photos have shown galaxies whose speed of
recession from us exceeds light speed.

DWH says: I have gone to quite some length to explain this in the theory
and I
don't know if I can make it any clearer. The photons, at the instant of
their
emission, behave as if the galaxy was dead stopped and proceed to our
telescope
at 300M kps.

Do I read you correctly here? Three hundred -million- kilometers per second?
DWH says: I meant 300,000
Show your calculations. How did you compute their rate of recession? The
Hubble itself, with its relatively modest aperture, is incapable of
having
obtained the necessary spectroscopic data on any galaxy within the Deep
Field photos.

DWH says: You are mistaken there my friend. The spectropic data including
red
shift, for all 3,000 galixies in both fields is on the HST website.

I am sorry, you are wrong there. The Hubble, with its modest 60 inc.
DWH says: 100"
aperture, is totally incapable of gathering the necessary spectroscopic
information from the galaxies in the deep field. By spectroscopic, I mean
using a diffraction grating to spread the light out from a galaxy into a
spectrum.

DWH says: In the first link you gave in your next post the whole first article
is about spectroscopic observations of galaxies in the HDF at red shifts of
over 3.2

Please provide a link to the page on the HST website where you claim that
they give -spectral- information.

Furthermore, one year ago, HST revisited DFS for 10 hours and discovered
6,000
galaxies in the same field with the new ACS camera.

But they did not obtain -spectral- information with the Advanced Camera for
Surveys.

They -did- get approximate color information by photographing the field
through different colored filters, but that is most definitely not the same
thing as getting a spectrum.

Please show us your calculation that establishes that z = 1.7 corresponds
to
a rate of recession that is faster than light.

DWH says: I haven't calculated anything. The "z" numbers are the
percentage of
light speed. A "z" of 1.7 means 170% of the speed of light.

No, it is only at LOW REDSHIFT that z may be approximated by the formula
z = v/c
This approximate formula is reasonably accurate only for z 0.1

DWH says: Ned Wright clearly showed on his website that z = 1.5 was 150% light
speed. Below is a copy of a segment of an article on the Hubble web site
regarding the most distant type Ia supernova ever found. As you obviously know,
the high z research teams have found hundreds of Ia type Sne and an astronomer
on one of the teams that I know, gave me the (z+1x3) formula for computing
expected light curve rise times, and he says ALL the Sne they have been able to
measure have rise times according to the formula, including a few above z = 1.
I see no reason not to conclude that the formula would hold true regardless of
z #.
" The Hubble discovery also reinforces the startling idea that the universe
only recently began speeding up, a discovery made about three years ago when
the unusually dim light of several distant supernovas suggested the universe is
expanding more quickly than in the past, but there were alternate explanations.
The more distant supernova (redshift z=1.7) refutes these alternatives and
offers the first tantalizing observational evidence that gravity began slowing
down the expansion of the universe after the big bang. Only later did the
repulsive force of dark energy win out over gravity's attractive grip."

At relativistic velocities, z = sqrt((c+v)/(c-v)) - 1

Arent you a little
embarrassed to speak so authoritatively to me and have your naivete hang
out so
blatently?

No. With simple questions, I have repeatedly caused you to display your deep
ignorance.

DWH says: I am happy to learn that you apparently have some qualifications
whoever you are. I was disparing of any of the "brains" on this forum risking a
fall.

If you can't get even the simple questions right, how can you expect to
handle the grand questions of the universe?

DWH says: I have rebutted every statement you've made and you haven't convinced
me of anything. I'll tell you what I'll do though. I'll pay $100 for your real
name and a copy of your PHD.

Please donate the $100 to the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation.

Minor Crank

Simultaneously posted on sci.physics.relativity and cc'ed to Ned Wright:

Dear Dr. Wright:

I am currently engaged in debate on sci.physics.relativity with "Dwain W.
Higginbotham", a crackpot who has been citing your Cosmology Tutorial web
site as reference material for some ridiculous assertions.

I normally wouldn't bother you with this sort of stupid debate, but Dwain
has promised a $100 reward to anybody who can show him to be wrong about
"any part" of his theory. I don't need the money, but I -would- like to see
$100 go to the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation.

Anyway, as seen in the excerpt below, Dwain asserts that z above 1 implies
recessional rates above light speed, and cites YOU as reference.

Could you answer back to me at with permission to
post your response on sci.physics.relativity? My newsgroup reply address
has antispam characters in it, so hitting the "reply" button won't
necessarily result in your reply being addressed correctly.

Thanks,
Minor Crank

P.S. I am, of course, writing to you under my "handle" rather than my real
name, but you may remember me as the person who asked you about what effect
dark matter and dark energy may have on orbital dynamics of bodies in the
solar system.

---- posted on sci.physics.relativity ----

"Dwhig265" wrote in message
...

DWH says: Ned Wright clearly showed on his website that z = 1.5 was
150% light speed.
Below is a copy of a segment of an article on the Hubble web site
regarding the most distant type Ia supernova ever found. As you
obviously know, the high z research teams have found hundreds of Ia type
Sne and an astronomer on one of the teams that I know, gave me the
(z+1x3) formula for computing expected light curve rise times, and he
says ALL the Sne they have been able to measure have rise times
according to the formula, including a few above z = 1.
I see no reason not to conclude that the formula would hold true
regardless of z #.