Posts by DannyBloem

Problems with using Cepheid variables to calculate distances:

1) Their luminosity can be diminished by dust between stars. p. 56-57

yes but you can seeif there is just between them by spectral analysis. And as you continue it can be corrected for it.

To compensate for this “astronomers either observe...(them) at infrared wavelengths where the effects are less significant,” or they “observe them at many different wavelengths so they can assess the effects and correct for them.” p. 57

Translation: Although Cepheids are what we use as a standard candle to measure distances, they really are not very useful in determining whether or not the universe is expanding (or at what rate) because to do this, we must accurately determine the distances to far off galaxies. And even though Cepheids are what we use to do this, we can’t do it very accurately because Cepheids are only useful in nearby galaxies

Do you see what I am getting at?

Yes probably, but maybe you should tell us a bit more, where you getting at...

“Nevertheless, astronomers have developed several methods for determining distances to remote galaxies.”

But “Because many of these techniques must be calibrated using the Cepheid distance scale” they are considered secondary distance indicators...Yet scientists cannot reach a consensus about which, if any, secondary indicators are reliable.”

Not all are. I give some of the methods of calculating distances above. They all seem to fit the red shift expanding universe theory resonable. So I do not see any problem to throw the whole theory away because of some not very accurate. However how futher the galaxies the uncertaincy of the exact distance increases.

Rod P, is there any more to say about the distances etc? I have given a lot of information about it now.
Do you want to make a point about some other things of the big bang? Like background radiation or others?

Danny

Me and my lady friend were attacked in Capetown by a guy with a knife. I was frozen of fear, she kicked him very hard, but became little injured by the knife, he took of injuired also. I did basically nothing, just stading there. Did not make me feel very proud.

I had also some problem in Rio.

So the places I feel not safe are the cities in South Africa, Brasil, and also I did not feel to safe in Phnom Pheh late at night.
In big American cities I really felt very unsafe, and things look scary.
never been in Irak, but felt safe in Iran, and other muslim countries.

Europe, australia en new zealand is reasonable safe imo.

Very safe cities are imho, tokyo, bangkok, hong kong, scandanavian cities. Also the smaller pacific islands etc are very safe.

What is your opinion about this?

I think this is a concern for the GB now, as it is very easy to start some lawsuit against people preaching that homosexuality is wrong etc.

This was done already with some muslim imans (succesfull) and with the pope (not succesfull)

I think the WTS is very carefull with it in publications. However some individual speakers say some things sometimes that would allow somebody to make a case.

Danny

Ozzie,

Some of the things you mention would work.

Make them intersting, better speakers, give woman more to do.

maybe some other form of expressing your faith. arts, singing, having fun, etc.

But now back to the real JW world: have an elder call you just before the meeting to ask if you come......

Danny

This is just my opinion but:

for the general public, yes. (a many hold muslim teaching repsonsible)

for the law and people who know a bit more about the actual teachings: no. The WTS does not encourage terrorism.

Danny

If there was a big bang... do you think everyone stood well back?

PaulJ, no of course not, that explains why we did not hear anything from God since.....

Hey there Danny and Elsewhere, don't stop now. I'm quite enjoying your back and forth tete-a-tete.

Have to sleep sometimes, we ahave some time difference :)

I was not successful in identifying the points of light surrounding the primary object, and therefore could not comment on their respective distances either. I looked at literally dozens of sites to find such info and nothing shed any light on this. Perhaps you could enlighten me and the rest of us.

Because we are in our galaxy with lots of stars in each direction that you look you will find stars (not in each direction a equal amounth by the way) So the points of light are very probably all stars. Maybe one or two could be other galaxies, but they have a more fuzzy form. It is easy to examine if it is a star when you use a spectroscope. You can see what the star is made of and the temperature of the star. A spectroscopic analysis can always show if it is a single star or a whole galaxy of stars. You do not need the redshift for this.
See my picture of the Andromeda. There are two satelite galaxies, but it is clearly that they differ from the stars. Stars are more pointlike.

Danny, if you look to Velocity (Redshift) as an explanation, are you suggesting that if a quasar appears to be in front of a galaxy (nearer), and the galaxy has a lesser redshift, that therefore it is because the galaxy is travelling at a lesser velocity away from us, and so we get this lower reading? And therefore, the implication is that the quasar could still be farther away?? Please clarify what you are suggesting.

I do not really suggest this, as I do not think it is very likely.
First of all, from this and some other examples it seems that there is a connection between some quasars and some normal galaxies. There is also some support of this in observations made in radio wavelengths.
So this quasar is not in front or closer by then the galaxy, it is near the galaxy, and has about the same distance. So probably at least a few others.
Anyway, we have to ask if the red shift of the quasar is so high, and it is closer than expected, then what other process gives the quasar the red shift.
A possibilty is that it is moving away from us. Red shift is speed, this can be speed due to expansion of the universe or actual speed of the object. So if this object is moving for some reason at half the speed of light away from us, it would give this result in observation.
However I can not see any reason why this object whould travel so fast. So I don't think this is a good explanation, but it is a possible one however.
The second thing is that red shift can also be caused by gravitational pull. If this quasar is a very compact heavy object, its radiation would have a redshift even if it is not moving. So this could explain it.
There can maybe also be another process at atomic scale, causing a red shift.

Does this invalidate the relation between red shift and distance. No, not at all. This relation is shown to exists. It proves that there are maybe other factors, specially in quasars that have to be included in this relation. It can also mean that some or maybe all quasars are not as far as we though.

An anology: There is probably a relation betwen the temperature of the tires of a car, and the speed of the car. (in equal conditions, same kind of cars etc). Supose you have a formula for this (probably a notr very simple one) and it allows you to calculate or estimate the speed my measuring the temperature.
Now we see a motorbike come along and messure that the speed by the temperature of the tires. But this motorbike is traveling alongside a car, and we estimated of course a very different speed. The motor is lighter, different tires etc.
So what is our conclusion now: Cars do actually not move (there was no big bang) or the relation seem to be more complex and in case of cars it works out find, but in case for a motorbike we need to add some things?

Danny