[geocentrism] Fraunhofer lines
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 11:11:10 +1000
I'm amazed.. I used to believe in the reality of the reasoning behind.
Fraunhofer lines .
Now not sure. The assertions are full of the same type of presumptions as
nearly all physics. It is assumed the element in the surface of the sun between
the light and us absorbs a set particular frequency leaving a black line. And,
now get this, it is because we know the particular light frequency for a given
element we can say Haaa that element is on the surface of that star, between
its light source and us.
Let me presume that they are correct concerning this relationship between
frequency and element, which is a reasonable assertion which may be
demonstrated in the laboratory.
So now comes the tricky illusory bit. We first of all allow that all the stars
will give similar spectrums from their original light. This in no way can be
gaurranteed, but let us allow it to be certain for the blob we are discussing.
Let us further accept that helium will block frequency k which gives a specific
red color.
Now lets us cause this blob of light to be moving away from us. The complete
spectrum will shift towards the red end. Some of the UV will become violet, and
some of the red will become infra red. The absorbtion line which was observed
blocking frequency k will now "appear" to be blocking the lower frequency of J.
And it would be reasonable to say that this proved the star was moving away
from us..
But in the real situation we know nothing about the star being observed. It
could be stationary with a lower temperature, and thus spectrum in the lower
frequency range.
We do not know if there is any Helium there, this is presumed based on the
THEORY of stars being thermonuclear conversions of H2 to helium. That the
absorbtion line exists at frequency J and not k could be indicative of another
element or isotope of one.
Yet here are the type of assertions made on presumptions, and though I give
note the simplistic explanation may be for children, the reasoning is in error
as I explain in red. .
Scientists knew that if the universe was expanding, then space would be
stretched. This meant that anything in the space would also be stretched. This
stretching is too small to be noticed in matter because gravity counteracts it;
but in EM waves this is noticeable as a red shift. Space is not stretched. The
speed of the EMR is fixed, and unchanged. As the transmitter moves away, the
wavelength is increased , and this is inversely proportional to Frequency. As
the wavelength increases, the receiver experiences a lower frequency.
When this red shift in the Fraunhofer lines of distant stars and galaxies was
noticed it was clear proof that both the Expansion and Big Bang theories were
correct. All other theories, such as Steady-State Theory2, were generally
disregarded. Notice that all encompassing acceptance on assumption.
Another useful consequence of this is that the further away an object is, the
more space the light has travelled through so it will be more red shifted, this
allows astronomers to accurately calculate the distance of other galaxies.
That last paragraph is nonsense.
For waves that travel through a medium (sound, ultrasound, etc...) the
relationship between observed frequency f' and emitted frequency f is given by:
where
is the speed of waves in the medium (in air at T degrees Celsius, this is
332 + 0.59T m/s)
is the velocity of the source (the thing emitting the sound)
For waves that travel at the speed of light, such as radio waves, the
relationship between observed frequency f' and emitted frequency f is given by:
Change in frequency Observed frequency
where
is the transmitted frequency
is the velocity of the transmitter relative to the receiver in
meters/second: positive when moving towards one another, negative when moving
away
is the speed of light in a vacuum m/s
is the wavelength of the transmitted wave subject to change
Notice that the distance has no bearing on the frequency observed in this
equation.
If he was correct then over time all our stars would red shift into invisible
EMR.
Now to add more about how THEY are confused, what is missing with this picture
from wiki. ? The answer is within the 5th paragraph above. Philip.
Astronomy
Redshift of spectral lines in the optical spectrum of a supercluster of distant
galaxies (right), as compared to that of the Sun (left).
The Doppler effect for electromagnetic waves such as light, is of great use in
astronomy, and results in either a so-called redshift or blueshift. It has been
used to measure the speed at which stars and galaxies are approaching toward or
receding from us, that is, the radial velocity. This is used to detect if a
single star is, in fact, a close binary and even to measure the speed of
rotation of stars and galaxies.
The use of the Doppler effect for light in astronomy depends on the fact that
the spectra of stars are not continuous. They show absorption lines at well
defined frequencies that are correlated with the energies required to excite
electrons in various elements from one level to another. The Doppler effect is
recognizable in the fact that the absorption lines are not always at the
frequencies that are obtained from the spectrum of a stationary light source.
Since blue light has a higher frequency than red light, the spectral lines from
an approaching astronomical light source show a blueshift and those of receding
sources show a redshift.
Among the nearby stars, the largest radial velocities with respect to the Sun
are +308 km/s (BD-15°4041, also known as LHS 52, 81.7 light-years away) and
-260 km/s (Woolley 9722, also known as Wolf 1106 and LHS 64, 78.2 light-years
away). Positive radial velocity means the star is receding from the Sun,
negative that it is approaching.
Other related posts:
- » [geocentrism] Fraunhofer lines
