I can't seem to find that page...AtlAg05 said:
Uh oh, we hit page 404…..
I apologize for the nerdy dad joke.
I can't seem to find that page...AtlAg05 said:
Uh oh, we hit page 404…..
I apologize for the nerdy dad joke.
Strive to greater heights,
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
For a future brighter than the past,
Waking up each morning inspired,
To learn new secrets of the Universe! https://t.co/NllIrVjK4F
jkag89 said:Strive to greater heights,
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
For a future brighter than the past,
Waking up each morning inspired,
To learn new secrets of the Universe! https://t.co/NllIrVjK4F
Watch Dragon’s first spacewalk with the @PolarisProgram’s Polaris Dawn crew https://t.co/svdJRkGN7K
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) September 12, 2024
Since one of the arguments for the moon landing being fake was it was impossible to pass the radiation ring alive, this pretty much destroys that one, right?jkag89 said:Strive to greater heights,
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
For a future brighter than the past,
Waking up each morning inspired,
To learn new secrets of the Universe! https://t.co/NllIrVjK4F
Phatbob said:Since one of the arguments for the moon landing being fake was it was impossible to pass the radiation ring alive, this pretty much destroys that one, right?jkag89 said:Strive to greater heights,
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
For a future brighter than the past,
Waking up each morning inspired,
To learn new secrets of the Universe! https://t.co/NllIrVjK4F
Phatbob said:Since one of the arguments for the moon landing being fake was it was impossible to pass the radiation ring alive, this pretty much destroys that one, right?jkag89 said:Strive to greater heights,
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
For a future brighter than the past,
Waking up each morning inspired,
To learn new secrets of the Universe! https://t.co/NllIrVjK4F
ABATTBQ11 said:Phatbob said:Since one of the arguments for the moon landing being fake was it was impossible to pass the radiation ring alive, this pretty much destroys that one, right?jkag89 said:Strive to greater heights,
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
For a future brighter than the past,
Waking up each morning inspired,
To learn new secrets of the Universe! https://t.co/NllIrVjK4F
It's all fake. SpaceX is just the latest iteration of NASA's grand conspiracy to keep the lie alive.
/Moon landing deniers
Unfortunately due to the "bureaucracy" of our Federal Government, not until November.jt2hunt said:
When is starship launching again?
I wish it was "just" bureaucracyjkag89 said:Unfortunately do to the "bureaucracy" of our Federal Government, not until November.jt2hunt said:
When is starship launching again?
What did I miss?TexAgs91 said:I wish it was "just" bureaucracyjkag89 said:Unfortunately do to the "bureaucracy" of our Federal Government, not until November.jt2hunt said:
When is starship launching again?
All because the Russians raised the price on some refurbished missiles. Short sighted greed has cost them lots of cash.Ag87H2O said:
What an incredible achievment by SpaceX. From the Falcon to the Dragon and now to these new space suits and the early stages of EVAs, they are blazing a trail for everyone to follow.
Well done.
bthotugigem05 said:
They're much more similar to the Gemini suits than what's on the ISS. The consumables for the ISS suits are in the suit itself versus via the umbilical in the SoaceX suits.
I'm not smart enough to have an opinion but it does seem like some of the stuff from Hubble/Webb are challenging basic fundamentals about how some of these oldest galaxies/black holes got…to where they are/were. I also enjoy a good nerd fight.Quote:
However, in this new study, Dr. Shamir suggests that redshifta phenomenon where light from distant objects shifts toward the red end of the spectrum, indicating they are moving awaymight not necessarily prove that the universe is expanding in the way the Big Bang theory suggests. Instead, evidence could support an alternative: the "Tired Light" theory.
First proposed in 1929 by Swiss astronomer Dr. Fritz Zwicky, the "Tired Light" theory offers a different explanation for the redshift observed in light from distant galaxies.
According to this theory, as light travels through space, it loses energy over vast distances due to interactions with particles or fields, causing it to "tire" and shift to longer wavelengths, such as red.
This process would give the appearance of an expanding universe without requiring an actual outward movement of galaxies from a central point, as proposed by the Big Bang theory.
The "Tired Light" theory was initially sidelined by the scientific community in favor of the Big Bang theory, primarily because it could not fully account for certain observations, such as the cosmic microwave background radiation and surface brightness of galaxies evolving with time.
However, recent observations and analyses, like those presented in this new study, could prompt a re-evaluation of Dr. Zwicky's hypothesis.
In the newly published paper, Dr. Shamir argues that recent observational data challenges the standard interpretation of redshift as evidence of universal expansion. The study suggests that the tired light model might better explain certain cosmological phenomena, particularly how light behaves over enormous cosmic distances.
The study focuses on discrepancies between observed data and predictions made by the Big Bang model, including the rate of expansion inferred from the redshift data. Dr. Shamir points out that while the Big Bang theory predicts a uniform expansion rate, the observational data shows a more complex picture that could be interpreted through the tired light framework.
Moreover, the study introduces a series of calculations and simulations to demonstrate how the tired light model might align with current data on the universe's structure and behavior. It suggests that the tired light model could potentially explain phenomena like the Hubble constant's inconsistencies a number that represents the universe's rate of expansion which has been a subject of intense debate in the scientific community.
jkag89 said:What did I miss?TexAgs91 said:I wish it was "just" bureaucracyjkag89 said:Unfortunately do to the "bureaucracy" of our Federal Government, not until November.jt2hunt said:
When is starship launching again?
nortex97 said:
Time to re-evaluate the Big Bang? "Tired light."I'm not smart enough to have an opinion but it does seem like some of the stuff from Hubble/Webb are challenging basic fundamentals about how some of these oldest galaxies/black holes got…to where they are/were. I also enjoy a good nerd fight.Quote:
However, in this new study, Dr. Shamir suggests that redshifta phenomenon where light from distant objects shifts toward the red end of the spectrum, indicating they are moving awaymight not necessarily prove that the universe is expanding in the way the Big Bang theory suggests. Instead, evidence could support an alternative: the "Tired Light" theory.
First proposed in 1929 by Swiss astronomer Dr. Fritz Zwicky, the "Tired Light" theory offers a different explanation for the redshift observed in light from distant galaxies.
According to this theory, as light travels through space, it loses energy over vast distances due to interactions with particles or fields, causing it to "tire" and shift to longer wavelengths, such as red.
This process would give the appearance of an expanding universe without requiring an actual outward movement of galaxies from a central point, as proposed by the Big Bang theory.
The "Tired Light" theory was initially sidelined by the scientific community in favor of the Big Bang theory, primarily because it could not fully account for certain observations, such as the cosmic microwave background radiation and surface brightness of galaxies evolving with time.
However, recent observations and analyses, like those presented in this new study, could prompt a re-evaluation of Dr. Zwicky's hypothesis.
In the newly published paper, Dr. Shamir argues that recent observational data challenges the standard interpretation of redshift as evidence of universal expansion. The study suggests that the tired light model might better explain certain cosmological phenomena, particularly how light behaves over enormous cosmic distances.
The study focuses on discrepancies between observed data and predictions made by the Big Bang model, including the rate of expansion inferred from the redshift data. Dr. Shamir points out that while the Big Bang theory predicts a uniform expansion rate, the observational data shows a more complex picture that could be interpreted through the tired light framework.
Moreover, the study introduces a series of calculations and simulations to demonstrate how the tired light model might align with current data on the universe's structure and behavior. It suggests that the tired light model could potentially explain phenomena like the Hubble constant's inconsistencies a number that represents the universe's rate of expansion which has been a subject of intense debate in the scientific community.
Future versions I'm sure will incorporate the PLSS (Portable Life Support System)bthotugigem05 said:
They're much more similar to the Gemini suits than what's on the ISS. The consumables for the ISS suits are in the suit itself versus via the umbilical in the SpaceX suits.
flakrat said:jkag89 said:What did I miss?TexAgs91 said:I wish it was "just" bureaucracyjkag89 said:Unfortunately do to the "bureaucracy" of our Federal Government, not until November.jt2hunt said:
When is starship launching again?
This reeks of politics
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/spacex-s-next-starship-flight-delayed-by-months/ar-AA1qudHP?ocid=BingNewsSerp
SpaceX is deeply upset about the development, criticizing the FAA in a lengthy blog post on Tuesday for the time that it's taking to grant a license.
"We recently received a launch license date estimate of late November from the FAA," SpaceX said in the post. "This is a more than two-month delay to the previously communicated date of mid-September. This delay was not based on a new safety concern, but instead driven by superfluous environmental analysis."
The Big Bang theory has been passing tests for a very long time.MSFC Aggie said:
Interesting read. Yes, there are studies/theories out there that say the speed of light is not constant. Constants are basically ways to make the math work. Constants like gravity, speed of light, etc. may be ok for our little micro universes, but I believe the only constant is chaos....ie, variability.
I've always thought the Big Bang was too "convenient". We'll probably get to a point that we say....wow, we were way off on that theory. Who knows...
I think part of the fun is that some consequences would be really hard to test. Veritasium did a video about how we don't really know if the speed of light is constant - we just know it's consistent.bmks270 said:
If the speed of light has variance throughout the universe, how would this be tested and demonstrated?
There is just some things I don't think we will ever be able to know or measure as humans.
Unless it leads to some gravity / mass defying break through, observing too much beyond our own galaxy seems pointless given we can't yet leave earth.
I get that it's a constant that has proven itself repeatedly for a hundred years (not responding to you specifically on this), but if it decays and we have to measure stuff we couldn't see/detect at all 20 years ago, and only now can, with more detail on dark energy/cosmic background etc., it seems like something has to give to my little mind.bmks270 said:
If the speed of light has variance throughout the universe, how would this be tested and demonstrated?
There is just some things I don't think we will ever be able to know or measure as humans.
Unless it leads to some gravity / mass defying break through, observing too much beyond our own galaxy seems pointless given we can't yet leave earth.
Astrophysicists (not one, of course), always look for something they can measure that can be problematic to a formula that is accepted, and this one is fun. Whatever, don't ask me to explain this kinda table.Quote:
"The results showed that galaxies that rotate in the opposite direction relative to the Milky Way have lower redshift compared to galaxies that rotate in the same direction relative to the Milky Way," Shamir said. "That difference reflects the motion of the Earth as it rotates with the Milky Way. But the results also showed that the difference in the redshift increased when the galaxies were more distant from Earth.
"Because the rotational velocity of the Earth relative to the galaxies is constant, the reason for the difference can be the distance of the galaxies from Earth. That shows that the redshift of galaxies changes with the distance, which is what Zwicky predicted in his Tired Light theory."
TexAgs91 said:
If the speed of light has changed, that would throw many other things into chaos. For example the fine structure constant
Change the speed of light and that changes the strength of electromagnetic force. Atoms don't work anymore.