Why the sky is dark in the night

So, as stated, the sky is not dark at night. It is awash with radiation.

This refutes post 1, and indeed, the thread title.

Take a moment to reform your premise.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And what is that ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You are making up things.....

I never said that "studying something a lot is useless".....you are making up.
I never claimed that my knowledge is steering me to the right answer....Another making up from you.
I never dosmissed knowldege as a valid path to right answers...Another making up from you.

Basically your revised/clarified argument is that..in general whatever comes from mainstream cannot be wrong and must be accepted as truth.....Very right in most of the cases, but that does not deprive anyone from raising questions. You cannot take shelter in "what are your credential to raise questions on mainstream ? That's again no argument.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Who are 'those who know' here ?

Another make up...

There is no contradiction here. You have to distinctly understand that idea of dissent comes from the knowldege only, you cannot argue that look you gained the very idea from the knowledge as discovered by scientific community, so you cannot question them...it is bad argument. My objection is to the 'fund driven scientific endeavor which is promoting certain questionable things, without answering associated questions.'.. [May be I have not been able to articulate it properly, but you should get an idea.]

By all means.....But Dear DaveC, what did you contribute to this thread except stating that they cannot be wrong ? What did Paddoboy contribute to this thread accept associating agenda with me, he does not even understand what is flat universe, some copy paste. What did Russ_watters contribute to this thread, except a failed attempt to patronize me, the guy admitted that he took one month to guide through some calculation to a poster in some other thread, that poster's learning ability apart, I would have terminated Russ Watters for inefficient teaching, if I were his boss.

If your "those who know" are these guys, then they are nothing but parroting maisntream....

 

If you say that darkness is zero radiation...then you have to take a moment to reform your premise.

Give me a place on Earth (forget universe) which is radiation less ?? Not even best of your vacuum.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Another cop out?
I think he has hit the nail fair square on the head, just as many others have.
You have claimed you never said many things and in most cases that has been shown to be false: You claimed you do not indulge in conspiracies also, yet you have on more than one occasion hinted at GP-B being a fraudulent outcome and that this also exists with aLIGO and its recent confirmations......
Or were you just "playing games" as you have also claimed when others have shown you to be wrong......
We just had a similar episode with one of our supernatural/paranormal pushers, claiming he to was "joking" when a few relevant points were made to show his claims as the nonsense they are and supported by fabricated dialogue.
All tarred with the same brush I suspect.

You have admitted to believing in a deity, and let me say there is nothing wrong with that in itself. The problem appears that this belief could be driving your ridiculous anti science/conspiracy/clowning stances that you gleefully seem to admit to when shown to be in error........
Couple those with your equally ridiculous conspiracy claims, and I believe I'm pretty close to the mark.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The same mainstream that has shown you to be in continuious error in your claims.
It has evidence, both observational and experimental to support its accepted theories......It has credentialled professional experts.
You have nothing other than an electrician's license I think it was? and your religiously driven conspiracy nonsense.

 

Mods, can you ask this guy, which post of mine in science section has any link with deity ??

This man cannot answer with content, so every time he resorts to nonsense.....

And none of my stand is anti science.

 

The rather naive unsupported, emotional, rhetoric continues.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Emotional ??

 

Appealing to the mods? You have said you accept a deity of sorts and I questioned it in facetious way whether it was Christian or Hindu......Fact.
Did I say anti science? My apologies...I should say anti mainstream science, OK?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And couple that with your conspiracy nonsense and self admitted "playing games" and your intentions seem obvious.

 

Paddoboy......

You are making certain copy pastes which are available freely on the net, so please answer following...

1. Are you aware of any recorded Galaxy (or object) which was visible on some certain point of time in past, and now disappeared due to receding velocity >c ?

2. Which is the most distant object, which we have observed, and which will dispapper beyond our visible range due to receding velocity > c ? And after how much time ?

3. This receding is due to accelerated expansion of universe, but there is substantial gravity which is present till a very substantial distance from the peripheral point of any such Galaxy, surely there could not be any red shift as long as the light/photon is in the Gravitational filed of any such Galaxy, so what is that point beyond which the red shifting starts....... For example there is no expansion between Andromeda and Milky Way due to Gravity, so a photon originating at MW, will not feel any red shift at least till Andromeda, the same thing should hold good for the distant Galaxy and its local surroundings.

4. If you study the Gravitational Lensing in detail, then you will come to know, that the light which is getting lensed by the Lensing Galaxy, is infact quite away (possibly millions of light years and more) from the peripheral point of the Galaxy, suggesting substantial gravity at a very far point....so there cannot be red shift till any suchn point ?

Try these questions and please tell me if any Deity or God or agenda is involved......

 

I have been to temples, churches, mosques, gurudwaras, bahai centers world over...I love these monuments, whats your problem ?

Accepted...

 

Freely available and correct.

For the first 380,000 years before temperatures had dropped sufficiently for electrons to couple with atomic nuclei, the Universe was opaque with just plasma and photons unable to travel.
After the recombination the light [brightness] was released for want of a better word] and we still see that today as the CMBR at a temperature of 2.7K

Andromeda is part of the local group of galaxies and all are gravitationally bound so that the large scale expansion is overcome...eg: Picture a fish swimming upstream at 10kms and hour [universal expansion] against a current of 12 kms an hour [gravity]
Remember, Olber lived around the 1800's when we were unaware the Universe was expanding.........

The CMBR along with the other reasons all aptly explain why Olber's paradox is not really a paradox.
No, the expanding universe, the 2.7K CMBR, the intensity of the light and distance, the photon energy etc etc.

In essence as you have shown many times in many threads, you don't appear interested in an answer, unless perhaps in this case it is the one given tic at post 8.
Just a continuation of your hopeless evangelistic mission to somehow invalidate science.

For the first 380,000 years before temperatures had dropped sufficiently for electrons to couple with atomic nuclei, the Universe was opaque with just plasma and photons unable to travel.
After the recombination the light [brightness] was released for want of a better word] and we still see that today as the CMBR at a temperature of 2.7K

All our prime accepted cosmology fit together like a hand in a glove.....although we have no certainty about the finite nature of the universe. Not that it makes any difference to olber's paradox which is not a paradox.

Some redshifts are quite large, as is the Universe. You must accept this...


You need to realise that galaxies at such large distances, near the edge of the observable universe, are in time, going to be beyond the observable universe.
In fact a few hundreds or so billion years hence, no galaxy external to our local region will be visible. We call it the DE factor.

Ever heard of WMAP?
Ever heard of the accelerating expansion rate that WMAP discovered?
So, no, in the long distant future, our observable universe will be just our own merged local group and all distant galaxies shifted beyond the observable horizon.
It's not surprising you consider it incomplete when you have misunderstood the most basic assumptions and data from recent times.
Our local group is gravitationally bound as are other local groups and regions of mass/energy densities over smaller scales. But over larger less dense scales, the accelerated expansion overcomes the smaller gravitationally bound scales.

I could give you a few links, but that wouldn't make a bit of difference with your agenda.
Hope that helps alleviate your confused state.

 

Don't repeat the same copy paste, this shows that you are just babbling....

 

Doing what you do best again, avoiding having to admit that just maybe your religious agenda is affecting your views on mainstream accepted science.

More examples of your well known dishonesty. A shame you can never present an argument or debate a point without any porky pies to mislead.

And couple that with your conspiracy nonsense and self admitted "playing games" and your intentions seem obvious.[/QUOTE]

 

It's the facts as far as we know that counts....so they'll be repeated if and when necessary. Far more sense than the unsupported fairy tales and ignorance of expansion of spacetime that you appear to be suffering from.
The essence of 21st century cosmology is that the BB, SR/GR and the evolution of the Universe/spacetime, along with the particle zoo all compliment each other, not withstanding your ludicrous conspiracy theories and religious agenda.

 

magine.gsfc.nasa.gov/features/cosmic/farthest_info.html

The Farthest Visible Reaches of Space
About the Image

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Current observations suggest that the Universe is about 13.7 billion years old. We know that light takes time to travel, so that if we observe an object that is 13 billion light years away, then that light has been traveling towards us for 13 billion years. Essentially, we are seeing that object as it appeared 13 billion years ago.

With every year that passes, our newest technology enables us to see further and further back.

The image used for this stop on our journey is the Hubble Ultra Deep Field (UDF). The UDF is one of the deepest views of the visible universe to date; certainly it was the deepest when it was originally created in in 2003-2004. There are approximately 10,000 galaxies in this view, which is a sort of "core sample" of a very narrow patch of sky near the constellation Fornax. The smallest, reddest galaxies in the image, of which there are about 100, are among the most distant known objects!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

UDF, Credit: NASA, ESA, S. Beckwith (STScI) and the HUDF Team

The UDF looks back approximately 13 billion years (approximately between 400 and 800 million years after the Big Bang). Galaxies that existed in that time period would be very young and very different in structure and appearance than the grand spirals we see nearby today.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Image Credits: UDF - NASA/ESA/S. Beckwith(STScI) and The HUDF Team.
For UDF Location and Age of the Universe graphics: NASA

What is the Farthest Known Object From Earth?
Update 02/03/16: Here are the newest candidates (as of September and May 2015 respectively) for farthest galaxy yet detected. EGS8p7 at more than 13.2 billion light years away, and EGS-zs8-1 at 13.1 billion light years away.

In December of 2012, astronomers announced a Hubble Space Telescope discovery of seven primitive galaxies located over 13 billion light years away from us. The results are from survey of the same patch of sky known as the Ultra Deep Field (UDF). This survey, called UDF12, used Hubble's Wide Field Camera 3 to peer deeper into space in near-infrared light than any previous Hubble observation.

Why infrared? Because the Universe is expanding; therefore the farther back we look, the faster objects are moving away from us, which shifts their light towards the red. Redshift means that light that is emitted as ultraviolet or visible light is shifted more and more to redder wavelengths.

The extreme distance of these newly discovered galaxies means their light has been traveling to us for more than 13 billion years, from a time when the Universe was less than 4% of its current age.

Their discovery, which you can read more about in the NASA feature is exciting because it might give us an idea of how abundant galaxies were close to the era when astronomers think galaxies first started forming. (Phil Plait has a good column about this discovery too.)


As of this writing it seems that one of the galaxies in this recent Hubble discovery may be a distance record breaker - it was observed 380 million years after the Big Bang, with a redshift of 11.9. This means the light from this galaxy (pictured below) left 13.3+ billion light years ago.

Just under a month ago, the current candidate was this object: a young galaxy called MACS0647-JD. It's only a tiny fraction of the size of our Milky Way - and was observed at 420 million years after the Big Bang, when the universe was 3 percent of its present age of 13.7 billion years. To spot this galaxy, astronomers used the powerful gravity from the massive galaxy cluster MACS J0647+7015 to magnify the light from the distant galaxy; this effect is called gravitational lensing.

Earlier in 2012, with the combined power of NASA's Spitzer and Hubble Space Telescopes, as well as the use of gravitational lensing, a team of astronomers spotted what might then have beenthe most distant galaxy ever seen. Light from this young galaxy, MACS1149-JD, was emitted when our 13.7-billion-year-old universe was just 500 million years old.


In 2010, a candidate for most distant galaxy was found in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field. UDFy-38135539 is thought to be 13.1 billion light years away. There is more information in this article on Phil Plait's blog. I've used his labeled images:

The objects in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field may well be the farthest known objects, but there are other contenders.

They include a galaxy called Abell 1835 IR1916, which was discovered in 2004, by astronomers from the European Southern Observatory using a near-infrared instrument on the Very Large Telescope. The object is visible to us because of gravitational lensing by the galaxy cluster Abell 1835, which is between this object and us. This galaxy is thought to be about 13.2 billion light years away, which means it would date to about 500 million years after the Big Bang. Note though, that this find has not been verified by other instruments - the Spitzer Space Telescope tried in 2006 without success.


Also in 2004, a team using both the Hubble Space Telescope and the Keck Observatory discovered a galaxy that is believed to be about 13 billion years away from us. It was found when observing the galaxy cluster Abell 2218. The light from the distant galaxy was visible because of gravitational lensing. The very distant object is the one circled. For more information, check outthis press release.


Then there's the infrared James Webb Space Telescope. If you recall, Hubble has near infrared capability, but not mid-infrared, and for objects with very high redshifts, to see these most distant of objects would require a powerful telescope with mid-infrared capability. JWST will be able to see farther and deeper than was ever possible before.

In fact, one of JWST objectives is to look even further back, to just 200 million years after the Big Bang. One model of galaxy evolution has the first galaxies forming then and we need JWST to test this theoretical prediction!


(Note: JWST will be able to see these first galaxies without the aid of gravitational lensing; gravitational lensing might allow us to see them better, but would not necessarily let us see further back in time.)

Distance Information
Some of the most newly detected objects may be over 13 billion light years away, as derived from a standard model of the Universe. However, a powerful new generation of telescopes, like the James Webb Space Telescope, will be needed to confirm the suspected distances of these objects.

When 13 billion light years is translated into kilometers, there are a staggering number of zeros - it comes out to approximately 123,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 km.

As time progresses, so will our ability to see futher and further away - giving us insight on the very beginnings of the Universe's existence!

 

Nonsense continues.......