[General] cosmological red shift

[Hodge John]

Dr. Baer;The arXiv version of the New Astronomy paper may be easierto download. Scalar potential model ofredshift and discrete redshift</FONT><BR>http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0602/0602344v1.pdf Hodge 

    On Monday, January 25, 2016 3:03 AM, Hodge John <jchodge at frontier.com> wrote:
 

 Dr. Baer:An alternative explanation of cosmic (galactic redshift)that does not use the Doppler effect:https://www.academia.edu/16999174/Scalar_potential_model_of_redshift_and_discrete_redshiftNo other model explains the discrete redshift observations.Hubble liked what became known as “tired light models”.  The same equation is used in the explanation of the Scalar potential model ofthe Pioneer Anomaly  http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0612/0612567v2.pdfThat is, these paperssuggest the galactic redshift, the pioneer anomaly, and the Pound--Rebkaexperiment are the same phenomena.    The plenum is similar to theclassical ether and the General Relativity’s “gravitational ether” with someslight differences. Hence, the different name.  This model also posits somecharacteristics of photons used in the https://www.academia.edu/17116351/Diffraction_experiment_and_its_STOE_photon_simulation_program_rejects_wave_models_of_light  Gauthiernoticed the equation did not have a velocity term. This suggests the plenum islike the Higgs field. That is in the acceleration part of the plenum, theplenum causes a change in the “mass” (inertial mass?) of the photons. Perhapsthis suggest a hint about the character of the Inertial Mass.  Hodge 

    On Sunday, January 24, 2016 3:34 PM, Wolfgang Baer <wolf at nascentinc.com> wrote:
 

   Chandrasekhar;
 Reading your "could space be considered as the inertial rest frame" in the SPIE vol 9570 
 I would very much like to find an alternative explanation for the red shift and am interested in your absorption line argument
 but do not understand your logic.
 
 If a star is moving away from us both the inner and outer corona are moving at the same velocity.
 The inner corona atom emits light "f0'that is red shifted To "f" in the media due to its motion
 The outer corona atom absorbs light at frequency "f" that is blue shifted relative to its natural "f0' frequency because it is moving toward the source
 This leaves a hole in the spectra in the media at "f" red shifted
 An atom on earth is not moving toward the source and therefore the arriving light will still be at red shift frequency "f" 
 atoms on the earth with natural "f0' frequency will not be able to absorb the light 
 
 All light frequencies shift and the hole at "f" is red shifted due to the motion of the star away from us.
 Why do you say this is not a doppler effect?
 
 I would like to find a gravitational argument rather than a Doppler argument fro the red shift, but do not understand how your argument works.
 What am I doing Wrong?
 
 Wolf
 Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com 
 
_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at jchodge at frontier.com
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>


   
_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at jchodge at frontier.com
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20160125/dab1bf83/attachment-0001.htm>