Author 
Message 
Sam Wormley science forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 1491

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:35 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



GSS wrote:
Quote:  Let us review the Michelson  Morley Experiment (MMEx) in the
settings of the end of 19th century or early dawn of 20th century. The
null result of MMEx was a major puzzle and a challenge to the
Physicists of that time.
The MMEx was conducted in the backdrop of two fundamental notions or
assumptions :
(a) Absolute nature of space fixed in the aether frame. Measure of time
was also assumed to be an absolute fundamental dimension independent of
spatial dimension.
(b) Continuous wave nature of light propagating in empty space or
vacuum at uniform speed c. The process of continuous emission of light
waves from vibrating atomic electrons was assumed to be similar to the
emission process of sound waves from a vibrating diaphragm.
Primarily the MMEx was conducted to experimentally detect the fixed
aether frame by measuring the velocity of earth moving through it. As
such the null result of MMEx was simply interpreted to imply the
nonexistence of the fixed aether frame in particular and invalidity of
assumptions at (a) above in general. That was not all, to explain the
null result of MMEx some more assumptions had to be introduced which in
the long run proved to be a turning point for physics.
The additional assumptions introduced to explain the null result of
MMEx, especially the second postulate of SR, paved the way for
propounding the special and general theories of relativity by Albert
Einstein leading to a drastic change in the worldview of Physics.
In view of the raging controversy regarding the validity of Relativity
Theories, it is quite pertinent to seek some alternative explanation
for the null result of MMEx. For this I propose to retain the validity
of assumptions at (a) and question the validity of assumptions at (b)
above. In this regard kindly refer to following article in support of
this viewpoint.
http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/universal_frame.pdf
Let us consider a source of light A moving at a constant *velocity v*
in the universal reference frame. In order to understand and grasp the
detailed mechanism of emission of a photon during the transition of an
atomic electron from its higher energy state to a lower one, we need to
mentally visualize the detailed instant to instant orbital motion of
the electron. For this kindly refer to a model of Hydrogen orbitals at
the following link.
http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/hydrogen_orbitals.pdf
This model is based only on Coulomb interaction and does not account
for spin interaction. Detailed computations of orbital transitions show
that the photon emission time is generally of the order of only 10^16
seconds. This implies that the photon emission process is more of a
'spontaneous emission' rather than a 'continuous emission' of light
waves. Further, since the photon wave packet must propagate at constant
*velocity c* in the universal reference frame (under vacuum
conditions), the *relative emission velocity* of the photon with
respect to the light source A will be given by [vector c  vector v].
The new hypothesis regarding photon emission can now be stated as,
New Hypothesis : If a light source at rest in the universal reference
frame, under certain energy transition, emits a photon of frequency f0
and wave length L0 then the corresponding frequency f and wave length L
emitted by the same light source moving at velocity v in the universal
reference frame will be given by 
f = f0 . Relative emission velocity [vector cvector v]/c
= vector c  vector v . f0/c
And L = c.L0/vector c  vector v
With this hypothesis, the null result of MMEx is easily explained
because the number of wave lengths (or total phase shift) along the
pathlengths of transverse and axial beams of light remain constant,
independent of the velocity v of the light source. For complete details
of this explanation, kindly refer to the following link.
http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/new_hypothesis.pdf
Therefore, we may conclude that the *relative emission velocity* of
photons from a moving source is dependent on the relative direction of
emission in comparison with the direction of motion of the source.
After emission from the source, the photons have to propagate at
constant velocity c in the universal reference frame (vacuum)
regardless of the motion of the source. If v is the instantaneous
velocity of the source in the universal reference frame, then the
relative emission velocity of the photon will be given by the (vector c
 vector v). As per the proposed new hypothesis, the energy E and
frequency f of the emitted photon will be proportional to the *relative
emission velocity* vector c  vector v.
Specifically, let us consider an observer O to be at rest in the
universal reference frame and let a source S approach the observer with
velocity v. The frequency f of photons emitted by S in the direction of
its velocity vector v will therefore be reduced by a factor (cv)/c. On
the other hand the frequency of photons emitted by S in the direction
opposite to its velocity vector v will be increased by a factor
(c+v)/c. Hence the observer O will find the frequency of photons
received from an approaching source S to be reduced by a factor of
(cv)/c and that of photons received from a receding source S to be
increased by a factor of (c+v)/c.
However, this new hypothesis needs to be critically examined and tested
before formally accepting it as valid. Implications of the new
hypothesis could be drastic in cosmology as the observed red shift of
distant stars and galaxies will indicate a contracting universe instead
of the currently held view of an expanding universe!! Moreover the
proposed hypothesis is expected to be applicable for the photons
emitted from electron transitions in atoms and molecules but not for
continuous EM waves radiated from RF circuits and antennas.
GSS

Einstein: "The introduction of a 'luminiferous ether' will
prove to be superfluous..."
See: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS
OF MOVING BODIES
By A. Einstein
June 30, 1905
"It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamicsas usually understood at
the present timewhen applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries
which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. Take, for example,
the reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a conductor. The
observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative motion of the
conductor and the magnet, whereas the customary view draws a sharp
distinction between the two cases in which either the one or the other
of these bodies is in motion. For if the magnet is in motion and the
conductor at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an
electric field with a certain definite energy, producing a current at
the places where parts of the conductor are situated. But if the magnet
is stationary and the conductor in motion, no electric field arises in
the neighbourhood of the magnet. In the conductor, however, we find an
electromotive force, to which in itself there is no corresponding
energy, but which gives riseassuming equality of relative motion in
the two cases discussedto electric currents of the same path and
intensity as those produced by the electric forces in the former case.
"Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to
discover any motion of the earth relatively to the ``light medium,''
suggest that the phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics
possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. They
suggest rather that, as has already been shown to the first order of
small quantities, the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be
valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics
hold good.1 We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which will
hereafter be called the ``Principle of Relativity'') to the status of a
postulate, and also introduce another postulate, which is only
apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always
propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is
independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. These two
postulates suffice for the attainment of a simple and consistent theory
of the electrodynamics of moving bodies based on Maxwell's theory for
stationary bodies. The introduction of a ``luminiferous ether'' will
prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view here to be developed will
not require an ``absolutely stationary space'' provided with special
properties, nor assign a velocityvector to a point of the empty space
in which electromagnetic processes take place.
"The theory to be developed is basedlike all electrodynamicson the
kinematics of the rigid body, since the assertions of any such theory
have to do with the relationships between rigid bodies (systems of
coordinates), clocks, and electromagnetic processes. Insufficient
consideration of this circumstance lies at the root of the difficulties
which the electrodynamics of moving bodies at present encounters".
And, of course the paper goes on to develop the ideas
and make his case... 

Back to top 


dda1 science forum Guru
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 762

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:19 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



GSS wrote:
Quote:  Let us review the Michelson  Morley Experiment (MMEx) in the
settings of the end of 19th century
GSS

Let's not , antirelativistic piece of s**t Gurcharn Sandhu. f*** off. 

Back to top 


FrediFizzx science forum Guru
Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 774


Back to top 


Tom Roberts science forum Guru
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1399

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:36 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



GSS wrote:
Quote:  In view of the raging controversy regarding the validity of Relativity
Theories, [...]

There is no "raging controversy" at all. There is just a handful of
people who do not understand the basics of these theories making a lot
of noise.
Quote:  it is quite pertinent to seek some alternative explanation
for the null result of MMEx.

That is always appropriate, as that is how science progresses.
But it is hopeless to attempt to do this without understanding the
current theories of physics; for this experiment the relevant theories
are: SR and classical electrodynamics. Knowing _and_using_ basic logic
is also necessary. Your writings fail on these points, and are therefore
useless.
Your "new hypothesis on photon emission" becomes simply a ballistic
theory in the classical domain. While such theories can indeed explain
the MMX, they are refuted many times by other experiments.
Tom Roberts 

Back to top 


Sue... science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 2684

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:44 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



GSS wrote:
Quote:  Let us review the Michelson  Morley Experiment (MMEx) in the
settings of the end of 19th century or early dawn of 20th century. The
null result of MMEx was a major puzzle and a challenge to the
Physicists of that time.
The MMEx was conducted in the backdrop of two fundamental notions or
assumptions :
(a) Absolute nature of space fixed in the aether frame. Measure of time
was also assumed to be an absolute fundamental dimension independent of
spatial dimension.
(b) Continuous wave nature of light propagating in empty space or
vacuum at uniform speed c. The process of continuous emission of light
waves from vibrating atomic electrons was assumed to be similar to the
emission process of sound waves from a vibrating diaphragm.

Over a hundred years later we know that isn't how light
propagates, so why do we need to explain the null result
from an ill conceived experiment?
Isn't LIGO keeping the proponents of implausible propagation
modes entertained any more? They probably need to be
reminded that 'Silence is golden' ;)
Sue...
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html
http://www.research.ibm.com/grape/grape_ewald.htm
http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/liquids/inddip.html
snip 

Back to top 


Sue... science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 2684

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:04 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



GSS wrote:
snip
Quote: 
Specifically, let us consider an observer O to be at rest in the
universal reference frame and let a source S approach the observer with
velocity v. The frequency f of photons emitted by S in the direction of
its velocity vector v will therefore be reduced by a factor (cv)/c. On
the other hand the frequency of photons emitted by S in the direction
opposite to its velocity vector v will be increased by a factor
(c+v)/c. Hence the observer O will find the frequency of photons
received from an approaching source S to be reduced by a factor of
(cv)/c and that of photons received from a receding source S to be
increased by a factor of (c+v)/c.

If the 'observer' looks like this:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html
"Retarded potential"
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node50.html
"Advanced potentials ?"
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node51.html
....then the problem of observer dependence is solved.
Sue...
....
Quote: 
However, this new hypothesis needs to be critically examined and tested
before formally accepting it as valid. Implications of the new
hypothesis could be drastic in cosmology as the observed red shift of
distant stars and galaxies will indicate a contracting universe instead
of the currently held view of an expanding universe!! Moreover the
proposed hypothesis is expected to be applicable for the photons
emitted from electron transitions in atoms and molecules but not for
continuous EM waves radiated from RF circuits and antennas.
GSS 


Back to top 


Phineas T Puddleduck science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:18 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



In article <1150481958.252422.29100@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, GSS
<gurcharn_sandhu@yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote:  In view of the raging controversy regarding the validity of Relativity
Theories, it is quite pertinent to seek some alternative explanation
for the null result of MMEx. For this I propose to retain the validity
of assumptions at (a) and question the validity of assumptions at (b)
above. In this regard kindly refer to following article in support of
this viewpoint.

Thats news to me. News to anyone sane in fact. I'm thinking of a second
law to go with Relf's Law
"Any science website on Geocities is shite."

The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
Official emperor of sci.physics. Please pay no attention to my butt poking
forward, it is expanding.
Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approachs
the odour of roses." 

Back to top 


Sorcerer1 science forum Guru
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 410

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:21 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



"GSS" <gurcharn_sandhu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1150481958.252422.29100@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
 Let us review the Michelson  Morley Experiment (MMEx) in the
 settings of the end of 19th century or early dawn of 20th century. The
 null result of MMEx was a major puzzle and a challenge to the
 Physicists of that time.

 The MMEx was conducted in the backdrop of two fundamental notions or
 assumptions :

 (a) Absolute nature of space fixed in the aether frame. Measure of time
 was also assumed to be an absolute fundamental dimension independent of
 spatial dimension.

 (b) Continuous wave nature of light propagating in empty space or
 vacuum at uniform speed c. The process of continuous emission of light
 waves from vibrating atomic electrons was assumed to be similar to the
 emission process of sound waves from a vibrating diaphragm.

 Primarily the MMEx was conducted to experimentally detect the fixed
 aether frame by measuring the velocity of earth moving through it. As
 such the null result of MMEx was simply interpreted to imply the
 nonexistence of the fixed aether frame in particular and invalidity of
 assumptions at (a) above in general. That was not all, to explain the
 null result of MMEx some more assumptions had to be introduced which in
 the long run proved to be a turning point for physics.

 The additional assumptions introduced to explain the null result of
 MMEx, especially the second postulate of SR, paved the way for
 propounding the special and general theories of relativity by Albert
 Einstein leading to a drastic change in the worldview of Physics.

 In view of the raging controversy regarding the validity of Relativity
 Theories, it is quite pertinent to seek some alternative explanation
 for the null result of MMEx. For this I propose to retain the validity
 of assumptions at (a) and question the validity of assumptions at (b)
 above. In this regard kindly refer to following article in support of
 this viewpoint.

 http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/universal_frame.pdf

 Let us consider a source of light A moving at a constant *velocity v*
 in the universal reference frame. In order to understand and grasp the
 detailed mechanism of emission of a photon during the transition of an
 atomic electron from its higher energy state to a lower one, we need to
 mentally visualize the detailed instant to instant orbital motion of
 the electron. For this kindly refer to a model of Hydrogen orbitals at
 the following link.

 http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/hydrogen_orbitals.pdf

 This model is based only on Coulomb interaction and does not account
 for spin interaction. Detailed computations of orbital transitions show
 that the photon emission time is generally of the order of only 10^16
 seconds. This implies that the photon emission process is more of a
 'spontaneous emission' rather than a 'continuous emission' of light
 waves. Further, since the photon wave packet must propagate at constant
 *velocity c* in the universal reference frame (under vacuum
 conditions), the *relative emission velocity* of the photon with
 respect to the light source A will be given by [vector c  vector v].
 The new hypothesis regarding photon emission can now be stated as,

 New Hypothesis : If a light source at rest in the universal reference
 frame, under certain energy transition, emits a photon of frequency f0
 and wave length L0 then the corresponding frequency f and wave length L
 emitted by the same light source moving at velocity v in the universal
 reference frame will be given by 
 f = f0 . Relative emission velocity [vector cvector v]/c
 = vector c  vector v . f0/c
 And L = c.L0/vector c  vector v

 With this hypothesis, the null result of MMEx is easily explained
 because the number of wave lengths (or total phase shift) along the
 pathlengths of transverse and axial beams of light remain constant,
 independent of the velocity v of the light source. For complete details
 of this explanation, kindly refer to the following link.

 http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/new_hypothesis.pdf

 Therefore, we may conclude that the *relative emission velocity* of
 photons from a moving source is dependent on the relative direction of
 emission in comparison with the direction of motion of the source.
 After emission from the source, the photons have to propagate at
 constant velocity c in the universal reference frame (vacuum)
 regardless of the motion of the source. If v is the instantaneous
 velocity of the source in the universal reference frame, then the
 relative emission velocity of the photon will be given by the (vector c
  vector v). As per the proposed new hypothesis, the energy E and
 frequency f of the emitted photon will be proportional to the *relative
 emission velocity* vector c  vector v.

 Specifically, let us consider an observer O to be at rest in the
 universal reference frame and let a source S approach the observer with
 velocity v. The frequency f of photons emitted by S in the direction of
 its velocity vector v will therefore be reduced by a factor (cv)/c. On
 the other hand the frequency of photons emitted by S in the direction
 opposite to its velocity vector v will be increased by a factor
 (c+v)/c. Hence the observer O will find the frequency of photons
 received from an approaching source S to be reduced by a factor of
 (cv)/c and that of photons received from a receding source S to be
 increased by a factor of (c+v)/c.

 However, this new hypothesis needs to be critically examined and tested
 before formally accepting it as valid. Implications of the new
 hypothesis could be drastic in cosmology as the observed red shift of
 distant stars and galaxies will indicate a contracting universe instead
 of the currently held view of an expanding universe!! Moreover the
 proposed hypothesis is expected to be applicable for the photons
 emitted from electron transitions in atoms and molecules but not for
 continuous EM waves radiated from RF circuits and antennas.

 GSS
Been there, done that, got the Tshirt.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doppler/Doppler.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/Sagnac.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Catalina/Drive.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus.exe
Just don't expect these shitheads to agree with you.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/STM/Scoundrels.htm
Androcles 

Back to top 


Sorcerer1 science forum Guru
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 410

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:25 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



"Tom Roberts" <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:oDEkg.63281$4L1.9635@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
 GSS wrote:
 > In view of the raging controversy regarding the validity of Relativity
 > Theories, [...]

 There is no "raging controversy" at all. There is just a handful of
 people who do not understand the basics of these theories making a lot
 of noise.


 > it is quite pertinent to seek some alternative explanation
 > for the null result of MMEx.

 That is always appropriate, as that is how science progresses.

 But it is hopeless to attempt to do this without understanding the
 current theories of physics; for this experiment the relevant theories
 are: SR and classical electrodynamics. Knowing _and_using_ basic logic
 is also necessary. Your writings fail on these points, and are therefore
 useless.

 Your "new hypothesis on photon emission" becomes simply a ballistic
 theory in the classical domain. While such theories can indeed explain
 the MMX, they are refuted many times by other experiments.

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Lucent/Roberts.htm
Androcles.
 Tom Roberts 

Back to top 


Sorcerer1 science forum Guru
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 410

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:31 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



"Sue..." <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1150490665.866394.57250@r2g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
 snip
Ok, I will, you arrogant stupid tord.
Androcles 

Back to top 


GSS science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 173

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:35 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



Sue... wrote:
Quote:  GSS wrote:
Let us review the Michelson  Morley Experiment (MMEx) in the
settings of the end of 19th century or early dawn of 20th century. The
null result of MMEx was a major puzzle and a challenge to the
Physicists of that time.
The MMEx was conducted in the backdrop of two fundamental notions or
assumptions :
(a) Absolute nature of space fixed in the aether frame. Measure of time
was also assumed to be an absolute fundamental dimension independent of
spatial dimension.
(b) Continuous wave nature of light propagating in empty space or
vacuum at uniform speed c. The process of continuous emission of light
waves from vibrating atomic electrons was assumed to be similar to the
emission process of sound waves from a vibrating diaphragm.
Over a hundred years later we know that isn't how light
propagates, so why do we need to explain the null result
from an ill conceived experiment?

We do need to explain the null result of MMEx because it marked a
turning point in fundamental physics. In my opinion, in the grand maze
of the unknown, we took a wrong turn and are now heading towards a dead
end. The 'proper' explanation of that experiment can help us choose the
right direction for the fundamental physics.
GSS 

Back to top 


Phineas T Puddleduck science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:42 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



In article <1150554959.172709.57650@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, GSS
<gurcharn_sandhu@yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote:  We do need to explain the null result of MMEx because it marked a
turning point in fundamental physics. In my opinion, in the grand maze
of the unknown, we took a wrong turn and are now heading towards a dead
end. The 'proper' explanation of that experiment can help us choose the
right direction for the fundamental physics.
GSS

And don't tell me. Only YOU know the true answers? Every one else is
wrong?
For the third strike and the full house, so to speak, do you have a
geocities website?

The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
Official emperor of sci.physics. Please pay no attention to my butt poking
forward, it is expanding.
Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses." 

Back to top 


GSS science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 173

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:10 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
Quote:  In article <1150554959.172709.57650@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, GSS
gurcharn_sandhu@yahoo.com> wrote:
We do need to explain the null result of MMEx because it marked a
turning point in fundamental physics. In my opinion, in the grand maze
of the unknown, we took a wrong turn and are now heading towards a dead
end. The 'proper' explanation of that experiment can help us choose the
right direction for the fundamental physics.
GSS
And don't tell me. Only YOU know the true answers? Every one else is
wrong?

I am not making any such claim.
Exploring various alternatives is a standard accepted scientific
approach.
Why don't you study the detailed proposal and come out with specific
objections if any???
GSS 

Back to top 


Sue... science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 2684

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:38 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



GSS wrote:
snip
There is an approximation detailed here that might be
supportivie of your model:
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node97.html
....or it might not. A similar approach is taken anyway.
Sue... 

Back to top 


dda1 science forum Guru
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 762

Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 4:04 pm Post subject:
Re: A New Hypothesis on photon emission explains the null result of MMEx but implies a contracting Universe.



Patented Imbecile Gurcharn Sandhu persists:
Quote:  Why don't you study the detailed proposal and come out with specific
objections if any???
GSS

We studied it , f*** face, patented imbecile Gurcharn Sandhu. You got
it wrong, cretin. 

Back to top 


Google


Back to top 



The time now is Tue Aug 22, 2017 5:01 pm  All times are GMT

