Re: OT POLITICS Is the universe open, closed or flat?

[Guest guest]

Darrell,

>Yeah, well the red shifts may have an electrical component, and if so,

>distant objects in the telescope may be closer than they appear. If you

> dabble in fringe science, read up on the plasma discharge theory of

>comets and the electrical theory of the solar system.

>

>

The Doppler Effect works for waves of all persuasions. As far as

stellar objects go, then we are dealing with electromagnetic radiation,

which does indeed have an electrical component. The whole spectra gets

shifted if the object is moving towards or away from the observer.

Movement perpendicular to the observer is not determinable. Actually

though, the idea that objects are closer than they appear (I don't know

if you are joking or not) reminds me that with Hubble Space Telescope

sees super far away objects, and at humungo distances, all is clear and

sharp. This defies what should be happening. There should be

blurriness way out there, but it is not the case.

I may sound fringical, but honestly, I dabble in astronomy of the plain

Jain type. That said, I think many ideas are worthy of consideration as

so much is just unknown.

>Have you ever wondered why quite a few comets are brighter than the

>can't happen because comets are just dirty little snowballs. If you're

>interested I can give you a url showing a comet passing close to the

>sun and apparently causing a massive solar flare. And yes, I don't

>beleive everything I read. To receive funding scientists have to

>force observations to fit current herd mentality theories, such as the

>dirty little snowball comet theory.

>

>

Sure I'm interested. The perihelion of comets is generally so close to

the sun, how ever do they stay " alive " for more than one trip round the

big fireball?

>Have you heard that Cassini has dropped a probe towards one of

>Saturn's moons. Scientists predict the moon will be frigid and quite

>cold due to frozen methane. I may be wrong, but watch and see if

>they don't find that it is a hot moon instead.

>

>Darrell

>

>[Who doesn't sit in his under wear in the basement reading

>conspiracy theories. I don't have a basement, and I wear pajamas.]

>

Uh, sorry Darrell, we have your number now. You may be naked looking

for UFOs right now for all we know. :-P

Yes, methane is a component in some of the Jovian planets/satellites.

Are you referring to Titan? Why do you say it may be hot? It is/was

estimated to be about 95 Kelvin (-295 degrees F). What gives?

~Deanna