fripro

NASA has announced that when the hubble telescope is aimed at the distant Universe towards 13.5 billion years,that there is no visible light, this means that red and blue dominate the received distant light. I again ask could this be a possible indicator that the Universe is rotating as red means doppler shifted away and blue means doppler shifted towards the telescope view? FRIPRO

I have seen this photo before from NASA's Hubble space telescope, and if it is the true color I would address it as a collision of two massive objects, both moving at near the speed of UV light in the dark matter (you have been refering to) to a collision. This would cause the resultant residue to move in the dark matter at velocities greater than the velocity of light in that dark matter. Thus the blue light. This light (or a form of it) can be seen in any atmosphere where a mass velocity exceeds the velocity of light in that matter. It can also be explained as a cone of radiation similar to the sharp sound one hears in the earth's atmosphere when a airplane exceeds the sound barrier. This is a form of and example of Chrenkov's light.

http://vmsstreamer1.fnal.gov/VMS/Samples/Cerenkov.ram I guess I lost my way, however if my coment appears twice that is what happen. With respect to the bullet photo above, could the blue light be Cerenkov Radiation? To understand Cherenkov log on to: http://vmsstreamer1.fnal.gov/VMS/Samples/Cerenkov.ram FRIPRO

I admire the thought of houses, and I raise the point that as one travels in an airplane over the top of all the homes, even as the earth turns, and one continues to circle the globe of houses he will come back to the first house you pointed out So is the Universe, rotating, the source of centripical gravity an the galaxies are the houses my young friend equates to. One must not forget that the airplane must fly in an atmosphere, over these uncountable number of houses. So true is the Universe, it also has an atmosphere-- Dark Matter!

I could not help but comment on your spheroid drawing. In recent photos in 3d steroscopic placed on the fourm (I refer you to--Fripro's Gyroscopic Universe Vision) on this SFN forum string. It referes one to a spheroid version of the Universe with photographic http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=30901

Martin here is and improvemnt on the stereo photo above FRIPRO http://www.fripro.com/STEREO%20UNIVERSE%20UIDE.htm

Martin There was an ancient drawing and belief that a turtle supported the earth just as Edtharan said. It demostrates how only about 2 to 5 thousand years has past,where we have progress from the turtle to a Universe that is particle in nature and all mass and radiation(WAVES) are constructed in many form from these particles (dark matter) and the Vortex attraction between all matter is the Dark energy, scientist are paying more attention to. http://www.fripro.com/stero%20Universe.htm

DNA others Phi For All Martin pointed out in an earlier thread (Flat in this case) just means that no matter how big the triangle its angles add up to 180 degrees. It doesn’t mean 2D. Stereoscopic telescopes like Hubble are capable of, seeing 3D. It is sad that Hubble is off line now. NASA has announced that the Hubble telescope (which just was damaged by the CME from the sun and other reasons) will be repaired in 2008, and plans are still underway for the James Webb Telescope, Hubble's successor, which would be launched in 2011. JWT will be designed to view objects in visible light and infrared, and its mirror will have six times the area of Hubble's mirror. Its goal is to study the first stars and galaxies that formed in the early Universe. It will operate 1 million miles (1.5 million km) away from the Earth, and will not be serviceable from orbit. JWT can take stereoscopic photos years apart and we will be able to see the universe in greater resolution stereographically. One way you can see the stero photo referenced, is to cross your eyes. Here is a deep space stero-like photo in part from NASA Hubble space telescope. Imagine the points (when viewing this stero photo) that I have pointed out earlier. The red shift can also be viewed, at the yellow galaxy. Indicating rotation. I also wish to point out that if the Earth was transparent and if one could see through the earth at the various hurricanes, tornado etc. on the so call tranparent globe. We could also see through the earth to huricanes on the other side--the same for a rotating Universe These huricanes are similar to galaxies. The huricanes and tornados on a transparent earth would be at all angles, similar to the stero photo I have referenced. They are in the earth's thin atmosphere which is particle like also. It would take an entire book to even approach the proof you are looking for. The Universe is particle in nature and all mass and radiation(WAVES) are constructed in many form from these particles (dark matter) and the Vortex attraction between all matter is the Dark energy, we all are paying more attention to. Log on to: http://www.fripro.com/stero Universe.htm

I am preparing the text and photo's now that will give you something to think about. Please give me the time to answer ]when[/u

I will give your perfectly valid question that any theory like what you have proposed must fullfill. but let's not get into argument of sarcasm, as that is not scientific.

I know what you have asked me is a leading question, next I would be asked to prove it, just how can I do that? My answer is theoretical based on years of scientific experiments an observations. It is very hard for our human mind to comprehend the premise that the entire Universe’s bubble-like globe is made of the ether's particle's, mass, and waves. All mass galaxies are expanding across its particle atmospheric surface. This same Universe (a soap bubble example) floats in the infinite nothing.

The Universe is immense beyond all imagination of individual humans on Earth. One can see in the deep space photograph by NASA an obvious tilting of the galaxies at many different angles. This seems to infer that some background galaxies are on the surface of a transparent expanded globe. This globe probably is rotating; however, because of its size, perception of the rotational movement on Earth, in our Milky Way galaxy, is impossible to measure.* Of course the Hubble camera was looking in one direction, so where are we with respect to the globe? My guess is in the outer shell of the globe through which we are now looking, the shell being very thick but transparent to various frequencies of radiation infra red (UV, visual light, X rays, gamma rays, micro waves, radio waves, etc). * Observation of the red shift exhibited less red shift than expected, indicating that the expansion of the Universe across the globe's surface is speeding up. It could also imply that the Universe is rotating. A rotating Universe would be gyroscopic, the source of gravity ,g, on Earth. Now watch the nasayers!

I never realized that our forumn had so many young students that is great. Being 84 years old and in excelent health I hope to part with important theories about the Universe, that I am sure is important to you students and friends. Tom

I am sure the moderator does not permit me to advertise where my theories are being published. Believe you me Martin I have studied the standard mainstream cosmology before making my coments above.m

The variable speed of light (VSL) concept states that the speed of light in vacuum . . . My belief and published theory is that light can not travel in a vacuum. This where I differ, however I do believe as the density of the ether atmosphere of the Universe changes the speed of light is not constant.,

I am not quite sure what you are driving at, fill me in. I again would like to quote: http://www.spaceandmotion.com/physics-censorship-nobel-prize-laureate.htm I still believe publishing on a forum is important to find out where ones scientific topic might need some help.

One of the problems that I have experienced on this fourms in science is most log on's seem to want to tear down legimate scientific theories. I want to post a quotation from from DeBorlie nobel-prize-laureate (to whom I am in deep debt).* He (Louis de Broglie) said: The history of science teaches that the greatest advances in the scientific domain have been achieved by bold thinkers who perceived new and fruitful approaches that others failed to notice.* If one had taken the ideas of these scientific geniuses who have been the promoters of modern science and submitted them to committees of specialists, there is no doubt that the latter would have viewed them as extravagant and would have discarded them for the very reason of their originality and profundity.* More recently, in the domain of theoretical physics, of which I can speak with knowledge, the magnificent novel conceptions of Lorentz and Planck, and particularly Einstein also clashed with the incomprehension of eminent scientists. The new ideas here triumphed; but, in proportion as the organization of research becomes more rigid, the danger increases that new and fruitful ideas will be unable to develop freely. Let us state in a few words the conclusion to be drawn from the foregoing. While, by the very force of circumstances, research and teaching are weighted down by administrative structures and financial concerns and by the heavy armature of strict regulations and planning, it becomes more indispensable than ever to preserve the freedom of scientific research and the freedom of initiative for the original investigators, because these freedoms have always been and will always remain the most fertile sources for the grand progress of science. FRIPRO

The Universe is not infinite; however it (the Universe) does exist in infinity FRIPRO

Moo: I have not called you a quack. In fact i READ ALL OF YOUR POSTS AND TRIED TO GIVE YOU MY REPLYS, ON THE FACT THAT THE UNIVERSE DOES haVs an ether dark matter atmosphere which conducts the masS/wave of radiation across it breath (atmosphere) Here is some further proof of my contention: MOO Thanks for your long and lengthly coments and I assure you I have given it much thought, but here is something I think you should understand as science with respect to the ether. Marusa Bradac of the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC), located at the Department of Energy’s Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC), has said, We had predicted the existence of dark matter for decades, but now we've seen it in action. The method that they used made the landmark observations by studying a galaxy cluster 3 billion light years away. Dark matter, the elusive stuff that makes up a quarter of the Universe, may have been seen in isolation for the first time. Further information can be seen on line at "] I have viewed the photos that Marusa's team took, and there is some possibilities that the blue light they viewed from the dark matter may be a form of Cerenkov's radiation, as I predicted, which may be able to detect the dark matter of the ether consisting of WIT particles,etc. I am impessed with their discoveries. In nuclear power plants, Cerenkov's radiation can be see as a blue light in the cooling water, this light is produced by high velocity electrons which travel faster then the velocity of light normally found in water. Astronomer researcher from Johns Hopkins University Baltimore (James Jee) using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope discovered a ghostly ring of dark matter that formed long ago during a titanic collision between two massive galaxy clusters. The ring's discovery is among the strongest evidence yet that dark matter exists. Astronomers have long suspected the existence of the invisible substance as the source of additional gravity that holds together galaxy clusters. Such clusters would fly apart if they relied only on the gravity from their visible stars. Although astronomers don't know what dark matter is made of, they hypothesize that it is a type of elementary particle that pervades the Universe. Credit: NASA QUACK. You still have no proof, and we won't consider quackery without proof. People *have* changed their minds (If you'd know SCIENCE, you'd know that... and you'd know the many many many many many examples of new theories that were shocking -- and ACCEPTED! wow. Amazing. How'd they do that! oh.. shoot! the small detail of supplying proof. Damnit, how petty scientists are. Damnit! You don't know science. You're a quack. And you really are boring. The only reason this thread went over 4 pages is because I seem to keep trying.

It can not be that boring , at leae this forum lasted more then five strings.

The cry from the many theoretical and scientific experts says, "Prove it." Go to any online forum on the internet, and one will see how badly divided the world's communities are, with regard to answers to the above arguments.* You would be amazed at the amount of advice an author like me gets from the readers of the forums. Most people, students, and scientists have been schooled in the concept of experimental proof and constant argument as to any new theory that threatens what they have learned in university, etc. New theories, even if valid, are required to fight the rigid rules of the established groups in science and religion. Most people on Earth are frozen in their ideas and thoughts and are in a proverbial deep freeze. Only the free thinker is eager to look to new theories about an intelligent Universe. FRIPRO

FOODCHAIN With respect to this forums subject one must study an entire book, and all of its physical tests; because one cannot offer impeachable proof on the forum due to time and space. One must have a grasp for the entire subject, as outline in any ones book as a matter of fact. Blowing my own horn is not what forums are for. But we can give rise to thought--is it possible? Perhaps I should look into this subject further, a free thinker would argue. Foodchain-I have argued with forum members on this fantastic subject. However none of my arguments stand alone, and I have been well reminded of this. How can one over look a lifetime of inventions (Published in ones book) that demonstrate the very thing that we are talking about. Inventions (patented, manufactured, measure, and tested) based on the existence of the Universe's ether particle atmosphere. The math calculations is a way to calculate the particle mass--however it is only a tool as inferred. Then to find through NASA’s space probes that there is a parallel in space of these inventions is promising. I know that forum members can pick out any portion (as the radio talk show host call "tidbits, or sound bites") then build a case around it; however this is political not science. It takes a open minded free thinker to question the authenticity of the entire subject outlined in this forum The Universe's Intelligent Design via Evolution. Then asking careful questions with out ridicule./unQuote FRIPRO

DeBroglie's mass wave theory 1924 mc² = hƒ*was converted, by Fairbairn, Thomas Edward, to show WIT particle mass in grams. The WIT particle is the basic particle mass of the ether's dark mass. It makes up all waves and mass in the Universe.*Note:*throughout these calculation is**v* being frequency in hertz of a mass wave (photon)1. E1=*hv Planck's constant 6.62559x10-27 erg . sec********************************************* 2.E2= mc2**Einstein's c = velocity of UV light = (2.99792457x1010 cm /sec) E1 = E2 or hv* = mc 2**** *m = hv*/ c 2 h and c 2* are*a constant k f ******************* k f*= 6.62559x10-27erg.sec /(2.99792457x1010 cm / sec) 2 * k f =*7. 371963x 10 -48 erg . sec / (cm / sec) 2** DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS SIMPLIFIED ************************ m=k f ν*= 7.371963 x 10 -48* g . sec**X 1 hertz*******v in hertz is 1/sec*********************m=k f v = 7.371963 x 10 -48* g . sec / sec = 7.371963x 10 -48* g *****************M = 7.371963x 10 -48* g***is Mass in grams for the WIT particle.**Mw Mw = 7.371963x 10 -48* grams Dimensional analysis (simplifying unit conversion) , by a Professor of Math. at Owens Community College. *(Note: the dimensional analysis of the complex units is very important, as it resolves the complex units into a simple gram unit for the mass of a WIT particle). "Seeing the mass *Mw in grams was electrifying I now realized that I had the ether's basic particle's value." I chose Planck's constant to calculate the WIT particle mass, my motive being, Planck's Time is a measure of time that a wave of UV light in ether takes to cross the distance equal to the Planck Length. Planks length is a measure of the density (between WIT particles) of the WIT particle Ether atmosphere of the Universe. Thus determining the speed of UV light in the Ether of the Universe's atmosphere. The WIT particle calculations solve the problem of the inconsistency between two incompatible theories, that of the General Theory of Relativity (the understanding of mass in space) and the Quantum Mechanics Theory (the understanding of mass particles on the sub atomic scale), the reason being that the WIT particles make up all mass as a vortex, true for all particles from the microscopic to the macroscopic. *

...I never supplied any links unless it was to a direct quote from a scientist or organization that is direct reference to the argument. I have never placed my own site, link or e mail. Others have done this, by copying my references and placing them on the forum to use in an argument against me.[/i] I also can see why you would mention this. I am also suprised to see these quotations as it is hard to tell my work from whom ever copies and paste it on the forumn--please. Thank you for puting me wise to this questionable action on the forum.FRIPRO

For reference I recommend the forum (who readers up to now did not coment on the subject,however are very interested in the subject) log on to the URL http://vmsstreamer1.fnal.gov/VMS/Samples/Cerenkov.ram This is a fantasic video and sound of MASS/WAVE action in any (ANY) medium.This includes the Universe's ether (Aether) FRIPRO