snp.gupta

Sir, We can even develop software to our specific needs.. If you try to solve the perturbations of planets as a separate entry, it will be problematic. You have to deal with them in overall. For example: Dynamic universe model is a many body problem. It solved specifically, 1. Formation of Non-collapsing Galaxy disks 2. Expansion and contraction of universe. 3. Missing mass and Circular velocity curves of stars 4. Pioneer anomaly etc… We have to formulate our equations properly in many body problems, then implement them, that will do the trick..

If there are some images, if we can confirm they are so. We will cross that image out. Hence mass will reduce....

Multiple bending of light ( Subbarao’s Paths), Gravitational Lansing of light and Gravitational Bending of Light….

Sir, what is your openion, Bigbang is "singularity" or not?

Thank you for information....

Thats a nice idea sir, i would like to join you... May be we can take year 2000; 0,0 hours as basis. I see most data is available readily from catalogs. We have to calculate distances based on luminosities only... We have to write equations... No sir, Mass distribution may not be same... His Idea is correct. There may be some IMAGES for galaxies, which may cancel out eventually; I don’t know. I am just speculating……

Thank you, That is correct. We all would like to see your NOW results. Do you have them already???

Do you observe the universe is isotropic in any scale? (I am sorry about my post about CMB in previous thread. Just I want provoke some thought. But not disturb the thread…..)

May I add a point here??? (See the boldface above) No part of sky CMB map is similar to any other part of sky. As one of our friend suggested, for CMB, one can give an analogy like some kind of fog. We see - well- fog and stare inside it. After some training of the eyes we see the faint contours of our neighboring house. It is simply because the fore ground radiation depends on the different sources like stars, Galaxies and astronomical bodies. They vary from place to place. The radiation differs depending on foreground. That’s why we see contours, what do you say?

I dont know. how to convince them??? If they want they can argue and convince us in a public forum like this. Or else they can go on publishing papers in an isolated way... As one of our friend suggested, for CMB, one can give an analogy like some kind of fog. We see - well- fog and stare inside it. After some training of the eyes we see the faint contours of our neighboring house. It is simply because the fore ground radiation depends on the different sources like stars, Galaxies and astronomical bodies. They vary from place to place. The radiation differs depending on foreground. That’s why we see contours…

Not only that; stars and other astronomical bodies also emit radiation in the same WMAP frequencies, they should eliminate all stars and dust clouds etc… They eliminated SUN , Planets, Moon, Galaxy disk. COBE by design collects samples of radiation not in the direction of COBE to SUN, but perpendicular to that direction. Other stars also like SUN, why should they keep stars?

You are correct sir... CMB is generated from Stars, Galaxies, Dust & clouds other astronomical bodies. What do you say?

You are correct sir, Why eliminate only one or two…, they should remove all. Similarly all radiation from stars, all astronomical bodies and galaxies they should eliminate… Then only we can see if any thing remains!

We can calculate the effective radiation of these galaxies, if not at least we can approximate their radiation, which was what I did…But ignoring totally is not correct.

The dish antennae used MEASURES radiation from distant objects. For local you have to use some immersion thermometers, some thing like we put into our mouth, when we get fever. Galaxies EMIT :-)microwave radiation, so do stars and other astronomical bodies. You are correct here. All this radiation should be eliminated, it was not done till now from say 1965. If you know any instance of such elimination, please let’s discuss…. I don’t know what you have asked NASA, what you have understood. Check for “ Galaxy Catalogs” in Google…