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…

Yes sir, I am saying about the standard cosmological view No replies.... Ok.. Let us discuss:-) What are WMAP sources????? How to explain them? What are they? 2008 WMAP sources paper & 2008 WMAP 5-yr data release ware taken to visualize the concepts. 1. Here basically we argue that radiation is received in all frequency ranges from astronomical bodies from Radio, Far infrared, Quasars, QSOs, to Stars, Galaxies, and X-ray sources, such that they cover the Blackbody spectrum theoretically from one end to another. 2. Large angular movements of WMAP in multiple of 22.5° start causing the thermal fluctuations, smaller angular movements near the radii of main-lobe gains will cause the maximum fluctuations and in very small angular movements systematic and measurement errors dominate the signals. 3. In addition uneven Microwave dish gains from Main-lobes, Back-lobe and side-lobes cause the lot of errors in signals in Multipole moment maps. Calculation of Bigbang emitted radiation temperature using Vakradiation also given QORG catalog was used for showing the real astronomical bodies, which are in the vicinity of those WMAP sources given in 2003 year. 4. Thus this paper fairly explains the Basic properties of CMB like Black body spectrum, WMAP sources, thermal fluctuations in multipole moment maps etc., with in the normal Physics framework, and with out using any Bigbang concepts

I mean to say... a) It is not generated by any stars, galaxies, astronomical bodies, etc.

Probably because of time factor, you are confusing; I will change my statement as follows… CMB is radiation from Bigbang . It is not from any stars, Galaxies, any Astronomical bodies, or even from Interstellar dust / Inter-Galaxial dust. What do you say sir?

Sir, There are Ideas about 1. This thread starting point….about WMAP / CMB… 2. BTW the question of Big Bang versus Big Bounce… May be I will put forward about the first here, as I started the thread here. And universe model questions may be in some new thread , ok Radiation from Bigbang was from about 13.7 billion years old. It is not from any stars, Galaxies, any Astronomical bodies, or even from Interstellar dust / Inter-Galaxial dust. What do you say sir?

Resp Martin sir, That’s what I also want to derive from you sir, I want to provoke a bit, hence I asked repeatedly same question. That is a correct answer… Warm regards =snp

Respected Martin Sir, I thank you once again for such nice explanatory and practical worldly guidance… You are correct, in the first stage, say in 1965, after Penzias and Wilson , precision of optical and microwave instrumentation was not enough to resolve the sky into millions of stars and Galaxies as we see in today’s catalogs. Definitely we should not mistake the elderly decisions that time. It is all history now. What is my point of view is not to waste further of human intelligence and brain power. Definitely it is not my point of view… That’s why I am not arguing or agreeing about the second stage you have mentioned. [ Pussst… I don’t want to be branded and ostracized as Crackpot, lunatic or even M.A.D…..] Ok lets go into " BTW the question of Big Bang versus Big Bounce is still open, the timing is right for disagreement and thinking up alternatives in that department. " What shall I do for that sir, Shall I put forth some of my xxxxx ideas on that?????:D I want to work for the humanity and I don’t want to criticize any one… Thank you once again, Warm regards =snp

Thank you for your advice sir… I am bit new to this forum, I did posting in other forums. Posting on this subject is not new to me. For ref see: *LINKS to Garbage removed* I read those fundamentals. You can test my knowledge, if you please. Now just I want to discuss WMAP point sources, over which they have published many papers. If they have filtered out and erased the sources and show clean CMB, that way they feel CMB is originated from Bigbang. Hence it is by the best way, by eliminating all witnesses against, proves Bigbang! Still if you people want to discuss about the possible origins of CMB other than from Bigbang you are welcome, Otherwise, hail Bigbang !!!!! Cheers !

:-)Thank you sir, But I could not see any answer for our search. You can down load that paper by Googling, or shall I give you a link for that Bennett paper???

How to explain WMAP sources??? We can see ' Extragalactic Sources' Bennett paper 2003, 'WMAP observations: Foreground emission' in particular 208 extragalactic point sources, including the 5 spurious ones. We can see WMAP '2008'-- 5-year data release also.

You are exactly correct sir, thank you for such a nice explanatory post… But you said in your earlier post as given below I am still confusing… You mean by Rotation space gets bent, is it????