Has red shift ever been measured during a solar eclipse? we can only look at stars in the night sky. This means the sun is behind us whenever red shift has been measured in a star or universe or whatever. My point is - red shift has only ever been measured while looking away from the gravitational field of our sun. Just as a stars position is changed due to the gravitational effect of the sun, so also should its red shift, when compared to its non solar eclipse measurement. My theory is that the starlight, traveling as a wave, expands as it enters the gravitational field of our sun, and compresses as it exits the gravitational field of the sun. since we can only see stars in the night sky, our perspective is limited by our position in the gravitational field of our sun and the planet closest to what ever telescope is observing it. In order to get a true measurement of the red shift, wouldn’t we have to be able to compare both measurements? This might call into question weather or not red shift really means that our universe is expanding.
Yay! You’re back!
With optical telescopes, yes. But radiotelescopes have no problem operating during the day.
Nope. Redshift is a bit of a misnomer, because it implies that we’re just talking about visible light, which is a very small piece of the electromagnetic spectrum. But the downshift of frequencies is observed across the entire spectrum.
so your saying the radio telescope that measures the red shift is pointing at the sun and measuring the red shift as the light travels past our sun and into the radio telescope along with the sunlight?
That’s nonsense!
Astronauts on the way to the moon, or standing on the moons’ surface could see stars during the daytime. The crew on the space station can see stars during the daytime. Heck, over 50 years ago, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin could see stars during the daytime.
if the entire spectrum of light down shifts, it could be explained by the expansion of all the frequencies as they enter the gravitational field of our sun and our perspective in it, giving the appearance that things are moving away, when actually, the frequencies are only expanding relative to the space they are entering. The same way audio frequencies appear higher as the car moves towards you, and lower as the car moves away from you. Our perspective of the light spectrum is not unique to the observer. It is owned by the largest mass that is effecting space in our relative position, the sun.
Regardless of day or night relativity still applies, your statement suggests that they could see the stars moving away, and do not need any other evidence that the universe is expanding.
I’ll give you some points for creativity, but your theory doesn’t work. According to your theory, the red shift is a result of our sun, which would provide the same red shift for all light being affected by its gravity. What we actually have observed is that more distant object are red shifted further.
Your theory needs some work.
Every time there’s a news story based on a survey, people immediately pipe up with things the survey might not have controlled for, confounding factors they can think of in the five minutes it takes them to read the headline which they’re certain are worthy of mention in the thread about the article because, hey, this might invalidate the whole thing! This could blow the idea wide open! This could change everything!
It’s impossible to imagine the people who worked on the study could have thought of any of those things. It’s utterly beyond the ken of mortal commentator that people who are familiar with a field might have some insight into it, and could potentially run a study without ignoring age or height or any of the other factors most adults have on a driver’s license. No, what those experts lack is someone who learned everything they know about their field from what they noticed out of the corner of their eye as they raced from the article itself to the forum or comment section, heady with the confounding factor to undo months or years of work.
My point is, after you can explain why this comic is wrong you can tell us why every cosmologist who supports the Big Bang is incorrect and what predictions your model has made which are anywhere near as successful.
The problem with all of those so called “experts” is that they rely on math, and math is a whole pile of worthless crap. To learn more about this, you might want to browse this previous thread if you missed it.
If cosmological redshift really were due to the gravitational effects of the Sun, then during a solar eclipse would be the worst possible time to measure it, because that’s when our lines of sight are passing most deeply through the Sun’s gravity.
I’m not familiar enough with astronomy to provide direct evidence, I think radio telescopes pretty much take care of that, however, there is such a thing as gravitational redshift and it was astronomers who discovered it. I can’t imagine how they could have discovered the different types of redshift and spent 100 years studying it without realizing which type is which.
the point is - the light wave, as it travels, in three dimensions, expands and contracts through the various gravitational fields it encounters. The gravitational field is representative of whatever mass is creating it, including density of the mass. Measuring red shift during a lunar eclipse, as the moon blocks the sun, would allow you to measure the star light wave as it is on its way past the sun, instead of approaching it. Then you would be able to compare it to the measurement of the same starlight as it approaches the sun, and get a more accurate idea of what is really going on.
Well then you’d see periodic variation in the apparent shift of EM wavelengths at night as the bloody moon moves across the sky.
One star that we can surely study during daytime is good old Sol and we know that there is no discernible shift from it since we can directly compare spectra from it with spectral lines on Terra. A good example is helium, but there are other lines we can see on the sun.
First things first: Lunar eclipse vs Solar eclipse.
Now that that’s settled, are you suggesting that gravitational effect on light due to the sun varies during an eclipse?
We have to put a stop to all these light waves coming and going until we can find out what is really going on!
The hamsters ate my nice post. The one that began “I’m not sure why I’m bothering but …”.
Now I’m not bothering except to say that everything the OP has said is not only unphysical, it’s anti-physical.
Fortunately for OP, pseudo-science explains everything science does not.
<drooling pseudo-snarkie>
The speed of light, c, is slowing down over time … everything in the universe it stationary with respect to everything else in the universe … these distant objects only appear to be moving away from us when in fact the light these objects emitted oh so long ago is actually moving faster … dE/dt = c[sup]2[/sup] ∂m/∂t + 2mc ∂c/∂t …
</drooling pseudo-snarkie>
I came across this theory in the editorial section of some science magazine about 20 years ago … the author was bemoaning that the entire physics community was locked into just one view of the universe and that this was bad for the scientific method … someone somewhere should be trying to falsify GR if for no other reason to show that GR can be falsified … C’mon, the above (pseudo-)theory isn’t any crazier than the expansion of the universe is still accelerating, talk about bozo ideas …
The OP is just on a fishing expedition, whether he’s right or wrong at least he’s trying … and someone should be trying … if the experts aren’t, then us lessers must …
Light from a distant source is only coming towards the gravitational well of the sun if we are observing something straight up in the sky at midnight - or otherwise exactly opposite the sun. The night lasts an average of 12 hours - a little less for useful astronomical work, and during the night we see half the sky. The point being that we can easily observe objects that are quite close to 90 degrees from the direction of the sun. And we measure objects at all intermediate angles. Thoughout the year this angle changes over a large range as well. So if the angle made with the sun direction caused a difference we would see variations in the spectral shift all over the place. We don’t.
And yes we do measure the spectra of objects with angles that point some of the way towards the sun - the HST is in space and whilst the target to sun angle is restricted to be greater than 50 degrees, that gives you a very large part of the sky that can be seen at any time - and again, as the year progresses it sees the entire sky as well, so you still expect to see a seasonal variation in spectral shift if the Sun affected the spectra. And again, no such variation is seen.
So, the idea has clear refutation from current observations.