File: ngc 7603.jpg (9 KB, 404x403) Image search: [Google]

9 KB, 404x403

There is proof, however, that Hubble's Law isn't a law at all, though it is a very important discovery which science does not completely understand yet. In the rush to proclaim how smart humanity's become, all evidence contrary to the "law" has been dismissed as mere quackery. It only takes common sense to realize that today's science has developed an unhealthy dependence on this law; if anything contradicted it, 60+ years of big bang theory would come crumbling down.

The problem is that galaxies have been found that have been linked to quasars. Quasars have some of the highest red shift scores observed in the universe. So, obviously, today's scientists say that they are the farthest things away. But, when a quasar is attached to a galaxy with a lower red shift score, it breaks Hubble's Law. The same galaxy can't be at two vastly different distances from Earth. Instead of studying these anomalous galaxies, modern science chooses to ignore them as coincidence. When science starts doing shit like that, your faith in it should be greatly disturbed.

Remember, every time you hear in the new that some new galaxy has been found "x" billion light years away, you should know that the law they are using is unproven. We still really know so little about the cosmos. It is man's pride in his own knowledge that is driving these proclamations.

>>693864099

this is a picture of NGC 7603, one of the galaxies mentioned in the documentary

the "z" scores are the red shift values

though they appear to be small numbers they are relative to one another

when a red shift score is double another's score, it means it's really fucking far away from the other according to hubble's law

however, the image clearly shows that the two objects are next to one another

red shift cannot be a reliable way to judge a distant galaxy's distance from earth

>>693864198

there's a stupid image to belittle every important idea in the world, isn't there?

The universe will die one day. Nothing can live forever.

You are right there is no absolute proof of the universes age. Hubbles law however is directly observable and the winding back of the observed expansion leads to an educated guess of the time that everything should be squashed into a singularity, all other things being equal.

Its not like they pinned all the available theories on a wall and threw darts at it. Im absence of other data its a pretty solid theory.

File: 1457913314776.jpg (46 KB, 492x311) Image search: [Google]

46 KB, 492x311

>>693864198

>Whenever someone tells you the universe is "x" billion years old, the truth is that he is guessing.
>It's more likely the universe had no beginning and will have no end. The universe is most likely not expanding.

Thanks for not guessing, as well. Dumbassniggercunt.

>>693863930
Tillman's crest and the little dipster.

Why don't people understand that we know literally nothing? We assume. We don't know. And you don't know either faggot.

Why do people always act like this is a given law that can't be wrong in any way? All we "know" is our best guess to explain a certain problem.

tl;dr just off yourself

>>693863930
not how science works, buddy. its the best explanation until the next best explanation appears.

>>693864737

You ignore the instances where the red shift scores make no sense. They are not a reliable indicator of distance. The red shift values are not understood.

>>693865213

lol i never said i knew, but it's clear the big bang theory is wrong, that is all that is known

There are thousands of people around the world who are twice as smart as anyone who has ever posted on 4chan and whose lives are dedicated to making scientific discoveries that would have a tiny fraction of the historical importance of producing real evidence against the Big Bang... but OP has got it all figured out, and this is the venue that he decided to use to convince people of it.

>>693865230

This is the next best explanation. That's how science works.

File: vlad the implier.jpg (25 KB, 339x360) Image search: [Google]

25 KB, 339x360

>>693865374
You don't get it do you?

>>693865458

Faith is those people is the exact same as faith in god. The people in the documentary have the decency to tell you they have no explanation as to why red shifts are the way they are. I'd rather put my faith in honest people.

>>693865672
Understanding that scientific progress is not made on YouTube is not faith, it's elementary scientific literacy.

>>693865230

You enjoy believing in whatever you're told to believe. A couple hundred years ago, you'd believe that everything revolves around the earth.

No one wants to believe he's one of the stupid people. That explains you.

>>693865964

Yea, I'd say that everyone involved in this discussion isn't a scientist. BUT the people in the documentary are.....so listen to them instead.

The arrogance that a NEET watching conspiritarded youtubes thinks he knows more than the combined scientific community is astounding.

I hope this is bait....

>>693866432

When people call alternate scientific explanations for the cosmos "conspiracy theories," something else is wrong.

>>693866432
The arrogance of the scientific community is really what astounds me. Just think about it. Everything we know about the universe is observed from earth. We have very few vessels that have ever acquired data from locations different than earth, and we have never really acquired any data from outside the sol system. Nothing the scientific community ever spits that purely holds data from such an isolated place as earth can ever really be considered fact. It's only factual in the given circumstances. For all we know, the cosmic background radiation could by anything really, or something completely different. We will never know. We can only really speculate.

Take math for an example, can you confidently say that it was invented or discovered?

>>693866930
Once 'alternative' theories provide evidence that stands up to rigour and peer review and actually provides a better explanation to observed phenomena then they will no longer be alternative and inherit the status of the current theory.

To quote Tim Minchin: "what do you call alternative medicine that actually works?"

..... "medicine"

>>693864737
THIS
>>693865254
No, the model is incrementally perfected. Big Bang is pretty much scientific consensus today regardless of particulars, there's been a good half a century of increasingly accurate observations and modeling has been proggresively tweaked.

Science is by its nature an approximation of truth, we don't give up on relativity because quantum mechanics nor viceversa, we know we are somewhere near to a good description of the universe, no one claims at this point that it is 100% accurate.

File: LZaoWI3.gif (1 MB, 500x374) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 500x374

>>693863930
Too many videos OP. Explain it concisely or get the fuck out.

>>693863930
I'm not watching your stupid fuckin shit nigger. All your "likely's"are just dumb shit kike guesswork as well. The only fact in this world is that everything is a theory and humanity don't know shit.

>>693863930
Dear faggot,

Typically one provides a theory when striking one down. Explain or gtfo.

>>693865213
Because the alternative is relativism and nothing can be known because assumptions. You have to work on those if you want to get past cogito ergo sum and most of us understand this, science isn't dogma. Having said that there is such a thing as scientific facts, working on some basic existential assumptions, and solipsistic thought is a dead end. It's like choosing SJW philosophy in which all opinions are valid no matter how irrelevant and stupid or just taking the measured approach that most sane adults will be able to repeat any given observation...

>>693863930
>This is called Hubble's Law. Basically, each galaxy has a "red shift" score based on its observable light emission. According to the law, galaxies with high red shift scores are farther away.

This thread is bullshit, do not bother replying

>>693865964
Don't try arguing with hillbilly scientist, they remain convinced only unanswerable questions are valid since this allows them to think there's validity in their pet theories...

>>693867897
Agree, don't really have the patience to go through all of that just to squash some lame Christian attempt at disqualifying established scientific thought. If something as fundamentally important as the Big Band had been discredited I think we'd be reading about it in journals like Nature, not watching it on fucking Youtube...

>>693869031
It's not that I don't have the patience, I'd just rather not spend an hour and a half listening to bullshit points that I've probably already heard brought up. That's probably what you meant though.

>>693866432
/thread

why don't you go ahead and debate actual scientists then? lmao

File: 1454436496050.jpg (291 KB, 959x960) Image search: [Google]

291 KB, 959x960

>>693867275
What's your point? Any scientist that says what we know about the Universe is pure fact is lying. Who doesn't know that?

>>693867275
>Take math for an example, can you confidently say that it was invented or discovered?
didnt read anything but that, and yes, we can confidently say it was invented. math is a human concept used to make things easier to understand in our language. are you fucking retarded?

>>693870500
are you 10 years old?

>>693870789
Are you? Who gives a fuck if the best we can do is speculate?
>We will never know. We can only really speculate.
How do you know?

>>693868386

I am not going to argue with you about how there are many things in this observable universe that can be considered as fact, BUT considering that most of our observable universe is observable through what we call consciousness and we know very very little about this simple thing that allows us to experience EVERYTHING, shouldn't we try to explore a little more about what it means to be conscious and delve into a little epistemology before claiming to KNOW scientific facts on a cosmological scale.

ITT: stoner logic

>>693867275
There isn't a severe need to explore the universe on that scale yet and you're whining about there not being an answer for the question of universe origin. BB Theory is an approximation of a series of truths gathered over our entire existence, you imply that scientists who support it refuse alteration of it but it does happen, just not at the rate of which you find satisfactory.

>>693864198
i support this theory the most

>>693870280
Underrated post

/thread

>>693871101
your attitude screams you're 10.

>who cares about anything!! all we can do is guess and estimate so who cares!
speculation are educated guesses based on inconclusive evidence. you already fucking knew that if you even attended elementary school you fucking dumbass.

a theory is a well substantiated, documented, and supported explanation of our observations. our knowledge based on these theories have a role to play in advancing our education.

you aren't doing anything. you're worthless and your opinions are also worthless. have a read and goodbye, i have a policy not to deal with special educated nuts.

http://www.fritzwagner.com/ev/tools_for_analysis_3.html

>>693869031

not a Christian here, though the big bang theory fits nicely with the belief in creationism

that's something you and neo-christians have in common

File: MFlvu2z.png (205 KB, 421x263) Image search: [Google]

205 KB, 421x263

>>693872239
Holy shit dude chill. I was calling out the guy I responded to for precisely that. Maybe you misinterpreted me. Maybe I misinterpreted him, I don't know.

>>693863930

this is just a resource for people who'd like to know what other scientists think about the big bang theory

the idea that everyone who doubts the big bang theory is a nutjob is more based in sociological reasons than actual science

one day, the next newton or einstein or whoever will come around and blow everyone's minds

it takes no sacrifice to believe what everyone else believes on the assumption that the majority is right

the majority is usually pretty stupid

>>693872408
Don't associate creationism with the scientific method, creationism doesn't change save when it needs to lure more idiots into it's rank and file.

File: l_8053fb031a4c189d6b060ba83200efc2.jpg (179 KB, 600x800) Image search: [Google]

179 KB, 600x800

>>693863930
If the universe has no beginning then how are stars formed?
>Every fucking one knows that stars consume hydrogen and helium and produce heavier elements what they distribute into space after their lifetime.
>Also everyone can see the spectrum of the stars and determine how many heavy elements are in there due to spectral lines. Everyone can see how small stars that are older because they burn longer have less heavy elements than young big stars that just exist for a few million years.
>If the universe was eternal, why isn't the universe full of heavy elements already?
>And where does all the new hydrogen come from to maintain the >90% hydrogen containment of the interstellar space?
None of your bullshit videos can explain that with a static universe.

>>693863930
>the universe is most likely not expanding

I see you have no idea what you are talking about and are just guessing.

We know the inverse us expanding because we can observe it

We know how far away things are because we can me sure it

We know the big bang happend because we can still detect it.

You need to go back to school before you feel the need to make stuff up and pretend you know what you are talking about.

Remember kids the big bang was discoverd by accident through observation, no one set out to look for it we discoverd it because observations indicated it.

>>693872898
Somebody get OP some burn heal...

>>693873333
...and checkum.

>>693873233
>You need to go back to school
can you imagine that nigga in school? the teacher will start explaining how black holes work and dis nigga will probably jump out of his seat in his Sonic costume telling the teacher he's wrong and to look at youtube videos.

>>693872898
That's because OP is wrong has no idea what hes talking about abd his videos are more fictitious than ancient aliens

He's just reached that age (around 14 15) where he wants to feel he's more enlightend than everyone so he starts acting retarded to feel special

>mom I'm a genius and know more about cosmology than everyone else because I can't possibly be wrong!

We can tell the universe is expanding because things further away from us that are MOVING further away from us have a REDSHIFT, because red is the longest wavelength in the spectrum.

Also, remember this important detail??? COSMIC BACKGROUND RADIATION.

It's the radiation that still exists throughout the universe from the uncomprehendingly fast expansion from a singularity.

you are no better than a flat earth theorist.

>>693873647
Lol yeah

He's like that autistic kid on the back of the room who thinks he's smarter than everyone and says things like "I'm doing bad in school because it's beneath me" "I should be in working at NASA right now but I need the pointless degree I already know more about than most graduates" "stupid teacher didn't know anything I should be teaching the class"

But when you talk to them everything they say is wrong and when you correct them they yell and get louder.

Dumbfuck, the redshift shit has nothing to do with distance. Scientists use it (the doppler effect) to judge somethings speed and direction relative to earth. It's just one of a number of things they factor in to calculate distance, they still have to triangulate based on the origin of the universe and our distance from that same point. If something is shifted red it just means that it is moving away from us.

>>693873999
I literally have that kid in my class I didn't even realise it was that common holy fuck fucking autists

also nice trips

>>693873681

wait t'il OP finds out about the Doppler effect

>>693863930
>The universe is most likely not expanding
Actually it's contracting. The reason that light from every direction seems to be redshifted isn't because those light sources are moving away, it's because the wavelength of light (like everything else in the universe) was larger when that light was emitted. On the small scale, the strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces keep everything in proportion as it shrinks, but over extremely great distances (such as the distances between galaxies) inertia wins out. The galaxies remain the same distance from each other, but are shrinking. Since everything in each galaxy, including the measuring standard (the wavelength of light) that we use to judge the distance to the next star, is shrinking the measurement seems to be constantly increasing because the ruler we're using is shrinking along with everything else.

File: parallax with p.png (1 MB, 937x375) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 937x375

>>693874046
We already concluded OP is retarded for mixing up redshift observations with parallax distence triangulation.

>>693874046
>nothing to do with distance
>use it to calculate distance

wow a contradiction v nice top science

>>693874173
Back in both junior high and highschool I knew someone like that, it's like the autism makes it impossible for them to think "perhaps I don't know more than the people who spent decades reserching it"

>>693874192
Said no cosmology ever

>>693873233
>We know the inverse us expanding because we can observe it
This is actually incorrect. The fact that everything in the universe *seems* to be moving away from us at the same speed no matter which direction you look is a clear indication that we're misinterpreting something. The observations we have made, those to which you refer, have been interpreted as evidence that everything is moving away from earth at the speed of light. The problem with that is that it could only possibly happen if the earth were the center of the universe, and we already know that we're orbiting a smallish star way out at the end of one arm of our medium-sized galaxy which is rather off-center of the observable universe.
The concepts of everything moving away at the speed of light and anything moving toward us (the Andromeda galaxy, for example) are mutually exclusive.

The universe isn't infinitely expanding, there has to be something else causing the apparent redshift.

>>693874627
fucking realest shit ever

I don't understand why society won't let people euthanise autistic kids or kids with Downs like they bring nothing to society apart from pity

they just waddle through life and make shitty threads like this

>>693875034
>measure
Forgot that one too.

File: stephen-hawking-a.jpg (68 KB, 690x388) Image search: [Google]

68 KB, 690x388

>>693874192
>>693875034


>Mfw I don't think they are trolling

>>693874725
Mr President, that's not...entirely accurate.
Try googling "the universe is shrinking" and prepare to shit bricks.

>>693875266
Damn I'm on fire with GETS today.

File: faith.jpg (132 KB, 530x406) Image search: [Google]

132 KB, 530x406

>>693874192
>cosmology has a good modell that can explain shit
>I DONT LIKE IT
>LETS CREATE SOME TOTALLY RETARDED EXPLAINATION BECAUSE FUCK YOU SCIENCE THATS WHY

>>693875451
Snap-back theory

>>693875476
Yeah, like when people could CLEARLY see that the earth was flat, but some asshole had a problem with that and made up some new explanation because FUCK YOU.
Fucking scientists, why can't they just believe the ancient texts like everyone else?

>>693871572
>guys, let's halt all scientific progress and only continue to think about the world once we've finally fully figured out what consciousness is and how it works.

>>693875034
>it could only happen if the earth was the center of the universe

In cosmology all points are the center as the universe all expanded from the same point and observations from every location would look the same.

But yeah no, you are right and every cosmologist who has advanced degrees and decades of reaserch are wrong.

Yep that MIST be it because you with no degree and no formal education can't possibly be wrong

>>693863930
And there's your problem faggot.
You didn't understand, and you base decisions on it.

Red and blue shift have nothing to do with distance, it's due to 2 objects moving towards or away from each other.

>>693875034
>our medium-sized galaxy which is rather off-center of the observable universe

you know that our galaxy is literally smack bang in the centre of our observable universe, right?

the whole universe, well who knows. but the definition of observable universe is a sphere radiating out from... well, us.

>>693875451
Wow a theory postulated by one scientists that has yet to be verified abd peer reviewd is 100% correct!?

Oh wait science dosnt work that way

Womp Womp

>>693875904
This

The center of the universe is where ever you happen to be observing from

File: agVpDyW_460sa.gif (2 MB, 460x460) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 460x460

>>693875768
No fucking scientist ever believed that the earth was flat. The diameter of the earth was already calculated by Sumers, Egypts and later Greek mathematicans simply with measuring the lenght of shadows at different points on earth at the same time of the year. That's something children learn in school today. You would know that, had you been there for once.

>>693875783
>every cosmologist who has advanced degrees
>thinking the one theory you've heard popularized the most is the only one there is and is universally accepted
>>693876001
>hurr i click one link, therefore the guy in that link is the only guy there is
There are over seven billion people on this planet. Do you REALLY think you've already heard every idea already, and that anything you aren't previously exposed to must be the imagination of the person from whom you first hear it?

>>693876455
No we haven't heard every idea and most likely all our current ones are only part of the picture.

But you are acting as if 100% fact the shrinking model is true because one petson belives it.

His idea may be correct but it has no validation through experimentation and is just a hypothesis right now.

>>693876151
>observer dependent universal boundaries
Why don't you just wear a crystal and sacrifice a goat if you're going to spout bullshit like that, anon?
Neither you nor your observations (thankfully) are the center of the universe. Fuck off.

>>693876866
nice dubs.

there is a few mathematically valid hypothesis that the universe is eternal and has no actual boundary, and the only definition that counts is the observable portion of the malaise, which is by default centred on the observer.

>>693876805
>because one petson belives it.
How obtuse can you be?
The fact that it makes sense to me means at least two people believe it. And you're arrogant as fuck for presuming that every one of the other 7.5 billion people in the world agree with you.

Not to mention the fact that popular belief has NEVER been an accurate measure of scientific fact, or there would only be four elements.

But please, do explain how else the redshift could indicate the same speed in every measurable direction (without magically making yourself the center of the universe) and I'll give your theory equal consideration.

>>693876866
No you don't get it there is no center of the universe In cosmology and as such the center is where ever it's observed from.

It's not metaphysical mumbo-jumbo it's perspectives.

If you observe the universe from Earth earth is the apperently center, if you do the same on a planet in Andromeda tgat planet is the apperently center.

Look up the center of the universe and you will find its "everywhere and nowhere"

Hell even Stephan Hawking talks about it, but I guess you are smarter than him huh?

They universe will eventually restart. you know that?

>>693877226
I'm saying that just because it makes sense to you dosnt mean it's right, until it's validated through experimentation it's just a hypothesis.

You arn't the end all be all of facts, what you belive isn't guerenteed correct, you get mad at others for thinking like than than say you are 100% right because I belive it...

I think you may have autism.

>>693877351
the universe is constantly restarting, even as we speak. only problem is you cannot travel between or pass information between universes. you are stuck in this one.

as for our universe, it is most likely flat. in the absence of an external massive force it will just burn out.

>>693877226
>you are arrogant because you and the rest if the scientific comunity belives one model that may not be correct

>I am superior because I belive a model that is 100% correct lalalalala I can't hear you lalalalala

Found the autist>>693873999 was talking about guys

>>693877462
lol, nope.
i just called bullshit on you asserting that only one person believes it, i didn't claim to be the end all be all, nor did i get mad.
It is a workable theory, not some uneducated bullshit that I made up, and the fact that you hadn't heard of it before does not invalidate it.

Again, please do offer any explanation as to how all points in the universe appear to be uniformly moving away from us. The shrinking theory does that, the expansion theory does not.

>>693875034
>off-center of the observable universe.
>observable universe

You know why it's called that, right? Because it's what we can see of the universe. The Earth IS the center of the observable universe because that's where we're observing from you dipshit.

>The fact that everything in the universe *seems* to be moving away from us at the same speed no matter which direction you look is a clear indication that we're misinterpreting something.

You are wrong, the question isn't whether or not everything is moving away from everything else at an increasing speed, that has been tested and confirmed hundreds of times by independent scientists, fuck, I've done it myself in my modern physics lab. The question is "Why is this happening?"

That's the really interesting thing to question.

>>693877760
Do please point out where in my post I claimed a 100% correct model. I don't recall even mentioning a unified field theory.
I think you're just inflating what you *thought* i said because you can't disprove what I *actually* said.

Went to walmart came back and i see you still replying to this 15 year old attention whore. Just tell me why /b/ros

File: 1464439224515.jpg (80 KB, 640x640) Image search: [Google]

80 KB, 640x640

Serious question here. Why do scientists refer to objects far away from earth as "from the past"? Like, when referring to a quasar, for example, they say looking at them is like looking into the past. But aren't quasars old as fuck compared to us? Weren't they created first? Since they have existed for longer, isn't it more accurate to say looking at them is like looking into the future?

>>693878003
>The question is "Why is this happening?"
That's called a "hole" when it happens in a theory. It's an observed phenomenon that cannot be explained by the framework of the theory.
And you're spazzing like a fundamentalist at the insolence of an alternate theory that has no trouble explaining that phenomenon.

Why is this happening?

>>693877833
I'm not a cosmologist I don't know, we will have to wait and see if the theory holds water, but remember lots of theories in cosmology fall away or are disproved through observation and experimentation.

You can belive what ever you want but you need to change your views as new evidence cones to light, I'd it's found the shrinking model is correct I will gladly accept it, until then it's just an interesting hypothesis put forth by one guy.

I hope he continues his reserch.

>>693878236
They say that because an object that is a million light-years away is not observable in its present state. We can only see the light that left it a million years ago, because it takes light a million years to travel a million lightyears.

We won't be able to see what that object actually looks like today (if its even still there) until today's light reaches us in a million years.

>>693875904

rofl, we've moved from the "the earth is the center of the universe and everything revolves around it" to "we really are the center of the universe, by chance"

>>693874414
This is exactly the only reason all those egg shaped planets have no life.

>>693878236
It's because light travels at a finite speed. Since they are millions or billions of lightyears away, we are seeing the light they produced millions or billions of years ago. We see what they were like back then. So it's like we're seeing into the past.

>>693878236
Because the farther away you look the farther back in time as light has a speed limit.

For example if you look at the sUN you are seeing the sun as it was 8 minutes in the past as it takes light 8 minutes to reach earth from the sun.

You look at alpha centauri you see it as it was 4.5 years ago as it takes light 4.5 years to reach us from it

When you look at Andromeda galaxy you see the galaxy as it was 2.2 million years ago as it takes 2.2 million years to reach us from it.

>>693875886

naw faggot, i understand that a red shift is coupled with the galaxy's brightness

>>693878279
>put forth by one guy.
That's pretty much every hypothesis in the history of ever, anon.
>you need to change your views as new evidence comes to light
Which is why you're ardently sticking to theories that predate the computer age? I'm the only one in this thread who's even considering the new theory, everyone else is swearing by their 8th grade science textbook.

>>693876225
Actually I clearly remember learning in school how everyone thought the Earth was flat until modern science first put a satellite into space and proved them wrong.

Yay for the education system.

>>693878862
No bra I said it's interesting and I hope he keeps working on it but until it has experimental backing it's just a hypothesis.

You are the one who's clinking to a new hypothesis and saying the established one is wrong and everyone but you is arrogant and dumb.

I can tell you have autism so I'll stop talking to you as you just won't ever understand.

File: 1468110900377.jpg (160 KB, 1014x668) Image search: [Google]

160 KB, 1014x668

>>693877202

Serious question. How would pic related not be the center?

>>693878912
Norse sailors knew it was round because when a ship approaches from a distance they could see the top of the mast before they could see the hull. In Anthony and Cleopatra's time they knew it was round because the day that the sun was directly overhead and they could see all the way to the bottom of the wells was on a different day in Cairo and Rome. They even attempted to calculate the diameter of the earth from this, but their estimate was around twice the actual size.

But the official word of academia was that it was flat, because that's the way the church taught it. It's not like everyone accepted it once one guy put the idea forth. New ideas are always ridiculed by the majority until they are proven, then the old ideas (and the people who ardently clung to them) have their turn being ridiculed by the majority.

>>693878912
Wow where do you live? That's retarded, we have know the earth was round for thousands of years.

Hell go look up science videos from the 1940s before space flight, they have globes abd talk about round earths.

There are earth globes dateing back to the 1500s and reffrence to a round Earth thousands of years earlier.

>>693863930
Redshift is about the speed they're moving away, not their distance from earth, you idiot

>>693879227
>see a fuckhuge hole in Theory A
>see an explanation in Theory B
>believe Theory B, largely because no one who subscribes to Theory A can approach explaining this hole without observer-dependent metaphysics
>get accused of fanatacism and mental illness
Yeah, that's been pretty much the entire history of radical discoveries. No surprises here.

>>693878729
Has nothing to do with brightness either.
Stop trying so hard faggot

>>693866073
So either you do not believe in anything, wich mean you don't have a say in any matter, or you are a "true believer" and are caring for old stories that some rapist wrote in a book aeons ago.
In short, I just believe you're bait

>>693874537
It's factored into calculating distance, but the doppler effect by itself only gives an indication of relative speed IF you know the base frequency of what you're measuring.

The doppler effect has nothing to do with distance by itself, but it can be used to help measure distance when combined with other information. A car driving 100 MPH away from you will have the same pitch if it's 5 feet away or 50 feet away.

>>693867275
Proof that math was invented by man -> math aren't flawless.

File: eyes.jpg (192 KB, 1150x703) Image search: [Google]

192 KB, 1150x703

Alien bro here

OP isn't that wrong, you mother fuckers still have a lot to learn though, at least about the observable universe. In the next few hundred years your scientists will find out about (what we call the asymmetrical complex) a structure in which we refer to as the universe in my time variance.

>Hint: What you call Math is not an invention, it is a universal language - humanity just does not fully understand it yet and will require the power of its computer technology to figure it out.
>The universe we are in is not 3 dimensional, what you are perceiving however is - the math you are using is missing a dimension.
>The universe is neither finite or infinite
>The big bang is a flawed theory but your species will figure it out in time.

That's all I can really share with you guys as I can't disrupt this time variance anymore than I have.

>>693879793

You are quite literally either trolling or retarded. The only person talking about "observer-dependent metaphysics" in this thread is you. Look up the definition of the word "observable" since you've obviously never heard it before and then explain to me how given a fixed speed of light in a vacuum we can be anything other than the center of the observable universe. Or does your "radical discovery" also throw out relativity and the constant speed limit of the universe as well?

>>693880824
space tits / gtfo

>>693880824
Shit boys, it's happening

>>693879793
Agree with that

>>693867275
> it's a conspiracy

Me thinks you have your tinfoil hat on too tight, kiddo. It's suffocating what little brain matter you have in that thick skull of yours. Maybe loosen it up a bit.

Yeah, I know. Dem evil lizard-men hell waves from da gub'ment might squeeze their way in a bit, but you can take a few jolts of it for a while.

File: 000511c4-5a18-3f36-a5ec-25e38f3bb12b_720.jpg (82 KB, 720x428) Image search: [Google]

82 KB, 720x428

>>693880824

>mfw that's earth first legitimate alien encounter

>>693881332
All that cheese on the moon that was never explored you know, it make them life really difficult to bear...

>>693880824
>>693881505

I genuinely prefer this type of trolling to the rest of the psuedointellectual crap being spouted in the thread.

>>693880824
if this is true it means illegal aliens are leeching out wifi, we must build a spacewall

cause and effect
something cant happen without something causing it

>>693881936
A spacefirewall for our wifi !

Hilariously stupid OP aside, this is a super cool thread just cause I never had any idea 4chan had so many not-retarded people / fellow spacefags.

Astronomy/astrophysics board when?!

>>693882111
then what caused god?

File: BlackLivesMatter.jpg (276 KB, 1898x956) Image search: [Google]

276 KB, 1898x956

Sign the petition to formally recognize Black Lives Matter as a terrorist organization,(

petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/formally-recognize-black-lives-matter-terrorist-organization