Eddington and the CMB - Dismantling the mysticism

[kiwi]

Hi Zyxzevn

Thanks for linking to the video again kiwi.
I really had to watch it again after a few years.

Its a complex situation isnt it? ... but fundamentally quite basic

There is also the matter of the "perfect black body radiation", which Robataille does not go into much.

He does actually cover that in his papers, and points out the application via Plancks equation is actually valid but only so in the case of a PERFECT situation, which even in the case of Graphite shows its a theoretical "perfection" and in nature the situation does not exist to that degree of absolute perfection.

All you need to ask anyone who claims this line of research is false is "do you own a cell-phone"? .... If all cavities contained Black Radiation as claimed by accepted Science then Cell Phones ( and UHFMRI scanners for that matter) would not work. Its a devestating "truth" that leaves no wriggle-room for weasel wording deniers

..... SNIP......This reality is well-known in microwave technology and
is the basis for the existence of resonant cavities. Conversely,
if Kirchhoff was correct, then any radiation incident into a microwave
cavity would become thermalized and immediately
change the temperature of the cavity. Signal would be lost as
the radiation became blackbody at the final temperature of the
cavity. However, the reality is that microwave cavities used in
electron spin resonance and much of telecommunications are
resonant devices. They are made of nearly perfect reflectors
over the frequency range of interest. The same situation is encountered
in Ultra High Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging
(UHFMRI) wherein resonant cavities are utilized to acquire
images [10, 11]. The use of such cavities clearly demonstrate
that Kirchhoff’s Law cannot be valid, as MRI depends on the
conversion of signal from the spins into voltage, without the
loss associated if the cavity was acting as a blackbody. MRI
uses the ability to build up standing waves in resonant cavities
during testing, transmission, and reception, in a manner
independent of cavity temperature [10, 11].
The arguments advanced relative to resonant cavities in
the microwave and at MRI frequencies is not solely geometrical.
Absorption of incident photons, transformation into thermal
vibrations, and re-emission into thermal photons does not
occur in perfectly reflecting cavities. Kirchhoff and Planck
cannot claim otherwise, when they assert that all cavities contain
black radiation [2, 3, 8].
http://vixra.org/pdf/1708.0053v1.pdf

Thank you Kiwi.
That helped.
Paul

Cheers Paul .... If you have not already seen these videos released by Dr Robataille I highly recommend you do... designed to educate the likes of us lesser educated peeps

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL7QIO ... shelf_id=1

[Michael Mozina]

If you look at the present mainstream dark matter dilemma, it directly relates back to their claims about the microwave background. They took *one* (microwave) wavelength range of the spectrum and tried to claim that it *does not* ultimately relate to stars, and dust and scattering and all the typically things that we find in space, rather it's mystically related to some mythical 'surface of last scattering', from the outside wall of their cute little snow-globe universe.

Forget the fact that Eddington *nailed* and 'predicted' the average temperature of the dust in space to within 1/2 of one degree of the correct temperature based upon the scattering of starlight on dust, somehow the 'temperature' of space is unrelated to that feature entirely and related to a distant past event that is somehow *still* more relevant than all the other factors described by Eddington combined. What are the odds?

They've put so much time, money and 'prestige' on trying to get a 'fit' to a so called "baryon acoustic oscillation" pattern that they've now *permanently* locked themselves into the existence of exotic forms of matter. This has led to the pure denial of all *different* and massive mass estimation problems that they made in that landmark and now *infamous* 2006 lensing paper. They have to bury their collective heads in the sand to the fact that in the past 5 years we've found more mass in the form of plasma and gas halos around our own galaxy than all the stellar mass of the galaxy combined.

There's really nothing left standing of exotic matter theories in 2017. LHC blew away their beloved SUSY theory, their presumed 'savior' of their dark matter dilemma prior to LHC. PandaX also came up empty, LUX came up empty, Xenon-1T has come up empty, and dozens of other 'experiments' have also come up completely empty.

Their baryonic mass estimates of galaxies used in 2006 have been falsified a dozen different ways, and they *still* won't acknowledge any type of problem with their "proof of dark matter" claim. They *still* cite that 2006 Bullet Cluster-f*ck* study as being grandiose "evidence" of "dark matter". It really doesn't matter one iota to them if what they believe is actually "right" or correct, or what the alternatives might be. All that matters to them in 2017 is protecting their income sources and protecting their prestige. They don't even care about "truth" anymore.

Their whole microwave argument is a complete joke. The mainstream acts as though this one wavelength range is oh so special, but it's obviously not. It simply originates from all the stars in the heavens, and that light gets scattered over distance, just like every other wavelength under the sun, from radio and microwaves, all the way up into the x-ray and gamma ray spectrum which is exactly why there's a gamma ray background too.

The "bright" areas of the "cleaned up" microwave images are obviously distant galaxy clusters and areas of higher cluster density. They aren't related to any mythical surface of last scattering. The darker regions are simply areas of lower foreground cluster density. They aren't related to any mythical surface of last scattering either.

BICEP2 demonstrated *conclusively* that the mainstream can't even logically or consistently tell the different between ordinary dust emissions and their mythical surface of last scattering from the ancient wall of their make-believe silly little snow globe universe.

Without a doubt, the microwave background is *not* their crowning jewel of math, it's the mathematical noose they put around their own neck, while obligating and committing themselves to the existence of a metaphysical definition of matter.

The really laughable part of their whole microwave background claim is that the one and *only* place in their math formulas where they try to include any amount of 'scattering' is in those 'bright' areas of the microwave images where they claim the background bright areas are related to *forward scattering* of their snow-globe photons rather than being related to the stellar output of those densely packed galaxies!

What a ridiculous joke.

[Metryq]

Obviously, Dark Matter must be caused by anthropogenic global warming "carbon" pollution!

[Zyxzevn]

BICEP2 demonstrated *conclusively* that the mainstream can't even logically or consistently tell the different between ordinary dust emissions and their mythical surface of last scattering from the ancient wall of their make-believe silly little snow globe universe.

I find it amazing that mainstream science can not even grasp the plasma physics going on on the sun
(hint: it is not magnetic reconnection). And yet still they claim to be very certain of things that we
can not even see.

In the context of the CMB, we have no idea of what the history is of the universe.
Yet many claim that they do, and come up with unicorns and other invisible stuff.
As if this can affirm their claims.
In real science, we would see the need for invisible, undetectable stuff as evidence for
a problem with the theory. Somehow this basic logical concept has disappeared from science.

So logically, the need for dark energy, dark matter, black holes, confirms that the theory is
completely flawed.
Instead, if we explain the same evidence with existing physics (like plasma-redshift) the
astronomy "scientists" are suddenly all against it.
We are not "specialists'...
..like we are not astrologers, and should believe in astrology too.

And if we show that the CMB evidence is flawed, this should make them give better evidence.
Instead we see them attacking the messengers.

If your "science" needs to attack the messengers, it should not be called "science" any more.
And yet this is what I see often in mainstream astronomy.