|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
 Posted - 06/12/2001 : 21:45:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Like I said I questioned him, because I was unfamiliar with his *theory*. There were many other posters at the board who were also will to provide their explanations. And www.badastronomy.com is a site by Phil Plait who is an astronomer interested in debunking or pointing out the misconceptions about astronomy in particular and science in general, like standing an egg on end on the vernal equinox. If I have a question I've learned which posters to trust and which ones to take with a grain of salt.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell!
I think that is a good way to go. However, I tend to stay clear of the folks who are interested only in challenging anything and everything in science. (i.e., who can adequately cover all sciences?) My scientist friends have warned me to stay away from sites that do not have .edu or .gov in their URLs. That is hard for me to do. Therefore, instead, I am very careful when I am not at a .edu or .gov site. If I followed their advice, it would not be any fun at all.
Thank you for the advice.
ljbrs
Knowing better is a formidable task! However, not wanting to know anything at all is hard on the brain...
|
 |
|
|
Bozola
Skeptic Friend
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2001 : 22:18:42 [Permalink]
|
ljbrs, you write beautifully. I am in awe of such skills.
Bozola
- Practicing skeet for the Rapture. |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2001 : 19:15:54 [Permalink]
|
Bozola:
Thank you. In my opinion, you write well, yourself. On the other hand, I can get pretty pedantic in my writing. Once in awhile, you will catch me throwing away formality and having fun with the topic at hand. However, this happens to be one of my favorite topics, so I must be careful so that I do not get trampled by any of the perfectionists here who might disagree with the sources of my ideas.
Incidentally, you will never find me *correcting* writers at this (or any other) site for their grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. I only correct bad ideas which go contrary to science (as I understand it). And of course, I can be wrong about the science, since I am not a scientist (but had optical physicists in my family for quite a few generations before I came along). However, knowledge most certainly is not passed on through evolution. Therefore, I will always give way to those who know much more than I do about any subject (unless my information comes from excellent sources).
I am interested in the content of the message, and not in the style, etc. Ideas and knowledge are what count. Richard Feynman (one of my favorite physicists) simply murdered the English language. But, oh what fun it was to read his "stuff"! I would give my pedantic style for his ideas and knowledge any day.
ljbrs
Doing better comes from knowing better...
(I keep changing my "If you knew better, you'd do better!")
Edited by - ljbrs on 06/13/2001 19:36:30 |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2001 : 19:18:57 [Permalink]
|
Bozola:
I just love your "Practicing skeet for the Rapture."
|
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2001 : 20:34:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I am interested in the content of the message, and not in the style, etc. Ideas and knowledge are what count. Richard Feynman (one of my favorite physicists) simply murdered the English language. But, oh what fun it was to read his "stuff"! I would give my pedantic style for his ideas and knowledge any day.
ljbrs:
A few years ago, I took a 2-year sabbatical from teaching and worked as a copywriter/book reviewer for a (now deceased) dot-bomb internet bookstore.
During my time there, I had the opportunity to write up a review of Feynman's lecture "The Motion of Planets Around the Sun" -- which was kind of a one-off guest lecture he did as a favor. The book was a joy to read, but the capper was the enclosed CD: a full recording of the lecture, live, as presented to the grad student audience.
What was amazing to me was the clarity of the presentation and the excellent pedagogy in his lecturing...even in the midst of his fluffs of the language.
If you can find a copy at the library, I think you'd enjoy it.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2001 : 02:29:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Incidentally, you will never find me *correcting* writers at this (or any other) site for their grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc.
If you did that, you would have little time for anything else!
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2001 : 21:04:32 [Permalink]
|
Zandermann:
quote:
A few years ago, I took a 2-year sabbatical from teaching and worked as a copywriter/book reviewer for a (now deceased) dot-bomb internet bookstore.
During my time there, I had the opportunity to write up a review of Feynman's lecture "The Motion of Planets Around the Sun" -- which was kind of a one-off guest lecture he did as a favor. The book was a joy to read, but the capper was the enclosed CD: a full recording of the lecture, live, as presented to the grad student audience.
What was amazing to me was the clarity of the presentation and the excellent pedagogy in his lecturing...even in the midst of his fluffs of the language.
If you can find a copy at the library, I think you'd enjoy it.
Thank you. I already have a great many of his lectures on CD and on tape (all that I have yet been able to find). I have many, many of his lectures on tape from his *Lectures on Physics* as well as the books themselves. I have two copies of *Feynman's Lost Lecture--The Motion of Planets Around the Sky*--one on CD with accompanying book (which I have read), the other coming with a large set of many other tapes from his *Lectures on Physics* which I have not yet opened. I think I was lucky to get the second one, because the providers of the tapes and CDs were being sued by Feynman's wife and family. I have the *Six Easy Pieces* on CD and the more difficult set, *Six Not So Easy Pieces* (both from his *Lectures on Physics*, as well. I like everything that has to do with Richard Feynman and additionally have a great many more of his books. I also have a large science library with many, many reference books (mostly astronomy and physics).
I do not know how I will find time to read everything or listen to everything that I own. But, that's life. Maybe when I retire... IF I retire!
I understand that Richard Feynman was difficult with people he worked with (showboating). However, he is considered by many to be the *greatest American physicist of the 20th Century*, so he had a right to be mildly arrogant. He did not seem to be arrogant whenever I saw him on television. So, perhaps those tales were exaggerations.
Thanks for the suggestion(s). It reminded me of things I need to do.
ljbrs
I knew well enough to load up on Feynman's treasures. Therefore I knew better and did better... (variation on a theme)
Edited by - ljbrs on 06/14/2001 21:09:27 |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2001 : 21:19:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
Incidentally, you will never find me *correcting* writers at this (or any other) site for their grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc.
If you did that, you would have little time for anything else!
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Many of the writers here might come from other countries. I could never speak (or write) their languages (except some French that I still remember). And the French do not like having others *murder* their language, so that is out! In addition, there are many other abilities than just handling the English language. And some may have difficulty with the typing of their posts. I look for the content of the ideas, and not the errors that can be made in haste.
ljbrs
If I did better, I might know better!
|
|
|
|
Espritch
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 06/23/2001 : 14:41:57 [Permalink]
|
A thought.
The big bang theory is primarily based on the observation that astronomical objects are red shifted suggesting that they are moving away from us. Generally, the more distant the object, the more red shift observed.
The theory of dark matter has been purposed to explain observed behaviors of astronomical objects that would require more gravity than can be accounted for based on the amount of normal matter that astronomers have been able to observe. According to the theory, dark matter has an observable gravitational effect but is otherwise undetectable using current methods available to astronomers.
I just read a description on this bulletin board of something called the Compton effect which causes light to become more red shifted due to loss of energy when it collides with free electrons.
Ok. Here's the idea: what if dark matter exists and isn't completely inert. What if light can collide with dark matter particles and lose energy. One direct result would be that distant objects would show red shift, the greater the distance, the more red shift since there would be more opportunity for collisions with dark matter. The implication would be that red shift actually proves the existence of dark matter rather than the expansion of the universe.
The increased red shift observed in quasars as compared to the galaxies in which they are found could be explained due to a greater concentration of dark matter caused by their high gravity (some theorist think quasars are actually gigantic black holes) rather than due to their being expelled away from us.
Of course this doesn't account for observations that the rate of expansion is increasing. But then, no one has provided a satisfactory explanation of why that would be happening anyway.
Just a little something to chew on.
|
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 06/23/2001 : 22:13:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The implication would be that red shift actually proves the existence of dark matter rather than the expansion of the universe.
That is an very good point: I had the same thought during a Quantum Mechanics class, where we discussed the Compton Effect, so I asked one of my professors. He told me the following:
Compton Scattering behaves differently depending on the frequency of the photon that hits an object, as well as depending on the material of the collison. This would distort the shape of the spectrograph, which is a very discernible effect. There is a large amount of data concerning the effects of Compton Scattering of photons of different wavelengths colliding with many different materials.
Astronomers can determine what they are looking at by the shape of its spectrograph (a graph of the different intensities vs wavelength of the light recieved from an object). These shapes are very well documented by observation of closer objects.
The way Astronomers determine how fast an object is moving is by looking at the amount the spectrograph is shifted.
Astronomers determine how far an object is from us by Hubble's Law and by observing the amount of gravitational lensing around the object.
The amount of Compton Scattering experienced by photons before they reach us is one of they ways Astronomers are trying to find Dark Matter.
Thus, the implication is that the amount of Doppler Shift is evidence for expansion, and the degree of Compton Scattering is evidence for dark matter.
Edited by - Boron10 on 06/23/2001 22:17:49 |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2001 : 21:40:06 [Permalink]
|
Boron10:
That is just excellent!
ljbrs
You know better AND do better with a flair...
Edited by - ljbrs on 06/24/2001 21:41:55 |
|
|
|
The Bad Astronomer
Skeptic Friend
137 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2001 : 17:18:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
My scientist friends have warned me to stay away from sites that do not have .edu or .gov in their URLs. That is hard for me to do. Therefore, instead, I am very careful when I am not at a .edu or .gov site. If I followed their advice, it would not be any fun at all.
Yeah, don't avoid them, just beware of them. They may be run by, ah, unusual folks. I have a .com myself, and I'm a real live scientist and everything. ;-) But I am also wrong a lot, and admit when I am.
*****
The Bad Astronomer
badastro@badastronomy.com
http://www.badastronomy.com |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2001 : 20:07:38 [Permalink]
|
BADASTRONOMY is a great site. I think that your kind of thing is very important to counter the baloney which is put out by the media. I watch very little television and missed the Fox show on the Apollo landings. In fact, I am not certain whether the Fox show was on cable or on network television. Whatever, I missed getting an antiscience headache for certain.
I am not a scientist, but I am very interested in science. I was talked out of physics by my father who warned me about the male chauvinism I would encounter. I did not want to have the problems encountered by Lise Meitner! I have settled into being a scientific cheerleader. I also belong to a great (brilliant) astronomy club. I received my degrees in other areas.
I like your site very much. I particularly like the stuff which you have written for it (if you are indeed the author of at least some of it, if not all of it). Keep it up.
While I majored in neither, I have had enough science and mathematics to be able to follow what is going on in at least physics and astronomy (which was always exciting to me). My love for astronomy began clearly when I was three years old and I can remember the instant it happened. Viewing the Milky Way for the first time is awe inspiring, to say the least. I never forgot the experience with all of the details involved. I can still picture it in my mind.
ljbrs
|
|
|
|
Espritch
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2001 : 23:20:09 [Permalink]
|
Boron10
You're explanation on how the Compton effect differs from motion related red shift was very helpful. Of course I guess that means my hopes of receiving a Nobel prize in Astrophysics have been dashed. Dang! 
|
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2001 : 21:22:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I guess that means my hopes of receiving a Nobel prize in Astrophysics have been dashed. Dang!
Naaah! If that were true, then I may not win my own in Quantum Mechanics, eh?
-Timmy! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
