Red Shifting of Light from Galaxies.

[PoPpAScience]

Would light from a 'Shrinking Galaxy', Red Shift when measured, when received on another 'Shrinking Galaxy'?

[Meem]

What never really made a whole bunch of sense to me, is if red shift is what you see when light is traveling away from you, and blue shift is what you see when light is traveling towards you, why do any of the objects we recognize as other galaxies and starts have any red shift at all? Doesn't really make any sense to me. I blame Carl, and his simple explanation on Cosmos.

And I really dont get why why just about every visible light in the sky, "twinkles" or appears to be red and blue shifting to the naked eye. But I suppose that has something to do with the mostly nothing and atmosphere inbetween.

[theunify]

Red shift - A specral phenomena caused by acceleration.

Color of a galaxy - a complex mixture of spectral data and star composition.

Star composition - "see star naming philosophy", 1


1"Defining stars on a count up approach...we just don't know how many stars or compositions exist."











Until we count them..
~theunify

What never really made a whole bunch of sense to me...

[theunify]

Red shift noun.- A spectral phenomena caused by acceleration.

Color of a galaxy adjective? - a complex mixture of spectral data and star composition.

Star composition (can we count to infinity?)- "see star naming philosophy", 1


1"Defining stars on a count up approach...we just don't know how many stars or compositions exist."


The second post - Pinning down the method of understanding the cosmos is a dry and boring process which requires a universal language called math, or we could use any universal language, some maths are not universal, i.e. tensors and greek alphabets.

A good example of the "collapse" of rational thinking, is the infamous mathematiciation Gregori Perleman, he was awared a prize in Math for solving a Millenium Prize problem; well the funny thing about his proof was that it satisfied the committee and therefore was also proven non-universal. The millenium prize problems are not universal problems, they are a set amount of problems faced by current industry and therefore any solution is only a best of the best solution and not a universal, fluid solution.

Although I have had time to read Gregori Perleman's work on Poincare, it was accurate as far as anybody is concerned with relation to the problem, and it no doubt satisfied the requirement for the prize.

I think we can learn from Gregori Perleman's refusal to accept the prize; he says that it's because he doesn't want to be used as a false prophet for the math community, I think if we literrally examine his philosophy we can determine that Gregori doesn't think the Math community is focused on speaking a universal language, because math is afterall universal.

In order to satisfy the mathematician Perleman would probably be a good place to start, because if we can come to terms with the difference between reward and merit then we'd come far in stopping false science in the future. What I mean by this is that there really has to be a reason a world renowned mathematician is refusing a prize of 1 million dollars, clearly he is protesting and enjoying it.













Until we count them..

~theunify