Do you understand precisely how ammonia (or any other substance) is identified by spectroscopy - theory and practice?
Do you understand why ammonia was used in that paper? (I assume not, as you questioned the relevance of Oklo)
Do you understand how distances of astronomical objects are measured?
M31 distance measurements can be found at the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED). That compilation includes a variety of independent methods for measuring the distance and provides full literature citations.
? For what?
The achievable precision in detecting the tangential velocity of Andromeda Galaxy.
Radial [component of ] velocity is the component of velocity directly towards or away from you. The tangential component is velocity that is at right angles to the radial component. Every element (such as hydrogen or carbon) shows a characteristic pattern of wavelengths which are emitted. See, for example, this page at the University of Strasbourg. The Doppler effect -- see this site -- changes the apparent wavelengths, but the pattern doesn't change, so the size (magnitude and direction) of the velocity can be determined. Note that the Doppler effect is very well established. Just ask anybody who has gotten a speeding ticket involving police radar. Doppler shifts can be reliably detected and measured to very small velocities.
Incidentally, if you think that I'm just claiming that Doppler shift just shows the radial component of a velocity, I suggest that you spend some time reading any reasonably current (post about 1975) high school physics textbook.
Ah, Stardad, if you still feel the blueshift results are incorrect, please take your claim to ATM. There are several well established posters that would enjoy the opportunity for further discussion, myself included.
In what way can you claim the mainstream ideas haven't shown up? Blueshift / redshift. There's your answer. What more do you need to know before you present your idea? And if you don't understand redshift and blueshift then are you really in a position to be forming alternative solutions or theories?
Oklo is no concern to me. For reasons I won't get into here in this thread. Oklo is probably considered 'mainstream'Do you understand why ammonia was used in that paper? (I assume not, as you questioned the relevance of Oklo)
To some degree, yes, I understand how the measurements are made that they feel represent distances. Again, not to question that here..Do you understand how distances of astronomical objects are measured?
Well, for the Blueshift, I think it was claimed that light passes through ammonia or something, affecting it...yet the details haven't shown up. Once we have it admitted that only Blueshift is the basis for the claims about Andromeda, fine. So far it isn't quite there, I don't think..
?? My idea? Did I say I had one to present? I thought I was merely asking for the mainstream position here, with some details of the basis..?What more do you need to know before you present your idea?
Did I say I am in the dark totally about them? Look at the title of the thread! It mentions Blueshift. This is not the thread to question mainstream things. It is a thread to have them put forth clearly...so they perhaps can be dealt with in another thread in a more authoritative way.And if you don't understand redshift and blueshift then are you really in a position to be forming alternative solutions or theories?
stardad, please drop the attitude. It seems clear now that you do in fact have an agenda or initial stance which you are aiming to promote via a back-door. If you want to present an idea that's outside of the mainstream, do it in a new thread in the ATM (Against the mainstream) section. You'll find it in our index, in the "Proving Grounds" section.
You are welcome to ask questions, you are welcome to ask follow-up questions and even to disbelieve the answers. But annoying BAUT members - whatever they believe - is not allowed.
Get up, a get-get, get down.
In Post #24, you said,
And, again in Post #24 you answer,
"excited in a electrical discharge.". I wonder if exciting things then, is done in deep space?
Also, looking at your Doppler link, I see that the Lorenz transformation is part of what is used.
"In physics, the Lorentz transformation describes how, according to the theory of special relativity, two observers' varying measurements of space and time can be converted into each other's frames of reference. "
This seems to assume to me, that an observer in Andromeda would be under our laws and forces? If so, how do we know that?
Ok, so explain that a bit more. The amount of broadening tell you the distance? How is that?The amount of line broadening in the absorption lines indicate that the absorption occurred at the same distance (within error bars) that a galaxy, within the line of site between us and B0218+367.
What does this mean? How do we know only part was absorbed?As far as partial absorption, since the spectrum of B0218+367 has reached us, only part of the light was absorbed.
No. I would think Andromeda is far away and not near earth. As for what I think about shifted light, I think that we do not know that it means anything unless we know that the laws at the source are the same as here...So, you say that Andromeda counts as the area near the Earth and near the Earth, red/blue shift indicates motion.
No. But I am afraid to discuss it here, as it would be questioning the mainstream.So, by your statements, you must agree that the Blue shift of the Andromeda Galaxy indicates that it is moving toward us.