I don't know, mate. 
I play with Women. They have their own agenda. And so do I.
TBH, Lovely Lorna verges on the obese. I think of her as a Friend. TBH, I gotta way to go. Before it all becomes certain.
Without Musical talent, I subscribe to B.B.King's view of the World:
YouTube
I'll stick to Physics.
I play with Women. They have their own agenda. And so do I.
TBH, Lovely Lorna verges on the obese. I think of her as a Friend. TBH, I gotta way to go. Before it all becomes certain.
Without Musical talent, I subscribe to B.B.King's view of the World:
YouTube
I'll stick to Physics.
Even astrophysics is more predictable!I'll stick to Physics.
Seems I missed out on the 'ring of fire' yesterday, and I don't mean my Indian food delivery didn't turn up!
Watch live Sunday! Slooh webcasts the 'ring of fire' annular solar eclipse of 2020 | Space
I had a very good Day, today.
I was just bimbling down the Street when I saw an Audi 4X4 doing a three-point turn in front of me.
Female driver. And rather attractive. "After you, my girl !" I gesticulated. She gave me a smile that would light up a Canyon.
Turned out she knows my name. "Hi, Steve!". I was gobsmacked.
It's lovely Lisa, the Landlady from over the Street who bought me a bottle of wine last week.
She is fit. But I happen to be close friends with her Husband, Richard.
So am in a moral dilemma. What would Leonard Cohen do here?
Leonard Cohen Makes It Darker | The New Yorker
Be true to the last, is my opinion.
I was just bimbling down the Street when I saw an Audi 4X4 doing a three-point turn in front of me.
Female driver. And rather attractive. "After you, my girl !" I gesticulated. She gave me a smile that would light up a Canyon.
Turned out she knows my name. "Hi, Steve!". I was gobsmacked.
It's lovely Lisa, the Landlady from over the Street who bought me a bottle of wine last week.
She is fit. But I happen to be close friends with her Husband, Richard.
So am in a moral dilemma. What would Leonard Cohen do here?
Leonard Cohen Makes It Darker | The New Yorker
Be true to the last, is my opinion.
A fine cue for the attached Hubble image of the Orion Nebula (M42) which, along with three stars makes up Orion's Sword in the constellation Orion.
The Orion Nebula lies in the Milky Way galaxy and, at approximately 1,500 light years distance, is the closest stellar nursery (star-forming region) to Earth.
520 Hubble images, taken in five colours, were added to ground-based pictures to produce this mosaic which spans the same apparent angular size as the full moon.
Attachments
TBH, i veer between the Artists and the Scientists.
Both have something to say about the nonsense of life on planet Earth.
Dis is Da Lounge, right?
I love Frankie's rendering of That's Life.
Love it.
Both have something to say about the nonsense of life on planet Earth.
Dis is Da Lounge, right?
I love Frankie's rendering of That's Life.
Love it.
Yes, but music belongs over in the 'General Interest' section of the forum. At least, that's what all the people say...
Although, I'm happy to make an exception for any space themed music: YouTube
The hypothesis that the universe is expanding, is based on the red shift of light arriving from very very long distances. The premise is, that for light to red-shift, the wavelength must increase implying the frequency must decrease. A decrease in frequency of light photons, is also a decrease of energy per photon. The 'expanding' universe seems to be stealing energy from the photons by some means.
In Physics, a collision between a photon and an electron is possible. In fact, there are formulae describing such collisions. Since, Quantum Mechanics allows a photon to be treated like a particle, as in this case, the question whether photons travelling through space lose energy to nearby particles, should be logical to ask, at least tentatively.
If such a loss of photon energy exists, the hypothesis of an expanding universe collapses.
It is needless to state, since this is a public forum and not a university, my little annoying ramblings, are not some presumption to be awarded scientific recognitions of any sort.
In Physics, a collision between a photon and an electron is possible. In fact, there are formulae describing such collisions. Since, Quantum Mechanics allows a photon to be treated like a particle, as in this case, the question whether photons travelling through space lose energy to nearby particles, should be logical to ask, at least tentatively.
If such a loss of photon energy exists, the hypothesis of an expanding universe collapses.
It is needless to state, since this is a public forum and not a university, my little annoying ramblings, are not some presumption to be awarded scientific recognitions of any sort.
Really??
Still, the "decrease" is just imaginary as it is a behaviour only seen by a (relatively) static observer - the Ambulance is not changing tone while driving by ;-)
/
TNT has the gist of the answer. Here's an explanation adapted from that source of all information - the interweb.
The idea of the photon losing energy in transit is not an explanation for redshift. As edbarx correctly says, a photon doesn't lose energy unless it collides with a particle.
The key to understanding the position of a red-shifted photon is that not all observers will measure the same energy of the photon. Let's say an observer is traveling with the star or galaxy and sees a photon in the yellow portion of the spectrum. An observer who is moving with respect to the star (it doesn't matter if it's the star or the observer moving away) sees the same photon in the red part of the spectrum. That's OK, it doesn't violate the principle of conservation of energy, because they make their measurements in different reference frames.
The idea of the photon losing energy in transit is not an explanation for redshift. As edbarx correctly says, a photon doesn't lose energy unless it collides with a particle.
The key to understanding the position of a red-shifted photon is that not all observers will measure the same energy of the photon. Let's say an observer is traveling with the star or galaxy and sees a photon in the yellow portion of the spectrum. An observer who is moving with respect to the star (it doesn't matter if it's the star or the observer moving away) sees the same photon in the red part of the spectrum. That's OK, it doesn't violate the principle of conservation of energy, because they make their measurements in different reference frames.
In fact, the redshift in light is not directly comparable to the Doppler effect in sound. The physics is different in each case.
I studied red shift maths once, don't think I'll be going back there!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.