Mars & Life creation in Universe

[Weitter Duckss]

Please provide the source for this claim.

Pretend you do not know what.

The debate is about the body realizes that spins around its own axis. Only such rotation leads to the capture of other bodies. Rotation of the body which are satellites in the ranks and Venus and Mercury in order to consider the legality of rotation.

All quotes are from my published articles and from my website.

At the end of the book, "In Search of the Lost Universe" debate I ended up with: "... because there is no likelihood that all work be sinless, it is based on natural law. If you do not see the mistake, keep working and you will discover, if not Now then, with time, or will he discover someone else. important thing is that your effort is paved with good intentions. "

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Pretend you do not know what.

The debate is about the body realizes that spins around its own axis. Only such rotation leads to the capture of other bodies. Rotation of the body which are satellites in the ranks and Venus and Mercury in order to consider the legality of rotation.

All quotes are from my published articles and from my website.

At the end of the book, "In Search of the Lost Universe" debate I ended up with: "... because there is no likelihood that all work be sinless, it is based on natural law. If you do not see the mistake, keep working and you will discover, if not Now then, with time, or will he discover someone else. important thing is that your effort is paved with good intentions. "

Thats where you are wrong Weitter Duckss, good intentions counts for exactly nothing in science, unless it is backed up by evidence.

You have yet to show us hard evidence for you hyphothesis. All you have done so far is to present you opinion. Having an opinion is all very good, but it does not count as a scientific proof.

Present some hard data, so we can see what you are basing your beliefs on. Until then they remain your personal opinion.

[toast]

Pretend you do not know what.The debate is about the body realizes that spins around its own axis. Only such rotation leads to the

capture of other bodies. Rotation of the body which are satellites in the ranks and Venus and Mercury in order to consider the legality

of rotation.All quotes are from my published articles and from my website.

Anyway.

Please provide a scientific based and authentic source to back your claim given and as shown below:

(...) A single turn of the rotation of Universe is completed in 94,5 billion of years.

[Weitter Duckss]

Thats where you are wrong Weitter Duckss, good intentions counts for exactly nothing in science, unless it is backed up by evidence.

You have yet to show us hard evidence for you hyphothesis. All you have done so far is to present you opinion. Having an opinion is all very good, but it does not count as a scientific proof.

Present some hard data, so we can see what you are basing your beliefs on. Until then they remain your personal opinion.

I agree for the good intentions, but they are here to say that I am not infallible and errors may creep, which are not in this case.

It is more than enough evidence and seeing that the independent rotation about the axis of space bodies only cause entrapment of other bodies.

A body that does not have an independent spin, without exception, do not have satellites.

The bodies regardless of size, if they have an independent spin, have satellites (with very few exceptions, Mazda has not been observed or their rotation is not old enough).

Independent rotation of the body that has more spin about an axis in one orbit.

It lalo check and on Wikipedia.

[toast]

Mazda has not been observed or their rotation is not old enough

Well ...

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Mazda has not been observed or their rotation is not old enough).

Observe this

Once again I am not entirely sure what your point is ?

And still not a lot of actual evidence. Only your opinion.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Noteverythingisaconspiracy

[Weitter Duckss]

Anyway.

Please provide a scientific based and authentic source to back your claim given and as shown below:

Sory, I noticed that there included in articles.

…

A diameter of this object is just as big as the team of scientists claims the age of the universe to be. It is clear that by measuring length or distance we can get these and only these measurements; age is not calculated that way. Therefore, a distance from COBE to the farthest point of the universe is 13.7 billion of light-years and, presuming the same distance in the opposite direction – which is highly unlikely – the diameter of our universe is some 27 billion of light-years. That datum, as it can be seen on the picture, is valid for the most distant points in the horizontal direction.

…

A blue or red shift is possible only if a rotation exists and it is absolutely impossible if there is an expansion or explosion. Let us replace the Moon's orbit with the universe now. We can see that the results of COBE are obtained in the orbit. The rotation of the universe is the only thing that makes blue shift possible, i.e., that some celestial objects can move towards us.

The most distant space objects, as seen through the astronomic devices, are estimated to move at the speed of some 270 000 km/sec. These objects are situated in a so-called equatorial part of the universe and their path is of the round form.

With that speed and the diameter of 27 billion of light-years, a celestial object from that part of the universe requires some 94,5 billion of years to make a single turn (2 x 13,7 x π x 1,1), which at the same time makes one turn of the rotation of the universe...

Edited July 23, 2014 by Weitter Duckss

[Weitter Duckss]

Refers to the smaller bodies in the Kuiper belt. The existence of rotation does not mean that at the same time by capturing the other bodies. Or telescopes have not yet detected.

[toast]

*snip*

Thats just your hypothesis, so:

Please provide a scientific based and authentic source to back your claim given

[Weitter Duckss]

Thats just your hypothesis, so:

What is the proof for you? When we measure the distance we get history, age? Of course you like most accept that the length is not the length but the age of the universe. According to you, man 2 meters tall is 200 years old. When I look at an object in the Americas from Europe he is older to me, but at the same time Europe is in America old for awhile?? 13.7 (,5, ,8) is a distance. How does this affect the rest of the article: What if we really register the waves coming in from the past?

Edited July 24, 2014 by Weitter Duckss

[toast]

What is the proof for you? When we measure the distance we get history, age? Of course you like most accept that the length

is not the length but the age of the universe.

I do not understand what you would like to say here but I`m in the impression that you think that LY is a measurement value

for time but it isn`t as its a measurement value for distance.

According to you, man 2 meters tall is 200 years old.

I didn`t wrote anything here that may lead to such math.

When I look at an object in the Americas from Europe he is older to me, but at the same time Europe is in America old

for awhile?? 13.7 (,5, ,8) is a distance. How does this affect the rest of the article: What if we really register the waves

coming in from the past?

What?

BTW, it seems that you don`t know what you wrote by yourself, example:

(...) Therefore, a distance from COBE to the farthest point of the universe is 13.7 billion of light-years and, presuming the same

distance in the opposite direction – which is highly unlikely – the diameter of our universe is some 27 billion of light-years.

So you say that it is unlikely that the diameter of the universe is = 2x13,7. In the same post you made some home-made kitchen

math like this:

(...) With that speed and the diameter of 27 billion of light-years, a celestial object from that part of the universe requires some

94,5 billion of years to make a single turn (2 x 13,7 x π x 1,1), which at the same time makes one turn of the rotation of the universe...

First to say is that we do not have any evidence that the universe is rotating. 2nd to say say is that your simpel 13,7x2 math is an

indicator that yr level of knowlegde in astronomy is on a very low level as you don`t know that the diameter of the universe is much

bigger than 13,7x2 but you feel well prepared to try to establish some new theories. This cannot work.

[Weitter Duckss]

If you read the "Dark Flow .." then you have to realize that the universe is expanding outward in all directions, but is moving in the same direction (looking at a snapshot of the universe from the right side to the left side), which discredits all official theory.

Although the evidence clearly you will not say no to Bing Bang but you will stubbornly insist on it or replace it with a similar Nonsense. Why?

For now it only fits in the rotation of the Universe and "that distracts some unknown force in an unknown direction."

[toast]

If you read the "Dark Flow .." then you have to realize that the universe is expanding outward in all directions, but is moving

in the same direction (looking at a snapshot of the universe from the right side to the left side), which discredits all official theory.

Although the evidence clearly you will not say no to Bing Bang but you will stubbornly insist on it or replace it with a similar Nonsense.

Why?

There is no snapshot of the universe and there is no evidence for yr hypothesis at all. All astronomical knowledge that we have today

is the result of hundreds of years of scientific research and the only one who stubbornly insist on (home-made) nonsense is you here.

For now it only fits in the rotation of the Universe and "that distracts some unknown force in an unknown direction."

There is no evidence that the universe is rotating but the rotating universe hypothesis is a part of yr wet dreams, simply just that.

[Weitter Duckss]

You've decided to be a believer without the desire for scientific progress. I appreciate it. It's your choice. Would not be good to have all of the same mind.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Would not be good to have all of the same mind.

It's not about being of a different mind, it's about evidence. You simply do not have any. You have a belief, which is fine for religion, it's not enough for science.

[badeskov]

You've decided to be a believer without the desire for scientific progress. I appreciate it. It's your choice. Would not be good to have all of the same mind.

No, YOU have decided to become a believer without any evidence and in the same breath, preach said belief. As asked across numerous threads, present your scientific evidence and convince us. For now, all you have presented have been incoherent ramblings with no ties to objective reality whatsoever.

So please, present evidence and we will listen. Until then, you are just one in a pool of many with absurdly ridiculous that you no neither the means nor the ability to substantiate. You are neither the first nor the last.

But you actually have no clue what I just wrote, have you?

Cheers,

Badeskov

[Weitter Duckss]

Let's go back to the display showing the dark flow.

Look at the map showing the movement of clusters of galaxies.

I do not think that NASA scientists have made so much oversight and set the movement of clusters of galaxies in the image of Berlin or the picture of the universe 400,000 years after hatching from an egg left by the Big Bang, when galaxies were not present?

[toast]

This thread is useless.

[keithisco]

This thread is useless.

I was all for giving him the benefit of the doubt and to present coherence in his argument.

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening anytime soon

[Weitter Duckss]

Below is an article for fun, which is frequently visit Croatia more than this topic. Not for a specific theme, by nature belongs to this topic.

The Oort cloud, speed of light is not the limit

A hypothesis appeared from the astronomical observations of the other stellar systems that, in its outer regions, the Solar system may also have a gaseous belt. That assumption is even today very often taken as hypothetical, because there is not enough evidence or visible proofs to support it. The objects in the Oort cloud are small; while the rest of the matter is gas (with the use of telescopes, we can barely see Pluto and other bigger or smaller objects in the Kuiper belt, which is significantly closer to us).

The existence of that belt is being proven by the comets, incoming into the interior part of the universe, because their trajectories are outside the Kuiper belt.

The existence of the Oort cloud gives us the opportunity to verify if the movement of matter on the most distant points from the center (Sun) is generally faster and what are the reasons for it.

When the galaxies are a subject matter, that fact was already confirmed by observation. When talking about universe, we know that the most distant objects have the greatest speed; accordingly, the Oort cloud should have a greater speed of rotation around Sun. The speed of Mercury is Ø 48 km/s, Earth 29.8., Saturn 9.6. and Pluto 4.75. The cosmic speed decreases with the increase of their distance to Sun: Makemake 4.4, Eris 3.43, Sedna 1.04, Oreus 0.5, Varuna 0.38, etc. With the increase of distance, the average temperature of the objects is decreasing; the average temperature of the objects in the Kuiper belt ranges from 30 to 50°K, while the average temperature of the Oort cloud is estimated to range from 4 to 12°K.

The objects and comets incoming from the Oort cloud have the average speed greater than those in the Kuiper belt (the data state the average speed of 10 km/s), while a part of them have the speeds greater than all other objects (Hale-Bopp 52.5, Halley’s comet 66, Shoemaker-Levy hit into Jupiter by the speed of ~58 km/s).

Therefore, even though the distance increases, and the speed should be decreasing, it increases drastically. The main reason for this increase is the low temperature that exists in the Oort cloud.

A turning point of the another kind of behavior is the temperature fall below -259°C, i.e., below the

melting point of hydrogen (H₂). The objects which start off from the Oort cloud towards the interior part of the Solar system have great starting speeds, which with time (after a number of cycles) decrease.

Low temperatures, below 12°K, make it possible for the objects to achieve great speeds – even though their gravitational forces are weak – speeds that, besides the Oort cloud, exist on the edge of galaxies, as well as on the outer edge of universe.

When we master the technology of low temperatures, we would be able to explore successfully our system. It is necessary to cover the spacecraft plating with the materials which could with magnetization lower the temperature of the spacecraft plating below -260°C (PrNi₅ is one of these materials that has this ability, through to superconductivity, i.e., it can be cooled down below 1°K) and when we master the temperatures below the melting point of helium (He), which is -272,14°C or 1°K, we would be able to achieve the speeds greater than the speed of radiation (light) and to start exploring the neighboring stellar systems.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Below is an article for fun, which is frequently visit Croatia more than this topic. Not for a specific theme, by nature belongs to this topic.

The Oort cloud, speed of light is not the limit

A hypothesis appeared from the astronomical observations of the other stellar systems that, in its outer regions, the Solar system may also have a gaseous belt. That assumption is even today very often taken as hypothetical, because there is not enough evidence or visible proofs to support it. The objects in the Oort cloud are small; while the rest of the matter is gas (with the use of telescopes, we can barely see Pluto and other bigger or smaller objects in the Kuiper belt, which is significantly closer to us).

The existence of that belt is being proven by the comets, incoming into the interior part of the universe, because their trajectories are outside the Kuiper belt.

The existence of the Oort cloud gives us the opportunity to verify if the movement of matter on the most distant points from the center (Sun) is generally faster and what are the reasons for it.

When the galaxies are a subject matter, that fact was already confirmed by observation. When talking about universe, we know that the most distant objects have the greatest speed; accordingly, the Oort cloud should have a greater speed of rotation around Sun. The speed of Mercury is Ø 48 km/s, Earth 29.8., Saturn 9.6. and Pluto 4.75. The cosmic speed decreases with the increase of their distance to Sun: Makemake 4.4, Eris 3.43, Sedna 1.04, Oreus 0.5, Varuna 0.38, etc. With the increase of distance, the average temperature of the objects is decreasing; the average temperature of the objects in the Kuiper belt ranges from 30 to 50°K, while the average temperature of the Oort cloud is estimated to range from 4 to 12°K.

The objects and comets incoming from the Oort cloud have the average speed greater than those in the Kuiper belt (the data state the average speed of 10 km/s), while a part of them have the speeds greater than all other objects (Hale-Bopp 52.5, Halley’s comet 66, Shoemaker-Levy hit into Jupiter by the speed of ~58 km/s).

Therefore, even though the distance increases, and the speed should be decreasing, it increases drastically. The main reason for this increase is the low temperature that exists in the Oort cloud.

A turning point of the another kind of behavior is the temperature fall below -259°C, i.e., below the

melting point of hydrogen (H₂). The objects which start off from the Oort cloud towards the interior part of the Solar system have great starting speeds, which with time (after a number of cycles) decrease.

Low temperatures, below 12°K, make it possible for the objects to achieve great speeds – even though their gravitational forces are weak – speeds that, besides the Oort cloud, exist on the edge of galaxies, as well as on the outer edge of universe.

When we master the technology of low temperatures, we would be able to explore successfully our system. It is necessary to cover the spacecraft plating with the materials which could with magnetization lower the temperature of the spacecraft plating below -260°C (PrNi₅ is one of these materials that has this ability, through to superconductivity, i.e., it can be cooled down below 1°K) and when we master the temperatures below the melting point of helium (He), which is -272,14°C or 1°K, we would be able to achieve the speeds greater than the speed of radiation (light) and to start exploring the neighboring stellar systems.

[toast]

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Everytime you make posts like your last one, this little puppy starts crying.

Do you really wan't that on your concience Weitter Duckss ?

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Forget the puppy, if I read any more of Mr. Duckss hypotheses I think I might start crying.

[Weitter Duckss]

Pooper average. In Croatia were compiled and Russia have refrained from comment.

Topic clearly points to one of the general principles of the universe. The small temperature are crucial in the Universe and Multiverse reconstruction, down to absolute zero.