The discussion centers around the concepts of "tired light" and the expanding universe, particularly in the context of a static universe. Participants explore the implications of these theories and their compatibility with observed phenomena such as redshift and blueshift.
Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the validity of the tired light theory, with some dismissing it as incorrect while others engage with the ideas presented in Ashmore's work. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the interpretation of redshift and blueshift.
Participants express uncertainty about the implications of the theories discussed, particularly regarding the definitions of redshift and blueshift and their relation to tired light. There are unresolved questions about the interpretations of the referenced research papers.
Ennio said:Has anyone read the book of this author? What is your opinion about this topic?
https://www.google.de/search?q=tire...j5vfAhXK2qQKHdHsD6AQ_AUIDygC&biw=1280&bih=623
stefan r said:He sites a peer reviewed paper by C.S. Chen. I do not have access to the full article. The abstract clearly says "blue shift" and "red shift". Lyndon Ashmore's https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228730621_Intrinsic_Plasma_Redshifts_Now_Reproduced_In_The_Laboratory-a_Discussion_in_Terms_of_New_Tired_Light (page 2, left column, second paragraph) claims Chen's research shows no blue shift. That looks like a contradiction.
Well if he is writing about "tired light", I wouldn't take his writings too seriously because tired light is not a correct idea/theoryEnnio said:Here you can find his publication to download. I have bought and read the book: really interesting
https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=70089
If red shift is called "tired" then blue shift would have to be "wakeful". No wonder those ideas have no credence these days.davenn said:Well if he is writing about "tired light", I wouldn't take his writings too seriously because tired light is not a correct idea/theory