SH Archive Hubble Telescope and the Olbers' paradox: where is the space dust?

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Tart Aryan
Date: 2019-10-31 20:24:26
Reaction Score: 1

If it was that easy to explain, they would not call it a paradox.

The paradox was theoretically solved in many ways 200+ years ago. It helped emerge the big bang theory. Dust has nothing to do with the paradox so I don’t understand your point. There are many possible explainations for the paradox. Nothing crazy stands out about it. If you’ve ever done long exposure photography you’d realize that if the objects in the universe are moving as they say, or at the very least the hubble is moving while maintaining focus on a single spot that light would make it past the dust via. Photography only picks up light. As the hubble moves different vantage points of a star will become clear of the dust over a long exposure time.
There’s certainly dust and there is certainly a paradox. Both, but especially the dust, can be easily explained via easily observed and repeatable things.

Also, the article you linked has a different explanation on how hubble can see through the dust.

it’s just my 2 cents so take it for what it’s worth. Your time is much more valuable on other issues in my opinion.

 

[KD Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2019-10-31 20:58:38
Reaction Score: 5

The paradox has never been solved, this is why it's still a paradox. We were provided with some hypothetical explanations for the paradox. Whether to accept those explanations is up to whoever. I don’t, for none of them prove anything.

Any space dust is an example of scientism. It is unverifiable and is a totally made up thing. There can be an infinite number of plausible and equally unverifiable explanations for the same event. If the space dust is not made up, please present some dust for examination. It has to be everywhere including the ISS orbit. Sure they could collect some to permanently remove the word paradox out of the equation here.

Additionally with such a specimen we could learn of some elements which are not on the periodic table. We are facing a similar issue with meteorites. Scientism originates them in space yet they have zero elements not included in our periodic table.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Schism
Date: 2019-11-01 16:21:01
Reaction Score: 0

This was a fascinating OP and I entertained the idea for a short period of time, lol. I'd never heard of it.

Figured I'd mention - my quote does not mean that I do not believe there is a paradox. I simply don't come up with all the answers about a lot of stuff, and move onto other things.

Paradox - Wikipedia

Many people do not believe in so much stuff. They need irrefutable evidence, or physical proof in their hands to believe, or even consider many things, and I understand that. I am no different about so many things myself. All at the same time, I put effort into not completely missing the boat about so many things to consider.

Any space dust is an example of scientism. It is unverifiable and is a totally made up thing. There can be an infinite number of plausible and equally unverifiable explanations for the same event. If the space dust is not made up, please present some dust for examination. It has to be everywhere including the ISS orbit. Sure they could collect some to permanently remove the word paradox out of the equation here.

Additionally with such a specimen we could learn of some elements which are not on the periodic table. We are facing a similar issue with meteorites. Scientism originates them in space yet they have zero elements not included in our periodic table.

There is information out there to be considered. Whether or not one chooses to put any stock in such information is up to them as individuals. In many cases, the information may not prove anything, but will at least make some people think

I don't expect NASA, or it's affiliates to disclose, prove otherwise, debunk, etc so many things. IMO, the distribution of information, disinformation, knowledge, truth, mystery, and so on is working to their advantage quite well, and has been for quite some time.

 

[Verity]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Verity
Date: 2019-11-02 02:58:35
Reaction Score: 1

I wrote this other day and thought I'd posted..

As for how it penetrates all of that space dust, the exposure times on this thing are days, weeks and months. It’s staring at the same spot in the sky and taking a long exposure shot.

Yes.
To human scale it could be as shown as follows; Using a large format camera, two men on a bright day, c.1904.
One man stays completely still, one walks back and forth. Exposure time perhaps two and a half minutes, tripod trembles ever so slightly now and then from vibration from a massive Clydesdale horse...
Big old horse and cart walks right through the shot, kicking up dust between the lens and the still man and the moving man.
Horse and cart would not be exposed, basically invisible, as is the dust and the moving man, but the still man'll be seen through the dust and the wobble at that distance.

Re. the Hubble shooting the earth; Same set up, with a tennis ball (representative of the earth) held up 3.5inches from the lens. Anything beyond the ball will be visible but the ball is not discernible- just a big old blob of nothing blocking the focussed, visible background. It's a 'zoom' lens, not a wide angle.

I don't know about space dust, but it seems too rudimentary a concept. 'Scientismistic'.
At this point in my travels, 'empty space' is composed of an energy-transferring lattice structure, crystalline in nature, invisible to the naked eye, and electro-magnetic energy gets trapped or attracted to various crossover points within that lattice. When enough energy is caught up or attracted to that point eventually material mass begins to form.
If space dust was a thing wouldn't it be attracted/spun up in to the formation of a new mass? Like candy floss strands in a whirling vortex clinging to the stick. Maybe it would eventually be caught up and spun into mass, but try and catch the details of sugar crystals in a candy floss machine with a long exposure.

 

[EUAFU]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: EUAFU
Date: 2019-11-02 03:28:51
Reaction Score: 2

A few years ago I read about an American college student who discovered that Hubble was really just a plane carrying optical instruments and not the much-publicized satellite. By the way, everyone should know that these "Hubble" images are merely illustrative images.

 

[Verity]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Verity
Date: 2019-11-02 07:42:19
Reaction Score: 1

A few years ago I read about an American college student who discovered that Hubble was really just a plane carrying optical instruments and not the much-publicized satellite. By the way, everyone should know that these "Hubble" images are merely illustrative images.

"Artists impression."

 

[tigermouse]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Tigermouse
Date: 2019-12-03 22:20:06
Reaction Score: 2

What do you do when there is something contradicting your theory to the point of invalidating it? I don't know about you, but our science declares it a "PARADOX". A very simple solution to a very complicated problem. Now, everything in this story is official, and that makes it just that more ridiculous. That's my personal opinion only, but feel free to voice yours.

Dark Night Sky Paradox

View attachment 3385

In a nutshell ~ Olbers' paradox. The night sky is supposed to be lit up like a flood light due to the amount of stars up there. This is clearly not the case. And the reason we do not see this overwhelming sky size spot light shining down our own backyard is... cosmic dust blocking the view.

• Olber's paradox is explained by cosmic dust instead of the Big Bang
• On Olber’s Paradox
• Wikipedia - Olber's paradox

View attachment 3389
Schematic of the distribution of stars in an infinite universe and Olber's Paradox
Credit: Penn State Astronomy & Astrophysics

Hubble Space Telescope

View attachment 3386

Hubble orbits the Earth at an altitude of about 353 miles (569 kilometers). It takes about 97 minutes to complete one orbit around the Earth. Hubble passes into the shadow of the Earth for 28 to 36 minutes in each orbit.

Here are some of the pictures allegedly made by this awesome piece of equipment. More HUBBLE pictures at this NASA link.

• Hubble’s Lonely Firework Display - Roughly 50 million light-years away the little galaxy NGC 1559 has hosted a variety of spectacular exploding stars called supernovae.

View attachment 3387

• Hubble Spots a Green Cosmic Arc - This Hubble Space Telescope image shows a cluster of hundreds of galaxies located about 7.5 billion light-years from Earth.

View attachment 3388

My question: Where is this interstellar cosmic dust? How come this Hubble thing allegedly orbiting our planet at 353 mile altitude can take a photo of galaxies located 7.5 billion light years away? NASA taught it to see through the dust?

7.5 billion light years away... how many miles is it? Let's see.

1 light year = 5.88 trillion miles.
7,500,000,000 light years x 5,800,000,000,000 = no clue what this is called but my calculator demonstrated this 4.35^22 miles. I think in a more conventional way the distance looks like this - 43,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles.

This is your paradox, ladies and gentlemen: The night sky is supposed to be lit up like a gigantic floodlight. Obviously it is not because we have this interstellar cosmic dust blocking our view. Yet the Hubble telescope orbiting 353 miles above Earth is able to penetrate at least 4.35^22 miles of dust saturated space and snap a photo of some Galaxies far far away.

What's funny, we are so dull, we believe this non-sense. What's even funnier, Hubble is unable to take a picture of Earth. Why? Here is why:

• The surface of the Earth is whizzing by as Hubble orbits, and the pointing system, designed to track the distant stars, cannot track an object on the Earth. The shortest exposure time on any of the Hubble instruments is 0.1 seconds, and in this time Hubble moves about 700 meters, or almost half a mile. So a picture Hubble took of Earth would be all streaks.

Hubble orbit speed: 5 miles per second at 353 miles above Earth
ISS orbit speed: 4.76 miles per second at 205-270 miles above Earth

$2.5 billion Hubble telescope weighing, 24,500 pounds and measured at 43.5 feet does not have a camera to take a picture of Earth located only 353 miles away. Yet, it brings us joy with the images of the galaxies located 43,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles away. It is also capable of penetrating 4.35^22 miles of space dust. That same dust preventing the stellar light from reaching our planet Earth.

Are we being duped?

To answer the last question first. Yes we are being duped but perhaps not compleatly intentionally. Maybe a case of the loudest voice shouting accross the playground getting the most atention. Look at einstien.
At a guess...an edumacated one at that, I would say that light in its essence is not visible. Our eyes have adapted to cope with translating enough of what is needed for us to interact with the universe. The light we see is in fact not a ray/beam or wave (thats just what some long suffering scientists want it to be) it is a constant that when interacting with certain materials burns off the materials potential. Kinda like scrapeing a quantum knee. We see that as a translated version of what is actualy happening.
The reason we can not see all the light is that it is not there until it interacts with matter of a certain potential. some materials in possibly what might be called 'exotic' states might not heat up or be excited enough to give off what we would call light. Like a hot plate that stays black when on full. or.....
It could be we are blinder than we think.

 

[Belialith]

Here are some of the pictures allegedly made by this awesome piece of equipment. More HUBBLE pictures at this NASA link.

Looking at these photos, I begin to wonder whether they are even actually taken by "this awesome piece of equipment." I have heard so many supersoldier stories that there are spacecraft beyond what we've ever seen, and have read so much about ancient technologies and civilizations that had their own space crafts....that I have to wonder whether there is some spaceship taking these pictures and perhaps even has taken a photo of our own galaxy, and then off to NASA who tells us its from the HUBBLE. How do we know they are telling the truth when we have since found out that almost everything the so called 'authorities' have ever told us are only lies.

In the photo "NASA returns Hubble To Full Science Operations" you can see smudges in the picture, and then everything around it is BLACK. But press the arrow on each side of the page and look at all the other pictures, and every single one has stars in the sky. So? What are they trying to hide from us?



--
And what is that? A green cosmic archon?
Haha!
I saw in another picture, it looks like a huge spaceship. Like something that was found under the water on our planet, because of the geometrical striping on it...

• Hubble Spots a Green Cosmic Arc - This Hubble Space Telescope image shows a cluster of hundreds of galaxies located about 7.5 billion light-years from Earth.

​

...Like this one, for example:


Here's a bigger picture of the "green cosmic archon"(lol)....


----
Yea, that's crazy...

I agree that we can see those things we call planets. We see lighted objects of specific colors and shapes, like this Saturn below. Why do you think those are planets in a traditionally defined way?

I agree that we can see something. But the only reason we think of those as planets, is because we were told those are planets.

What's real in the below video? It's worth watching.

That's crazy. What then IS real?
On the channel where that video was published on June 30, 2017, it has the write up. Here's an excerpt:

"That's right - new Blue Beam Technology allows not only to see and hear the holograms but actually feel them. It is possible by manipulating the density of air and water molecules. New alien technology allows scientists to slightly increase the distance in Hydrogen atom core protons and orbiting electrons. The change is less than one thousands percent, yet it feels like you are touching the real thing."

" On the large scale model of Blue Beam Project - It produces abrupt geometrically impossible clouds because Blue Beam Space Satellite literally have to drill the hole though the clouds to bring realistic large scale hologram images."

"The second giveaway is the production of excessive amount of atmospheric electricity. Shrinking the distance between Hydrogen atoms core and orbiting electrons even by less than one thousands to make holograms not only look real but feel real, also makes air to conduct more electricity creating lighting and thunderbolts in the places they usually won't be appearing."


OK....with all that said, haha, I heard that there is really no such thing as atoms and orbiting electrons...hahahaa. To get really crazy.

Anyway, I know that aliens or whatever they are, have really sick minds and use really strange technology to manipulate people with. I was attacked years ago by their strange technology. I won't go into details because too long to tell. But the point is, they sent a 'cloud' of paranoid energy around me one sunny day when my friend picked me up to spend the day with him and his young daughter. I knew instantly where it was coming from, but I had to do my own research, so I asked my friend how he was feeling that day, and he seemed totally fine. I had to endure that horrible cloud of fear pressed up against me all around me, for hours. It finally wore off near the end of the day, just before my friend drove me back home. Again, the opposite thing happened at his house this time. While I was there, some type of energy was again directed at me, but this time it was a pure love feeling energy. It lasted for three straight hours. They were trying to assume as though 'Jesus' was sending me the energy, because that's the picture I first saw when that energy came through. Even though it was pleasant, I knew it was not true or real. So there you go. Those are just two experiences I had with their "alien" technology.

The strange thing that I just remembered about those two experiences, is that the "paranoid-fear" energy started at me, about 2pm in the sunny daytime, and ended just prior to him bringing me home, which would be just at sunset. It must have lasted about 6 or so hours, I unfortunately forgot to measure the amount of time it lasted. Then a few months later, the opposite happened. It was in the deep of night that the "love" energy began, and lasted for exactly 3 hours, which faded in the early morning hours, and almost instantly, so that I did measure the amount of time that was projected at me.

[I hope they post my post that I put up earlier, called "Anunnaki Evil Systems" because then you'll understand how all this has been going on a long time, and we've been stuck here, in reincarnational cycles over and over with constant memory wipes, and that's why we don't have a clue of what technology is already around, and how they play games with us, making us assume we are just now creating these technologies].