SkipCaptcha
708
edits
Changes
mLine 96:
Line 96: + + + + + + + + + + +
→Duplicate articles
Please stop creating [[Cosmological_redshift|duplicate articles]]. Add anything new to [[redshift]] instead of creating new articles explaining the same thing with a slightly different name. thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:06, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
Please stop creating [[Cosmological_redshift|duplicate articles]]. Add anything new to [[redshift]] instead of creating new articles explaining the same thing with a slightly different name. thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:06, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
:Hi Max, It is not a slightly different name, and it is not a name invented by me. It is used as such ([[cosmological redshift]]) in cosmology. The name "cosmological" makes it different from any other redshift that is not "cosmological". E.g. "recessional redshift" may be also "cosmological" but not necessarily. Opinions of cosmologists are divided in this since cosmology is not a finished science in which there are no doubts what is what. I'd like to explain every shade of meaninf to the readres who are interested in the details, and not just shrtchange them as other people may do not caring too much about what readers understand.
:If you think that I explained it already and just invent another name for the same thing (which I never do since I feel there are too many names for the same thing) let me know and if this is relly the case I gladly follow your suggestions. If your suggestion is improper for some reason I'll explain what are the differences in meaning. Do we have an agreement?
:In cosmology there are really two main theories: the [[Big Bang]] and [[Einsteinian gravitation]] (as I call it) since it is built on Einstein's understanding of physics. I don't call it "Einstein's" since Einstein didn't know many things that got discovered later but are predicted by his theory and not by the [[Big Bang]]. E.g. "[[dark energy]]" which is pure invention of the [[Big Bang]] proponents who don't understand the universe. Have you read my [[relativists]] article?
:[[Einsteinian gravitation]] predicts observations leading the [[Big Bang]] proponents to assuming [[dark energy]] but those predictions are not published since the [[Big Bang]] proponents hope that Einsteinian explanation will get not noticed.
:I write in conservapedia for the sole purpose to explain all cosmology to people who don't understand it and might think that the [[Big Bang is a theory of the universe, while it is [[Einsteinian gravitation]] that I propagate since Einstein is already dead and can't speak. E.g. contemporary students don't even know that Einstein said that spacetime metric '''''must be non symmetric''''' while the [[Big Bang]] metric is assumed as symmetric and Einstein's paper not mentioned in bibliografy from which those students learn creationism instead of physics as they should.
:I'd appreciate your answering this message.