Not sure if troll or just really really ignorant.

well, it's not

That we can observe? Don't tell me the core of the sun is the hottest spot, because we can't observe that.

Let me clear that up for ya...

He's not a troll.

"The biggest problem with Arp's analysis is that today there are tens of thousands of quasars with known redshifts discovered by various sky surveys. The vast majority of these quasars are not correlated in any way with nearby AGN. Indeed, with improved observing techniques, a number of host galaxies have been observed around quasars which indicates that those quasars at least really are at cosmological distances and are not the kind of objects Arp proposes.[5] Arp's analysis, according to most scientists, suffers from being based on small number statistics and hunting for peculiar coincidences and odd associations. In a vast universe such as our own, peculiarities and oddities are bound to appear if one looks in enough places. Unbiased samples of sources, taken from numerous galaxy surveys of the sky show none of the proposed 'irregularities' nor any statistically significant correlations exist"

"As more recent experiments have expanded the amount of collected data by orders of magnitude, it has become increasingly simple to test Arp's postulates directly. A recent study stated that:
"... the publicly available data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and 2dF QSO redshift survey to test the hypothesis that QSOs are ejected from active galaxies with periodic noncosmological redshifts. For two different intrinsic redshift models, [...] and find there is no evidence for a periodicity at the predicted frequency in log(1+z), or at any other frequency."[10]"

your dudes not credible



actually, at this point im pretty sure he's just trolling

you can still analyze the temperature of the core...or at least approximate it accurately enough to know that it's hotter than the corona

No you can't.

SEARCHING FOR OVERTURNING CONVECTION IN PENUMBRAL FILAMENTS: SLIT SPECTROSCOPY
AT 0.2 RESOLUTION

L. R. Bellot Rubio1, R. Schlichenmaier2, and K. Langhans3

Recent numerical simulations of sunspots suggest that overturning convection is responsible for the existence of
penumbral filaments and the Evershed flow, but there is little observational evidence of this process. Here, we
carry out a spectroscopic search for small-scale convective motions in the penumbra of a sunspot located 5◦ away
from the disk center. The position of the spot is very favorable for the detection of overturning downflows at the
edges of penumbral filaments. Our analysis is based on measurements of the Fe i 709.0 nm line taken with the
Littrow spectrograph of the Swedish 1 m Solar Telescope under excellent seeing conditions. We compute line
bisectors at different intensity levels and derive Doppler velocities from them. The velocities are calibrated using
a nearby telluric line, with systematic errors smaller than 150 m s−1. Deep in the photosphere, as sampled by
the bisectors at the 80%–88% intensity levels, we always observe blueshifts or zero velocities. The maximum
blueshifts reach 1.2 km s−1 and tend to be cospatial with bright penumbral filaments. In the line core, we detect
blueshifts for the most part, with small velocities not exceeding 300 m s−1. Redshifts also occur, but at the level of
100–150 m s−1, and only occasionally. The fact that they are visible in high layers casts doubts on their convective
origin. Overall, we do not find indications of downflows that could be associated with overturning convection at
our detection limit of 150 m s−1. Either no downflows exist, or we have been unable to observe them because
they occur beneath τ = 1 or the spatial resolution/height resolution of the measurements is still insufficient.

This post was edited by AEtheric on Apr 12 2012 07:03pm

Oh falling back on wikipedia again, eh? Can't use your own words, eh? I'm not surprised. The study is valid regardless of what wikipedia says.

really? you realize youre entire first post is just copy/pasted, and then you copy/pasted an entire page from his website

obviously im not going to do my own investigation to show arps fraudulent especially when its already been done.

your guys a fraud, i showed you why.

you wanna talk about some conspiracy about scientist just randomly not accepting "evidence" *cough* against the big bang. They have legit reasons for not accepting it - that ive showed you. youre the one being shown the truth and blantantly denying it

First of all, you've been quoting other people and saying nothing yourself this entire thread, and I point you directly above this post to:



which is supposed to be a refutation of what I said, but it doesn't actually say anything pertaining to what I was claiming. They use measurements of radius and density in conjunction with the mechanics of nuclear fusion to determine core temperature.

The funny thing is when I asked you about what Arp has said, you just told me (twice) to go to his website, and subsequently quoted his website. Seems to me you found a dissenter and just played devil's advocate without knowing what you're actually advocating. What do you actually know about cosmology?

For what it's worth, the point of the wiki quotes is this: Arp finds arbitrary statistical anomalies and expects them to overthrow an entire theoretical cosmological model. No one says he's wrong; they just say his "evidence" is insubstantial.