The Early Years in White Dwarf Research - Gravitational Red Shifts?

[@Chris.Davies]

I am a decidedly simple man: Pierre uploads a video, I watch the video, I enjoy the video, and I upvote the video. SIMPLE!

[@leelafferty954]

Good stuff, Doc. Science has been derailed for >100 years. You're getting it back onto the rails to where it should have been for all these intervening years. .

[@JoseSilveira-newhandleforYT]

Thank you Dr. Robitaille! Redshift is also a problem impacting the calculation of expansion and the distance of stars, and all start with a wrong assumption.

[@critical-thought]

Jose! So true. Redshift is one of the most poorly understood property of distant light. Heck, we don’t even really understand “close” light.

[@JoseSilveira-newhandleforYT]

@@critical-thought Hi Critical! Yep, what we don't understand is as large as the universe.

[@fredfarquar8301]

Alfven pretty much showed that redshift cannot be used as an indicator of distance at all, won a Nobel Prize for his work, and has been steadfastly ignored by astrophysics ever since. Very sad, but it IS slowly turning around.

[@JoseSilveira-newhandleforYT]

@@fredfarquar8301 Hi Fred! Absolutely!

[@maxhubert3785]

This is the best KZbin channel by far.

[@DDrew67]

Demystify Sci is a close second imho...

[@leelafferty954]

@@DDrew67 Dr. Robitaille was one of their first guests back when they started out wearing alien costumes. kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZpelaoBqq897jrs&pp=ygUoZHIuIHJvYml0YWlsbGUgZGVteXN0aWZ5IHNjaWVuY2UgcG9kY2FzdA%3D%3D .

[@flyfin108]

@@DDrew67 thats horrible, these guys are just full of it, try See the Pattern instead, no annoying sfx, no hubris, just purely curious inspections of claims in science

[@flyfin108]

@@DDrew67 i wonder what kind of brainfart can view life as "it shreds all into little pieces and maximises destruction" (from the "life does not exists") even the names gets me boiling but i guess thats they goal, to get reaction

[@joonasmakinen4807]

⁠@@flyfin108You are too harsh on them. The strength of DemystifySci is the diversity of scientists and drive for collaboration. See The Pattern has neither while Gareth has good content otherwise. He does not seem very open for collaboration though with exception of Thunderbolts. I don’t know nor understand his reasons for that. DemystifySci Podcasts lack supportive visual presentations, which I wish they’d address.

[@mikemacdonald2094]

This was good. Looking forward to the next video. I like starting with phenomena and seeing how the possible explanations line up with reality rather than starting with an explanation. Thanks! Good job.

[@albertperson4013]

As usual with Dr. Robitaille's presentations, my brain hurts.

[@randywise5241]

The result of the mind expanding faster than the skull.

[@chrimony]

In broad terms, he's just saying that he lines observed can have an alternative explanation (chemical reactions) that are seen in the lab, but ignored in astrophysics. Also that the scientists cherry picked and otherwise fitted their data to match expected results.

[@JamesHolben]

Mine has merely redshifted as I have always been told I was ultra dense... :P

[@Mrch33ky]

Like your mind is expanding...

[@JamesHolben]

@@Mrch33kyIf a person doesnt have a basic understanding of physics and chemistry, Dr. Pete might as well be talking Egyptian....

[@barbarian1111]

Suspicious Observers thank you for your work.

[@axeman2638]

Great work Pierre, i suspect that a great deal, perhaps even most, of the claimed experimental or observational evidence for modern physics does not stand up to critical scrutiny. These experiments and observations need to be examined again before things can move forward.

[@acetate909]

Modern academic cosmology is built on a house of cards. Every week I see new scientific papers and articles with titles like "Scientists shocked with discovery of galaxies that shouldn't exist" or "Newly discovered star has scientists baffled". These anomalies keep piling up and and up and scientists throw out ad hoc explanations in order to keep their out of date theories relevant. When is the "crisis in cosmology" finally going to lead to a paradigm shift? Scientists can't keep coming up with new kinds of exotic matter and inventing things like dark energy/matter forever. Eventually their preferred cosmological model is going to implode due to its ever expanding contradictions and growing distance from empirical data.

[@axeman2638]

@@acetate909 What do they say?, physics progresses one funeral at a time.

[@acetate909]

@@axeman2638 I think thats a Max Planck quote and he was correct 100 years ago and even more correct today.

[@alpineflauge909]

world class content

[@critical-thought]

Excellent presentation. So refreshing when a truly scientific mind puts evidence to the test. Thank you sir!

[@samtigernotiger3886]

In view of these fundamental errors and the far more metaphysical than scientific evaluation of their own measurement results, probably driven above all by the desire to cry with the pack, I could never be as diplomatic as Ph.D. Robitaille. Respect for that!

[@kimberleebrackley2793]

Always a pleasure, Dr.Robitaille.

[@doltBmB]

I strongly recommend to look up Reg Cahill, who has conducted a review and verification of the michelson-morley experiments, finding that the published data was not reliable, and that they actually did find a preferred direction, and that this revised finding can be replicated both using the original method and other methods. this should finally put the relativity nonsense to rest for anyone who cares to study it honestly.

[@EnergyTRE]

they have to make illumination a electro magnetic frequency as its already known to be. not a particle as is false labeled to the masses. Michaelson-morley experiment was a failure many times and will always be because of the fact none of you comprehend what illumination actually is. spoiler alert illumination is not a particle.

[@Mrch33ky]

True, the original experiments detected a signal of 5-7 kilometers a second. Subsequent experiments found large signals as the methods of detection became more refined. And yet somehow how that became a "null result" in the textbooks. James DeMeo wrote an excellent book on the topic as well.

[@theroguetomato5362]

As always, excellent. Thanks for your persistence, Mr. Robitaille.

[@davidmcguinness9187]

Thanks for the video

[@mdeasy]

My favorite Scientist!!

[@thunderleg6605]

I was skimming channels and thought the thumbnail said - Red Dwarf, the early years - As an American, I winced thinking of British humor and then took a closer look. heh

[@justinkennedy3004]

"Winced"?! 😮 Surely you meant "fondly and wistfully grinned"! Please edit immediately.

[@bradbradeen9277]

Awesome! Thanks for exposing the massive amount of human biases in astrophysics and all of science as well. It all started with Newton and Darwin...and continues to this day.

[@rooskohn8990]

Looking forward to the next video.

[@TigerTiger-fx3ps]

Could gravity be the result of a z-pinch effect? We hav observed galaxies forming on birkeland currents asa result of z-pinching

[@keithnorris6348]

Incredibly dense astrophysicists is a far more reasonable explanation than incredibly dense white dwarf stars. As always your show is the most interesting of all thank you very much , I hope more will follow have a great one Dr.

[@Mrch33ky]

Oh snap.

[@bramblemat]

The reason people beleive that spectral colours are intrinsic to light is understandable. After all opaque surfaces don't allow the free flow of light;)

[@ghislainchabot1601]

It really makes you wonder what is going on in the astronomer's community ?????

[@robert1audio1]

What a woundweful mind. Spectacular.

[@whgordon6109]

A Most Excelent Video! Many Thanks

[@ralphthompson328]

WOW

[@HoratioNegersky]

Based

[@torahtimes5380]

So once again the astronomy community has been practicing fitting observations to philosophy and presumptive theories when the observations are problematic.

[@flyfin108]

no matter how many times you repeat "incredibly dense object" it still is not Thank You Sir Robitaille.

[@SoufianeBella]

💚☀️🌴

[@doltBmB]

isn't gaia pronounced like "g-eye-ah" and not "gah-ee-ah"

[@justinkennedy3004]

Maybe he put that in there so the opinion of anyone who focuses on the pronunciation of a scientifically irrelevant word can be ignored? As in, anyone commenting on that doesn't understand the *gravity* of his presentation. Alternate theory: learning the spelling and pronunciation of that French name of his as a child was so traumatizing any three vowels back to back make him have a flashback. More seriously, our brains down what we ask of them and if you ask yours to pay attention to perceived mistakes for the goal of drawing attention to them then it will do the same with your mistakes and this is not fun enough to support an entire life. Focus on the good and your brain (or soul or the simulation programmer or whatever is responsible for this effect) will create good in yourself when it can't find it elsewhere. Life changing stuff, truly.

[@summerbrooks9922]

No. It is fine the way Dr. Robitaille's has pronounced it.

[@Mrch33ky]

Greek is not your first language is it?

[@markweikle5645]

Shifting reality to meet the model you choose ultimately only indicates a lack of creativity.

[@Dan-gs3kg]

From the sounds of it, the lensing that is supposed to happen is not irrespective of wavelength, thus there is no saving them from the issue of no observed gravitational lensing.

[@Mrch33ky]

As always, very informative and worthy of contemplation.

[@robertle3038]

DUDE, is the sun going to take out the earth? What can we all do about it?

[@Mrch33ky]

yeah, NO.

[@davestorm6718]

I would love to see Doc's take on the [failed] Gravity B probe experiment. I lost the links to a paper and a YT video, both of which outlined, in detail, all the failures encountered, and the bogus results (integration of noise from the wobble w/ MOEs adjusted no less than 3 times!) that were published many years ago. It's hard to find honest, or non-retracted, details of it, today. If the EU gets their way, ANY "science" that is not part of consensus science can (and will be) be censored (this is real, folks!) from social media platforms (of which YT is a part of). YT will cave in to the EU's (and any govt sponsored censorship) to avoid legal problems.

[@peacepoet1947]

Don't believe that most of the people I know, wouldn't have a clue about what you're explaining about the interference when measuring the distance of stars using red shift spectrum results.

[@acetate909]

Have you been paying attention for the past three years? Particular fields of science are prone to group think and appeal to authority. Just because many scientists claim to believe something is true doesn't make it so. There are myriad ways people alllow themselves to ignore empirical evidence in favor promoting something that will help their career and avoid social isolation from their peers. If the pandemic fiasco didn't wake you up to the massive issues inherent in the fields of academic science than nothing will open your eyes.

[@Nuts-Bolts]

Snow White, Dwarf? For a terrible moment I feared Robitaille had gone Woke!

[@maryannferraro1925]

Dr. Robitaille is passionate about his work ❤️. Truth as he knows it. Some scientists don't tell the truth because they rely on funding and are loyal to the people funding them. Lots of respect for Dr. Robitaille, #1 in my books.

[@patriciaoudart1508]

❤Thanks. Have a look at Jean-Pierre Petit KZbin Channel, It's in French, but He is You level in Astrophysics, and have done a lot of York about the red Shift, and other hypothesis about the structural universe, galaxies formations and lense effects over observations, a treasure to explore at your level of knowledge. Sadly, his peer reviewed articles are rare, because they contradicts academic models. I would love you begining to analyse his verified founds.

[@Arthur-zz5cu]

I take it that redshift has Sirius problems. Perhaps Prof. Dave might enlighten us. (The destruction of a Model is a joyous event, and an apoplexy for the ossified mind. They cannot bend but only shatter.)

[@johnlord8337]

The newly discovered electro-static and electro-gravitic model shows that the whole Hubble constant (and Einstein constant) based upon the faulty corrollary of the Doppler shift being used for photon detection and whether red shift or blue shift, creating respective expanding or collapsing universe status. New research shows that the whole red shift is a false concept based upon the Doppler shift - as the Aether sub-quantum particulates, electrino photino and graviton photino have variable light speed - thus being gravitationally captured by a larger gravitation object. Larger photons with light speed have gravitational lensing and escape. These photinos display the red shift anomaly, and have no qualitative and quantitative properties in the current version of the cosmic status. One can't even truly calculate the photinos and blue shift, as free and rogue photinos flying around the cosmos from ancient to late (super)nova explosions create "noise" in the blue shift that can't validate 100% puritiy of the data with anything stated as blue shift and a collapsing cosmos. The whole Doppler shift of terran experience, has no valid criteria dealing with cosmic surveillance data !!!!

[@KevinRavensberg]

Wow, I didn't expect data would be weighted with 0 if the result was not what the astronomers expected... that's no way to come to scientific conclusions.

[@Jueyes-vg2gb]

I dont feel this is your opinion anymore, I feel the evidence supports you more than it supports them, crazy world where some non-astronomer has to be ringing the bell. Hey guys look here, real evidence, makes sense, elegant and simple

[@KaliFissure]

There can only be blue shift from a local gravity well. Space is compressed by gravity so higher frequency. Red shifts can be seen within a structure, relative to.... one edge of a rotating galaxy is red one is blue. And SOME objects may be moving toward or away from is enough to give red shift or blue shift. But the cosmological red shift is a geometric artifact. The curvature of spacetime caused by the mass between observer and observed.

[@EnergyTRE]

space has no properties how can you compress it 😂 time nor space have effects or properties

[@KaliFissure]

@michaelmyrick6973 and yet you are created out of it. And you must have SOME properties

[@KaliFissure]

@@EnergyTRE you are locked in this qm framework. But fields are very literally the derivative of an actual fluid flow. Literally. Dosage is a fluid. Flows in a dielectric fluid cause charge separation. Charge is an artifact of flows in mass free space

[@EnergyTRE]

@@KaliFissure no i am not created out of space but the Æther that lets their be space lol

[@EnergyTRE]

@@KaliFissure no dielectric is magnetism lol it was relabeled short time ago. charge is due to the Æther being moved. nothing to do with time or space they effect nothing.

[@jasonwarren9279]

The foundation becomes even shakier considering that the "constants" of nature are not actually proven to be constants.

[@stensballe3683]

cant we call it entropy rather than gravitational 🤡

[@JoshuaTreeObservatory]

Laughed out loud. And yes I agree that that astronomers' explanations for shifted spectral lines are based on questionable logic or intellectual dishonesty, and not based in lab work: their theories rely on the fact that astronomers cannot actually see the distant stars; all they can really see are spectra, i.e. information from light, and no details of the surface or angular size of the objects. Of course, in the case of the Sun, in which details of the surface are seen, they display there an inability to actually see what they are looking at.

[@Kenzofeis]

The term "Fruit from the poisonous tree" applies to more than only legal matters

[@johnlord8337]

What part of confirmation bias and reverse engineering one's theory to make the data comply (negative what is perceived as "noise") with their concepts. Plain and obvious BS !!!

[@Mrch33ky]

Yes, Modern Astrophysics Physics is full of confirmation bias and "reverse engineering". You hit the red shift on the head. Maybe it should be called Einstein Bias , eh Johnny ..

[@JamesHolben]

Dr. Halton Arp demonstrated that redshift has little to do with distance or recessional velocity.