Space Explosion Is Farthest Thing Ever Seen (gamma-ray burst about 13 billion light-years away)

Space.com on Yahoo ^ | 4/28/09

[NormsRevenge]

A stellar explosion has smashed the record for most distant object in the known universe.

The gamma-ray burst came from about 13 billion light-years away, and represents a relic from when the universe was just 630 million years old.

"It easily surpassed the most distant galaxies and quasars," said Edo Berger, an astrophysicist at Harvard University and a leading member of the team that first demonstrated the burst's origin. "In fact, it showed that we can use these spectacular events to pinpoint the first generation of stars and galaxies."

"The burst most likely arose from the explosion of a massive star," said Derek Fox, an astrophysicist at Penn State University. "We're seeing the demise of a star — and probably the birth of a black hole — in one of the universe's earliest stellar generations."

Gamma-ray bursts mark the dying explosion of large stars that have run out of fuel. The collapsing star cores form either black holes or neutron stars that create an intense burst of high-energy gamma-rays and form some of the brightest explosions in the early universe.

A light-year is the distance that light can travel in a year, or about 6 trillion miles (10 trillion kilometers). So astronomers are seeing this particular burst as it existed 13 billion years ago, because the light took that long to reach Earth observers.

NASA's Swift satellite first detected the ten-second-long gamma-ray burst in the early morning on April 23, and quickly swung about to point its Ultraviolet/Optical and X-Ray telescopes.

[DigitalVideoDude]

Yeah... I understand that some do not go with the FAR AWAY theory.

But many do believe this and I wonder how they would answer my question.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

The Electric Sky

*********

A Challenge to the Myths of Modern Astronomy

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

more:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/

“From the smallest particle to the largest galactic formation, a web of electrical circuitry connects and unifies all of nature, organizing galaxies, energizing stars, giving birth to planets and, on our own world, controlling weather and animating biological organisms. There are no isolated islands in an electric universe”.

David Talbott and Wallace Thornhill
Thunderbolts of the Gods

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

The measuring technique is in serious doubt...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Found the threads...

Giant solar waves spew more energy than 10 bn atom bombs

and

Giant Solar Twists Discovered

NOw check post #48...#50...#52...#53...

AND THIS #63.....

&**************************************************

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Oct 01, 2004 Quasar in Front of Galaxy

October 3, 2003: the big bang was proved wrong. Again. And here is the proof (image above). The galaxy, NGC 7319, is a Seyfert 2, which means it is a galaxy shrouded with such heavy dust clouds that they obscure most of the bright, active nucleus that defines a normal Seyfert galaxy. This galaxy has a redshift of 0.0225. The tiny white spot is a quasar either silhouetted in front of the opaque gas clouds or embedded in the topmost layers of the dust. The redshift of the quasar is 2.114.

Why does this prove the big bang wrong? One of the two major foundations of the big bang is that redshift is proportional to distance. That means the larger the redshift of an object, the farther away it must be. The other major foundation of the big bang is that all redshift is a measure of velocity. Again, the larger the redshift of an object, the faster it is moving away from us. Combined, these two foundations become the expanding universe, which can be traced backwards to the big bang.

Look at the picture again. By the big bang principles, this quasar must be billions of light years farther from us than the galaxy, because its redshift is so much larger. And yet the galaxy is opaque, so the quasar must be near the surface of the dust clouds or even in front of them.

63 posted on Sun 22 Mar 2009 01:24:24 AM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Sorry it took so long....see #45 on this thread for the counterexample to the redshift theory....

Thanks Fred....

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

See #45....for counterexample to the Red Shift theory ...and it's corollary the Expanding Universe Theory

[mnehring]

Look at the picture again. By the big bang principles, this quasar must be billions of light years farther from us than the galaxy, because its redshift is so much larger. And yet the galaxy is opaque, so the quasar must be near the surface of the dust clouds or even in front of them.

Actually not, if the dust clouds have a large enough gravitational field, you may be seeing stars behind the dust cloud, but the light is bent around the gravitational object.
We see this with stars and our Sun.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

That would be pretty extreme bending...I didn’t think the effect was that strong....

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Resource:

Cosmic distance ladder

*******************************EXCERPT****************************

The cosmic distance ladder (also known as the Extragalactic Distance Scale) is the succession of methods by which astronomers determine the distances to celestial objects.

[mnehring]

Extreme is a subjective term, especially when dealing with objects and distances as massive as we are here. During an eclipse, with the right equipment, you can see the stars behind the sun on what appears to be the face of or around the sun. Considering the distances with the other image, that would be a fraction of a degree of a gravity well shift from what we can directly observe.

[LibWhacker]

I've been asking myself, physicists, and anyone else who might know, that same question for 30 years now. I might have totally screwed up the explanation, but here's what I've come away with: It seems to have something to do with "inflation," the claim that the universe increased in linear size by a factor of 10²⁶ in a fraction of a second. I've even seen some claims that it increased by a factor of 10^10,000,000. Boy, that'd make your ears pop! Anyway... In inflation theory, the universe increased to about one-third of its present size in almost an instant.

So the light from this gamma-ray burster had quite a ways to go to get to us when the GRB exploded 630 million years later. Now, you might think the light would get to us in 4 or 5 billion years since that supposedly was the size of the universe back then and since, by relativity theory, the speed of light is constant for all observers. However, that does not apply when space itself is being created in between the two points all the while light is traversing the gulf. Thus, it has taken 13 billion years to get here, not 4 or 5 billion.

I'm not a physicist and, like I said, I don't know if I got it exactly right, but that's the best I can do to cobble together the answers I've gotten over the years from various experts. Cheers!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Ernest and Fred! Hence the keyword...

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/haltonarp/index