Here you can comment on, or see comments made on, “R.I.P. Expanding Universe (b. 1930, d. 2012)” .
Sub-title:
(The Big Bang never happened)
There have been doubts cast over many years on the Big Bang model of the Universe, and on the idea that the Universe is expanding, but here is the PROOF that the model is just plain wrong, and more to the point, exactly why.
Click here to go to the article itself, at: R.I.P. Expanding Universe (b. 1930, d. 2012).
You can enter a comment on the article below. All comments welcome.
commentmaster 
Comments
For the answer as to what causes the gravitational redshift of distant galaxies, see http://www.deceptiveuniverse.com. (Hint – the Shapiro effect).
LikeLike
Like it. Don’t understand all of it, but Fred Hoyle was saying a similar thing years ago with his ‘Steady State theory’, and now we have Christoff Wetterich. Great. Stuff the ‘theory’ set in stone brigade.
LikeLike
Well, what is it then? It cannot be the Shapiro effect, it only increases the time, and does not redshift the light. But Einsteins theory of gravitational waves gives the answer, energy is different from mass just only by a constant, c square. A photon consequently affects the gravitational field and loses energy. Google Jian-Miin Liu on the internet, he at least is moving in the right direction!
David Noel comment: That’s right, the photon loses energy under the influence of the gravitational field it passes though. Its speed can’t change (from “c”), so the energy loss shows up as a wavelength shift.
LikeLike
David: I agree. See Cosmology and Cosmic Dust, APRIM-2014 at http://www.nanoqed.org
LikeLike
Regarding Black holes and Theoretical Implications of Nano-scale Quantum Gravito-magnetism on the Nature of Our Steady State Universe I hope you take an opportunity to view my Patent Application and the recent Journal article I published and take a look at my below writings on the subject. My approach is as an experimentalist not as a theoretical cosmologist. As an experimental physicist most of my theoretical approach is to use existing theory where ever I can; theories like QM, QED, GR, SR, insulator, semiconductor, conductor, and superconductor physics. I know about these theories based on my experience experimentally using these in my career as an engineer and scientist. For example SR applies to the medical linear accelerator used in my job at Accuray and QM, insulator, semiconductor, conductor, and superconductor physics applies to my job at Hughes. Please feel free to check my LinkedIn Profile to verify this. See https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=46259511& I found my invention while working in the Disk Drive Industry at Phase Metrics. See http://www.calfree.com/ApplicationPCTUS1352501.pdf
In 2010 I read this article by Sir Penrose that explained the apparent presence of two perfectly concentric rings in the EM background radiation as due to some pre-Big Bang event. I had my own theory based on my invention that suggested the two perfectly concentric rings in the EM background radiation suggested the presence are the Einstein Rings of a super massive black hole at the center of our universe and that the universe was steady state instead; i.e., no Big Bang required. The article I recently published on that subject is titled “Theoretical Implications of Nano-scale Quantum Gravito-magnetism on the Nature of Our Steady State Universe” See http://www.pluralidade.info/Pluralidade1_101_118.pdf
In Cartography of the Local Cosmos the authors’ examine what is called “The Great Attractor” in the Centaurus A Cluster. The video can be found in standard and high definition here: https://vimeo.com/64868713 My hypothesis is that this video and the article Cartography of the Local Cosmos support the theory that there is a super massive black hole at the center of our universe; instead of the currently accepted theory that it is an expanding [emergent] hypersphere instead.
There is this incorrect theoretical presumption that gravitomagnetism propagates at the speed of light. I assume what is called the large extra dimension for gravitation which allows gravitation at variable speeds. Photons [light] has no inertia and photoelectric effect is only a property of non-bonding electron orbitals in matter, not anything to do with gravitation what ever. The simplest flaw I see is it fails to address the anti-symmetric nature between the mass of electrons (electron…0.00091×10^-27 kg ) and protons (proton…1.6726 x 10^-27 kg ) and how that effects the flow [mobility] of the different types of charge, protons[holes] and electrons. Since the form of energy the light weight electrons produce is light [mass-less photons] and the force of energy protons produce is attractive gravity [massive gravitons] therefore I assume EM and gravitation are not directly related, but only indirectly instead. In order to understand why gravity is different [stronger] close-up you have to understand the theory of gravitation being what’s called the large extra-dimension…
Theoretical physicists Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali pointed [2], out that prior to now, gravity had not been measured below a distance of about a millimeter. They whose model is known as ADD, suggest that there could be extra dimensions as large as a millimeter in diameter. In particle physics, the ADD model, also known as the model with large extra dimensions [1], offers an alternative scenario to explain the weakness of gravity relative to the other forces. This theory requires that the fields of the standard model are confined to a four-dimensional membrane, while gravity propagates in several additional spatial dimensions that are large compared to the Planck scale.
Theoretical physics typically treats the Planck scale as the highest energy scale and all dimensional parameters are measured in terms of the Planck scale. In models of large extra dimensions the fundamental scale is much lower than the Planck scale. This occurs because the power law of gravity changes. For example, assuming r is the distance between the gravitational induction sensor and the spinning disk; when there are two extra dimensions of size d, the power law of gravity is 1/r^4 for objects with r <> d. This relationship suggests if we want the Planck scale to be equal to the next accelerator energy (1 TeV) we should take d approximately 1mm.
As suggested by ADD, gravity could be just as strong as the other forces but only felt strongly at short distances. Scientists funded by the European Space Agency have measured the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field for the first time in a laboratory. Just as a moving electrical charge creates a magnetic field, so a moving mass generates a gravitomagnetic field. According to Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity, the effect is virtually negligible. However Tajmar [3] have measured the effect in a laboratory. Their experiment involves a ring of superconducting material rotating up to 6,500 times a minute.
In the event horizon of a black hole gravity is faster than the speed of light. In that domain light is forbidden. Einstein’s problem was he only understood the universe from the side of electrons not the holes side that dominates it. If you think of empty space as a high density of holes and matter as regions where electron density is higher then you see Einstein Dirac etc…, where blinded by the light produced by electrons…, that’s why they couldn’t see the holes in the universe all around them.
Magnetism is a property of electromagnetism produced by electron states in matter; gravity is produced by the mass of the matter which mass comes from the mass of the neutrons and protons of the element of matter as described in the periodic table of the elements of matter.
…………………Particle
…………………Name………….Mass
…………………proton………….1.6726 x 10^-27 kg
…………………neutron………..1.6749 x 10^-27 kg
…………………electron……….0.00091×10^-27 kg
The mass of a neutron is greater than the mass of a proton because the neutron contains a proton, contains an electron with some subatomic particles.
Neutron stars are collapsed matter leaving only neutrons at the atomic scale that makes up the neutron star and black holes are nearly identical but made of protons [holes] instead.
Black holes are black not because light doesn’t escape but because black holes are made of holes [collapsed protons] where light is not present because there are no electrons to absorb the light for re-emission of the light.
Holes are the mechanism for quantum tunneling in the semiconductor; as well as superconductivity. To understand how “holes” work it is useful to examine the Hall effect in semiconductors. The Hall effect is due to the nature of the current in a conductor. Current consists of the movement of many small charge carriers, typically electrons, holes, what are called mobile ions or all three. When a magnetic field is present that is not parallel to the direction of motion of moving charges, these charges experience a force, called the Lorentz force. When such a magnetic field is absent, the charges follow approximately straight, ‘line of sight’ paths between collisions with impurities, phonons, etc. However, when a magnetic field with a perpendicular component is applied, their paths between collisions are curved so that moving charges accumulate on one face of the material. This leaves equal and opposite charges exposed on the other face, where there is a scarcity of mobile charges. The result is an asymmetric distribution of charge density across the Hall element that is perpendicular to both the ‘line of sight’ path and the applied magnetic field. The separation of charge establishes an electric field that opposes the migration of further charge, so a steady electrical potential is established for as long as the charge is flowing.
In the classical view, there are only electrons moving in the same average direction both in the case of electron or hole conductivity. This cannot explain the opposite sign of the Hall effect observed. One very important feature of the Hall effect is that it differentiates between positive charges moving in one direction and negative charges moving in the opposite. The Hall effect offered the first real proof that electric currents in metals are carried by moving electrons, not by protons. The Hall effect also showed that in some substances (especially p-type semiconductors), it is more appropriate to think of the current as positive “holes” moving rather than negative electrons.
See http://www.calfree.com/FiguresGravityRectifierPZTvGMRpit&bump.pdf
The geometry of matter, or lack there of, causes a force field to be produced that I could measure. The reason gravitation is a direct tensor is because it has two components one is the normal gravitational energy produced by the presence of matter’s nucleus in the universe and the other what we call repulsive anti-gravity or dark energy is produced by its absence. But the tensor for gravity is much stronger than anti-gravity since the absence of mass produces only about 16% of the magnitude for the same volume (geometry). Some other differences are normal gravity is much stronger below 1 mm from matter than it is above that distance; as is the antigravity force. I found for normal gravity above 1 mm it is consistently linear with distance; while antigravity is ~ 0. That means the force is 1/r^2 above 1mm and 1/r^4 below 1 mm but that means gravity is still linear with distance within both regions of normal gravity space time. Antigravity on the other hand is a third order force repulsive force tensor whose force fields are like that of balloon with their force field’s strength being strongest at the membrane of the balloon and weak inside. Regarding the gravitational temporal relation both forms of gravitation experience the same amount of frame dragging as described in Einstein’s General Relativity theory; so doesn’t that means Time must be the substance between gravitational energy and EM energy that makes up our existence?
See http://www.calfree.com/ProofThatGravityIndependentMagnetism.pdf
My GMR head sees the magnetic image at 100nm distance and something else? The way i distinguish the EM from the gravitation is using Maxwell’s right hand rule for magnetic induction. Using that rule I know the edges of my nano-features on a spinning disk will produce a magnetic induction signal that is dependent on the direction of the magnetization of the magnetic media on the disk which I can control by change the bias applied to the write transducer [a microscopic metal coil] on the head in the disk drive assembly. Notice the direction of the gravitomagnetic signal shown doesn’t change; that’s because that force field’s direction depends on the presence or absence of matter.
My discovery is that time has a bandgap in between gravitational energy and EM energy. See http://www.calfree.com/Non-renormalizabilityOfTime.pdf Here is what my Patent Application has written about this graph. “[0058] Fig. 13 illustrates the time band gap between gravity and electromagnetism in the mass spin-valve device. Fig. 13 illustrates the time band gap between gravity and electromagnetism; is about 22uSec. Fig. 13 illustrates that within the gravitational rectifier device that time has a “band-gap”; much like the semiconductor again; where that time band-gap depends on the Nano-feature’s “gravitomagnetic energy” or “mass-energy” plus “electromagnetic energy” relative to the merged head 402. ”
Time must be a substance. That’s because gravitational space time is produced by hole states of matter and electromagnetism spacetime (EM or light) is produced by electron states of matter. QM is built on EM space time; not gravitational space time. However Special Relativity is built on EM space time while General Relativity is built on gravitational space time. The manifold of events in spacetime are a “substance” which exists independently of the matter within it…Special Relativity and General Relativity created a conundrum for Einstein that he tried to resolve unsuccessfully to unit the two theory in to one grand unified field theory. My discovery is that while the speed of light is constant that’s not true for gravitation. It can be slower in speed and faster too. Einstein focused to much on the speed of light and not enough on the “holes” all around him. That’s where the gravitation is. That “electromagnetism is in spacetime A” let’s call that space-time “{EM} space-time”, and this is what Einstein’s “Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper”[4] (“On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”) described which reconciles Maxwell’s equations for electricity and magnetism with the laws of mechanics, by introducing major changes to mechanics close. to the speed of light. This later became known as Einstein’s special theory of relativity (SR).[5][6]That “gravitation is in spacetime B” let’s call that space-time “{G}space-time” and this is what Einstein’s General relativity (GR) describes. According to general relativity,[7] the observed gravitational attraction between masses results from the “warping of space and time by those masses”. When I write about this “manifold of events in spacetime are a “substance” which exists independently of the matter within it” this “manifold of events in spacetime” is this property that makes Time; as we measure it; the emergent {positive arrow of time}. Therefore time is a vector which direction depends on your position in our universe which is created by a change of energy states between gravitation to electromagnetism; and visa versa.
[1] ANTONIADIS, N., ARKANI-HAMED, N., DIMOPOULOS, S., DVALI, G. New dimensions at a millimeter to a Fermi and superstrings at a TeV. arXiv: hep-ph/9804398, 1998.
[2] ARKANI-HAMED, N., DIMOPOULOS, S., DVALI, G. The Hierarchy problem and new dimensions at a millimeter. arXiv: hepph/9803315, 1998.
[3] TAJMAR, M., MATOS, C.J. Gravitomagnetic Fields in Rotating Superconductors to Solve Tate’s Cooper Pair Mass Anomaly. arXiv: gr-qc/060786, 2006.
[4]EINSTEIN, A. Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper. Annalen der Physik 17: 891-921, 1905.
[5]EINSTEIN, A.; GROSSMANN, M. Entwurf einer verallgemeinerten Relativitatstheorie und einer Theorie der Gravitation. Zeitschrift fur Mathematik und Physik 62: 225-261, 1913.
[6]EINSTEIN, A. Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitatstheorie. Annalen der Physik, 49, 1916.
[7] HILBERT, D., Die Grundlagen der Physik. Mathematische Annalen, 92, 1924.
Michael Boyd
LikeLike
Being a species of finite beings it is not possible to conceive the infinite. Perhaps the universe just simply has always been, and has no boundary. Why is it considered that the most distant celestial body is the most ancient, what is the frame of reference. To me that ideology presumes earth to be the center of the universe which is primitive thinking, and reverts to the Big Bang theory, and the expanding universe which are flawed theories at best. We do not and cannot ever determine our physical location within the universe, again because there is no frame of reference. There is no equation possible to determine the scale, expansion, contraction, or origin of the universe without a frame of reference such as known boundaries, something we simply do not have the ability to establish. Mathematics and theories will never produce a solution to the universe, just employment for many PHD’s.
LikeLike
I am very glad to see that other people also dare to question the big bang theory! It keeps getting more unbelievable each year, yet most scientists seem to be almost religiously attached to it instead of asking hard questions. I summarized a few issues here (among other topics):
http://www.askingwhy.org/blog/second-puzzle-the-big-bang-puzzle/big-bang-puzzle-piece-2-older-than-legally-allowed/
http://www.askingwhy.org/blog/second-puzzle-the-big-bang-puzzle/big-bang-puzzle-piece-i-seeing-red/
LikeLike