20091113

The Coming Revolution in Cosmology

We supposedly live in a universe that exploded out of nothing. As an earth scientist, I have had real problems with that. Thirty years ago I actually believed in the Big Bang Theory too. Not anymore. You see, as an independent consultant I have had too much time on my hands. So much time that I was able to check those claims out from the perspective of an onlooker not exactly afraid to get his hands dirty. I love math, but I love rocks and soils more, stuff that is real rather than ideal.

My look into the Big Bang Theory (BBT) began with an examination of its underlying assumptions a la Collingwood and Kuhn. It turns out that the most important assumption currently held by establishment cosmologists and physicists is finity. Its opposite is INFINITY (The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions). Of course, it is impossible to prove without a doubt which of these assumptions is correct. One can only assume them. Choosing between them is a big scientific and philosophical deal: with finity the universe explodes out of nothing (or a “singularity, which amounts to the same thing) and with INFINITY the universe is eternal and everywhere.

But as a species, we have pretty much grown up with finity. Our finite world starts out with a blanket over our heads. The earth becomes flat. Then it becomes a planet with its sun revolving around it. Then it becomes just another small planet revolving around a minor star. Then it becomes a hundred billion galaxies each with a hundred billion stars supposedly expanding into 4-dimensional “spacetime.” Even with these obviously hugh numbers we have managed to keep things within reach—mathematically, if not realistically.

But now for the revolution…

It is my belief that the revolution started by Copernicus is not yet complete. It won’t be until we adopt the only logical alternative: Infinite Universe Theory (IUT). Why will this occur and when will it be? In spite of its impeccable logic and the numerous scientific and philosophical problems that it solves, the IUT will not be accepted any time soon. Hardly a day goes by that the New York Times, Science, Nature, or some such establishment media outlet doesn’t report yet another “proof” of the efficacy of the BBT. All is seen through the eyes of finity and the BBT even though hundreds of scientists have gathered much data that discredits it. As the reigning paradigm, the BBT holds immense power and popular support. Budding cosmologists and physicists who have doubts about the reality of four dimensions, curved space, or the explosion of the universe out of nothing are weeded out. In cosmology and physics government grants are seldom, if ever, awarded to scientists who do not believe in the BBT. That is the nature of a scientific paradigm. It cannot be changed from within, because those who would question it are without. There are thousands of them. They are colleagues, mostly gray of hair, who are retired physicists now free to speak out. They are engineers accustomed to working with the real, 3-D world, not the imagined, 4-D world of the “modern physicist.” They are natural scientists untouched by the financial restrictions of the paradigm. They are folks just like you, who are curious about their surroundings.

Because of its philosophical flaws, the BBT is certain to be replaced by the IUT. What is not certain is the timing of this revolution. The assumptions underlying the IUT are the opposite of those underlying religion, which is the philosophy of probably 80% of the world’s population. Nevertheless, religious authority is under heavy attack as globalization speeds up. The current religious-economic wars are symptomatic of the inevitable destruction of long-held conservative worldviews. Having developed in semi-isolation, these philosophies cannot survive a world dominated by the logic of the internet and a wide-open mixing of cultures spawned by those wars. Philosophically, we cannot escape INFINITY. Even if you believed in a god that created the universe from nothing, you must wonder who created that god and what took it so long? Even Hawking has asked the next question: what existed before the BBT? There is no realistic answer, just more of the same: crunches, “multiverses,” “parallel universes,” etc. The mathematical dreams of 4 and 13 dimensions will not contain a universe that has existed everywhere and for all time.

A true revolution involves turning things upside down. As I said, the switch from finity to INFINITY is a really big deal. It won’t happen soon. Major philosophical changes cannot occur without major economic changes. The rate of global population increase began to slow in 1989. By 2050, population growth and economic growth will slow to a trickle. The current depression is sure to put tremendous stresses on conservative social and economic systems. Our adaption to the many changes required will include questioning of all those in authority, the BBT included.

8 comments:

Glenn Borchardt said...

It seems that there are an infinite number of infinite universe theories. Although I am partial to our latest book, "Universal Cycle Theory: Neomechanics of the Hierarchically Infinite Universe" (UCT), here is one from David Levy. My comments are in brackets:

The current concept that the universe is finite is wrong. It is absolutely infinite!!!

The Updated Theory for the infinite universe:

In our universe, Spiral galaxies are leading the activities as follow:

[GB: I once thought similarly. It turns out that no particular microcosm is “leading the activities.” I will explain this in detail in my blog “Is the Infinite Universe Regenerative?” planned for 20131218.]

A. Creation of a new Hydrogen Atom - a new mass is created around the galactic nucleus of spiral galaxy. Nucleus serves as the accelerating (or generator) that creates new material. In the near distance to the nucleus, there are probably tremendous forces and electric fields with huge energy. This creates thin layers of Hydrogen atoms. Those atoms are moving at nearly the speed of light.

[GB: I don’t know where you got this particular idea. Do you have a reference for us? Both hydrogen and helium are common interstellar gases (UCT, p. 172), along with about 118 others. Furthermore, “Massive clouds of hydrogen and helium circulate around spiral galaxies…” (p. 173) as well. In fact, hydrogen appears to be over 75% of all known baryonic matter and exists throughout the universe. As you know, hydrogen forms helium through fusion, which, in turn, forms other elements. Exactly how hydrogen itself is formed is not known. Your guess may be as good as any. However, having it form only from galaxies would seem to be putting the cart before the horse (i.e., where did the galaxy come from in the first place?). Even in the infinite universe it would seem that the larger, more complex microcosms (such as galaxies) must form from the smaller, less complex microcosms (such as hydrogen or aether). In UCT, we follow that rule by speculating that the formation of baryonic matter follows an infinite progression: electrons from aether-1, aether-1 from aether-2, ad infinitum. This is a consequence of the Eighth Assumption of Science, infinity (The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions).

BTW: I like your use of the term “galactic nucleus,” which is better than the oxymoronic “black hole” the cosmogonists use.]

B. Creation of wide range of Atoms and molecular: at this high speed there is a chance for collision between those new born Hydrogen Atoms. Also, due to the high pressure, temperature and electric/magnetic fields a nuclear fusion activity will set heavier atoms. (Eg, nuclear fusion between two atoms of hydrogen will generate helium). In this way all the atoms which are known have been created. Due to the high electric field, there is a wide range of intermolecular links. Therefore, all the following molecules are formed: water, carbon dioxide, silicates, and more. Over time, those atoms and moleculars crystallize into blocks and gradually migrate outwards from the bar shape.

C. Star Birth – by wiki " The bar may be surrounded by a ring called the 5-kpc ring that contains a large fraction of the molecular hydrogen present in the galaxy, as well as most of the Milky Way's star formation activity." Hence, those blocks crystallize and form hot mass balls. Each ball absorbs additional mass and increases its size- similar to a snowball. As long as the ball is in the creation mass zone, it will get more mass and increase its size. Gradually, a hot new star will appear. If it's a high-mass star then it will keep all the light gases (due to gravity) and become a giant gas star. If the mass is significantly larger there is a chance for a nuclear burning activity than it might become a sun star. But when it is relatively small, than the gases might emitted into space and therefore, it becomes a rocky planet like Earth and Mars.

Continued…

Glenn Borchardt said...

D. New star locked by interior side of spiral arm –The newborn star migrates outwards from the galactic nucleus. The Electric fields and forces in the nucleus of the galaxy form the shape of the famous BAR which is visible in most of the spiral galaxy. The star on the edge of the BAR continues with its outwards migration and starts penetrating to the gravitational forces of the interior side of the spiral arms. Therefore, It reduces its velocity and continue to rotate till it finely locked by the gravitational power of one of the spiral arm. It's similar to roulette ball bouncing between the cells numbers until it lost the speed and finally set in one of the cells. Therefore, the arm is drifting outwards, while new stars are getting in from the center!!! This fully meets Newton's laws!!!

E. Spiral arm - Spiral arm acts as a chain of star which is connected to each other by the gravitational power. This maintains the flat & high velocity. In fact, the galactic nucleus of a spiral galaxy like the Milky Way contains a mass of up to billions of suns. This core rotates on its axis and creates a circular motion for all the stars which are relatively close to it. Thus, rotation of a star near the galactic nucleus causes a higher speed to another star which is a little farther from the nucleus. It can be simulated as series of balls which are connected by elastic cord to each other. In one side the cord is connected to a spinning axis. Hence, the velocity of the other end of the cord will be directly affected by the rotation of the axis.

The balls in this example are the stars and the elastic cord is the gravitational power.

Note that all the stars in the Milky Way galaxy orbit in a uniform direction. All in one direction. Spiral arm is the ultimate answer for the high velocity of a star which is located far away from the galactic nucleus.


F. A brief calculation- Most of the 400 Billion stars are located at the spiral arms. Let's say about 70 Billion stars per arm. The length of each arm is about 70,000 years light and its diameter is 1000 light year. So, by average, there are about 1 billion stars in a cube of 1000 x 1000 x 1000 light year. That should be good enough to hold the gravitational chain power of the spiral arm!!!


G. New Spiral Galaxy - Each spiral mother galaxy creates new baby spiral galaxies.

This Idea perfectly fits and explains the source of the hydrogen "bridge" between Andromeda Galaxy and the Triangulum Galaxy.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120611193632.htm

"The new observations confirm a disputed 2004 discovery of hydrogen gas streaming between the giant Andromeda Galaxy, also known as M31, and the Triangulum Galaxy, or M33."

As both Andromeda and Triangulum are Spiral Galaxies, with rotational suppermassive black hole, they should have the requested power to generate Hydrogen Atoms in their core. Therefore, as they are drifting apart, they are Releasing Hydrogen and set this kind of bridge!!! Andromeda has about 1,000 Billion stars. It is the mother spiral galaxy. Triangulum has about 40 billion stars. Therefore, it is a young spiral galaxy. This Hydrogen bridge is actually the Umbilical cord which connects the mother galaxy – Andromeda' to her Embryo - Triangulum.

H. Universe expending -Each new spiral galaxy migrates away from the Mother spiral galaxy. Therefore, at the far end of the universe, the galaxies are moving away at ultra high speed. In the same token, the galaxies are moving in all directions. That gives an answer why the galaxies at the far end of the universe are moving faster away, while the Milky Way and Andromeda are moving to each other.

Continued…

Glenn Borchardt said...

[GB: If the universe is infinite, as you say, then how could it be expanding? How can the infinite universe have a “far end”? What would it be expanding into? There is no such thing as “empty space.” Another critical question is this: If the universe exists in one place, why wouldn’t it exist everywhere else?]

To summarize:

This Theory gives full explanation to any phenomenon in the Universe. For Example:

1. The cosmic microwave background (CMB) – this is not a thermal radiation left over from the "Big Bang" of cosmology. Instead, this is the Thermal radiation of any Spiral galaxy in the Universe. The mass creation in the core of spiral galaxy generates this radiation.

[GB: I don’t see how this kind of “mass creation” is any better than the Big Bangers’ creation from nothing. According to the regressive interpretation, mass is supposed to be converted into pure energy. You are proposing the reverse, which would use up radiation, not produce it. See my paper on E=mc2 and the one we just wrote on Neomechanical Gravitation Theory for the correct interpretation of the calculation called “energy” and the transformations between various types of the motion of matter.

2. Star Age in the Galaxy –Massive Young Stars at Milky Way's Center Puzzle Scientists – (August 17, 2013) http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/08/massive-young-stars-at-milky-ways-core-puzzle-scientists.html

That evidence is fully aliened with the new theory. However, those young stars migrate outwards. Therefore, as we move outwards from the center of the Galaxy we should find older and older Stars. That is Fully aliened with the following article: Signatures of radial migration in barred galaxies (11 Jan 2013) http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2545 "We have found an indication that the stars get older as you move out from the center of the galaxy."

Now, if we go to the Galactic Halo of the Milky way (About 80,000 light years from the center) there are very old stars. Please see the following article: Milky Way Leftover Shell Stars Discovered In Galactic Halo
http://www.universetoday.com/100158/milky-way-leftover-shell-stars-discovered-in-galactic-halo/#ixzz2kFcjFcrs

3. Star drifting in spiral galaxy – There are very young stars in the center. As you move outwards the stars are getting older. At the galactic halo the stars are very old. Therefore, this is evidence that the stars in the Milky Way are drifting outwards!!!

[GB: Here is the response from Steve Puetz, who did all the astronomy for the UCT book:

“I agree with the observation -- young stars near the core and old stars around the halo. However, I disagree with the interpretation that the stars in the Milky Way are drifting away from the core. There are several reasons why I disagree with the outward interpretation:

1) Massive stars are known to have short lives. Thus, they would not have time to drift all of the way to the halo.

2) Based on the shapes and characteristics of other rapidly rotating and oblate objects, the Milky Way is accreting matter (stars).

3) Stars near the core should be continually bombarded because of the heavy densities.

4) The density of stars near the halo is thin. Other stars would seldom collide with them.”

All this fits the general rule in neomechanics that vortices accrete matter (birth via convergence) as a result of rotation and lose it when rotation slows (death via divergence) as per the Sixth Assumption of Science, complementarity (All things are subject to divergence and convergence from other things).

David, I hope you get the chance to read "The Scientific Worldview" and are able to follow that by reading "Universal Cycle Theory: Neomechanics of the Hierarchically Infinite Universe." You seem to have thought about this a lot and might be able to give us a valuable critique of our work.]

David Levy said...

Steve Puetz: I agree with the observation -- young stars near the core and old stars around the halo. However, I disagree with the interpretation that the stars in the Milky Way are drifting away from the core. There are several reasons why I disagree with the outward interpretation:
1) Massive stars are known to have short lives. Thus, they would not have time to drift all of the way to the halo.

David: Please see again the following statement by wiki: "The bar may be surrounded by a ring called the 5-kpc ring that contains a large fraction of the molecular hydrogen present in the galaxy, as well as most of the Milky Way's star formation activity."
In the 5-kpc ring there is most of the Milky way's star forming activity. I assume that some of those new born stars are massive and some others might be smaller. So, those smaller stars (That are longer live stars) should drift all the way to the halo.

David Levy said...

Steve Puetz: 2) Based on the shapes and characteristics of other rapidly rotating and oblate objects, the Milky Way is accreting matter (stars).
David: Do we have a proof that Spiral Galaxy is accreting stars while it does not eject any mass or star???
Actually, I have just found new article which is fully support the idea that the Milky Way black hole ejects mass.
Please see the following article dated August 29, 2013 2:03 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/milky-ways-giant-black-hole-spits-food-180338156.html
"The new findings show definitively that most of the matter in the gas cloud surrounding the black hole is ejected out into space, which explains why it doesn't release light on its way in to be eaten".

David Levy said...

Steve Puetz: 3) Stars near the core should be continually bombarded because of the heavy densities.
David: Yes, I fully agree. This is absolutely aligned with the Updated Theory for the infinite universe. Please see the following explanation for this theory - "As long as the new born star is in the creation mass zone, it will get more mass and increase its size. Gradually, a hot new star will appear. If it's a high-mass star then it will keep all the light gases (due to gravity) and become a giant gas star. If the mass is significantly larger there is a chance for a nuclear burning activity than it might become a sun star. But when it is relatively small, than the gases might emitted into space and therefore, it becomes a rocky planet like Earth and Mars."

David Levy said...

Steve Puetz: 4) The density of stars near the halo is thin. Other stars would seldom collide with them.”
David: Yes, I agree. As you move outwards from the center the expected density of stars should be thinner. However, this does not contradict the Idea that the stars are drifting outwards.

Glenn Borchardt said...

Steve says:

Our different answers are based on different assumptions about how the universe operates. My ideas about accretion, excretion, rotation, mass, etc are based on neomechanics (especially relativism, in this case). Because other celestial objects that rotate and have a shape similar to a spiral Galaxy are accreting large objects (and I assume excreting aether's), then I assume spiral galaxies do the same. Levy believes stars migrate outward without really explaining why he believes that is the case -- other than agreeing with NASA.

Post a Comment

Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.

For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:

Nitecruzr writes:

[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?

The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/11/the-google-one-account-login-and-cookie.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/comments-and-cookie-filters-october-2014.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/the-new-commenting-captcha-is.html

Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.

Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/01/almost-nobody-controls-their-own.html