## 20240708

### Why Time is Faster on the Moon than on Earth

PSI Blog 20240708 Why Time is Faster on the Moon than on Earth

Hint: And it is not because of Einstein’s bogus “time dilation.”

Earth and Moon. Photo Credit: NASA Science.

Here are some quotes right out of the regressive woodshed:

“Time ticks faster on the moon because of its gravity is one-sixth that of Earth, a result of time dilation, as postulated by Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity.” [GB: It is true that, unlike GPS satellites, the aetherosphere around the Moon has a reduction in aetherial pressure that needs to be taken into account in addition to its distance from Earth.]

“‘At some point, we have to agree on what is the ‘zero’ day,’ says Turyshev. The ideal situation would then be to place atomic clocks on the moon to monitor the effect of time dilation compared with Earth from that date.”

Correct Interpretation According to Progressive Physics

From our univironmental analysis of the Pound-Rebka experiment we concluded that the velocity of light increases with distance from Earth.[1] They showed that EM (electromagnetic radiation) is blueshifted when going toward Earth and redshifted going away from Earth. They called that particular redshift “gravitational redshift,” claiming it was caused by “time dilation.” Astute readers know that time is motion, and that motion cannot dilate. So, what caused the gravitational redshift?

It is quite simple really, when you assume light is a wave in the aether and that the velocity of light is dependent on the medium through which it travels. Aether tends to have reduced pressure and increased density as a result of its collisions with ordinary matter during gravitation.[2] In other words, aetherial pressure decreases proximally (toward Earth) and increases distally (away from Earth). Because the velocity of light is dependent on that aetherial pressure and frequency is constant, the distance between waves going away from Earth tends to increase slightly.[3]

Distal Clock Speedup

So, what does this have to do with today’s post? It turns out that clocks are univironmentally controlled. That is, the motion within a clock is dependent on the outside (macrocosm) as well as the inside (microcosm). An increase in aetherial pressure produces an increase in the number and velocity of aether particle collisions to which the clock is subject. That increases the velocities of the submicrocosms within the clock, causing it to speedup. That is why clock speed is a function of altitude. Although the effect is tiny, GPS satellites need to account for it by accounting for altitude.

The Moon is a satellite too, and as you can see from the recent calculations in the O’Callahan article and the reprint, clocks on the lunar surface run 57 microseconds faster than on Earth. Of course, those articles needed to bow down to Einstein and his General Relativity Theory and time dilation to get published in the mainstream. Any mention of Aether Deceleration Theory and aether pressure differences could not be mentioned.

PSI Blog 20240708

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

[1] Pound, R.V., and Rebka, G.A., 1960, Apparent Weight of Photons: Physical Review Letters, v. 4, no. 7, p. 337–341. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/PR60]; Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, S.J., 2012, Neomechanical gravitation theory, in Volk, Greg, Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 19th Conference of the NPA, 25-28 July: Albuquerque, NM, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, v. 9, p. 53–58 [10.13140/RG.2.1.3991.0483].

[2] Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The physical cause of gravitation: Preprint [http://vixra.org/abs/1806.0165].

[3] Note that frequency is determined by the EM source. That is why the frequency of light in water remains unchanged when it enters the atmosphere, although the velocity and wavelength increase.

## 20240624

### Irrationality for Instilling and Enforcing Loyalty

PSI Blog 20240624 Irrationality for Instilling and Enforcing Loyalty

Is war possible without irrationality?

The Phantom Horseman,1870-93 by Sir John Gilbert (d.1897). Credit: Birmingham Museums Trust.

Thanks to Bill Wesley for this great response. It helps us understand the current state of theoretical physics and its irrational promotion of the Big Bang Theory.

“If we look at any social group there are nearly always aspects of religion in the core thesis that unites the group. The group insiders support each other in believing something that the group outsiders find impossible to believe, such that the irrational assertions made by the group canon are absolutely necessary to group identity since rational beliefs cross territorial lines so are shared by different groups. Rational beliefs cannot serve as a test of group loyalty like irrational beliefs can.

The irrational core belief is usually signaled by adherence to cultural practices associated with that particular belief, so everything from clothing to diet to the arts to language are regulated to signal adherence to the irrational core beliefs to other group members and to outsiders.

This tribal aspect of human nature runs counter to the needs of science; thus, science runs counter to the social needs of the human animal which are dependent on FASHION. [GB: Bill, I normally think of fashion as being relatively frivolous. I think it goes much deeper than that. As I have mentioned before, I believe the evolutionary purpose of religion is to instill and enforce loyalty. This was absolutely necessary for tribal defense whenever conflicts over scarce resources occurred. In other words, without loyalty war would be impossible.]

That means the social need for the irrational, the mythical, and the magical usually predominate over the needs of science for the rational, the objective, and the practical.

This means that the more the big bang is falsified the more attractive it becomes as a loyalty test to go ahead and espouse it anyway, as the big bang’s utility to science decreases, its social utility increases. [GB: This is an interesting observation in tune with Bill Mitchell’s suggestion over 30 years ago that the Big Bang Theorists amounted to being a cult just like the ones found among religions.[1] Even then, he was able to list 18 problems that would have led to the rejection of any truly scientific theory. As you and I have been saying all along, the durability of the Big Bang Theory is social, not scientific.]

As science the big bang is a very poor choice but also as ART the big bang is a poor choice, the universe is described as being "born" with no explanation what so ever, it is described as undergoing a heat death and the concept of entropy is hijacked and reformulated to support this claim.

It’s claimed that asking what caused the big bang is a pseudo-scientific question. Thus anyone who asks is defined as engaging in pseudo-science.

On an emotional level the big bang is a depressing formulation for the universe that is much the same as creationism without mention of God, thus it is even LESS rational than creationism since at least creationism attempts to explain what the first cause of a big bang might have been by attributing the infinite and eternal to God as a first cause.

An infinite and eternal universe does not need to explain a first cause, it was never created and is never destroyed so we need not waste time and intellect looking to make the impossible possible.

The infinite eternal universe is also inspiring as art, we need not try to cover over ugly flaws and impossible contortions, we can just stick to the evidence which suggests that the universe already has eternal life, an inspiring prospect.

By adopting a rational stance, we cannot be tested for group loyalty because for that we would need to submit to faith in the irrational canon of the mainstream cosmology club simply because that's what the current insiders have all done, independent minded scientists are not really welcome.

Science does not wear a uniform and is not well served by collective effort; this is why nearly all major innovation emerges from individuals and not from collectives." [GB: That does seem to be the case, with Newton and Einstein being good examples. Neither of them did much collaboration with others, which is common among those performing Kuhn’s “ordinary science” today. Most of the papers I have been reviewing lately seem to have at least a half dozen or a dozen authors. A recent paper claiming to confirm General Relativity Theory even had over 1000 authors.[2] Despite, or because of that huge number, none of them had the temerity to mention that the “gravitational waves” they detected were simply shock waves traveling through the aether at the speed of light as confirmed by a second paper.[3] None mentioned the data amounted to a falsification of Newton’s gravitational attraction hypothesis and that it had nothing to do with gravitation. Bill, all this is part of the “irrationality” you mentioned as the buttress for the Big Bang Theory. When the fundamental assumptions of scientific philosophy conflict with the irrational needs of society, the assumptions are bound to lose.

I might also mention that the current ominous surge toward irrationality is merely a prelude to the world-wide acceptance of fascism and the wars, big and small, that will accompany the destruction of “traditional values” along with the demise of the "Last Creation Myth" and the regressive physics that supports it.]

PSI Blog 20240624

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

[1] Mitchel, W.C., 1994, The cult of the big bang: Was there a bang? Carson City, NV, Cosmic Sense Books, 240 p.

[2] Abbott, B.P., et al.   (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), 2016, Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger: Physical Review Letters, v. 116, no. 061102, p. 1–16. [10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102].

[3] https://thescientificworldview.blogspot.com/2017/06/gravitational-waves-once-again-confirm.html

## 20240610

### How Universal Expansion Came to be Postulated

PSI Blog 20240610 How Universal Expansion Came to be Postulated

A trail of tears leading to the “Last Creation Myth.”

Galaxies receding from us have light spectra shifted toward the red end of the spectrum as shown here. Those coming toward us have light spectra shifted toward the blue end of the spectrum. Credit: Georg Wiora.

With regard to the previous post on Big Bang Theory Falsification No. 24, anon asks:

“Does this evidence suggest that the universe is older than the Big Bang Theory predicts since this galaxy's composition couldn't have developed 290 million years since the…inception of the universe…”

[GB: Correct, although we didn’t get that obvious conclusion from the cosmogonists who did the work. It teaches us a valuable lesson. Such behavior is typical during the early stages of a revolution, whether political or scientific. Contradictions must be covered up, ignored, or otherwise dismissed as irrelevant. That is why we have 24 falsifications, but the Big Bang Theory keeps marching on.]

“Is there any evidence in the universe currently that simulates the mechanics of The Big Bang Theory in present day or is this a one-time occurrence reserved for the creation of the universe?”

[GB: Explosions, which amount to local “expansions,” occur throughout the universe, as in the sudden conversion of a solid or liquid to a gas. At least, the imagery is there for the divergence, although the convergence equally common in the Infinite Universe is not.]

“…how did this mechanism become postulated?  It echoes the virgin birth of The Christ.”

[GB: Your implication is correct. The creation of something out of nothing is a religious assumption, with its popularity surreptitiously supporting the Big Bang Theory. That is why we call it the “Last Creation Myth.”

Here is a short summary of the evolution of the universal expansion hypothesis:

1.   The Michelson-Morley Experiment proves a “fixed ether” does not exist (1887).

2.   To wide acclaim, Einstein assumes a dynamic aether does not exist, implying that space is perfectly empty (1905).

3.   Einstein assumes time is a dimension in developing General Relativity Theory (1916)

4.   Friedman uses Einstein’s math to speculate that the universe could be expanding (1922).

5.   Bishop LemaĆ®tre hypothesizes the universe is finite with an ever-increasing radius (1927).

6.   Hubble mistakenly claims the cosmological redshift proves all galaxies are receding from us (1929).

7.   LemaĆ®tre publishes a popular book that was the first (and last) to use “cosmogony” in the title (1950).

8.   Various ad hocs are invented to support the Big Bang Theory every time it falters.

9.   One of the most egregious ad hocs was the “inflationary universe” invented by Guth to resolve the greater than c recessional velocities calculated for those with z>1.5 (1981). Cosmogonists gave up the Doppler effect and substituted perfectly empty space, which thenceforth was assumed responsible for universal expansion.

On top of all this, remember that “nothing,” that is, perfectly empty space is merely an idealization. It is only an idea. The assumed “nonexistence” is impossible. The Infinite Universe exists everywhere for all time.]

PSI Blog 20240610

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

## 20240603

### Big Bang Theory Falsification No. 24: 290 Million-Year-Old Elderly Galaxy Contains Oxygen.

PSI Blog 20240603 Big Bang Theory Falsification No. 24: 290 Million-Year-Old Elderly Galaxy Contains Oxygen.

Oops! Our own Sun is 4600 million years old, converts hydrogen into helium, and is not expected to produce oxygen for at least another 3 billion years.

“This infrared image from NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope (also called Webb or JWST) was taken by the NIRCam (Near-Infrared Camera) for the JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey, or JADES, program. The NIRCam data was used to determine which galaxies to study further with spectroscopic observations. One such galaxy, JADES-GS-z14-0 (shown in the pullout), was determined to be at a redshift of 14.32 (+0.08/-0.20), making it the current record-holder for the most distant known galaxy. This corresponds to a time less than 300 million years after the big bang.

In the background image, blue represents light at 0.9, 1.15, and 1.5 microns (filters F090W + F115W + F150W), green is 2.0 and 2.77 microns (F200W + F277W), and red is 3.56, 4.1, and 4.44 microns (F356W + F410M + F444W). The pullout image shows light at 0.9 and 1.15 microns (F090W + F115W) as blue, 1.5 and 2.0 microns (F150W + F200W) as green, and 2.77 microns (F277W) as red.
Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, Brant Robertson (UC Santa Cruz), Ben Johnson (CfA), Sandro Tacchella (Cambridge), Phill Cargile (CfA)”

Another great heads up from George Coyne:

“Glenn,

The JWST finds galaxy, JADES-GS-z14-0 existed only 290 million years after the big bang. NASA knows that this galaxy was already old at this point: "The presence of oxygen so early in the life of this galaxy is a surprise and suggests that multiple generations of very massive stars had already lived their lives before we observed the galaxy."

As reported in the January 9, 2009 edition of Scientific American "The first stars did not appear until perhaps 100 million years after the big bang nearly a billion years passed before galaxies proliferated across the cosmos.”[1]

My question is how a large galaxy containing multi-generation stars can exist 290 million years after the hypothesized Big Bang.

If the JWST finds elderly galaxies one year past the Big Bang will it cause some astronomers to question the BBT? What do you think, Glenn?”

Here are some quotes from this NASA blog article written by Thaddeus Cesari:

“In January 2024, NIRSpec observed this galaxy, JADES-GS-z14-0, for almost ten hours, and when the spectrum was first processed, there was unambiguous evidence that the galaxy was indeed at a redshift of 14.32, shattering the previous most-distant galaxy record (z = 13.2 of JADES-GS-z13-0).

…this galaxy must be intrinsically very luminous. From the images, the source is found to be over 1,600-light years across, proving that the light we see is coming mostly from young stars…

…This much starlight implies that the galaxy is several hundreds of millions of times the mass of the Sun! This raises the question: How can nature make such a bright, massive, and large galaxy in less than 300 million years?

…the brightness of the source implied by the MIRI observation is above what would be extrapolated from the measurements by the other Webb instruments, indicating the presence of strong ionized gas emission in the galaxy in the form of bright emission lines from hydrogen and oxygen. The presence of oxygen so early in the life of this galaxy is a surprise and suggests that multiple generations of very massive stars had already lived their lives before we observed the galaxy.”

[GB: Thanks once again George. I have been waiting for this Second-Generation evidence from the James Webb Space Telescope for quite a while since the Hubble Space Telescope also had similar indications. Let me simplify:

Elements are formed via convergence, that is, by the pushing together (fusion) of less massive elements via gravitation. The simplest is the fusion of two hydrogen atoms to form helium atoms. Because it is so young, that is about all that can be expected from our Sun. Older, redder, more massive stars have mostly completed this phase of star evolution and thenceforth produce higher pressures. This high pressure results in massive elements such as oxygen, gold, silver, and uranium. Eventually, they explode as supernovas, scattering those elements throughout the Milky Way. These essentially are contaminants mixed with the hydrogen gas that forms stars and their planetary systems.

I predict NASA eventually will discover gold in some of those “elderly galaxies” at the edge of the observed portion of the Infinite Universe.

George, now for your questions: “If the JWST finds elderly galaxies one year past the Big Bang will it cause some astronomers to question the BBT? What do you think, Glenn?”

[GB: Some of the younger cosmogonists will have qualms, but the older ones like Neal de Grasse Tyson, will squelch them. They have long careers and numerous utterances to protect. Remember, we now have 24 falsifications of the Big BangTheory, and that has not fazed believers in finity. My prediction still stands: Infinite Universe Theory will not be accepted by the mainstream until 2050.]

PSI Blog 20240603

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-first-stars-in-the-un/

## 20240527

### Is the Universe a Thing or a Process?

PSI Blog 20240527 Is the Universe a Thing or a Process?

Neither. The universe contains things (nouns) and their motions (verbs).

From George Coyne, who is the Canadian director of PSI and author of “Notfinity Process”[1]:

“Hi Glenn,

If you and I are correct in the view that there is no limit to microcosms in motion then there is no ultimately large object that can be referred to as the Universe. So we need to think of universe as a verb involving a process of matter in motion rather than as a noun referring to a defined object. Do you have a comment on this? Does it conform with your model of reality? Your blog readers may be interested in what you have to say on this.”

[GB: Thanks George. You have hit upon an age-old conundrum concerning matter and motion. Thinking of a thing requires one to “define” it, that is, to make it definite and quasi-isolated from the rest of the universe. While each thing, each portion of the universe has XYZ dimensions, the Infinite Universe does not. So, is it still correct to think of and talk about the universe as if it were a normal finite object? Of course, that is what today’s cosmologists do, having become cosmogonists, who claim to study the “origin of the universe.” To do so, they must think of it as finite—something that once did not exist, but now it does.

They get around this by using Einstein’s Special Relativity Theory in which he assumed perfectly empty space and his General Relativity Theory in which he assumed the universe had four dimensions. While those are not scientifically valid claims, they are highly popular with those who assume the Fifth Assumption of Religion, creation (Matter and motion can be created out of nothing) and “feral mathematicians” who assume the Fourth Assumption of Religion, separability       (Motion can occur without matter and matter can exist without motion).

There has always been confusion between matter and motion. Philosophical dualists such as Descartes tend to think of matter as natural and motion as supernatural. In modern times Alfred North Whitehead even became known as the “process philosopher”—to wide popularity. Modern physics entertains the idea of “matterless motion” when it speaks, like Einstein did, of matterless fields responsible for gravitation and magnetism.

I have even come across reformists who use math in their “attempts to determine the size of the universe,” which makes no sense unless one assumes it is finite. Even so, I prefer to use XYZ dimensions to designate each of the things within the Infinite Universe and to use motion for what those things do. The noun-verb convention found in all languages obviously is suitable for understanding each portion of the universe.]

PSI Blog 20240527

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

[1] Coyne, G.S., 2021, Notfinity Process: Matter in Motion (2nd ed.), Chappell Natural Philosophy Society, 408 p. [https://gborc.com/Notfinity].

## 20240520

### “Infinite Universe Theory” Now Available as an Audiobook and as a Hardcover

PSI Blog 20240603 “Infinite Universe Theory” Now Available as an Audiobook and as a Hardcover

Infinite Universe Theory presents the ultimate alternative to the Big Bang Theory and the common assumption that the universe had an origin. Author Glenn Borchardt starts with photos of the “elderly” galaxies at the observational edge of the universe. These contradict the current belief that the universe should have increasingly younger objects as we view greater distances. He restates the fundamental assumptions that must underlie the new paradigm. Notably, by assuming infinity he is able to adapt classical mechanics to “neomechanics” and its insistence that phenomena are strictly the result of matter in motion. He shows in detail how misinterpretations of relativity have aided current flights of fancy more in tune with religion than science.

Borchardt demonstrates why only Infinite Universe Theory can provide answers to questions untouched by currently regressive physics and cosmogony. His new modification of gravitation theory gets us closer to its physical cause without calling upon attraction or curved spacetime or “immaterial fields.”

This is the book for you if you have doubts about the universe exploding out of nothing and expanding in all directions at once, that the universe has more than three dimensions, or that light is a massless wave-particle that defies the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Borchardt has put forth a solid case for an Infinite Universe that extends in all directions and exists everywhere and for all time.

“What a great read! Thanks so much for a book full of great ideas. I love the Q&A format; it’s very satisfying to have good answers to clearly stated questions.” -Rick Dutkiewicz

“Truly brilliant.” -Jesse Witwer

“A radical, daring, and innovative demolition of regressive physics, from the creation of ‘something out of nothing’ to the ‘God Particle.’” -William Westmiller

"Glenn Borchardt's book uses the hammer of Infinity to explain and destroy the junk theories that plague 'Official' physics today. This is a book that should be used in college courses, to give students a basic understanding of how physics is done. Physics has 'gone off the rails' for a century and it is books like Borchardt's that will return physics from its current unscientific and anti-materialist base and back on to a scientific and materialist road." -Mike Gimbel

“What a fascinating read!” -Juan Calsiano Progressive Science Institute

In addition to the audio book there now is a hard cover book in color.

Here is a list of all versions available on Amazon:

Audio \$3.99

Kindle ebook \$9.99

Black and white paperback \$19.95

Color paperback \$49.95 Special today \$46.75

Color hardcover \$59.95 Special today \$42.95 (BTW: Good time to ask your library to get this hardcover.)

PSI Blog 20240520

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

## 20240513

### Natural and “Artificial” Evolution

PSI Blog 20240513 Natural and “Artificial” Evolution

Understanding the universal mechanism of evolution—univironmental determinism.

EVOLUTION

OF

EVERYTHING

Anon writes:

“Thank you:) I am very excited to see my question on your blog and to see that climate change is worthy of integration of planetary change and the Infinite Universe Theory on your blog.  What effects will be seen on our planets in conjunction with IUT?”

[GB: Welcome. Always like to answer your questions.]

“One Question:

As a Geologist as an original profession, could the evidence of natural selection theorized by Darwin (who was also a Geologist) and Wallace be interpreted through artificial selection?

Artificial Selection: Changes explained by natural selection however due to exogenous manipulation through a biased third party on a global scale (including weather patterns, tectonic shifts etc.) rather than coincidental events.”

[GB: Actually, my Ph.D. was in Soil Science with minors in geology and chemistry (Thesis was “Neutron activation analysis for correlating volcanic ash soils”).

Remember that the universal mechanism of evolution is univironmental determinism (what happens to a portion of the universe depends on the infinite matter in motion within and without).[1] Anything one deems “artificial,” “biased third party,” “coincidental,” or otherwise “exogenous manipulation” is included in univironmental determinism (UD). The Darwin-Wallace mechanism is called “neo-Darwinism,” but it is only a special case involving biology. It only includes their “natural selection” and Mendel’s genetics. Even so, I always thought it was quite naĆÆve of folks who opposed evolution while partaking of its benefits. Where did they think all those wonderful dog breeds came from? Their ancestors (wolves) might be fine, but a bit too large and carnivorous for most tiny apartments. On the farm, we partake in evolution when we select the best cows and bulls for increasing milk production. Our race horses are bred from thoroughbreds that may have won races in the past.

Folks like to think they are “exogenous,” that is, outside of nature. Sorry about that, but we definitely are part of nature. Per UD, everything you see around you is “natural.” So, do we manipulate our surroundings? Of course. Does cementifying whole cities warm the climate within those cities? Of course. Do the oceans emit increased carbon dioxide when the climate becomes warmer? Of course.

Your question is definitely apropos to Infinite Universe Theory. The philosophy and mechanism (univironmental determinism) upon which it is based assumes the evolution (motion) of each XYZ portion of the universe is determined equally by the inside and outside of that portion. This means, of course, that the universe has to be both microcosmically and macrocosmically infinite.

By using UD I was able to discover the cause of gravitation and the production of the aetherosphere mentioned in the previous Medium.com posts. Also, it is the 10-yr anniversary of our highly cited paper on the cycles affecting Earth:

Puetz, S.J., Prokoph, Andreas, Borchardt, Glenn, and Mason, E.W., 2014, Evidence of synchronous, decadal to billion-year cycles in geological, genetic, and astronomical events: Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, v. 62–63, no. 0, p. 55–75. [10.1016/j.chaos.2014.04.001].

Univironmental determinism brings us out of the myopism that has always afflicted humanity. It is opposed to the 20th century scientific world view, systems philosophy, which tends to overemphasize “systems” while deemphasizing their environments. That is why the 300-year-old “attraction” theory continued into the 21st century. It is why we are still plagued with its archetype: the Big Bang Theory, with its explosion of everything out of nothing. It is time we rejected the myopism that produced that silly idea. It is time to replace the Big Bang Theory with the Infinite Universe Theory.]

PSI Blog 20240513

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2007, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 411 p. [https://gborc.com/TSW07].

## 20240506

### What keeps satellites in orbit?

PSI Blog 20240506 What keeps satellites in orbit?

Inertia of Planets and Aether Deceleration Theory of Gravitation

Artist’s impression of space debris around Earth (the size of debris compared to Earth is exaggerated). Photo credit: APS/Carin Cain

Anon writes:

“Hi Dr. Borchardt,

I was studying the curved space-time theory for reference.  What I didn't understand is that there is a large object that "curves" space-time (ex. Sun) and the smaller objects (the planets) take an elliptical pattern of rotation around the sun due to the indentation the larger object makes on curving space-time.  However, after a few rotations in this example the planets start losing velocity and start moving closer to the larger object (the sun) that the other objects (the planets) are rotating around.

How does ADT [Aether Deceleration Theory of Gravitation] explain the planets and the sun maintaining a certain velocity to keep a constant distance without allowing the sun's gravitation to attract the planets to amalgamate with the sun?”

[GB: Good question, but first we need to discard the magical “attraction,” which still is a major part of theoretical physics and cosmogony. Next, we have to reiterate Newton’s First Law of Motion, which I modified as follows:

“Every microcosm continues in uniform motion until the direction and velocity of its motion is changed by collisions with supermicrocosms.”

Remember that Newton used the word “unless” instead of the “until” we use. This was a tipoff that he assumed the universe was finite. In tune with that, he assumed cosmological bodies ultimately were surrounded by perfectly empty space, which he called “absolute space.” If that was true, those bodies really would travel perpetually only in a straight line, never to revolve around other bodies like they obviously do. That is why the magical attraction hypothesis was necessary even though his laws of motion did not include it.

The problem with “attraction” is that there is no known physical reason for it. Be reminded that in progressive physics we assume all causes are physical: the collision of one thing with another per Newton's Second Law of Motion, which I modified as:

“The alteration of motion is ever proportional to collisions from supermicrocosms; and is made in the direction in which those supermicrocosms were traveling.”

This is where aether particles become critical for producing the curved motion of satellites. The aetherosphere around each rotating cosmological body has relatively high distal aether pressure and relatively low proximal aether pressure. A revolving satellite exists at the point at which the distal impacts match the proximal impacts. This is similar to the process by which an airplane remains in the atmosphere.]

“If earth is losing velocity, could it be moving closer to the sun or nearer mercury causing climate change? If this is not the case now, how long would it be before earth gets pulled into the sun's gravity?  Could ADT predict this?”

[GB: Earth indeed is losing velocity, just like any other object undergoing inertial motion in a universe in which perfectly empty space is impossible. Earth’s macrocosm (non-empty space) produces friction that slows its rotation sporadically by a “leap” second about every two years. Its revolution about the Sun slows too, amounting to a “leap” day every four years. This means the size of Earth’s orbit is increasing. It is not currently being pushed into the Sun, so it eventually will get colder, not warmer.

In the meantime, Earth is getting warmer, with sea level at San Francisco rising at about 2 mm/yr during the last century. Of course, that warming has been occurring for the last 22,000 years, with sea level having been 126 m lower than it is now. That is part of the glacial cycle with subcycles occurring as well. For instance, there was a medieval warm period about 1000 years ago and a “little ice age” about 600 years ago. The major glacial-interglacial cycles were explained by Milankovitch, who used the precession, obliquity, and eccentricity of Earth in his theory. We pointed out some failures of that theory in explaining the sedimentary record:

Puetz, S.J., Prokoph, Andreas, and Borchardt, Glenn, 2016, Evaluating alternatives to the Milankovitch theory: Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, v. 170, no. 158, p. 158–165. [10.1016/j.jspi.2015.10.006].

You are right in implying that the position of Earth in relation to the Sun’s position in the Milky Way and its relation to other planets and their various cyclic behaviors affect our climate. However, Newton’s equation for gravitation F=(Gm1m2)/R2 works fine regardless if the cause is a push or pull or thought to be nothing at all.]

PSI Blog 20240506

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

## 20240501

### Einstein’s “Space-time” is caused by the Aetherosphere

PSI Blog 20240501 Einstein’s “Space-time” is caused by the Aetherosphere

The deceleration of aether particles during gravitation produces the increases in density responsible for “Dark Matter” and the bending of starlight surrounding ordinary matter.

“Projected density plot of a redshift š§=2.5 dark matter halo from a cosmological N-body simulation… There are also many satellite galaxies, each with its own subhalo which is visible as a region of high dark matter density in the image.” Photo credit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cosmo0.

Space-time is among the most famous “Einsteinisms” that “prove Einstein is always right.” In progressive physics we define an “Einsteinism” as a prediction that is correct, but for the wrong reason. With his rejection of aether, Einstein was left with “perfectly empty space” or a “field,” which, likewise was considered matterless motion.

General Relativity Theory predicted that light passing by a star, such as our Sun, would be curved around that star due to curved space-time, which was assumed to be the “cause” of gravitation. Eddington’s observations during the 1919 eclipse were used to claim Einstein was right, with his anointment as the world’s foremost genius. This always was a bit confusing because Einstein claimed light was a massless particle. So if massless, how could it be affected by gravitation? Actually, his calculation of 1.75 arc-seconds for the gravitation effect did not adhere to Newton’s equation for gravitation, which is F = (Gm1m2)/R2. He simply did not include the mass of the photon (which would have been m2 in the equation. Its inclusion as a zero would have made F equal to zero as well. By not including it, the result was his claim that masses simply curved the empty space around them. This was an apparently magical effect readily accepted by Eddington and budding regressive physicists.

## The Physical Cause of Gravitation

Whether magical or non-magical, light bending amounted to an “effect,” not a cause. The effect was refraction, but what was doing the refracting? Now, in progressive physics we assume all causes are physical: the collision of one thing with another. This follows from Newton's Second Law of Motion in which the motion of the collider decreases as the motion of the collidee increases. This is the approach I used in my thrice-rejected paper on the physical cause of gravitation, which you can download for free here.

In that paper I pointed out that the physical cause of gravitation was obvious. It is a fact that gravitation involves acceleration. That means there had to be an accelerator, which would become decelerated in the process. I now call my theory of gravitation the “Aether Deceleration Theory of Gravitation” (ADT for short). We see evidence for this theory wherever we look, with the effect (gravitation) being obvious and the cause (aether deceleration) being increasingly obvious.

I write “increasingly obvious” because the physical effects attributed to distal increases in aether detection, space-time, time dilation, gravitational redshift, dark matter, and the Shapiro Delay all fit aether deceleration as the result of collisions that cause gravitation. Of course, it is not obvious to regressive physicists who, by definition, are afflicted with aether denial. We also can fault Newton for not adhering to his own Second Law of Motion. True, he once suggested a physical cause, although he got it backwards: his hypothesized medium in his push theory had increasing distal density, instead of the increasing proximal density we now recognize.

## Aether Density vs. Aether Pressure

According to ADT, the deceleration of aether particles during gravitation tends to increase the density of the aether medium adjacent to whatever the aether particles contact. The densification is a result of the decrease in aether particle activity, otherwise known as “pressure.” In other words, aether density increases proximally (nearby baryonic matter), while its pressure decreases proximally. The reverse is true in the distal direction, with aether pressure increasing distally and aether density decreasing distally.

I will give only short descriptions of how these properties are manifest in the claims attributed to “Einsteinisms.” The details are given in my books on Infinite Universe Theory and Religious Roots of Relativity.

## Distal Increases in Aether Detection

Thousands of repetitions of interferometer measurements invariably show that fringes in Michelson-Morley-type experiments increase as a function of altitude. The lack of a significant fringe taken at low sea level in Cleveland was used as proof there was no fixed ether independent of Earth, which is true. But because the aetherosphere is attached to Earth, just like our atmosphere, little relative motion between the aetherosphere and Earth was detected. In short, the so-call “null” result of the Michelson-Morley Experiment was like trying to measure the velocity of the jet stream in your basement. Good luck with that!

## Space-time

Light is bent when it travels from a less dense medium (e.g. air) to a denser medium (e.g. water). The densification of the aether medium near baryonic matter does the same, forming what I call an “aetherosphere” around every object. An atmosphere, such as the one around Earth, can produce similar effects.

## Time Dilation

Clocks speed up as a function of altitude. This is because aether pressure increases distally, causing light velocity to increase and aetherial collisions become more numerous at altitude. Time is motion and cannot dilate. The “time dilation” trope was an ad hoc used to support Einstein’s claim light speed always was constant. The velocity of wave motion is relatively constant because it is controlled by the medium. When the pressure within the medium increases, wave velocity increases.

## Gravitational Redshift

Because light velocity increases distally and frequency does not change, light waves become longer distally and shorter proximally.

## Dark Matter

This simply is the high density aetherosphere that tends to surround and appears to be attached to all baryonic matter. There are other kinds of dark matter since cosmological objects either have to become luminous due to extremely high gravitational pressure such as in stars like our Sun or via reflection of light from such. Dark matter became evident when the rotating spiral galaxies failed to show a drop off of gravitational effects commensurate with their luminous contents. The attached aetherosphere contributed mass to the outer reaches of spirals that was several times the mass that could be accounted for by the luminous contents.

## The Shapiro Delay

This is the delay produced when light encounters a denser layer near a cosmological object. This is especially obvious when the layer contains an atmosphere containing water, which transmits light at 225,000,000 m/s instead of the 300,000,000 m/s that occurs in outer space. Any ordinary gas surrounding a planet would produce a similar, though tiny effect. The aetherosphere would perform similarly because the aether medium is denser than the aether medium in outer space.

It is greatly satisfying to have finally discovered the physical reason for gravitation and all these effects hitherto explained by “Einsteinisms.” They are all just as magical as the so-called “gravitational attraction” still used by theoretical physicists in addition to space-time to preserve their myopic view of the universe.

PSI Blog 20240501

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.