Reference
Papers, Articles, and Comments:
7/13/4
Dark Matter and Dark Energy: One and the Same?
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040712.html
Yes! They are both figments of man's imagination and only result
because modern cosmologists refuse to examine the speed of gravity issue.
Glimpse at Early Universe Reveals Surprisingly Mature Galaxies
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14524
The cosmos is infinite. Those galaxies were trillions of years old
when the light left them 12 or 13 billion years ago. The single big
bang/single expanding cosmos/single finite universe model is dead. RIP
Massive Black Hole Stumps Researchers
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/heavy_blazar_040628.html
Of course this is predicted by an infinite cosmos model. I'm not
stumped at all.
Test May Confirm Strings As Basic Constituent Of Matter, Energy
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-04n.html
"According to string theory, all the different particles
that constitute physical reality are made of the same thing-tiny looped
strings whose different vibrations give rise to the different fundamental
particles that make up everything we know."
Here is there whole problem in a nutshell. The string theorist want to
make "everything" out of strings and so they ignore the mass. This is
exactly akin to trying to make something out of Tinker Toys by using only
sticks, but no hubs. In nature, mass and gravity (strings and
superstrings) are parts of the same thing. One can not separate them
out and study them separately because they become something else when you
try to manipulate them. To be correct, you must study the entire
physical system, which means all the energy in the mass and all the energy
in the gravitational system which arises from the mass. I have
proposed that the actual strings that make up the gravitational system are
derived by the strong force and the energy for these strings comes from the
mass itself. Thus they are infinitely connected and can't be
separated. Instead of using the mass, current string theorist
simply insert extra dimensions where the mass should be, but one can't make
mass from extra dimensions. They also forget to account for the speed
of gravity. So reality is made of mass, the connections of gravity
between these masses (which makes all space that we know) and the energy
that flows through these systems. The gravionic model resolves every
question asked in this article, if only they would ask.
Big Bang Theory Busted By 33 Top Scientists
http://www.rense.com/general53/bbng.htm
This was busted years ago by my paper
some philosophical
observations on cosmology (SPOC doc)
Universe Measured: We're 156 Billion Light-years Wide!
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html
How this poses as science is a mystery to me. First of all, all
cosmologists today completely ignore the cone of knowledge concept and the
importance of the speed of gravity in their models. In physics and the
philosophy of space and time, I was taught about the cone of knowledge.
The model assumes that all knowledge comes to us at the speed of light,
therefore this speed puts a limit on what we can know about the cosmos.
We can only know about those events that light has had time to reach us.
Those events that we can know about are said to be within out cone of
knowledge. Every viewpoint has its own cone of knowledge and
everything outside that cone is called the ultimate elsewhere. We can
never know about those events. My model of gravitational systems
suggests that the speed of gravity is C2. If this is true,
the cone of knowledge concept would be modified by the difference between
the speed of gravity and the speed of light, since by being aware of the
speed of gravity, we would be able to "know" about some events by that
mechanism. The concept of the cone of knowledge would remain the same,
but the boundaries would expand. In the above article, all they can
claim is that they are discovering the edge of the cone of our knowledge,
but not that the knowable cosmos is X Billion light years wide. When
they measure the age of "the universe," they never take into account the
ages of the stars and galaxies that emitted the light. Some of these
were a trillion years old when the light left them 13.7 billion years ago.
And to top all of this off, they assume the speed of gravity is infinite.
Since gravity acts as nature's coordinate system, the speed of gravity must
be taken into account by any model dealing with cosmic distances. They
never take the speed of gravity into account, because it is assumed as
infinite in our Euclidean coordinate system. Nature does not make this
assumption.
Zeroing in on the Milky Way's Black Hole
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/blackhole_mw_040401.html
First of all, I suspect at the center of the Milky Way there are numerous
black holes "piled together" as
seen in the picture to the left which shows the black holes of a galaxy
cluster. After all, the Milky Way is the main galaxy in a galaxy
cluster, since numerous galaxies orbit our own. I have proposed
that the Milky Way is at least a trillion years old and its central blacks
holes contain all the missing "dark matter" for our galaxy and the center
has numerous black holes, not just one. A recent experiment with gamma
rays shows 91 identified sources, although these may not represent all the
black holes in the center of the Milky Way galaxy.
Mystery of Milky Way's gamma rays solved
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994792
Hubble Finds Farthest Galaxies Strangest Yet
http://www.rense.com/general50/galx.htm
How old were these galaxies when the light left them 13 billion years ago?
Were they a trillion years old? How can the whole cosmos be just 13 billion
years old, when everywhere we see galaxies that are much older? In the
photo, we see galaxies colliding and in all stages of development, both old
and new. There is no edge to an infinite cosmos. If we look
farther in the same direction using a larger telescope, we will just see
more galaxies. For these scientists to think that they are seeing the
beginning of everything is just more evidence of their advanced arrogance.
Universe Has At Least 30 Billion Years Left
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dark_energy_040220.html
I can't believe these people actually get paid for saying these things.
In an infinite cosmos, we have an infinite amount of time left. Of
course each universe, say the Milky Way and associated galaxies, only has so
much time left. The cosmos stretches back in time to infinity, out beyond
the farthest galaxy that we can observe to infinity, and on to an infinite
future. I can resolve every conflict stated in this article and one
doesn't need dark matter or dark energy, both of which are figments of man's
imagination. If two physical systems do not have connections of
gravity between them, they do NOT affect each other. Thus, their dark
energy is merely physical systems with no interaction between them, as each
is moving it's own way throughout an infinite cosmos. In an infinite cosmos
there is no center and physical systems are moving in every direction.
All dark matter is matter that has "gone down the drain" of a black hole and
is now expressing almost all of its energy as gravitational space.
Mystery solved. Why can't we move on?
Hubble's Window On The Universe Begins To Close
http://www.rense.com/general49/window.htm
Actually Hubble doesn't look back to the beginning of everything. In
an infinite cosmos, there is no beginning or end. If we build larger
telescopes and look farther away, we will always see more galaxies in an
infinite cosmos.
Research On Tiniest Particles Could Have Far-Reaching Effects
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/physics-04e.html
Neutrinos are single masses without gravions, thus they can't easily connect
with the "real" world. In essence, each neutrino is like its own
universe, since it is not connected to ours. Most masses are
combinations of more than one mass working together. There is a self
gravion between the masses and it generates an advertising gravion, which
defines the gravitational space of the mass. In most cases in nature,
gravions begin all real reactions. With the case of neutrinos, having
no advertising gravions, they must directly collide with another mass before
an interaction takes place. This is how they pass through mass without
having an interaction.
Hubble and Keck Team Up to Find Farthest Known Galaxy in the Universe
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=13660
How old was this galaxy when the light left it? Notice the article
mentions the surprise at not finding a strong hydrogen line. That is
because this galaxy does not represent some kind of beginning galaxy in
their single big bang/everything from nothing cosmology. The fact that
this galaxy has elements above hydrogen means that at a minimum it has to be
at least billions of years old, if not trillions.
New Study Shows How Black Holes Get Their "Kicks"
http://www.spacedaily.com./news/blackhole-04b.html
Actually they don't always merge into a single black hole. See the
illustration to the right of the black holes of a galaxy cluster and one can
easily see that the black holes merge, but not always as one peak.
As far as gravity waves, I don't think they exist. When black holes
merge, there must be a gravitational realignment that takes place at the
speed of gravity, or C2. There are no gravitational
events that take place a the speed of light, or C.
Two new superheavy elements weigh in
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994628
Bob Lazar says that the aliens use element 115 to modify space and time and
to propel their spaceships. Maybe there is a market out there for
element 115.
Ancient Cosmic Superstructure Defies Theory
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/galaxy_string_040119.html
I told you so. Old galaxies far away are predicted by the infinite
cosmos model.
Galaxy find stirs Big Bang debate
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/08/galaxies.find/index.html
The infinite cosmos model solves this debate.
Jets Spout Far Closer to Black Hole Than Thought, Scientists Say
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=13344
Faintest spectra ever raise glaring question: Why do galaxies in the
young universe appear so mature?
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=13328
More evidence my infinite cosmos model is correct. In an infinite
cosmos, one will find galaxies of all ages scattered throughout the portion
of the cosmos visible to us.
NASA Hubble Space Telescope Sees Record-breaking ancient galaxy
clusters
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=13308
How old were these galaxies when the light left them?
Visual "Mirages" Probe Distribution Of Dark Matter
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/darkmatter-03p.html
Speed of Light Not Slowing, NASA Study Says
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/lightspeed_031217.html
The uncertainty principle, part of quantum physics,
allows for virtual particles called quantum fluctuations to pop in and out
of existence at the subatomic level, creating what some researcher believe
is a "quantum foam" that makes up the fabric of spacetime.
There is no uncertainty in nature, as she "knows" where every mass is by its
connections of gravity called gravions. Gravions exchange energy at
the speed of gravity, which I have predicted is C2. Thus it
appears that particles "pop in and out of existence" but in reality, they
have just exchanged energy through the gravitational system at the speed of
gravity. It only appears that they have popped into existence because
most of humanity is not aware of the speed of gravity and measures
everything in relation to the speed of light, which is C. Particles
"popping in and out of existence" is almost as silly as big bang events
coming from "nothing." I've predicted they come from black holes that
have grown too large to hold their energy.
Some researchers believe that quantum foam slows
passing light in much the same way as air or water does, since light travels
fastest in a vacuum.
Light doesn't travel in a vacuum, it only travels through gravions, which
make up all space that we know.
It would also allow researchers more freedom use extra
dimensions of space, whose existence also violate Einstein's special theory,
in their pursuit to find a unifying "theory of everything" to describe the
entire universe. But Stecker's research puts a damper on the search for
extra dimensions.
There are no "extra" dimensions and time is not a dimension. The
gravionic model of physical systems (GMOPS) is the unifying theory of
everything.
Physicists Lead The Field In Solving A Major Mystery
Of The Big Bang
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-03zd.html
Will the cosmologist ever examine their assumptions? The assumption of
a single big bang event, the assumption that gravity can have its effect at
an infinite speed and distance, and the assumption that we can somehow "see"
everything that exists are just bad assumptions.
Neutron Star Collisions Common, Study Suggests
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/neutron_stars_031203.html
The best I can tell, there is no such thing as a gravity wave.
However, there are reconnections of gravions, following any real events in
the cosmos.
New Twists on the Milky Way's Big Black Hole
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_031124.html
New particle is double trouble for physicists
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994389
Quest Begins To Unmask Dark Matter-And Perhaps
Supersymmetry
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-03za.html
The matter that holds galaxies together is matter that has already "gone
done the drain" of the black holes at the center of the galaxy.
There is no square space waiting for gravity to bend it. Rather all
space is made from the connections of gravity called gravions that arise
from the mass and are never straight to begin with. For objects to be
under the control of a galaxy, the objects must have gravionic connections
with the black
holes
in the center of the galaxy. See the illustration at left of the
gravitational structure of a cluster of galaxies. Notice how all the
mass is centered in numerous black holes of varying sizes. Since
neutrinos are essentially masses without gravions, they can not be counted
as mass influencing the galaxy. No individual particles can
participate in the galaxy mass unless they have connections of gravity with
that particular universe. In the first picture above, we clearly see
lots of "holes" which is where Big Bang Events (BBEs) have occurred in the
past. Matter tends to concentrate around the edges of these events and
thus we see the numerous "strings" that develop when the cosmos is viewed
from larger perspectives.
Gravity Probe B Launch Status Report 14 Nov 2003
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=11000
"Dark matter" forms a ghost universe that mirrors our own, new theory
shows
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12963
Considering the limits on the speed of gravity and its implications on any
cosmological model, this article says absolutely nothing about reality.
I can't believe they actually publish this stuff when it is so meaningless.
All the missing matter is contained within the black holes at the center of
each object studied.
Thousands Of Previously Unseen Galaxies Come Into Focus
http://www.rense.com/general44/thou.htm
I wonder how old these galaxies were when the light left them. A
trillion years old perhaps? Scientists never seem to consider the age
of the galaxies when the light left them. Also, as I have predicted,
take any portion of the sky, aim your biggest telescope at it and all you
will see is thousands of fully formed OLD galaxies that you didn't even know
were there. The cosmos is infinite in age and size.
Big Bang sounded like a deep hum
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994320
These guys assume so much and understand so little.
Rediscovered NEO Asteroid Hermes Is A Binary
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/asteroid-03o.html
This is more evidence that Van Flandern is correct in his model of planetary
formation, especially the part about exploding planets. If the
material in our solar system is made from exploding planets, rather than
being left over from the creation of the solar system, then Van Flandern has
predicted that many of these objects would have their own satellites.
This article gives us evidence this is true.
The Missing Link In Planet Formation
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/extrasolar-03p.html
Will it prove the "traditional" model or will it show that
Tom Van Flandern has a better model of planetary
formation?
Long-lost near-Earth asteroid spotted
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994285
We'd better get busy and start protecting our planet. After all, it is
the only home we have and we'd better take care of it if we want to survive.
Please see the
Asteroid
Capture Project for more information.
Astronomers date Universe's 'cosmic jerk'
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994264
How do these people get away with calling themselves scientists? If
anyone else in any other area of science were to say they could make
something from nothing, everyone would call them fools. Yet
cosmologist make the claim daily and no one even laughs. In an
infinite cosmos, "things" are moving in every direction and there is no
expansion or contraction of a single finite universe.
Expansion of the Universe Was Once Thought Sluggish - Now Speeding up
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12759
All of this is based on the assumption of a single expanding finite universe
and the assumption that the gravitational system updates at an infinite
speed. None of this is true and the findings above are meaningless in
the face of an infinite cosmos and the limits of the gravitational system.
Space Seen as Finite, Shaped Like a Soccer Ball
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/universe_soccer_031008.html
Apparently, cosmologists are not required to study physics or the philosophy
of science and the cone of knowledge concept. All information we
perceive, is delivered at the speed of light. Therefore, any
information, whose light has not had time to make its way to us, is
ultimately unknowable. The information we can perceive is called our
cone of knowledge, while everything else is considered the ultimate
elsewhere. By all accounts, the ultimate elsewhere is larger than our
cone of knowledge. If we can not even see all that exists, how
can anyone propose that the cosmos is finite? The single big bang
model is bankrupt and is wasting much of our time.
Astronomers claim dark matter breakthrough
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994214
Dark matter is matter that has already gone "down the drain" of the black
holes that are the center of all galaxies. That is the only way "dark
matter" can influence gravitational structures without "showing itself."
First Supernovae Quickly Seeded Universe With Stuff of Life
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12589
Where is the time for all of this to happen? More hogwash based on the
impossible dream. The single big bang/single expanding universe/finite
cosmos model is not even possible, much less probable.
ESA Sees Stardust Storms Heading For Solar System
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-03b.html
One of the basic problems in pregravionic science, is the notion that
everything is static and unchanging. Under the gravionic model, all
physical systems are in constant states of change. As we see in the
article above, our solar system is under the influence of forces outside
itself. How scientists can think the objects just stay in the Kuiper
Belt region, apparently preserved for billions of years, is beyond me.
If small dust particles are disturbing Kuiper Belt objects, then they are
probably disturbed by larger celestial objects, such as stars and orphaned
planets. Tom Van Flandern has proposed a very dynamic model of the
solar system, it's creation, and the constant changes that must occur over
billions of years. I think the Van Flandern model much better supports
the dynamic solar system we see, rather than the unchanging solar system
presented by "modern" science.
Livermore Lab Collaboration Seeking Nature Of Neutrinos
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/08/030818070726.htm
Neutrinos are merely elementary particles without gravions. Therefore
they can't react with the rest of the cosmos through the connections of
gravity. They must directly hit another mass before an interaction can
occur.
The eyes have it
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/
TPStory/LAC/20030809/FCSHEL/TPScience/
Under the gravionic model, there is only mass and the force of gravity.
All other "forces" are actually energies moving through the gravitational
system from mass to mass. All physical systems, including human
beings, communicate through the gravitational systems surrounding each and
every real physical system. When celestial bodies "meet" in "outer
space," they make their presence known to each other by the gravions that
define that objects real space or field of influence. Human beings are
similar and we can communicate directly through gravions, if we are aware
enough. (The energy of the human spirit is mostly contained within the
gravitational structures in the mind, but some of this energy does extend
into the full gravitational influence of the human being. Also, since
human beings are alive, they have more energy in their gravitational
structures than similar sized "dead" things. Thus they are able to
extend their gravitational influence farther and to control it somewhat.
Also, I believe that humans that love each other, can make connections of
gravity that can stretch at least the diameter of our Earth.) The problem
comes when one tries to reproduce a gravitational event. Under GMOPS,
all real events are unique and can never be repeated exactly.
Pregravionic science has made classes of events and only called those things
"real" that belong to one of their classes. Human thoughts have not
been considered "real." One person can extend gravions to another and
that person can "know" someone is looking. But trying to repeat the
experiment is hard, because the success or failure is determined by so many
factors outside the experiment, such as what each person is thinking, their
desire to participate or not, the quality and quantity of gravions they
share, and their awareness of their own particular physical system.
Under GMOPS, it is the same force that attracts galaxies or human beings;
gravity.
Gravity Variations Can Help Predict Earthquake Behavior
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/tectonics-03p.html
More evidence that the Earth's gravitational field is made up of individual
connections of gravity called gravions. Look at the shape of Earth's
gravity and see how it varies depending upon the mass present at any one
point.
It's Universal: The Lights are Going Out
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/lights_out_030807.html
More B.S. In an infinite cosmos, stars are always being created and
dying. Since all physical systems (stars, galaxies, etc.) are always
in motion and are moving in every direction, it is only a matter of time
until each system "runs into" more material. More stars will then form
and the process will continue. The lights are not going out. In
an infinite cosmos, there are cycles for every system and each cycle brings
new matter into play. When a system becomes to big to hold it's own
energy, the black holes at its center come apart and create another Big Bang
Event (or BBE). This recycles the mass and makes it available for new
stars in new galaxies in the future.
Astronomers capture a dwarf galaxy being torn apart in the dark matter
halo of a massive galaxy
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12276
For the first
time, astronomers have found direct evidence of a phenomenon long thought to
play an important role in the formation of giant galaxies: the ongoing
disruption of a small galaxy as it orbits within the dark matter halo
of a much larger galaxy.
I don't think cosmologist ever look at their assumptions. They just
make these grandiose claims without any apparent support in reality.
The small galaxy is being torn apart by the great gravitational effect of
the larger galaxy, but this doesn't come from dark matter, it comes from the
matter that has already "gone down the drain" in the black holes of the
larger galaxy and is now expressing itself as the gravitational space of the
galaxy. Small pieces of matter in the galaxies "dark matter halo"
could not have the desired affect. Only the black hole(s) at the
center could have the proper connections of gravity to cause the disruption
of the smaller galaxy. Also, the information transferred through this
system would occur at the speed of gravity, or C2.
New Theory of Time Rattles Halls of Science
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/time_theory_030806.html
Under the gravionic model, time is the changing of gravions, the connections
of gravity. Time is not a dimension. Nature is never static and
there are no isolated systems. A universe is defined as those physical
systems that orbit around a common center. Every universe is moving
towards order, or entropy is decreasing.
View of comets as pristine relics of solar system formation evolves
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12256
See next article because there doesn't seem to be much evolution of models
or examination of assumptions. See also
www.metaresearch.org for an
alternate explanation of how comets are formed and "cleared" from the solar
system by the larger bodies, meaning that the comets we see today would have
to be relatively "new" and probably formed from an exploding planet.
Asteroid Juno has a "bite" out of it
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12255
Juno, the
third asteroid ever discovered, was first spotted by astronomers early in
the 19th century. It orbits the Sun with thousands of other bits of space
rock in the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. One of the largest
asteroids, at a size of 150 miles across, Juno essentially is a leftover
building block of the solar system. Astronomers seem to be
totally unaware of their assumptions. What if this asteroid was formed
from a planet or other system that collided, exploded, etc.? Remember
that our assumptions shape any logic that follows. Bad assumptions
usually lead to bad logic.
Type 1a Supernovae Shape up for Cosmology - First Shape Measurement of
an Exploding White Dwarf
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12249
Accelerating
expansion implies the existence of a "cosmological constant" or other form
of so-called dark energy, now known to constitute some 75 percent of the
density of the universe. So if there is no accelerating
expansion, then all of this is meaningless. The connections of gravity
bend and stretch in every direction. There is no single expanding
"universe," but rather a series of universes moving in every direction.
This entire model assumes that the speed of light is infinite and that space
is straight. Both assumptions appear to be wrong to me.
Sloan Digital Sky Survey detects physical evidence for Dark Energy
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/darkmatter-03i.html
Dark energy, a major component of the universe and one
of the greatest conundrums in science, is gravitationally repulsive rather
than attractive. This causes the universe's expansion to accelerate, in
contrast to the attraction of ordinary (and dark) matter, which would make
it decelerate. Of course all of this assumes a single universe
is expanding. (The evidence speaks otherwise.) Under any other model
of cosmology, this statement is meaningless. Dark matter and dark
energy are just figments of their imagination. This study is much like
finding horses in the clouds. If one looks long enough, one can find
whatever one is looking for. "To
make the conclusion that dark energy exists we only have to assume that the
universe is not curved. After the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe
results came in (in February, 2003), that's a well-accepted assumption,"
Scranton explained. More assumptions. Every view of the
gravitational system shows that space is curved. There is no
"straight" space. All space is curved with objects moving in all
directions, not just away from us.
Gravity's Rainbow: GRACE Mission Pushes Forward
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gravity_map_030725.html
More proof that gravity is made of individual connections of gravity called
gravions.
Trace gas dates Universe's first stars
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993974
This article offers more evidence of an infinite cosmos. How old were
these structures when the light left them? Where did the higher
elements (carbon and oxygen) come from? The assumption of a single big
bang Event and a single expanding universe model is not serving humanity.
Big Bang afterglow reveals dark energy's repulsion
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993963
More bad assumptions. First is the assumption that the cosmic
background radiation came from a single big bang. This is probably not
true. Next is the assumption that a single universe is expanding.
There is no evidence to support this conclusion. Next is the
assumption that space is "straight" and the gravity has an infinite
propagation speed. The evidence contradicts these assumptions.
And finally, the assumption of "dark energy" is another bad assumption not
supported by the evidence. The
infinite cosmos model
I have proposed resolves all the issues stated above.
Imperfect Estimate Claims Universe Has 70 Sextillion Stars
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/star_count_030722.html
When I was a little boy, I looked up at the stars one night and asked my
mother, "How far do they go?" "Oh," she said, "they go on forever."
The current single big bang/single expanding universe/finite cosmos model
implies a finite cosmos, since there is a single Event, a finite time since
the Event, a finite expansion rate, and an edge by all accounts. From
philosophy we learn of the cone of knowledge that shows us we can only know
about those events that light has had time to reach us. All other
events are outside our knowledge, but we can't ignore the fact that there
are probably an infinite number of stars beyond our cone of knowledge.
I believe the evidence shows that the cosmos is infinite and not finite, as
the above number would indicate. I can't believe these people study
the cosmos, but don't understand the cone of knowledge concept.
Black Holes And Galaxies -- Missing Link Discovered In Our Own Cosmic
Backyard
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/07/030721085424.htm
There are so many bad assumptions in this article it is hard to know where
to start. All galaxies begin as a single star which turns into a
black hole. As this object moves through space and time, it encounters
more material and continues to grow. This process can take trillions of
years. All galaxies go through times where they are incorporating new
material and times when they are not. As we look at the heavens, we
see galaxies in all stages of evolution. This article assumes
that nothing moves faster than light when numerous studies indicate that the
gravitational system must "move" faster than light, since light moves
through the connections of gravity. The Milky Way galaxy contains
numerous black holes which represent trillions of sun masses and trillions
of years of evolution. Of course, eventually these black holes grow so
large that the energy can no longer be contained in that small "space" and
the physical system comes apart. The common gravitational structure is
lost and the gravitational energy reverts back to each individual mass.
This mass is now available for new systems of the future. All past
connections of gravity are lost in this Event.
Dark matter map reveals galaxy cluster's appetite
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993952
This
article states that no good measurements have ever been made of the
distribution of matter in galaxy clusters. Yet the picture to the left
clearly shows the distribution of dark matter in a galaxy cluster and it was
made years ago. The experiment was performed using the Hubble Space
Telescope as the "eyepiece" of a much larger telescope. The galaxy
cluster acted as the lens and another galaxy 1 billion light years behind
this cluster was photographed. A computer was then used to show the
gravitational structure of the galaxy cluster. The above photograph
was the result. It clearly shows that the "dark" matter is
concentrated in the black holes associated with the galaxy cluster.
There is no missing mass. It has gone done the "drain" of the black
holes at the center of the galaxy cluster, which means that this structure
is trillions of years old. Also notice the black holes of the galaxies
orbiting the massive black hole structure at the center of this galaxy
cluster.
The results show that, in general, the mass profile
decreases sharply towards the edges of the cluster - in good agreement with
the predictions of cold dark matter theory. This assumes that dark matter is
mostly heavy, slow-moving particles, known as WIMPS (weakly-interacting
massive particles), that easily clump together, rather than hot, fast moving
particles like neutrinos. This seems a bad assumption to me.
If the "dark" matter were concentrated in the black holes at the center of
the cluster, the preceding statement would still be true. The mass is
"cold" because it is in the black hole and can't emit light.
They also saw good evidence that the cluster is still
growing, by swallowing galaxies. Once a galaxy has been fully 'digested',
its dark matter will be spread out, contributing to the overall mass
profile. This statement is in perfect harmony with the
prediction of the gravionic model of physical systems which shows that for
mass to act on other masses, there must be a connection of gravity between
the two masses. Once mass is accumulated in a black hole, it helps define
the overall space of the black hole.
NASA's Gravity Probe B Arrives at Vandenburg AFB for Launch
Preparations
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12060
Bad assumptions lead to bad logic. There are two bad assumptions in
this experiment. One is the assumption that there is some
"square" space out there just waiting to get "bent" by gravity while the
other is that the speed of the gravitational system is infinite. Each
physical system in the cosmos makes its own space from its own mass and this
space is always curved and is probably never straight. Good old
Euclidean math looked very appealing to a small 1 G planet just coming to
awareness. Yet as we look more closely at the cosmos, we see that
there is no "straight" space. Where did this "straight" space come
from anyway? All space is made from the connections of gravity called
gravions which get there energy from the mass of the physical system.
There is no "warping" of a straight space, but rather space is made bent to
start with. So of course the gravity of the planet Earth is variable
depending upon the number and quality of gravitational connections and this
space travels with the planet as it orbits the sun.
NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope Helps to Confirm Oldest Known Planet
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12055
If the light left this system 13 billion years ago, wouldn't one then have
to add the age of the system when the light left the system, to the 13
billion years? Wouldn't this figure be greater than the "age of the
universe?" If this globular cluster contains any heavier elements (as
implied by the article), then where did they come from? Wouldn't they
require older stars and supernova that preceded the forming of the
globular cluster? How many billions of years are we talking about?
Obviously, when we look at the heavens, we see evidence of a cosmos much
older than 13 billion years. The single big bang/single expanding
universe/finite cosmos model of cosmology must go for it no longer serves
the needs of humanity. This model represents all the requirements of a
religion and none of the requirements of science. It has no predictive
value and requires one to assume on faith that something can come from
nothing.
State-Of-The-Art Solar Model Fits Massive 2002 Eruption
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11968
Everyone seems to neglect the gravitational component of all real physical
reactions. In this article, they state, "...
in a process known as magnetic reconnection, releasing magnetic energy to
accelerate and heat the CME as it erupts from the Sun's surface and blasts
outward through the solar corona..."
forgetting that all reconnections involve the gravitational system.
What they describe as magnetic reconnections are actually gravitational
reconnections and the energies involved come from the gravitational system
of the sun. This object can now leave the sun, because it has broken
its gravitational connections with the sun and has become its own
gravitational "being." This is evidenced by their description of the
event where mass and its gravitational structure are clearly described.
"The most dramatic
eruptions are coronal mass ejections (CMEs), in which giant, bubble-shaped
balloons of plasma and magnetic field lines blast outward at speeds of up to
1,500 miles per second." Plasma
represents mass while the field lines represent the gravitational components
of this object, since all real physical systems are made of energy stored as
mass and gravity (E=gmc2).
96 percent of cosmos puzzles astronomers
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/06/20/dark.energy.ap/index.html
All of this trouble comes from trying to fit a non-Euclidean cosmos into our
Euclidean thinking. The bonds of gravity are stretching and the cosmos
is not flying apart as they describe. Galaxies and galaxy
clusters are moving in every direction and are not expanding outward.
Again, bad assumptions lead to bad logic.
Hubble snaps stunning baby pic of cosmos
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/06/19/
bigbang.view.reut/index.html
These galaxies were billions or trillions of years old when the light left
them 12 billion years ago. How could the cosmos be only 12 billion
years old?
Berkeley Lab Physicist Challenges Speed Of Gravity Claim
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030619075759.htm
See a letter I wrote to
Virginia Trimble saying that the speed of gravity cannot be equal to the
speed of light, since gravity represents nature's coordinate system and any
coordinate system must move faster than the fastest "thing" that moves
through that coordinate system. Also, see Tom Van Flandern's work on
the speed of gravity as listed below on the left side under other
cosmologies.
A First Look at the Doughnut Around a Giant Black Hole
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11869
Rosetta Stone Decodes Gamma-Ray Burst Mystery
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11864
I wonder if Big Bang Events also cause gamma-ray bursts?
Hubble, Chandra Combine to Verify Cosmic Baby Boom
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/goods_survey_030619.html
There are so many bad assumptions in today's cosmology.
The assumptions that the speed of gravity is infinite. The assumption
that a single universe is expanding. The assumption that we live in a
finite cosmos that had a single beginning and an edge. If one's
assumptions are bad, then probably all logic that follows is also bad.
Mysterious Cold, Dark Matter Dominates the Universe.
The galaxy cluster, Abell 2029, is composed of thousands of galaxies
(optical image, right) enveloped in a gigantic cloud of hot gas (X-ray
image, left), and an amount of dark matter equivalent to more than a hundred
trillion Suns. Credit: Chandra X-ray Observatory: NASA/CXC/UCI/A.Lewis et
al. Optical: Pal.Obs. DSS.
X-ray Observations Confirm Dark Matter is Mostly Cold
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dark_matter_030616.html
There is nothing mysterious here. The only way that one
physical system can have an influence on another, is if they have common
connections of gravity (called gravions). All space is made from these
connections and all
objects orbiting a common center have connections of gravity with that
center. These connections are never straight, but can bend and
stretch. Therefore, the "missing" mass above (often called dark
matter) is actually not missing at all, but resides within the black holes
at the center of each galaxy and at the center of the galaxy cluster (which
represent galaxies
from the past that have gone "down the drain" of the large set of black
holes that makes up the center of any galaxy cluster). To the right we
see a gravitational "picture" of a galaxy cluster (made several years ago by
the Hubble and erroneously labeled dark matter). The peaks clearly
indicate that all the "missing" mass is within the black holes of each
galaxy, shown orbiting around a central set of black holes, and within the
central black holes themselves. Trillions of sun masses make up these
system. The larger the system, the closer the system is to going
critical and coming apart as another Big Bang Event (BBE). The system
above is large and may be one of the next candidates to go critical and come
apart. If the Event does occur in this region, then each of the
smaller galaxies outside the event horizon, would then "shoot" off through
space, since the connections of gravity that once held the system together
would then be broken. This part of space would become mostly void of
visible matter and would appear to us to be one of the great empty voids we
see in the cosmos. Each of these voids represent a place where black
holes have gone critical in the past and created a BBE. BBEs represent
the largest cycle in nature and recycle the matter of nature so that is can
be used in future universes. The above system is probably several
trillion years old.
Big Bang 'soup recipe' confirmed
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993821
How is this evidence of a single big bang? If big bang events (BBEs)
happen on a regular basis in the cosmos, then one would expect to see the
same results for each event. The assumption of a single big bang is a
bad assumption.
Preparing for Contact: Lessons from the Past
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_vakoch_history_030612.html
If the gravitational system updates at a speed faster than the speed of
light, why would any advanced civilization use something as slow as the
speed of light to communicate? Also, are we properly "grounded" to
receive such a signal.
Flattest Star Ever Seen - VLT Interferometer Measurements of Achernar
Challenge Stellar Theory
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11775
Tom Van Flandern has proposed a
model of planetary formation, whereby planets are formed when heavy elements
in a star move to its center and make it spin faster, until material is
thrown off to make planets. We should watch this star over the next
few years and see if it "makes" planets and then slows down its rotation
rate. This would be more evidence that Tom is right on this issue.
Hubble Telescope Finds "Ashes" of First Stars in This Universe
http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news.cfm?ID=524&category=Science
This article gives evidence for an infinite cosmos, not the "beginning" of
some single universe that arose from nothing 13 billion years ago. The
iron found at this distance shows that the material making up these distant
systems is made of "old" material, not new. These structures would
have been billions or trillions of years old when the light left them, thus
they show evidence of a cosmos much older than 13 billion years. In an
infinite cosmos, one would expect to find old and new material everywhere
one looked, including "looks" to the farthest "edges" of the cosmos.
In an infinite cosmos, there are no edges. In an infinite cosmos,
there is no center. Therefore we can't be there. (Cosmologists
like to place us at the "center" of everything, since the "edge" of the
"universe" is always the same distance from us. It is never 13 billion
years in one direction and 15 in another.) The cosmos doesn't revolve
around the Earth and the Earth is not the center of the cosmos. The
only ashes they have found are the ashes of their own models of cosmology,
dead from bad assumptions. Bad assumptions: something can come
from nothing, the gravitational system updates at an infinite speed, space
is straight and somehow gravity bends this straight space, we can "see" to
the edge of the cosmos, and the cosmos is finite in space and time.
Time Travel Will be Easy
http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=2765
If time is defined as the changing of the connections of gravity, then this
discussion is based on bad assumptions and is likely false.
In Support Of Galactic Unification
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-03s.html
Researchers discover X-rays in outer space
http://www.lamonitor.com/LAMONITOR/sites/LAMONITOR/
0518edition/myarticles540842.asp?P=540842&S=491&PubID=8799
Hailing The Hubble
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/30/60minutes/main556337.shtml
The Hubble looks as far as it can see, and all it finds is more galaxies.
In an infinite cosmos, this is what one would expect. Build a bigger
telescope and look farther and what would one see? More galaxies.
How old were these galaxies when the light left them? Answer:
Probably several trillion years old. Since they are about 15 billion
light years away, that means we have evidence of a cosmos that is at least
1,015 billion years old.
Hubble made the assumption that a single universe was expanding based on the
evidence of the
red shift.
Any other explanation of the red shift eliminates the only evidence that a
single universe is expanding. A single universe is not expanding.
What we see are many universes (galaxy clusters) moving in every direction.
Astrophysicists Predict Rapid Merging of Black Holes in Colliding
Galaxies
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11663
Yale Astronomer Sees New Gravitational Lens
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11661
More nonsense about a single expanding universe. What was before their
single big bang? And what is beyond the edge of their single universe?
Answer: An infinite cosmos.
Astronomers Burst Bubble on Shape of Nearby Space
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/aas202_bubble_030529.html
Satellite's Lucky Break May Lead To Secret Of Ultimate Explosions
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/05/030529080753.htm
New Evidence for a Stop-and-Go Universe
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/aas202_stopgo_030526.html
New Clues to Nature's Greatest Explosions
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/aas202_gamma_030528.html
UV light may have sparked life on Earth
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993778
Green Bank Reveals Satellite Of Milky Way In Retrograde Orbit
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-02a.html
Sloan Digital Sky Survey Study Confirms Dark Matter
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/darkmatter-03f.html
Chandra Finds Galaxy Growth Regulated by Big Black Holes
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/galaxy_growth_030522.html
More than Meets the Eye Found in 3,000 Galaxies
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dark_matter_030522.html
Galactic boom-and-bust cycle revealed
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993755
Mapping The Hidden Universe
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-03n.html
Florida Physicist Says Dark Matter, Extra
Dimensions Related And Possibly Detectable
http://www.space.com/spacenews/
spacenews_businessmonday_030519.html
Bull hockey pucks. Everything they think is extra
dimensions is just gravity working at C2. |
com
