7

............... Your words..........«But such a model based only on gravity does not explain the observed star velocities in galaxies and the observed accelerated expansion of the universe and far-field supernova observations. UGF cannot correlate and explain the cosmological constant, dark energy, and the observed Hubble constant».

..............Reply...................

See the Dynamic Universe Model's paper on "NO Dark matter" prediction.

............... Your words..........Your train of thought is understand.

Few doubt validity of Newton's law, according to which massive bodies interact with each other at any distance, due to some ideal magical force of attraction.

However, reality does not allow ideal and abstract properties of matter and fields. I hope, that we are materialists, not idealists.

..............Reply...................

What re the reality problems you are thinking off.... Lets discuss.

8

Your words....

What will happen to gravity at a very long distance....?

.... Reply.......

Open-out your doubts.

............... Your words..........Already during his lifetime, Newton had a discussion with Descartes and his supporters who argued that Newton's law of gravity does not have circulation of energy and there is no reason for the formation of force. This dispute continues to our times. ..............Reply...................

Lets discuss once again, what is your problem or Descartes problem?

9

............... Your words..........

In my essay is shown that Newton's law of gravitation is a special case, which is valid only near the surface of the cosmic bodies of the Solar system.

..............Reply...................

What is your inhibition??

I don't know .... I conducted many theoretical experiments; they explain all the observational results very well.

Some problems solved by Dynamic Universe Model I am giving below for example, many more are there...

At inside of Galaxy level........

1. Missing Mass problem.

2. Formation of astronomical jets at Galaxy center

3. High velocities in Astronomical jets

4. Densemass in Galaxy center.... Etc..

At Inter Galaxy level.........

1. Cluster formations

2. Large voids to the tune of one thirds of size of Universe

3. Existence of Galaxies at any place in the Universe

4. Existence of Blue shifted Galaxies in the Universe

5. Existence of Galaxies having different date of births and quenching of Galaxies

Etc....

ALL THESE RESULTS WERE DERIVED USING NEWTONIAN GRAVITATION LAW [I] WITH VERY LARGE DISTANCES [/I] ONLY AND NOTHING ELSE IS USED.....

ANY BODY HAVING A SIMPLE LAPTOP OR CALCULATOR CAN VERYFY AND GET THE SAME RESULTS.

ALL THESE PAPERS ARE AVAILABLE IN INTERNET FREE OF COST FOR ANY ONE TO DOWNLOAD [/B]

............... Your words..........Moreover, the gravitational coefficient is not at all a fundamental constant..............Reply...................

I DON'T decide about fixing fundamental constant. I don't know someone will decide about them, I am sorry.

............... Your words..........

Please ignore s and s in the above post... their server is not taking them even after many trails

=snp

10

All galaxies, like the planets of the solar system, move in orbital toroidal gravitational waves, which are formed due to the Newtonian force of attraction. However, after the formation of stationary toroidal gravitational waves, all galaxies and planets move by inertia and are in a potential well of stability, which is not taken into account in Newtonian mechanics. ..............Reply...................

I don't know why the concept of Gravitational waves is to be used here... We all will require some experimental results to support this idea.

............... Your words..........

I.e., cosmic bodies interact with each other with the help of toroidal gravitational waves, between which there can be both attractive forces and repulsive forces, as for example between atoms. Moreover, these forces are impulsive forces as result of quantum processes of transformation of toroidal gravitational waves.

For example, it only seems to us that the planets in circular orbits are held at the expense of the Sun's attraction, but on attraction must be spent energy.

..............Reply...................

No energy will be spent, as masses move in those orbits they will have Dynamic Stability so that they will not collapse into single lump of mass.

11

............... Your words..........

In fact, the gradient of the gravitational potential in the soliton orbital toroidal gravitational wave of the planet completely compensates for the gradient of the gravitational potential of the Sun. In this case, there is no force of attraction and the force of centrifugal inertia. ..............Reply...................

Still centrifugal and centripetal forces are present, where will they go? As per my understanding, the gravitational waves are generated probably in the Gravitational disturbances generated during Novae and Supernovae explosions, and Physicists tried to discover them and measure them.......

............... Your words..........Orbital gravitational wave is a self-organizing soliton that reduces the force of interaction, in accordance with the extreme principle of least action. In according this principle occurs any rectilinear motion of bodies by inertia. Now the principle of motion of bodies by inertia must be extended to bodies in circular orbits. ..............Reply...................

You can try

12

............... Your words.......... The criterion for the presence of force is the Unruh effect, according to which the force causes radiation. For example, comets have orbits with a large eccentricity, so they are attracted to the Sun and emit X-rays. Very small comet emitted x-ray waves with a power of 1 GW, and Jupiter also emits 1 GW in a circular orbit, but their masses are not comparable. Consequently, Jupiter, in fact, is not attracted to the Sun. ..............Reply...................

Hope you will see my paper on Pioneer anomaly and New horizons satellite trajectories.

Here the problem is you are considering only Gravitation of SUN, and neglecting Gravitation effects of other planets like Jupiter and Mars etc. Just doing TWO body problem will not be sufficient. You have to use Dynamic Universe Model at on solar system level.

Lets study an example. You probably think the oceans and seas are on earth and only Earth's Gravitation is acting on them. Hope you might have observed high rising waves of water during "high tides and low tides". Ask the fishermen there they will say low tide they happen at Full moon day and no moon day at evening 6 pm or morning 6 am

That was the time both Moon and Sun will be in line to form more attraction on Oceans or Seas or Large lakes, where water body is big

13

............... Your words..........

All galaxies in a dynamic universe are in an equilibrium state, like molecules in a liquid. But the liquid has a certain temperature, so there are vibrations of molecules and atoms around certain equilibrium centers. And the Galaxies oscillate around the centers of equilibrium.

..............Reply...................

Small correction please.... Read like this....

All galaxies in the Universe are in a dynamic equilibrium state gravitationally. It is UNlike molecules in a liquid.

SO problem you mentioned don't arise....... SO No temperature is required in the Universe, CMB radiation is from Galaxies and stars.

14

............... Your words.......... But the liquid has a certain temperature, so there are vibrations of molecules and atoms around certain equilibrium centers. And the Galaxies oscillate around the centers of equilibrium. ..............Reply...................

As the concept is wrong, this will not be required

............... Your words..........

I hope for mutual understanding and constructive discussion.

..............Reply...................

Definitely yes sir, we will do, we will discuss further

Thank you very much for such nice study of my paper and giving so many nice observations and doubts....

Best Regards

=snp.

Hi SNP Gupta,

Please forgive me for saying that this is not an easy paper to read.

I do get that there are alternative ways to think about the universe. And I agree that your dynamic universe is a possibility, and that the goal of the universe is to keep on going.

Thanks for your insight,

Don Limuti

    Dear Don Limuti,

    Very fast response....wonderful...

    Thank you for such nice comment on my essay. I hope you will study further on this Dynamic Universe Model....

    Your thinking is wonderful...

    Best wishes

    =snp

    Hi Satyavarapu,

    Your essay is hard to understand, but I think it is excellent. I am trying to figure out your ideas yet, going through your other published papers, since this out of my expertise (I am a physicist, though I like biology). Indeed there is a problem with what age does galaxies peak formation. They do seem to have a rather complicated way to behave. I wonder to know how do they appear in a telescope when they are forming. If seems they are always either stable or colliding.

    Dear Daniel de França Diniz Rocha ,

    ..............Reply...................

    Thank you for your valuable time and interest, we will work together no problem

    ............... Your words..........

    Your essay is hard to understand, but I think it is excellent.

    ..............Reply...................

    Thank you for your kind words and compliments ....

    ............... Your words.......... I am trying to figure out your ideas yet, going through your other published papers, since this out of my expertise (I am a physicist, though I like biology).

    ..............Reply...................

    Wowow wonderful!

    ............... Your words.......... Indeed there is a problem with what age does galaxies peak formation. They do seem to have a rather complicated way to behave.

    ..............Reply...................

    You mean about galaxy quenching? Or only peak formation ?

    ............... Your words.......... I wonder to know how do they appear in a telescope when they are forming.

    ..............Reply...................

    I am just giving two reported cases of Galaxies / Clusters of Galaxies which are being generated after Bigbang

    [35] Rakos, Schombert, and Odell in their paper 'The Age of Cluster Galaxies from Continuum Colors' Astrophys.J., 677 , 1019, DOI: 10.1086/533513, e-Print: arXiv:0801.3665 [astro-ph] | PDF arXiv:0801.3665v1 [astro-ph] 23 Jan 2008

    [36] C. PAPOVICH et el, CANDELS OBSERVATIONS OF THE STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES OF CLUSTER GALAXIES AT Z=1.62, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.3794v2.pdf

    See the CANDLES web pages also for simple language explanations.

    There are many other papers and websites also if want them I will give them....

    You can see the reply to post above by "Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 23:59 GMT"

    You can see the attachments there also for your ready reference

    ............... Your words.......... If seems they are always either stable or colliding.

    ..............Reply...................

    Not always..... Galaxies take birth, live their life, and then they will quench! Follow the life cycle

    ....................

    I am really thankful to you for your interest

    Best Regards

    =snp

      Dear Satyavarapu,

      What happens in the core or other levels in a star depends mostly on its size and mass. Small stars less than ½ the size of the sun can only fuse hydrogen because they do not have enough mass to generate the pressure and temperature needed to fuse helium. Stars the size of the sun can fuse hydrogen and helium, but can't fuse any larger atoms, as an example. Each time a heavier element is fused in a star it gives off less energy than the fusion of the previous next smaller atom. To say it in a different way, when you fuse helium atoms you get less energy freed up by the fusion process than you would when you fuse hydrogen atoms. You can still get some freed up energy by fusing atoms up to iron. Large stars actually do fuse iron, but they do that just before they explode in a supernova. When they fuse the iron it takes more energy to fuse it than is freed up, so the net effect is to cool the core, etc. When the core cools it cannot resist the pull of gravity, so it collapses. The end result is the supernova explosion. The fusion of iron and the lighter elements can produce elements up to about zinc by various processes. The larger elements are generally considered to be mostly made in the supernova explosions, etc.

      When you say "Initial electrons, protons, neutrons and neutrinos formations are sufficient, I don't think 4 proton Helium nucleus needs to formed. I did not work-out full details yet" Are you thinking that you would be able to up shift the frequency of the 60Mev photon high enough to generate all of those particles? If you are, I believe you are wrong in that assumption. First you would not need to produce neutrons or neutrinos because those were not originally present. They were created from some of the binding energy that was freed up as part of the fusion process. To make the 4 protons and 2 electrons to restore the amount of hydrogen to space that was transformed into the helium atom (which would still be in the star) would require that a 60Mev photon would have its frequency up shifted to about 3753Mev or close to 63 times its original frequency. It would likely require a very large mass to make such a large frequency change possible. That large mass would be exerting a great pull on the photon and it would likely pull the photon into itself before it could generate that large a frequency change. If the photon did escape the inward pull, it would then be subjected to the continual pull of the large mass as it traveled away from it and that pull would then down shift the photon's frequency again back to the 60Mev it had at the start. If it was somehow converted into the protons and electrons while its frequency was still up shifted, the matter particles would lose their speed of light motion as part of that process and gain a much larger mass effect than the photon had and would, therefore, then be pulled into the large mass that had upshifted the photon. It would likely be only very large stars or black holes, etc. that would have any chance of producing that large of a frequency upshift, so the new matter particles would either be pulled into the black hole and lost or pulled into the large star and fused along with its other hydrogen. That might make the large star be able to burn longer before it consumed all of its fusion sources, but it would not spread new hydrogen back into space to make new stars. If that really worked, very large stars should be able to attract all of the photons that they emit back into themselves converting them back into protons and electrons on the way back and then continue to burn forever, but it has been established that such very large stars actually have very short lifetimes on the order of 3 Million years compared to a life of about 10 billion years for a star the size of the sun. That is a very good observational indication that it doesn't actually work the way that you desire it to work.

      When you say "Good thinking, there can be other ways." What are those other ways?

      Most of the heavier elements especially those up near and including uranium are generally not fused in stars as a normal part of their fusion process. Even large stars cannot generate the pressure and temperature needed to produce these heavy atoms. They are mostly produced in supernova explosions, etc. The earth is much too small in mass to generate the pressure and temperature necessary to even fuse hydrogen into helium.

      There are two groups of people who I have found usually strongly desire to have the universe to have always existed and to continue to always exist. The first are those who want to believe in the natural origin to the universe and the life that is in it. This is because if they can convince people that the universe always existed it removes the need for a creator of it and if they can convince people that it has been in existence for some extremely long time it makes it easier to try to rationalize that life could have come about from random natural processes, etc. The second are those who have religious beliefs that require an eternal universe because their belief includes such things as reincarnation, etc. that would not work if the universe came to an end, so I can understand the reason for your hope. In the past I leaned toward belief in the naturalist concept, but as more information came to be understood about the complexity of the universe and about its need for a beginning and later the understanding that it was made to be temporary due to entropy, etc. and then the great complexity of the structure of living creatures began to be understood, it was just unreasonable for me to hold onto that belief in the face of all of that evidence that it all had to have been created by a very intelligent being.

      Sincerely,

      Paul

      Dear Paul N Butler,

      Wonderful reply!

      You did not make the reply in parts, so this time I also will make it a single lengthy reply, I hope it will be ok for you.

      Your words..........

      What happens in the core or other levels in a star depends mostly on its size and mass. Small stars less than ½ the size of the sun can only fuse hydrogen because they do not have enough mass to generate the pressure and temperature needed to fuse helium. Stars the size of the sun can fuse hydrogen and helium, but can't fuse any larger atoms, as an example. Each time a heavier element is fused in a star it gives off less energy than the fusion of the previous next smaller atom. To say it in a different way, when you fuse helium atoms you get less energy freed up by the fusion process than you would when you fuse hydrogen atoms. You can still get some freed up energy by fusing atoms up to iron. Large stars actually do fuse iron, but they do that just before they explode in a supernova. When they fuse the iron it takes more energy to fuse it than is freed up, so the net effect is to cool the core, etc. When the core cools it cannot resist the pull of gravity, so it collapses. The end result is the supernova explosion. The fusion of iron and the lighter elements can produce elements up to about zinc by various processes. The larger elements are generally considered to be mostly made in the supernova explosions, etc. ..............Reply...................

      Good Study , and nice explanation, at present I did not go into this subject of fusion of other elements, I have to workout and discuss with you. We can probably can discuss in last week of this month March 2017.

      ............... Your words..........

      .........................When you say "Initial electrons, protons, neutrons and neutrinos formations are sufficient, I don't think 4 proton Helium nucleus needs to formed. I did not work-out full details yet" Are you thinking that you would be able to up shift the frequency of the 60Mev photon high enough to generate all of those particles? If you are, I believe you are wrong in that assumption. ..............Reply...................

      I don't deny that at present. But I think there is still a possibility.

      ............... Your words..........

      ......................... First you would not need to produce neutrons or neutrinos because those were not originally present. They were created from some of the binding energy that was freed up as part of the fusion process. To make the 4 protons and 2 electrons to restore the amount of hydrogen to space that was transformed into the helium atom (which would still be in the star) would require that a 60Mev photon would have its frequency up shifted to about 3753Mev or close to 63 times its original frequency. It would likely require a very large mass to make such a large frequency change possible. That large mass would be exerting a great pull on the photon and it would likely pull the photon into itself before it could generate that large a frequency change. If the photon did escape the inward pull, it would then be subjected to the continual pull of the large mass as it traveled away from it and that pull would then down shift the photon's frequency again back to the 60Mev it had at the start. If it was somehow converted into the protons and electrons while its frequency was still up shifted, the matter particles would lose their speed of light motion as part of that process and gain a much larger mass effect than the photon had and would, therefore, then be pulled into the large mass that had upshifted the photon. ..............Reply...................

      Yes Good information.

      ............... Your words..........

      ......................... It would likely be only very large stars or black holes, etc. that would have any chance of producing that large of a frequency upshift, so the new matter particles would either be pulled into the black hole and lost or pulled into the large star and fused along with its other hydrogen. ..............Reply...................

      No Blackholes, it will be large star probably

      ............... Your words..........

      .........................That might make the large star be able to burn longer before it consumed all of its fusion sources, but it would not spread new hydrogen back into space to make new stars. If that really worked, very large stars should be able to attract all of the photons that they emit back into themselves converting them back into protons and electrons on the way back and then continue to burn forever, ..............Reply...................

      No black holes again please, no attraction of photons back...............

      Your words..........

      ......................... but it has been established that such very large stars actually have very short lifetimes on the order of 3 Million years compared to a life of about 10 billion years for a star the size of the sun. That is a very good observational indication that it doesn't actually work the way that you desire it to work. ..............Reply...................

      Lets observe and see. We have to first observe that there will be frequency shift and is happening. If it is not, there can be a fundamental mistake. But I don't think. The frequency shift is happening. We have yet to observe it. Many predictions of Dynamic Universe model came true. Lets see this.

      For me I never saw thro' a telescope till now. I don't have any access, I am not rich also to buy such equipment. Just a theoretician.

      ............... Your words..........

      When you say "Good thinking, there can be other ways." What are those other ways? ..............Reply...................

      We will discuss them after two weeks, please wait. I will contact you with a post before the contest ends.

      ............... Your words..........

      .........................

      Most of the heavier elements especially those up near and including uranium are generally not fused in stars as a normal part of their fusion process. Even large stars cannot generate the pressure and temperature needed to produce these heavy atoms. They are mostly produced in supernova explosions, etc. The earth is much too small in mass to generate the pressure and temperature necessary to even fuse hydrogen into helium. ..............Reply...................

      Yes correct

      ............... Your words..........

      There are two groups of people who I have found usually strongly desire to have the universe to have always existed and to continue to always exist. The first are those who want to believe in the natural origin to the universe and the life that is in it. This is because if they can convince people that the universe always existed it removes the need for a creator of it and if they can convince people that it has been in existence for some extremely long time it makes it easier to try to rationalize that life could have come about from random natural processes, etc. The second are those who have religious beliefs that require an eternal universe because their belief includes such things as reincarnation, etc. that would not work if the universe came to an end, so I can understand the reason for your hope. In the past I leaned toward belief in the naturalist concept, but as more information came to be understood about the complexity of the universe and about its need for a beginning and later the understanding that it was made to be temporary due to entropy, etc. and then the great complexity of the structure of living creatures began to be understood, it was just unreasonable for me to hold onto that belief in the face of all of that evidence that it all had to have been created by a very intelligent being. ..............Reply...................

      Though I am a firm believer of God, I am not following the creation verse called "Shristi Suktam " as in "Vedas". It was said there that the universe was created from a thought "want" or "Ichcha" in a wink. Hindu philosophy does not say Universe is eternal.

      ...............

      Sincerely,

      =snp.

      Dear S.N.P.Gupta,

      You present a very interesting theory that is different from the mainstream theory of the universe. I like original ideas. You conclude: "Here probably the 'a-biological world' learned from the Universe and subsequently the physical systems learnt to pursue the goal of reproduction and formed the "Biological world". Slowly these biological life forms acquired intelligence and now trying to understand Universe! That way probably the goal-oriented behavior is a physical or cosmological trend of the Universe......."

      While you have already replied to other commentators on the brief connection between the content of your essay and the question of intent for this essay, I too would have liked to hear more on the connection between the two. I know that the page limit makes it difficult to explain the Dynamic Universe Model and to explain the connection to aims and intent, but in the future revision of this essay I wish that you would give more depth to the connection.

      Early in my career I learned to be cautious about interpreting the results of simulations. Would the results of your simulations change if you allowed for black holes?

      William Goodwin

      Dear William B Goodwin,

      You present a very interesting theory that is different from the mainstream theory of the universe. I like original ideas. You conclude: "Here probably the 'a-biological world' learned from the Universe and subsequently the physical systems learnt to pursue the goal of reproduction and formed the "Biological world". Slowly these biological life forms acquired intelligence and now trying to understand Universe! That way probably the goal-oriented behavior is a physical or cosmological trend of the Universe......."

      ..............Reply...................

      Yes Thank you for your liking my essay and nice encouraging comments

      Thank you for visiting here

      ...............

      Your words..........

      .........................

      While you have already replied to other commentators on the brief connection between the content of your essay and the question of intent for this essay, I too would have liked to hear more on the connection between the two. I know that the page limit makes it difficult to explain the Dynamic Universe Model and to explain the connection to aims and intent, but in the future revision of this essay I wish that you would give more depth to the connection.

      ..............Reply...................

      I am reproducing the parts of the essay below for you to comprehend easily ......

      .... Intent.....

      '..... 1.1 About Dynamic Universe Model: In our Dynamic Universe every mass is moving in a direction and goal determined universal gravitational force (UGF) as the indomitable resultant vector of gravitational forces acted by all the other bodies in the Universe. This UGF is not constant force acting in only one direction. This resultant UGF vector force is varying according to ever varying dynamic movements and positions of all the masses in the Universe from time to time. In Dynamic Universe Model, this UGF is the fundamental concept; this model calculates this force "UGF" from moment to moment using its mathematical laws on each and every mass in the SITA simulations. In this way many present-day unsolved physics problems were solved. This method is different from conventional two body problem solution.[10]......'

      This UGF sets the goals for every Galaxy or for every mass..

      ...... Reproduction......

      Galaxies take birth in different times and quench (die) in different times in different directions. But the positioning of Galaxies is not random, they will come to a stable 'Dynamic Equilibrium' positions due to UGF is the main theam.

      Probably you may have a look at the points given by FQXi as guidelines...

      This essay is related to COSMOLOGY, This essay is, Original and is entirely different from all the previously published papers by author, It is unpublished. It is Technically correct. This essay covers the long-term, large-scale goals. This essay addresses questions such as:.............

      * How did physical systems that pursue the goal of reproduction arise from an a-biological world?

      Relevance:.. Universe is having Galaxies, which take birth and death is happening. In the Cosmos the biological world is also a part in which is reproduction is taking place. The same thing is happening in the Galaxies. In this essay this reproduction ability is emphasized.

      * What general features -- like information processing, computation, learning, complexity thresholds, and/or departures from equilibrium -- allow (or proscribe) agency?

      Relevance:.. Computer simulations were shown to support the paper.

      * How are goals (versus accomplishments) linked to "arrows of time"?

      Relevance:.. Here Goals were created by the Mathematics of Dynamic Universe Model in the form of Universal Gravitational Force (UGF). This UGF is the total resultant force on any mass ( here in this case the individual Galaxy) which decides the path to be followed in the next instance. That is how the time is pulling every Galaxy..

      * What separates systems that are intelligent from those that are not? Can we measure this separation objectively and without requiring reference to humans?

      Not Addressed...

      * What is the relationship between causality - the explanation of events in terms of causes - and teleology - the explanation of events in terms of purposes?

      Not Addressed...

      * Is goal-oriented behavior a physical or cosmic trend, an accident or an imperative?

      Relevance:.. Here the goal-oriented behavior is a physical or cosmic trend.

      Many papers and books were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example 'Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary' (1994) , 'Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe', About "SITA" simulations, 'Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required', "New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations", "Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background", "Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.", in 2015 'Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, 'Explaining Pioneer anomaly', 'Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets', 'Observation of super luminal neutrinos', 'Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up', "Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto" etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe

      With axioms like... No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

      Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

      Additionally you may please have a look at the CONCLUSION of the essay.

      For me character count came as problem

      I will revise the essay in near future and upload it to viXra ASAP

      ...............

      Your words..........

      .........................

      Early in my career I learned to be cautious about interpreting the results of simulations. Would the results of your simulations change if you allowed for black holes?

      ..............Reply...................

      This is not a General relativity type solution. Solves many problems which GR can not solve.

      Dynamic Universe model is a mathematical frame work that can be applied to different sets of masses. It is an General N-body problem solution with out singularities.

      In the simulations of Dynamic Universe Model, I will have to give the value of masses in Kg and their distances in Cartesian XYZ co-ordinates in meters, Many times I take the origin (0,0,0) as Center of Sun; But it can be center of earth, or center of Galaxy or center of molecule which depends on the problem.

      Black holes I can not give, as it is infinite density. If there is an error of Blackhole, the COMPUTER stops as it gets "1/0" one divided by zero error. It never occurred except in the cases, when same set of coordinates for some mass.

      ............... Your thank for your kind words dear William Goodwin,

      I hope you also will work-out some other new problem using Dynamic Universe Model. It may take few day to few months, depending on the problem.

      Best Regards

      =snp.

      Dear Satyavarapu,

      You wrote an interesting and pleasant Essay. Despite I do not agree with all your claims, I feel that your work and your ideas deserve a better spreading in the scientific community. Therefore, I decide to give you the highest score.

      Congratulations and good luck in the Contest.

      Cheers, Ch.

        Thank you Very much Corda,

        For your kindness and support.

        Best Regards

        =snp.gupta

        2.3. Galaxies born before Bigbang : We know we can see Galaxies from 32 billion light-years distance, for example GNz-11. See Oesch, P. A. et al. [34] in their paper in March 2016 [34] observed a very bright at Galaxy at z=11.1 measured with HST. This remote galaxy GN-z11, existed only 400 million years after the Big Bang, at a co-moving distance of 32 billion light years. We can see many instances and many Galaxies at very large distances as discussed in the introduction. Most probably these Galaxies are

        Do you propose that there are galaxies before Bid-Bang ?

        Do you propose that Energy Matter is due to centrifugal and centripetal forces.because the UNIVERSE is Turning on itself ... possibly on a 3-dimensional axis?