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?

          Dear S.N.P. Gupta,

          I agree with your intuition about the universe that every inanimate object in the universe has some kind of life within it. I also appreciate your effort to give this idea a scientific form through your Dynamic universe model. However, your model seems to be trying to pose a challenge to the general theory of relativity (GTR). This can be taken seriously by the main stream science only if you are able to mathematically reproduce important results of GTR which have been experimentally proved (such as bending of light near sun, Precession of perihelion of Mercury etc.).

          Thanking you and all the best,

          Biswaranjan Dikshit

          Dear David Pinyana

          Thank you for studying my essay, Thank you for your nice doubts, I hope my answers are ok for you....

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

          .........................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 ? ..............Reply...................

          Yes, Before Bigbang.

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

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

          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? ..............Reply...................

          No, Not that way, the Universe is here without any birth or death continuously. Galaxies are born and quench. Something like Hoyls steady state model without expansion.

          When we watch a children's rotating giant-wheel, some buckets come near, some go away. Like that Galaxies come near and go away....

          Blue shifted and red shifted Galaxies will be equal at the center of universe. We are not at the center of universe.

          See a Rotating universe....

          https://resonance.is/the-rotating-universe/

          Best Regards

          =snp.gupta

          Dear Biswaranjan Dikshit ji

          I agree with your intuition about the universe that every inanimate object in the universe has some kind of life within it. I also appreciate your effort to give this idea a scientific form through your Dynamic universe model. ..............Reply...................

          Thank you for the complements and blessings

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

          ......................... However, your model seems to be trying to pose a challenge to the general theory of relativity (GTR). ..............Reply...................

          Yes sir, There are many unexplained problems with Bigbang based cosmology. Blackholes & Bigbang singularities, Dark matter, Dark energy, Explaining the observation of Blue shifted Galaxies etc , so many.

          These problems are not present here. Dynamic Universe Models predictions about Blue shifted Galaxies and "No Dark matter" etc came true experimentally after 10 years.

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

          .........................This can be taken seriously by the main stream science ..............Reply...................

          -They have taken me very seriously.............................

          -I am seeing their suppressing idealogy for the last 30 years.

          -No financial support ( All the world's the finance goes to them only), whatever is their experimental support and results

          -No university will enrol anyone who is against Bigbang ,

          -No doctorates will be given.

          -No encouragement, mainstream and arXiv publish only Bigbang based results or papers. Other papers are rejected.

          - There are very very very few people like FQXi who support against Bigbang, and consider the views against Bigbang also. Mainstream is very powerful.

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

          .........................only if you are able to mathematically reproduce important results of GTR which have been experimentally proved (such as bending of light near sun, Precession of perihelion of Mercury etc.). ..............Reply...................

          All such results were done about 30 years back. And many more were done. They say they cannot be published, just rejected unceremoniously.

          For publishing papers other journals require some money after peer review. I have to pay money. How many results I will go on pay money for publication?

          There are many more results and papers ....

          Basically I am not a rich man; I have family and dependents to support.

          Best Regards

          =snp.gupta

            My essay on CMB published in FQXi two years back is also against Bigbang cosmologies

            Best

            =snp.gupta

            Gupta,

            Your blog reference indicates that Laura Mersini-Houghton at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the College of Arts and Sciences declares there are no black holes. What super-massive phenomenon is responsible for the orbit of solar systems around thus galactic mass and that of others throughout the universe?

            Regards,

            Jim

            Dear Satyavarapu,

            Note: I entered this comment on my paper's page, but apparently forgot to enter it here on yours, so here it is for continuity. You don't need to respond to it because I saw your response to it on my paper's page:

            It sounds good to discuss these things in the last week of the month, except that in about a week I need to start to work on another project and that will likely take up much of my time, so it might take me some time to get back to you each time.

            I believe that some gravitational frequency shifting has been observed, but it works both ways, so when a photon approaches a large star the frequency would shift up, but when it later began to go away from the star it would be shifted down again and I believe that the up shift would not be enough to produce all of those matter particles.

            I will wait for your contact then.

            Does Hindu philosophy give any information about what God's purpose was for creating the universe and if that purpose includes man in any way?

            Sincerely,

            Paul

            Dear Mr. Gupta,

            Thank you so much for your your very interesting post on my essay. I must confess that I haven't worked through your equations. But does the blue shift in galaxies relate to galactic filaments (I wonder). Best wishes to you in your on-going work. As far as blessings-- I know very little of your area of the world, but from my perspective here in the US, where rule of the jungle-- big fish eat little fish-- is breaking down civility and civilization, the blessings which you seek, I feel, are within you. Again, thank you for your post! I do enjoy seeing your equations. LGB

              Yes Dear Paul,

              I am busy a bit now, We will continue in the last week. Thank you for the post here

              Best

              =snp.gupta