Dear Peter Jackson,
Thank you very much for the supporting reply. You touched many points, very nicely. I want to give a point by point reply. I like the idea to work in collaboration with you, we will definitely do that. You are an multi-talented person with very nice knowledge of many fields. Please give more details of your model to me....
....Your words: As an Astronomer long focused on galaxies and cosmic evolution I found your ideas interesting and novel with much agreement with my own work and (some joint) published papers. Certainly the universe is dynamic, and many current assumptions (mainly in the 'Concordance' model) are flawed, incomplete or plain wrong!
.....My reply... You are exactly correct! Thank you very much for your appreciation!!
....Your words: but specifically; ".......our Universe reproduces its Galaxies." I've actually produced a model of precisely how it does this, with a full life cycle bases on detailed data analysis.
.....My reply... Wow, very nice!, I want see details.......
....Your words: "Galaxies tend to evolve from spiral to elliptical structure" Again that is indeed a basic part of the full evolutionary cycle the data supports.
.....My reply... Very Good, it is an expected part.
....Your words: I should say other ideas don't correspond well with findings and data. Part of my studies have been of the Hubble Ultra Deep Field survey data. Indeed I have the 'visible' wavelength image as my computer desktop background. One thing for certain is that it did NOT look the same back then as now. Far from it. There are many differences, including faster evolution and significantly lower mass functions (all smaller).
.....My reply... I want see that data, and want know why you decided like that, Was that based on the observed data.....?
....Your words: Few of the inconsistencies argue with your basics, but if you wish to be taken at all seriously by the current regime you'll need a lot better consistency with data across the board.
.....My reply... I am damn serious, I want this Dynamic Universe model to be always based on Experimental results and observed data, I will never back out.
Many papers and books were published on Dynamic Universe model, 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" in FQXi, "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 .
Prediction of existence of large number of Blue shifted Galaxies came true. Prediction of "no dark matter" came true. All these papers were published many places available in the internet.
All these books and papers can be downloaded from freely from Dynamic Universe Model Blog or viXra
....Your words: My own model is massively well evidenced (I've studied 20-30 papers etc/wk for decades)and includes better alternatives for the big 'Bang/Bounce' and the cosmological constant (cosmic redshift). But it still hasn't penetrated old doctrinal beliefs! ...
.... My reply... Please give some more details.... You can contact me by emails also... snp.gupta@gmail.com
...... Your words....(Yet it's still being refined and evolving as NONE of us should be too 'precious' about our theories!).
... .... My reply.... You are exactly correct, NATURE is very complex, and it produces new and new facets always. What we can check is how this model explains that observation. All these are being done for the betterment of humanity.
What we can check is how this model explains this new observation. That's what I am doing always for the last 30 years, without any support from mainstream..... It was a real torture to me for the last so 25 odd years, whatever the results and predictions that are that came true, no support.....
..... Your words....If you wish I'll post links to the Evolution paper and a video simply deriving redshift without requiring accelerating expansion. I think both may help inform and advance your own good work. ...
.... My reply... Yes please, I want have a look at them. Please send me, or post them here.
..... Your words....Most will of course say you're too far of topic here, but I feel better fundamental understanding of all nature from the smallest quanta needs better understanding of how the universe works. ...
.... My reply.... Don't worry. These all being done for the better understanding of the universe and its nature, and for the benefit of humanity, definitely NOT for embezzlement of Government funds.....
.... Your words.... It's also well written so I have it down for a good score. (though I try not to apply scores before reading all) ...
.... My reply.... I am also thinking the same, but I am giving high score to you now itself ! These interactions are very important.
Best wishes....
=snp.gupta