Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe by Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul,

I uploaded the full paper with Dynamic Universe Model Math to viXra. Now I got the web link address

http://viXra.org/abs/1703.0263

Hope you will have look and give your esteemed comments...

Best regards

=snp.

Daniel Rocha

Dear Satyavarapu,

I noticed that you did not notice my question on discussion of my thread. So, I ask you heare:

What do you mean by before the big bang w

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Daniel de França Diniz Rocha

Thank you for reading my essay.

That is a Good question.

There is no Bigbang according to Dynamic Universe Model. When I say BEFORE or AFTER Bigbang, it is the time frame to denote a point of time 13.8 gega years back. This is generally believed by Bigbang based cosmologists at that time there was a big explosion and Universe was started from that time.

Just to mention about that point of time I used those words "BEFORE or AFTER Bigbang".

I hope this clears.

Best

=snp

Paul Butler

Dear Satyavarapu,

I looked at your paper and the biggest problems that I see are ones that I have already mentioned to you earlier in the comments.

1. The first problem is that experimental observations show that when a photon is emitted from a source that is located in a gravitational field and received by a receiver that is located at a place closer to the center of the field where the field is stronger, the receiver will register the photon as being blue shifted (its frequency will appear to be increased), which goes along ok with your theory of photons' frequencies being blue shifted when approaching a large mass. The part that you are ignoring is that the opposite is also true. When a photon is emitted from a source that is located in a gravitational field and received by a receiver that is located in a place farther away from the center of the field where the field is weaker, the receiver will register the photon as being red shifted (its frequency will appear to be decreased), This means that as a photon would travel toward a large mass its frequency would be increased, but as it passed the large mass and began to travel away from it, its frequency would be decreased back down to where it originally was since observations show that the amount of frequency change experienced by the photon is the same in either direction, so that it would always be decreased by the same amount during the trip away from the large mass as it had been increased by its trip toward the large mass. This would mean that the idea that a photon's frequency could be increased by passing a cascade of stars would not work because the increase that it would receive when it was approaching each star would be taken back by the gravitational field of the star as it moved away from it. When it reached the gravitational field of next star in the cascade it would, therefore, be back to its original frequency before it had approached the previous star in the cascade. There would be no net increase in its frequency no matter how big the cascade was. After it left the gravitational field of last star in the cascade it would be back to the original frequency that it had when it was originally emitted.

2. The second problem is that the middle range atoms that are produced in stars as byproducts of the fusion processes that take place in them cannot be broken down back into the hydrogen atoms that were used to form them. That process cannot be reversed by the stars or in any large enough quantity by any other process known to man without the input of more energy than was freed in their production. This is the case because they are in a state of greater entropy because they contain less total motion content than was contained in the separate hydrogen atoms that were used to produce them. To change them back into hydrogen atoms would, therefore, require the addition of all of the motion that had been removed from them and radiated away in the form of energy photons and would also require the addition of more motion to make up for the normal escape, dispersion, and, therefore, loss of use of some of the input motion as a part of the entropy process. This does not occur in nature and if it did it would ultimately run out of the extra motion needed to enable the continuation of the process. These elements would build up in the universe over time and would be taken into new stars when they are formed from the dust and gasses, etc. that contain them. This would result in new stars being larger and denser over time. The larger and denser stars consume much more energy than the smaller stars, thus using up their hydrogen and other fusion source materials much more quickly and, therefore, they burn out much sooner (in as little as 3 million years instead of the estimated 10 billion years for a star like the sun). They also tend to end in a supernova, which produces even heavier elements that would be taken up in the next generation of stars, thus continually increasing the effect until the mass would be too great to form functional stars.

There are two things that are built into the most basic structure of our current universe that cause things to work in this way and they cannot be overcome or changed without completely changing the structure of the universe and that is something that man will never be able to do. They are:

1. During an interaction that transfers motion amplitude (speed) from one entity to another one, the motion is generally transferred from the entity that possesses the greater motion content (speed) to the one that contains the lesser motion content. The result of this through many interactions over a long period of time is that the motions that contained larger amounts of motion give up some of their motion while those with only a small amount of motion receive motion from those that give it up. The end result is that the overall dynamic range of motions decreases with the motions of all entities slowly changing toward the middle of the range. This partly explains why the middle range atoms are the most stable, while the lightest atoms tend to give up their greater motion contents to form the middle range atoms. It is easy to see that trying to expand the range back to where it was before it was narrowed by normal entropy interactions will require the addition of all of the motion that has been transferred from the entities that originally contained the larger amount of motion back into them, but this transfer can only be accomplished through interactions with entities that still contain motion contents that are large enough to allow the transfer of the needed motion content back into the midrange atoms to allow them to be transferred back into the higher range hydrogen atoms. In addition to this, more motion must be applied because some of the applied motion will be dispersed and lost to productive use to convert the atoms back into hydrogen atoms. This brings us to the other thing that greatly contributes to entropy.

2. Motion entities that exist in higher density areas tend to disperse into locations of lower density. This is largely due to the fact that any entity that travels toward the center of density is likely to enter into an interaction that will change its direction of travel, but one that travels away from the center of density is less likely to interact with another entity, so it will likely be able to continue in its path away from the high density area. This is why the motions that are freed up in the fusion process are radiated away from the star and don't just stay in it. Space is very large and if you dispersed al of the energy photons evenly throughout it, the energy density would be very low everywhere. Also, living creatures not only require energy, but require differences in energy to function and man requires these differences to power his machines, etc. We live by transferring motions (energy) from entities that possess greater motion amplitude (speed) to those with less motion amplitude and in the process we extract desirable work to function and to build the things that we build. No matter how much energy was available we could not survive if it was evenly distributed everywhere. That is why this part of entropy is so detrimental to man and all living creatures. As man transfers motion from entities that contain larger amounts of motions to those that have less motions in order to extract the desired work from those motions, he also contributes to entropy item number one above and because some of that motion always gets dissipated into space in the form of energy photons, etc. he also contributes to entropy item number two above also. The natural world works the same way. In order for it to do the work of reversing the fusion reactions of stars, all of the original motion content that was present in the hydrogen atoms would have to be added back in from some other higher energy source and in addition to that extra energy would need to be added from that source to allow for the amount that would go into the energy dispersion that would occur as part of the process. You have not given such a higher energy source in your theory. The gravity shifting that you mention in your theory would not work because of the equal down shifting that would occur when the photon traveled away from the gravity source and there is no other such source present in nature either. There are some other problems also, but I don't want to cover too much at a time because you seem to not be able to follow that many. There are, of course, also some good things in your theory, but it is not worth going into them until the above mentioned road blocks are removed.

Sincerely,

Paul

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul N Butler,

Thank you very much for studying my new paper and giving some fast comments. You are confusing a bit. They are no problems at all...

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

......................... I looked at your paper and the biggest problems that I see are ones that I have already mentioned to you earlier in the comments.

I will give an example. There was an old story. Some Greek philosopher argued a Greek Olympic runner who won gold can never overtake a tortoise which started a bit early and is ahead of him. He says by the time he moves half distance the tortoise will move some more distance. And by the time he covers half of the remaining distance, the tortoise will move some more ahead. And this argument continues.

Here you are talking about the Gravitational redshift, this is a much smaller effect. What Dynamic Universe Model proposes happens on the light rays that goes GRAZINGLY near some gravitational mass. The equations of Gr Redshift are available in Wikipedia... You can see clearly they are dependent on distances only. General case for a photon of frequency ОЅ 2 emitted at distance R 2 to observer distance R 1 (measured as distances from the gravitational center of mass) the equation

ОЅ 1 = ОЅ 2 SQRT ( R 1 ( R 2 в€' r s )/ R 2 ( R 1 в€' r s ) )

as long as R 1 , R 2 > rs holds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_redshift

For the Dynamic Universe Model case....

See in page 31 of the recent paper "Nucleosynthesis after frequency shifting in electromagnetic radiation near gravitating masses in Dynamic Universe Model with Math" Case3. When the velocity of gravitational mass is not exactly opposite or exactly in the same direction to the incoming light ray:

In this case the gravitational field will act as some brake or enhance the energy of the incoming light ray depending on (Cos П•) of the velocity of gravitational mass relative to incoming radiation, where (П•) is the angle between the light ray and velocity of gravitational mass .

The gravitating mass is moving with a velocity Ој in the opposite direction and applies brake on the photon. This is something similar to the case where the gravitational mass is fixed in position and the photon of the rest mass E / c2 is moving with velocity Ој Cos П• +c

Hence the initial velocity of photon = - Ој Cos П• -c. It's velocity is towards the gravitational mass. The photon is having a freefall. Its final velocity = - Ој -c - got [ where t is the time of flight of photon].

Initial Energy = m (Ој Cos П• +c)2 /2 = E (Ој Cos П• +c)2 /2 c2 = E (Ој2 Cos2 П• +c2+2Ој Cos П• c )/2c2

Final Energy = ВЅ (E / c2 )(- Ој Cos П• -c -got)2 = ВЅ (E / c2 )(Ој2 Cos2 П• +c2+go2t2+2Ој Cos П• got+2cgot+2Ој Cos П• c )

Change in Energy = ВЅ (E / c2 ) (go2t2+2Ој Cos П• got+2cgot ), here E = h П' that means

Change in Energy = ВЅ (h П' / c2 ) (go2t2+2Ој Cos П• got+2cgot )

Hence change in Frequency = П' = 1/ {2 (h / c2 ) (go2t2+2Ој Cos П• got+2cgot )}

If you want some numerical values for comparison sake you can do it...

It should be noted here....

a. The frequency change happens due to gravity of star mass, not due to relative direction of movement between grazing light ray and the star.

b. Star velocity is much much smaller compared to velocity of light. You can have a look at the equations

As the time is less I am making posts in different posts

See the original equations in Paper as suscript and super scripts I did not edit.... I will re post after answering all your observations

Best Regards

=snp

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul N Butler,

Thank you very much for studying my new paper and giving some fast comments. You are confusing a bit. They are no problems at all.................. Your words..........

......................... 2. The second problem is that the middle range atoms that are produced in stars as by products of the fusion processes that take place in them cannot be broken down back into the hydrogen atoms that were used to form them. That process cannot be reversed by the stars or in any large enough quantity by any other process known to man without the input of more energy than was freed in their production. This is the case because they are in a state of greater entropy because they contain less total motion content than was contained in the separate hydrogen atoms that were used to produce them. To change them back into hydrogen atoms would, therefore, require the addition of all of the motion that had been removed from them and radiated away in the form of energy photons and would also require the addition of more motion to make up for the normal escape, dispersion, and, therefore, loss of use of some of the input motion as a part of the entropy process. This does not occur in nature and if it did it would ultimately run out of the extra motion needed to enable the continuation of the process. These elements would build up in the universe over time and would be taken into new stars when they are formed from the dust and gasses, etc. that contain them. This would result in new stars being larger and denser over time. The larger and denser stars consume much more energy than the smaller stars, thus using up their hydrogen and other fusion source materials much more quickly and, therefore, they burn out much sooner (in as little as 3 million years instead of the estimated 10 billion years for a star like the sun). They also tend to end in a supernova, which produces even heavier elements that would be taken up in the next generation of stars, thus continually increasing the effect until the mass would be too great to form functional stars. ..............Reply...................

Why extra motion is required. Hydrogen is supplied from photon to proton frequency conversion process. It can be done by cascading of stars. See my first reply. The frequency conversion happens due to gravitation not by relative motion.

We don't require nuclear fission of mid range elements to make the Hydrogen back for continuation. By super novae explosions additional elements are formed and it is required...

Best Regards

=snp

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul N Butler,

............... Your words................................... There are two things that are built into the most basic structure of our current universe that cause things to work in this way and they cannot be overcome or changed without completely changing the structure of the universe and that is something that man will never be able to do. They are: . ..............Reply...................

The changing of structure of universe is impossible for man, before that he has to do the first step first... he should be able to understand the working of Universe first, if he can?

Dear Paul N Butler,

............... Your words................................... 1. During an interaction that transfers motion amplitude (speed) from one entity to another one, the motion is generally transferred from the entity that possesses the greater motion content (speed) to the one that contains the lesser motion content. The result of this through many interactions over a long period of time is that the motions that contained larger amounts of motion give up some of their motion while those with only a small amount of motion receive motion from those that give it up. The end result is that the overall dynamic range of motions decreases with the motions of all entities slowly changing toward the middle of the range. This partly explains why the middle range atoms are the most stable, while the lightest atoms tend to give up their greater motion contents to form the middle range atoms. ..............Reply...................

This explains partly only, the middle range atoms are more stable because of their atomic structure also

Dear Paul,

............... Your words.......... ......................... It is easy to see that trying to expand the range back to where it was before it was narrowed by normal entropy interactions will require the addition of all of the motion that has been transferred from the entities that originally contained the larger amount of motion back into them, but this transfer can only be accomplished through interactions with entities that still contain motion contents that are large enough to allow the transfer of the needed motion content back into the midrange atoms to allow them to be transferred back into the higher range hydrogen atoms. In addition to this, more motion must be applied because some of the applied motion will be dispersed and lost to productive use to convert the atoms back into hydrogen atoms. This brings us to the other thing that greatly contributes to entropy. ..............Reply...................

Hydrogen need not be prepared this way. Hydrogen Balance will be done in another process, the frequency changing process.

Best regards

=snp

basudeba mishra

Dear Sir,

You are right that the "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". It is not a two-body problem. The Model has to be singularity free and body-body collision-free n-body problem solution based on UGF acting on each and every body with some mass in the Universe. The nature of gravity is not attraction, but stabilization of bodies in the maximum permissible distance around their common barycenter determined based on their respective masses. Time has to move in one direction i.e. into future only.

The big bang, as it is presented, is now a discredited and discarded model. As you have pointed out, "The Galaxy GN-z11, born only 400 million years after the Big Bang, exists at a distance of 32 billion light years". This is impossible to explain in the big-bang theory - particularly after adding inflation. But big bang, if explained properly, could explain everything. In that model, there is no place for inflation, but a gradual reduction of the speed of light over the years. If we consider that, the age of the universe could be different. You have tried to explain it in a different way based on your model.

It is true that the distance changing has no effect on overall shape of the Universe. Thus, galaxies can be at any distance. You have given one explanation for it in your Dynamic Equilibrium of UGF in this model.

Your conclusion: "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!" is interesting and has the scope to develop it further.

We enjoyed your essay thoroughly.

Regards,

basudeba

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear basudeba mishra ji,

Thank you for your nice complements and blessings

...... Your words...................................You are right that the "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". It is not a two-body problem. The Model has to be singularity free and body-body collision-free n-body problem solution based on UGF acting on each and every body with some mass in the Universe. ..............Reply...................

Correct

............... Your words................................... The nature of gravity is not attraction, but stabilization of bodies in the maximum permissible distance around their common barycenter determined based on their respective masses. Time has to move in one direction i.e. into future only. ............ Reply.................

The nature of gravity is NOT ONLY attraction, but stabilization of bodies also. You can see Rotating Universe at this link:

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

................Your words....................The big bang, as it is presented, is now a discredited and discarded model. As you have pointed out, "The Galaxy GN-z11, born only 400 million years after the Big Bang, exists at a distance of 32 billion light years". This is impossible to explain in the big-bang theory - particularly after adding inflation. But big bang, if explained properly, could explain everything. In that model, there is no place for inflation, but a gradual reduction of the speed of light over the years. If we consider that, the age of the universe could be different. You have tried to explain it in a different way based on your model. ..............Reply...................

Yes Mishraji, Bigbang model had many problems, it will have singularities.

In Dynamic Universe Model, speed of light wont change with time. Gravitation attarction also constant and there is no Gravitational repulsion

............... Your words................................... It is true that the distance changing has no effect on overall shape of the Universe. Thus, galaxies can be at any distance. You have given one explanation for it in your Dynamic Equilibrium of UGF in this model. ..............Reply...................

Yes Mishraji, Galaxies can exist at any place and at any time in the Universe.

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

We enjoyed your essay thoroughly. ..............Reply...................

Thank you for good words and blessings. Hope you will do some further work on this model....

Best regards,

=snp

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul,

............... Your words.......... ......................... 2. Motion entities that exist in higher density areas tend to disperse into locations of lower density. This is largely due to the fact that any entity that travels toward the center of density is likely to enter into an interaction that will change its direction of travel, but one that travels away from the center of density is less likely to interact with another entity, so it will likely be able to continue in its path away from the high density area. ..............Reply...................

Non uniform density of masses (energy)is one of the fundamental axioms of Dynamic Universe Model

............... Your words................................... This is why the motions that are freed up in the fusion process are radiated away from the star and don't just stay in it. Space is very large and if you dispersed al of the energy photons evenly throughout it, the energy density would be very low everywhere. Also, living creatures not only require energy, but require differences in energy to function and man requires these differences to power his machines, etc. We live by transferring motions (energy) from entities that possess greater motion amplitude (speed) to those with less motion amplitude and in the process we extract desirable work to function and to build the things that we build. No matter how much energy was available we could not survive if it was evenly distributed everywhere. ..............Reply...................

No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); Non uniform density of energy etc are some of the fundamental axioms of Dynamic Universe Model

best

=snp

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul,

............... Your words.......... .........................That is why this part of entropy is so detrimental to man and all living creatures. As man transfers motion from entities that contain larger amounts of motions to those that have less motions in order to extract the desired work from those motions, he also contributes to entropy item number one above and because some of that motion always gets dissipated into space in the form of energy photons, etc. he also contributes to entropy item number two above also. ..............Reply...................

............... Your words.......... .........................The natural world works the same way. In order for it to do the work of reversing the fusion reactions of stars, all of the original motion content that was present in the hydrogen atoms would have to be added back in from some other higher energy source and in addition to that extra energy would need to be added from that source to allow for the amount that would go into the energy dispersion that would occur as part of the process. You have not given such a higher energy source in your theory. ..............Reply...................

All the stars are my energy sources. No single energy source is possible.

Best

=snp

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul

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

.........................The gravity shifting that you mention in your theory would not work because of the equal down shifting that would occur when the photon traveled away from the gravity source and there is no other such source present in nature either. ..............Reply...................

Thank you very much for giving so elaborate study on my new paper. The frequency change happens due to gravity of star mass, not due to relative direction of movement between grazing light ray and the star. You are confusing a bit. They are no problems at all...

............... Your words.......... .........................There are some other problems also, but I don't want to cover too much at a time because you seem to not be able to follow that many. There are, of course, also some good things in your theory, but it is not worth going into them until the above mentioned road blocks are removed. ..............Reply...................

I repeat that the gravitational field will act as some brake on the energy of the incoming light ray. There will be a lot of difference between 'speed of star' and 'speed of light.'

Please feel free to give any other problems also, we can discuss. I hope by now all the road blocks are removed.

Best Regards

=snp

Paul Butler

Dear Satyavarapu,

I believe that in an earlier comment to you I said that it looks like there is some observational evidence by man that gravitational red and blue shifts are generated in photons as they pass through gravitational fields. As I looked into it a little more, however, I found that it has not yet been determined either way in all of man's experiments that I have seen so far. So far, all of man's experiments that I have seen indicate that the red and blue shifts are of equal magnitude when two transmitter receiver combination units are used and are blue shifts when a photon is emitted (transmitted) from a source that is located where the gravitational field strength is low (such as out in space far from any large gravitational sources) and received in a location where the gravity field strength is high (such as near a star). They are red shifts when a photon is emitted (transmitted) from a source that is located where the gravitational field strength is high (such as near a star) and received in a location where the gravity field strength is low (such as out in space far from any large gravitational sources). The problem is that there are two main theories and some variations of both of them. One of those theories is that the photon's frequency is increased (blue shifted) as it travels from a lower field strength area into a higher field strength area and decreased (red shifted) as it passes from a higher field strength area into a lower field strength area as it travels through the gravitational field. The other theory is that the photon's frequency is shifted at the time it is emitted and received and is not shifted at all during its travel. Although it is possible to determine which theory is the correct one (one method requires the ability to generate gravity fields and to turn them on and off as desired, which man in this world cannot currently do, as an example), man in this world has apparently not yet made that determination. I must, therefore, stay within the bounds of man's current technological advancement level as much as I can, so I can't go farther into that area with you at this point. It looks like the above mentioned red and blue shifts are the ones that you consider small compared to the large blue shift that you mention as part of your theory. I have not seen any indication that man has observed such a large blue shift. Can you tell me where I can see the results of any observations that would support your great blue shift when a photon is close to a star that is not lost when it leaves the close proximity to the star and travels out into space where the gravitational force is much less? If this great blue shift exists it should not be difficult to observe it. It should be as simple as measuring the red or blue shift of the light photons from a star when the path of its light to the earth is very close to the sun during a total eclipse of the sun, so that the star's light photons would receive the great blue shift from traveling close to the large mass of the sun on the way to the earth and then measuring the star's light again (about six months later) when the earth is between the star and the sun, so its light would not pass close to the large mass of the sun on its way to the earth. The great blue shift that you predict should be obvious if it exists by comparing the two results. I believe that many experiments have been done during total eclipses of the sun for various reasons, such as to measure the curvature of photons in gravitational fields, etc., so the data may already be there if spectroscopic readings were done. The data for the stars when they are not aligned closely with the sun should be even more readily available. I do not currently have time to check it out because of the other project that I am currently working on now, so I will leave that up to you to check out. I would like to know what you find out about it, however.

If that great blue shift actually occurs, the frequency upshifting of the energy photons would increase the amount of energy in the universe. This extra energy would then be changed into matter particles (protons and electrons, etc.), thus restoring the energy to its normal level, but the extra matter particles that were created from the energy photons would increase the total amount of matter in the universe. As these new matter particles are fused in stars they are combined into atoms of midrange elements in the stars. When the stars burned out these midrange elements would be scattered into space and some would be taken into new stars, which would make those new stars denser or more massive than the previous generation of stars. As the midrange elements built up more and more in space, each generation of stars would be more massive than the previous generation until all new stars were very massive. They would fuse all of their fusible source material very quickly in order to counteract the great gravitational pull of their large masses (in as little as 3 million years compared to 10 billion years for a star the size of the sun). When they have fused all of their fusible material, most of them would end in a super nova that would generate the higher mass atoms. These higher mass atoms would then be taken into new stars and make them even more massive. At some point the mass of stars would become so great that no fusion reaction could keep them from collapsing in on themselves. Since your theory does not allow for black holes to be formed, the only other possibility would be very large supernova type explosions, which would create even more of the heavy element atoms. The process would speed up and build up to the point that no new stars could be formed due to the great amount of non-fusible matter present in the universe. I have not yet seen any part of your theory that would prevent this from happening. If there is such a part of it that would keep that from happening please let me know how it works and what if any observational data is available to support it. I am not worried about any need to break up the heavier atoms that are produced by the continual fusion of the newly created protons, etc. to produce more protons for fusion. If the gravity upshifting that you mention actually worked, it would, as you say, produce all of the new protons, etc. needed to continue the fusion process. What I am concerned about is that this continual increase in the amount of matter in the universe as a result of the continual production of the midrange atoms by the fusion process in the stars and the latter production of the heavy elements as these midrange atoms increased the masses of new stars causing them to end in supernova explosions would ultimately build up so much non-fusible matter in the universe that new stars could not be formed because they would be so massive that they would quickly collapse and explode in supernova type explosions before they could fuse much of their fusible material. As I said above I have not yet seen anything in your theory that would prevent that continual increase in the amount of matter in the universe. Your theory would need to have some mechanism that would eliminate this extra matter in order to compensate for the new matter that would be produced by the photon up shifting and conversion of the up shifted photons into matter particles, which would then be fused in the stars to continually produce this extra midrange atom matter. Just letting it be spread out in space would not work because over a long period of time all of space would become filled with it. So again, I ask you to show me how your theory would take care of that problem.

Sincerely,

Paul

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Paul,

Thank you for remembering my essay even after the contest virtually (voting) ends!

I am giving detailed replies to your post separately below...

Best Regards

=snp

James Hoover

Satyavarapu and Parameswara,

As we near the end of the contest, I recheck those I have read to see if I have rated them. I see that I rated yours on March 6th.

I hope you have enjoyed the interchange of ideas as much as I have.

Regards,

Jim Hoover

Vladimir Rodin

Dear Mr. Gupta,

I have already read your essay for a long time. The gravity and relevance of your work is doubtless. Of course, I highly appreciate your paper.

Best regards and good luck,

Vladimir A. Rodin

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Vladimir A. Rodin,

Thank you for your blessings....

Best

snp.gupta

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Hoover,

Wonderful exchange of ideas,definitely

Thank you for your blessings....

Best

snp.gupta

pjackson

Satyav,

To answer your questions;

"You mean both blue and redshifts are simultaneously present in a single Galaxy" Overall galaxies are bluer or redder. Open spirals are bluest (youngest) and large sphericals reddest (oldest), There are 2 other Blue/Red distributions of lower magnitude; First within each, which is complex and for various reasons (my papers explains) and including a 'dynamic' shift due to rotational velocity each 'side' *See Sauron, Atlas 3G etc.)

Second there is the 'Distance' (so time) distribution. Light from further away has higher redshift. Popular theory can only think of assigning this to accelerating expansion but I show that's not required Redshift Video.

There's also an underlying 'epoch' pattern of galaxy evolution, with peaks in quasar activity, which may paper also coherently explains as a recycling mechanism, into a new blue open spiral.

46c Yes, You got it. The pulse speed inside a collimated (layered) quasar jet See the NASA finding citation in my papers references. It doesn't need 'nutrino's or anything exotic. Look at Martin Rees's work going back even to the 1960's, and floods of data now available. No theory is considered worth a bean unless it confirms to the latest data!

Best wishes

Peter

Jonathan Khanlian

Hi Satyavarapu,

You say your model has no singularities, no space-time continuum, and no need for analysis under differential equations... This almost sound like "Digital Physics"! Check out my movie essay on iTunes, Vimeo, or Amazon Prime (sorry for the advert)

Jon

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Jonathan Khanlian,

You can down load whole book from viXra, it was my first book.

Thank you for your post Jonathan. Dont say it is advt. I would love to see that movie. Can you please give some web address reference?

Best Wishes to your essay....

Best Regards

=snp

Satyavarapu Gupta

Dear Peter Jackson,

Thank you for the nice explanations...!

So these "You mean both blue and redshifts are simultaneously present in a single Galaxy" are visible in a Galaxy that stays edge on and both the Astronomical jets are visible. Dynamic Universe Model also explains the existence of such Galaxies. These are classified as Galaxies which are not redshifted as well as not Blueshifted.

.......................Your words.................. Overall galaxies are bluer or redder. Open spirals are bluest (youngest) and large sphericals reddest (oldest), There are 2 other Blue/Red distributions of lower magnitude; First within each, which is complex and for various reasons (my papers explains) and including a 'dynamic' shift due to rotational velocity each 'side' *See Sauron, Atlas 3G etc.)................... Reply.................

Correct

.................................... your words........................Second there is the 'Distance' (so time) distribution. Light from further away has higher redshift. Popular theory can only think of assigning this to accelerating expansion but I show that's not required Redshift Video. ................... Reply.................

Very nice Video

.................................... your words........................ There's also an underlying 'epoch' pattern of galaxy evolution, with peaks in quasar activity, which may paper also coherently explains as a recycling mechanism, into a new blue open spiral. ................... Reply.................

Good

.................................... your words........................

Real Hard to believe.... Can you please give some references?

Best wishes Peter for your paper.

=snp

« Previous Page Next Page »