Respected prof James Lee Hoover

Thank you for the Excellent observations and questions with nice words...on Dynamic Universe Model...Your essay is also very good sir....

I am giving maximum appreciation to you for your essay 10... Best wishes for the essay...

=snp

Respected Prof Jonathan J. Dickau

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

I posted the revised abstract on Jan 2, I was travelling and I posted an earlier essay by mistake. I was in Bhilai for few days then. I know FQXi will not change the essay

.....May please see... sorry for the error....

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

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

I am sorry to disappoint, Satyavarapu...

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

No disappointment sir, I am trying to understand your nice observations about this model, it is a learning for me....

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

There is some value to various ideas featured in this essay, but it is full of basic errors that seem to reflect a fundamental misunderstanding. Perhaps you have under-estimated the depth of the problem, or perhaps you have some misconceptions about what the endeavor of Physics should be. However; if I was sent this paper as a reviewer for any of the journals where I have been a referee, I would have to say it has some flaws too deep to fix. Academic reviewers often use a three strike rule, where once they see 3 major flaws they will stop reading and if they are kind, they will enumerate those errors.

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

I want to learn the basic errors in this model, you will be pointing out....

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

I read the whole paper, however. So I'll start with the color vs frequency issue; do you realize that blue has a higher frequency than red? In several places; you appear to be saying the opposite. I think you mean that wavelength increases are a red shift while decreasing wavelengths indicate a blue shift. I agree, by the way, that evidence for blue-shifted galaxies is often ignored, and people have the false impression that everything in the cosmos is red-shifted. ..............Reply.......

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

May please see, above post on jan 2

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

At the 2nd Crisis in Cosmology conference, back in '08; more than one speaker cited blue shift evidence in their talk.

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

Some references please

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

I also agree with your basic premise that gravity can be treated as a kind of frequency shifting phenomenon. There have been a handful of serious academic papers about this, and it is an interesting topic to explore. Unfortunately; a much deeper understanding of things like virtual particles and photons, wave-particle duality, energy of motion, deBroglie wavelength, and so on, is required for a factual treatment of this subject. You come up short.

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

May please see my paper on Nucleosynthesis

https://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/p/10-feb-201-6-all-my-published-papers.html

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

I think you got lucky, because I already rated this paper a few days ago, and I was likely more generous than I would be today. Even with some of the deficiencies; it would not be so bad except for the exaggerated claims. But the fact you make such bold promises without a firm basis is offensive.

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

Thank you very much, I am sorry for the mistake done in a hurried way.... I did not intend the post wrong paper...

I did not rate your essay yet, I did not give less than 10 to any one or I refrain rating that essay...

Hope you will read the posting on Jan 2nd.

Hope you will point out some more mistakes... So that I will correct my self...

Thank you for the valuable time you spent on my paper and work...

Thank you for the blessings...

Best Reards

=snp

Respected prof Narendra Nath

I was very lucky to have blessings even at that age 85 years. Thank you for your nice analyzing words on my essay... I posted the revised abstract on Jan 2, I was travelling and I posted an earlier essay by mistake. I was in Bhilai for few days then. I know FQXi will not change the essay.....May please see that post... sorry for the error....

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

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

Your idea of nucleo-synthesis appears to be not consistent with the Big Bang hypothesis where the universe remained mainly H and He nuclei and formed the atomic structure rather late in evolution. The heavier elements formation could start far later and so also the observance of radioactive heavy elements much later. .............Reply.......

Yes sir, It was not consistent.... Dynamic Universe model predicted Blue shifted Galaxies about 10 years before they were discovered by Hubble space telescope few years back. Bigbang based cosmologies neglect about 33% of total Galaxies to support theit expanding Universe model.

May please see my paper on Nucleosynthesis

https://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/p/10-feb-201-6-all-my-published-papers.html

This paper on Nucleosynthesis to show Bigbang is not necessary to produce Hydrogen and Helium

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

You say something towards the non-changing nature of things and perhaps envisaging constancy in the strengths of the force field strengths ever since the creation of the universe. Also, you do not expect the velocity of light to change ever from a higher to a present lower value on the cosmic scale! .............reply.......

Yes Prof, Gravitation is constant in the universe, Velocity of light does not change in cosmic scale...

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

I tend to agree with last posting of Jonathan on your essay where he indicates some apparent contradictions in your arguments. Innovation of ideas is one thing but the essential postulates need to be based on some already known factual situation and experimental observations.

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

I replied his post and cleared the confusions, Hope you will look above post...

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

May be you can rephrase and re-orient your innovative ideas with better consistancy. I am not judging your mathematical formulations being an experimentalist but physical consistency could be improved further, to enhance the value of your innovative ideas in the presented theory. ..............Reply.......

You can check mathematics also, no problem sir.

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

We are all limited in our experiences depending on our background and so i am not commenting as any sort of expert at all. I am more or less like you, if not less!

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

Sir you are an expert. I want to ask a question,,,, which I am seeing for the last 35 years after publishing my first paper in the wonderland of Physics, that NO OTHER THEORY EXCEPT Bigbang is supported, even for just mental encouragement, forget financial support of any sort. They will not be entertained even for doing PhD in any University, all over the world this situation is same whatever the amount of work done in the other theories,. Or whatever the predictions came true..... This is true even after many failures of Bigbang based cosmologies. why so...?

Best Regards

=snp

I have responded to your comments on my Essay site. Kindly go there to see my response. I also note that your Essay appears to have received the most comments by many of the members of the community here, when comapred with other essays that i could find time to go through. The discussion here is a website one and thus comments become longer than otherwise needed in a discusion at a conference/meeeting! Let us hope that others too find time to look at the discussions on your essay. Strangely it does not have high rating though it has received comments from many other authors in this contest!

Satyav,

Certainly. I've replied in detain with links on my string.

Best

Peter

Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

You said, "This universe exists now in the present state, it existed earlier, and it will continue to exist in future also in a similar way." Do you think that the universe has existed eternally in the past or did it have a beginning? As for your solution to the N-body problem and other ideas I haven't the expertise to critique them, but it was certainly interesting to see your alternative views. You've obviously put in a tremendous amount of time and effort into them. Your idea of photons passing "grazingly" by a ponderous mass reminds me of Hawking radiation which occurs around the event horizon of a black hole (yes, I know you don't like black holes).

Good luck, Peter

    Dear Prof Peter Bauch

    Dynamic Universe Model says, "This universe exists now in the present state, it existed earlier, and it will continue to exist in future also in a similar way." Do you think that the universe has existed eternally in the past or did it have a beginning?

    ....... Correct sir......

    Australian Astronomers published many papers... There were many Galaxies that had ages before Bigbang, and many got extincted at 1/4 th of age of Bigbang...

    See my essay in FQXi one or two years back for full references of these papers... You can search with Google even...

    ......Your observation......

    As for your solution to the N-body problem and other ideas I haven't the expertise to critique them, but it was certainly interesting to see your alternative views. You've obviously put in a tremendous amount of time and effort into them. Your idea of photons passing "grazingly" by a ponderous mass reminds me of Hawking radiation which occurs around the event horizon of a black hole (yes, I know you don't like black holes).

    ............. Yes I was working on this for the last 35 years....Yes Black holes don't exist.... Hawking's radiation is different. Here I mean grazingly means.... some thing like TANGENTIALLY to a circle, slightly away from it....

    Help me to conduct the experiment for Energy to Mass conversion.....

    Thank you for the supporting words ....

    Best Regards

    =snp

    Dear Peter Jackson

    Thank you for all the nice explanations...

    I want to ask you few more questions, if you don't mind....

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

    You asked me to explain further.

    For Dark Energy the evidence of something beyond out detection and understanding is now overwhelming from every source, and even with flawed cosmological theory we know it mus contain ~86% of the total mass energy of the universe. It's also the 'condensate' from which all matter condenses. Can we really thing 'pair prooduction' comes from nothing at all! I suggest that would be naive and blinkered. The evidence below isn't exactly mainstream but all is more consistent with the evidence, i.e. resolving a tranche of anomalous findings;

    ..................Correct, matter or energy cannot be produced from nothing....

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

    As fermions don't detectably interfere with EM when coupled (n=1) they are 'matter' and 'dark'. Despite old theory hanging on, the numbers we now find contribute significantly.

    On cyclic cosmology, answering the 'pre-big bang' paradox and reproducing all CMB anisitropies this model looks better supported than any other including Concordance.;

    ...................... Have a look at my paper also explaining CMB anisotropies...

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

    HJ.v36.Cyclic Galaxy & Cosmological evolution. Alspo Google Laniakea and watch the video of cosmic dynamics...............................

    I could not download your PDF please... it was circling around some passwords... can you please send me copy to ... snp.gupta@gmail.com or attach that pdf here to your post?

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

    Ans in line with modern quantum optics this derivation of quantum redshift at the surface of all expanding Schrodingger sphere surfaces

    Redshift without expansion.

    ...................... Very good idea , and then how will you explain Blue shifted Galaxies?

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

    It's well known Newton is incomplete and inaccurate, as is GR but a bit less so, and my essay(s) show(s) QM's 'absolute' time is correct and 'space/time' is simply derived from just diffraction and Doppler shift of waves...........................

    Vet nice and correctly said....

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

    On that subject, last point; when you say 'frequency will increase (red shifted)' you mean 'wavelength'. Redshift is extended waves which gives DECREASED frequency (the time derivative at c). Wavelength (lambda) is blue shift (gamma waves are very short waves so high frequency. Waves are the REAL scalar, and fl is a constant. That's a staple of astronomy, and my see my 'Much Ado about Nothing' essay for more complete analysis.

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

    I am sorry for this error. I was travelling very heavily in that period at the time of posting this essay. I posted the wrong essay....

    Then later I changed the Abstract and posted on Jan 2:

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 2, 2018 @ 21:58 GMT

    Essay Abstract

    I know the essay will not be changed by FQXi....

    Thank you for the thorough observation. And keen reading.....

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

    But all good work otherwise. See Also the Sauron survey of galactic rotational shifts and ATLAS3G. I hope that helps.

    Can you please give me a link....?

    Best Regards

    =snp

    Dear SNP Gupta,

    You raise an interesting topic, but like others I don't find a clear fundamental thing or principle or formulae.

    This essay contest rewards well-written ideas that lead to new observations, and maybe yours ideas are that. But I can't make out how you intend to construct all of particle physics and general relativity, least of all make them into limbs of a larger consistent theory.

    It seems to be mere philosophy, and physics requires equations. To be sure, many of the Gedanken you use could be experimentally tested, or already have been (likely also excluding this result).

    Wayne

      Hi Wayne R Lundberg

      Thank you for the nice words and observations.....

      You raise an interesting topic, but like others I don't find a clear fundamental thing or principle or formulae......

      ..............My reply.......

      Here I saw many essays discussing what is fundamental etc, but in this essay, I went for the fundamental issue for energy to mass conversions and blue and redshifts and . I asked for help on observational verifications. I don't have a means for doing the observational verifications as I am an independent researcher.

      FQXi wanted this essay should not be a new essay. This original papers for this essay were published and available in the web, please refer them.

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

      This essay contest rewards well-written ideas that lead to new observations, and maybe yours ideas are that. But I can't make out how you intend to construct all of particle physics and general relativity, least of all make them into limbs of a larger consistent theory.

      ...............My reply.....

      Some people respond for such words, some will be like you of course. I am also not working for money. Some professors offered money to change into Main stream with money and Ph D etc , but I thought the Ideology of Dynamic Universe Model are better, and provide the world with more solutions and better predictions, even though nobody supports and provide any money to me. I am approaching each individual with this ideology and inviting them to to read my essay. I came to fag end of life. I don't expect much now.

      I am not intending to solve all the Physics problems, But I am working to provide solutions to cosmology portions. Thirty five experience with cosmological models taught me that there will not be any financial or otherwise support to any theory that is not supporting General theory of Relativity. I don't know why?

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

      It seems to be mere philosophy, and physics requires equations. To be sure, many of the Gedanken you use could be experimentally tested, or already have been (likely also excluding this result).

      .............. My reply.............

      There were many papers available on internet with full mathematical explanation. I can not give 25 pages of mathematics in just 9 pages. I just touched it. Many the axioms are experimentally tested or having observational support, the prediction here is one of the exceptions. Hope you will help me for this....

      Thank you for your interest in Dynamic Universe Model.......

      Best Regards

      =snp

      Gupta-Ji:

      Very creative thinking and contribution for somebody who is not a "professional" in the field. However, that is precisely what is needed to overcome the religion-like-belief that "the foundation of the edifice of physics has been laid out by GR and QM". Such controlling culture allows only the creation or invention of "new bricks and/or stones that will fit into the existing edifice". If GR and QM have extracted only partial truth of nature, which I believe is true, then we will remain stuck for ever with the partial knowledge of the universe. Such cultural imposition on our thinking has stagnated the evolution of human enquiring minds globally. I am glad to see that FQXi is helping to open up enquiring minds again.

      And, you have developed some logically self-consistent model that are not predicted by the prevailing theories.

      Best of luck!

      Chandra.

        Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

        There are thing in your essay I agree with, but overall I find it complex and confusing. But then again I find a lot of things complex and confusing like quantum mechanics and relativity. This does not mean that your dynamic universe model does not have merit. Einstein never got a Nobel prize for relativity, but after he passed most scientists found its value. I am also reminded of atomic theory which was a very debated topic in the history of science. Nowadays you can not get into kindergarten without pledging allegiance to atoms.

        Wishing you the best.

        The individual being is Brahman,

        Don Limuti

          Dear SNP Gupta ji,

          Thanks for reading my essay on Electron Spin and giving your views. I have read your essay and suggest that you read Dark Matter http://vixra.org/pdf/1303.0207v3.pdf

          Best wishes,

          Kamal Rajpal

            Respected Prof Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri sab,

            Thank you for your wonderful Blessings.. and Thank you for these nice words...

            I got some questions....

            Why Astrophysics and cosmology became "professional"?

            Why should these became a religion-like-belief that "the foundation of the edifice of physics has been laid out by GR and QM"?

            Why they became , Such controlling culture, which allows only the creation or invention of "new bricks and/or stones that will fit into the existing edifice? Why the GR and QM are extracting only partial truth of nature? Why this science became religion or culture?

            Yes I am also very happy that that FQXi is helping to open up enquiring minds again.

            Can you please tell me the truth of some these "why"s, I did not really understand them........?

            Thank you for your blessings once again sir for Blissful words..."you have developed some logically self-consistent model that are not predicted by the prevailing theories."

            Best Regards

            =snp

            Dear Don Limuti

            Thank you for the nice analyzing reply...and nice blessings on my essay...

            You are exactly correct saying "Einstein never got a Nobel prize for relativity, but after " verification" of bending of light rays near Sun.

            You are correct again ..about atomic theory... and for your wonderful words..."

            The individual being is Brahman...."

            Best

            =snp

            Dear Don Limuti

            I gave 10 for your wonderful essay it was 6.1 and after 10 it became 6.5

            Best wishes to your essay

            =snp

            Respected sir,

            Thank you for the nice analyzing reply and your kind Blessings...

            And yours is a very nice essay... I am giving 10, it was 6.6 earlier and now it is 7.2 after 10... Best wishes for the essay....

            Best Regards

            =snp

            ===========

            Dear "SNP": You have raised the following deep sociological question. Even though, I am not sociologist, I am attempting to answer by "going out on a limb"!

            "Why they became , Such controlling culture, which allows only the creation or invention of "new bricks and/or stones that will fit into the existing edifice? Why the GR and QM are extracting only partial truth of nature? Why this science became religion or culture?"

            I am again impressed by your persistent enquiring mind generating newer questions. That is the key to perpetual evolution of human minds. However, this was consciously discouraged by human tribal leaders around the globe once they settled down after developing agriculture, animal husbandry, etc. The strongest and the most intelligent tribal leaders could be easily replaced by any of their progenitors. The continued management remained in the hands of the privileged intellectuals (ministers). That is why the older tribal leaders employed the most intelligent administrators (ministers), while giving them access to opulent life.

            India is the best example that employed this technique earliest in the history. Recall that Veda, Upanishad, Geeta still represents best possible deep-thinking human philosophy. Yet, this knowledge was banned from the masses. That was institutionalization of slavery of Bharatiya masses. It started well before three thousand years ago. That is why Buddha and Jain "rebelled" (~500 years before Christ's birth). But our intellectuals, serving their masters, prevailed. Propagated explanations were brilliant to protect tribalism all over the world (later, feudalism, colonialism, capitalism, etc.). It continues even today with brilliant rationalizations, all over the world, as to why modern Democracy is the best. However, it not facilitating the evolution of all human minds! Subtly, the tribal-cultures, all over the world, have been continuously enhancing the interpretations of democracy to exploit the primitive evolutionary minds of the masses - procreation, survival food, pleasure, a sense of "stable life" and the fear of being deprived of these evolutionary desires. Instead of pro-actively nurturing the evolution of the humans masses, they actively "nurtured" to keep us at the level that we were ten thousand years ago; while enjoying the benefits of most modern technologies, managing our lives with fingers on our smart phones.

            Human evolution can be traced back to five million years old "Lucy", the first primitive bi-pedal human. Compared to Lucy, we are so much advanced in technology. But, we still are not consciously constructing a purposeful human civilization. I am sure everybody raises their children to have some purpose in their lives. But, those purposes are defined and constrained by to which "social-socket they can get themselves plugged in". Only rare few individuals venture to explore the meaning and the purpose of human evolution in the biosphere and their long-term purposes and roles in the cosmo-sphere. No country has defined a long-term national purpose for their collective citizenry. Our tribal leader-classes have become masters of applying skills of "animal husbandry" to manage the thinking-human masses all over the world.

            Only by systematic re-kindling of the enquiring minds of all humans can we start to evolve again as a thinking species. Almost all one-year-olds demonstrate that they are born with superb enquiring minds, displayed by their persistent original questions. But, we successfully kill the evolution of those genetically ordained minds by the time they graduate from college. We tend to grow a pair of long ears and a pair of horns like the ships we raise!

            The masses are systematically deprived of recognizing the higher purpose of human evolution through our ten-thousand years' of matured culture directed toward living as if we really belong to the "Animal Farm" (George Orwell). I am really not saying anything new or profound.

            We need to start thinking along the line of "Evolution Process Congruency" and as system engineers. We humans are here today because the brilliant engineers like Lucy and her husband continued to develop tools and technologies to live better than their "the-then best". That is the core biological evolutionary pressure. Remember, Lucy did not have any mathematics; not even any matured language. But they continued successfully through trial and errors using intuitive thinking to emulate the evolving nature, a marvelous system engineer. When something worked, they were automatically emulating some ontological rule (laws?) of nature.

            Yet no large set of (human invented) mathematical rules, or experimental data can gather COMPLETE information about any entity in this world. We are just advanced "Lucie's". We still do not know exactly what the electrons and photons are. However, we have succeeded in ushering in the Knowledge Age by constructing the Global Internet System!

            Please, read the Ch. 12 on how to think in the Indian paperback of my book, "Causal Physics: Photon by Nob-Interaction of Waves", Taylor and Francis, Indian Paperback (2017). You can also go to my web and down load the papers where my concepts have been developed over the last five decades. Remember, Lucy did not invent the modern religions five million years ago.

            Evolution is collective. Diversity is at the very foundation of biospheric evolution. These are not simply politically expedient expressions. Now that the humans have become thinking animals, it is fundamentally critical for us to allow the diversity of concepts to flourish, as long as they are expressly evolution process congruent. The only certain truth is that no individual humans have ever succeeded in finding the ultimate truth about our Cosmic System, of which, the Solar system is only a minuscule entity. When the Sun becomes a Red Giant, no life will exist in the Solar System. So, humans have to become deep Space-Travelers. Fortunately, we still have a billion years to evolve, provided we do not succeed in exterminating ourselves before becoming deep Space-Travelers!

            My papers: http://www.natureoflight.org/CP/

            Chandra.

              Satyav, (also posted on mine)

              You'll see the explanation for blue galaxies at high z in the 'cyclic..' paper, there's effectively no blue shift, just red, and derivable without accelerating expansion, as here;Video http://youtu.be/KPsCp_S4cUs

              There are many Sauron kinematic survey papers on arXiv i.e; https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0703531.all quite specialist, but all based on the same premiss of Doppler shifts from opposing edge rotation speeds.

              I hope all that helps. Do pass me a link to your CMB anistropy derivation.

              Very best