Dear snp,

While I still suspect you didn't read my essay carefully, I have to admit, I for my part am inclined to agree on an emotional "layman" basis with almost all of the many of your opinions you listed.

Let me just discuss this one:

"-Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe".

Hmm. Of course, the word universe means there is only one reality. In this sense, I too see it as closed as also is the so called absolute Archimedean infinity in contrast to Bernoulli/Leibniz/Cantor's relative infinities.

Nonetheless, Sommerfeld's radiation condition is certainly not wrong:

Radiation is never reflected from infinity.

I will not finally judge your essay before I managed reading your essay and related stuff with the due care.

Best,

Eckard

Dear Peter,

Thank you very much for nice comparison with discrete field model. You said....." All in all not a bad model but still inconsistent and with a couple of major conflicting assumptions. None I can see that are fatal, but it looks to me like more solid foundations are still needed.".... can you please explain them further?

Best wishes to your paper...

=snp

Sir,

First let me be honest. When I said I was amazed at your list of foundational points, I was expecting that I would see some basis for them. So I read your essay and your blog, but did not find any. Instead, I found paragraphs from Jon Schiller's book, "Big Bang and Black Holes, Origin of the Universe" along with your comments, such as

"On the contrary the discovery of CMB by Penzias and Wilson was only for starlight and Galaxy light; which will amount to CMB radiation. No CMB generated by Big Bang has been measured till date by any instrument."

Starlight? Really? How do you know this? I would love to agree with you because I think that the Big-bang is a cop-out and would like to see supposed evidence like CMB debunked, but I don't think that they just give Nobel prizes.

I also found equations in you essay, but could not follow your reasoning. Sorry.

I said that we are very much in agreement on many points, but I doubt that our reasons are the same. From your list, I agree with the following:

-No singularities

-No blackholes

-No warm holes

-No Bigbang

-Non-empty Universe

-No imaginary or negative time axis

-No Creation of matter like Bigbang

-No many mini Bigbangs

-No Missing Mass / Dark matter

-No Dark energy

-No Bigbang generated CMB detected

-No Multi-verses

My reasons for agreeing with some of these are explained in my essay. For others, I agree simply because concepts like dark matter, dark energy and multi-verses just don't sound right to me. They clash with my intuition and seem more like fairy-tale physics.

    Hi Satyavarapu Gupta,

    Your paper includes a promising new solution to N body motion problems along with a fine relevant history of mass motions and locations.

    First off you present frequency shifting in EM radiation. Let's see if I understand your 'EM radiation grazing near mass' by using a different perspective. A photon beam encounters a hydrogen atom in Earth's upper atmosphere. The wave structure of the photon interacts with the hydrogen wave structure, forming a more complex atom which settles lower in the atmosphere. Then another earth grazing photon combines its waves with the more complex atom adding further complexity. This continues until nitrogen, oxygen etc. are formed and the particle falls to earth. Mass is created. This collision process works better when the atom is moving toward the photon as the net motion is slower than c. It is c - u. On the other side of earth fewer interactions arise as the elements are moving away from the photons at speed u. The speed of any combination becomes c u and an atom is less likely to settle before it exits the atmosphere. This mass creation provides equilibrium as recycling occurs with the release by earth of heat and light.

    Note that your close pass issue states frequency increase (red shifted), in your abstract, your introduction and cases 1 &2. This is confusing - inverted shift. The questions you answered within the paper are all about frequencies. But including photons is mostly a side extension of your Dynamic universe model and your formula 25.

    I do agree with your discussion of creation of mass via extreme blue shifting of light. I also like your dynamic model for masses. You discuss mass rotation and its influence on the flow of other bodies and on the speed of light. You are able with tensors to plot the logical flow of matter via your program SITA which applies rotational drives from N number of masses to an item/group. The program must address many drive factors. You delete dark matter by including all components of N. I arrived at similar thoughts by placing two equal masses near each other. They have to rotate or will be crashed together. The rotations must all be the same - counterclockwise . Opposite rotations will crash. The universe is a counterclockwise whirling flow. We can see it in our solar system. Solar rotation drives planetary revolutions and rotations. Apparent imperfections such as Venus rotation, the moons rotation and the 90 degree tilted axis of rotation of Uranus are explained by factors such as the placement of the rotational force. A most interesting situation is the high latitude small moons of Jupiter which seem to orbit in reverse. Actually they jointly flow in a coiled path. Examining the varying distances from the sun and velocity changes keeps counterclockwise relevant. Can you process this flow near Jupiter in your program?

    regards,

    Paul Schroeder

      Dear Eckard

      Thank you for the reply...

      I was talking about SVM the Support Vector Machines in Regression Analysis for multivariable business forecasting. FT is a powerful tool I suppose it can be used....

      Your analysis is correct, fundamental is causality.

      Best Regards

      =snp

      Dear Eckard,

      I dont rate people low, give 10 or 9 or just refrain from rating that essay as a rule...

      Best Regards

      =snp

      Dear Eckard,

      Thank you for Nice logic

      Closed universe... logical analysis is one thing, Mathematically calculating on Dynamic Universe Model Sita is another.... Thats what I did.....

      35 years of working on Dynamic Universe Model without any support really hurts me. Now I came to fag end of life, why should I lower any person? I believe in God and Karma.... I did not yet gave any ranking yet to your essay. Please give me mail to snp.gupta@gmail.com, I will intimate you when I do that...

      I dont rate people low, give 10 or 9 or just refrain from rating that essay as a rule...

      Believe me somebody else did it...

      Best Regards

      Thank you Dear Declan Andrew Traill

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

      An interesting idea. I also think that the Universe can be modeled using linear equations based on Galilean principles. You might be interested to read my 2012 FQXi essay titled "A Classical Reconstruction of Relativity".

      The creation of Matter by light passing close to atomic nuclei is known to occur - pair production - but this is due to the strong electric field around, for example, a lead nucleus. Likewise electrons and positrons can mutually anihilate to produce gamma rays (light). There is a balance between both these types of events.

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

      Thank you, can you please send me a copy of paper and more details of pair production ...

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

      I think you have 'Red shifted' and 'Blue shifted' around the wrong way in you equations 32 and 33. A higher frequency would be a blue shift and a lower frequency would be a red shift.

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

      I noticed it. By mistake I sent older essay. FQXi puts older essay only.I put a corrected abstract, please see...

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

      Best regards

      =snp

      Dear Wilhelmus de Wilde

      Thank you for your nice appreciation....

      .............Your comments......

      I agree with all the points beginning with NO etc. Why ? Because I think that ALL of them were emergent phenomena in a past that applies to the emergent reality of an alo emergent agent, THEY ARE JUST ONE ILLUSION OF AN INFINITY NUMBER OF REALITY LOOPS. It is the result of time-interperetation of our limited consciousness. That is also the reason that our universe is looking ultimate fine-tuned. It is not useful to create a reality that is not perceived by an agent (in our case the agent is a human being).

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

      Yes correct, the agent who understands all these is agent....

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

      Your perception of reality is as you say a "singularity free tensor based math model".

      I can fully agree with that because any singularity will be behind the Planck area, so as an "entity" not part of emerging reality. The "math" part is the part of "thinking" the language of consciousness. I cannot follow you in the math part because mathematics are not my strongest point, but I assume that you will be right.

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

      Yes Math part is consciousness....

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

      Furthermore my perception is that in your own emergent unique reality this is YOUR finetuned explanation which is TRUE for you. It is YOUR "quantum reality loop". In middle ages there was no quantum mechanics and people had their TRUTH. In a million years when there are conscious agents that have the availability of other different senses and techniques in their OWN LOOP (where our history is placed in) will smile about us and our efforts. .

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

      Yes, they are quantum reality loops, we may not wait million years, but 400 or 500 years will be sufficient, so much software development is going on you see...

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

      But we are both sharing on our Subjective Simultaneity Sphere a lot of the same incoming data. I cannot but agree with the trgee cases you indicated. .

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

      Thank you so much...

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

      For ALL the questions that you are answering by DUM, you know already my answers, we are both right....

      I thank you for a well founded theory, that is is a valuable contribution to our thinking. .

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

      Thank you once again

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

      I esteemed you essay high with a rating and hope that you will do so also with mine.

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

      I am just doing the same for your esteemed essay.... Highest appreciation i am doing...

      Best regards

      =snp

      Dear Branko L Zivlak,

      Thank you and you are welcome to ask questions...

      The meteorology formations: cyclone, anticyclone, troughs, ridge and saddle you are asking are based on Fluid Mechanics, Heat and Gravity. The different formations in cosmology are based on Gravity, Universal Gravitation Force, Mass, Time and Distance. The laws of fluid mechanics are not applicable here as distance between star to star is in terms of light years. Heat and Brownian motion are not applicable here. For example the nearest star Proxima Centauri , which is at a distance of 4.5 Ly approx, will not show any heat on earth.

      The speeds and accelerations of masses are dependent on Gravity, Universal Gravitation Force, Mass, time and Distance only. I have link for an introduction.....

      https://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_15.html

      Hope this clarifies....

      You can have any more questions on my post, no problems..... You are welcome....

      Regards,

      =snp

      Dear Dr Diogenes,

      Thank you for the nice question.

      I think as you are basically Chemical Engineer and Bio Chemical Engineer.... Definitely you will have problems in understanding Cosmology, astrophysics and mathematics... Don't worry, I will explain you ... clear all your doubts...

      By the way...The topic here is "what is fundamental?"... Hope you don't mean I should beat around the bush discussing "what is fundamental", or discussing about the FQXi question ... "what is fundamental?"

      What I did is , I took a fundamental question of frequency shifting which is foundational to element formation....and energy to Mass conversion.... Is it not fundamental? You are a knowledgeable double doctorate, can you please tell me how many more papers you read on this energy to mass conversion.....?

      I know basic physics and the mathematics required to express the postulates of general relativity. I also know the essence of quantum mechanics and its basic equations and what they represent.

      Any way I strongly feel should not use bad words for the other peoples work especially when you don't understand, you ask questions about it, try to understand it....

      Best wishes to your essay sir, Hope you will read my paper once and ask doubts...

      Best

      =snp

      Hi Christophe Tournayre

      you said "I answered your comment in https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3029"..........But I could not find your answer.

      You said...."When I read your essay and if the universe behave as you described, the question that comes to my mind is: Before modern physics was discovered, where do ancient people thinking and actions fit into your theory?".................

      I will give one example about a temple of God Shiva in Telagana State, Near Hyderabad. It shows the shadow of God shiva linga, any time of day in a year. It is "Chaya Someswara Swamy temple, built around 1000 years back, uses interference of light 600 years before its invention by Newton.... Hope you will spend some time with wiki and Utube links below...

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

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nd0dditL5HY

      Best Regards

      =snp

      The style of your reply to Klauder caused me to look at

      https://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/

      I expected tangible serious arguments and less mere claims.

      You lost me.

      Fortunately I feel not obliged to rate your theory.

      Eckard Blumschein

      Dear Theodore St. John,

      I will have a look at your essay because I got to a similar judgement.

      Eckard Blumschein

      Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta

      How much is the acceleration between the galaxy and the void (I mean, the acceleration of zero does not exist)?

      Where can I see your Excel file with data and calculations or just the data for the stars in the Milky Way?

      With best wishes,

      Branko

      Dear Theodore St. John,

      Thank you for the nice support.

      CMB is starlight , Galaxy light etc... No bigbang generated microwave radiation. These Noble prizes are more of political nature

      I am working on No Black hole collision paper also...

      What about Blue shifted Galaxis?

      What are other points you are having still doubts , lets have some discussion

      Best Regards

      =snp

      Dear Paul Schroeder,

      Thank you for the kid supporting words......."

      Your paper includes a promising new solution to N body motion problems along with a fine relevant history of mass motions and locations. "

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

      First off you present frequency shifting in EM radiation. Let's see if I understand your 'EM radiation grazing near mass' by using a different perspective. A photon beam encounters a hydrogen atom in Earth's upper atmosphere. The wave structure of the photon interacts with the hydrogen wave structure, forming a more complex atom which settles lower in the atmosphere. Then another earth grazing photon combines its waves with the more complex atom adding further complexity. This continues until nitrogen, oxygen etc. are formed and the particle falls to earth. Mass is created. This collision process works better when the atom is moving toward the photon as the net motion is slower than c. It is c - u. On the other side of earth fewer interactions arise as the elements are moving away from the photons at speed u. The speed of any combination becomes c u and an atom is less likely to settle before it exits the atmosphere. This mass creation provides equilibrium as recycling occurs with the release by earth of heat and light.

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

      Not exactly that way Paul, a photon hitting atmosphere hydrogen.... cannot alter atomic structure. See my Nucleo Synthsis paper... You can get it from Dynamic Universe model Blog.

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

      Note that your close pass issue states frequency increase (red shifted), in your abstract, your introduction and cases 1 &2. This is confusing - inverted shift. The questions you answered within the paper are all about frequencies. But including photons is mostly a side extension of your Dynamic universe model and your formula 25.

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

      There was this error. FQXi don't change paper, I was on a travel, I posted it hurriedly. I did a correcting abstract after few days on this essay, please see...

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

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

      I do agree with your discussion of creation of mass via extreme blue shifting of light. I also like your dynamic model for masses. You discuss mass rotation and its influence on the flow of other bodies and on the speed of light. You are able with tensors to plot the logical flow of matter via your program SITA which applies rotational drives from N number of masses to an item/group. The program must address many drive factors. You delete dark matter by including all components of N. I arrived at similar thoughts by placing two equal masses near each other. They have to rotate or will be crashed together...................... Reply......................

      Correct

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

      The rotations must all be the same - counterclockwise . Opposite rotations will crash. The universe is a counterclockwise whirling flow. We can see it in our solar system. Solar rotation drives planetary revolutions and rotations. Apparent imperfections such as Venus rotation, the moons rotation and the 90 degree tilted axis of rotation of Uranus are explained by factors such as the placement of the rotational force. A most interesting situation is the high latitude small moons of Jupiter which seem to orbit in reverse. Actually they jointly flow in a coiled path. Examining the varying distances from the sun and velocity changes keeps counterclockwise relevant. Can you process this flow near Jupiter in your program?

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

      Not yet tried, I am planning to work it out soon.

      regards,

      =snp

      Dear Branko,

      I attached a file here. You can get all accelerations, Velocities and positions at that moment of of time, It was a simulation file. Not actual data was used.

      You can search internet, give me your mail id to send you, as higher sized attachments can not be added here.

      Please check and discuss...

      Thank you for your asking and your interest in Dynamic Universe model

      Best regardsAttachment #1: Vak_Branko_accl_Blue_shifted_Galaxies.xls

      Dear Satyavarupa,

      Thank you, I'll look at your essay. I've not found any mention of the Shapiro time delay of light, you say there have been no experiments relating to this kind of question. But there have, and the experimental results appeared to confirm standard theory. Best wishes, Jonathan

        snp:

        What is the link to the papers that compare the Dynamic Universe Model to actual observations?

        The STOE did this in STOE model of the universe http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1648

        I ask because I think it fails to fit data:

        Rotation curves are error?

        CMB(background radiation fits black body curve very, very well - not starlight.

        Other 10 observations of Pioneer anomaly (especially annual and diurnal variation) not accounted.

        Several other issues.

        Hodge