Alternative Models of Cosmology

The paper in the following link describes a new theory on the origin of our universe.

http://www.modelmechanics.org/2011universe.pdf

Also please visit my website for more papers on my theory:

http://www.modelmechanics.org/

Ken Seto

Welcome to http://vixra.org/

A New Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

A new physical model of our Universe, called Model Mechanics, has been formulated. The current state of our Universe as interpreted by Model Mechanics is as follows: Space isoccupied by a stationary, structured and elastic light-conducting medium called the EMatrix.A mass-bearing particle called the S-Particle is the only fundamental particle existsin our Universe. The different absolute motions of the S-Particles in the E-Matrix gives rise

to all the observed particles such as the electron and the different quarks. Also, the absolute motions of the S-Particles or S-Particle Systems give rise to all the forces and processes of nature. Model Mechanics leads to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity(DTG) and DTG unites with the electromagnetic and nuclear forces naturally [1, 2]. It alsoleads to a new theory of relativity called Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). IRT includes

SRT as a subset. However, unlike SRT, the equations of IRT are valid in all

environments....including gravity.

In cosmology, Model Mechanics provides natural solutions to the following problematic cosmological observations of the current theories:

1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of the universe disagrees with the predictions.

2. The observed rotational curves of galaxies disagree with the predictions of current theories.

3. The observed paths of travel of the spacecrafts Pioneer 10 and 11 disagree with the predictions of current theories.

4. The observable universe appears to have a much larger horizon than it is allowed by its observed age.

5. The GRT description of gravity gives rise to the observed flatness problem of the universe.

6. Dark matter....this is the free S-Particles that are not in orbiting motions around the E-Strings.

7. Dark energy....this is a repulsive effect arises from the interacting objects following the divergent structure of the E-Matrix.

The above Model Mechanical description of our current Universe leads to a new interpretation for the origin of our Universe. This new interpretation provides explanation for the following mysteries of our universe:

1. How the electrons and up quarks were produced during the Big Bang.

2. Why is there a preponderance of matter over anti-matter in our universe.

A paper entitled "The Origin of the Universe as Interpreted by Model Mechanics" is available in the following link:

http://www.modelmechanics.org/2011universe.pdf

hi

I am interested in astronomy ,and I knew from some sources that there are about 7000 blueshifted galaxies,but another source said that the number is only 100.

so if possible if any one is an expert in this field please tell me which number is correct.

best regards

Peter

I did not see your post , orelse I would have replied it long ago...

I am showing below that two quasars are blue shifted...

see :

http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8826339039574834163#editor/target=post;postID=3764090022352257683;onPublishedMenu=overview;onClosedMenu=overview;postNum=22;src=postname

or

http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8826339039574834163#editor/target=post;postID=3318178562691887961;onPublishedMenu=overview;onClosedMenu=overview;postNum=18;src=postname

For the text portion

I. The first Redshifted Quasar 3C273:

The author Schmidt in 1963 published the first paper on a quasar declaring it as red shifted [1]. He said:

"Spectra of the star were taken with the prime-focus spectrograph at the 200-in. telescope with dispersions of 400 and 190 ﾃ... per mm. They show a number of broad emission features on a rather blue continuum. The most prominent features, which have widths around 50 ﾃ..., are, in order of strength, at 5632, 3239, 5792, 5032 ﾃ.... These and other weaker emission bands are listed in the first column of Table 1."

He concluded that this quasi stellar object now well known as Quasar. It is the nuclear region of a galaxy with a cosmological red-shift of 0.158, corresponding to an apparent velocity of 47,400 km/sec. The distance would be around 500 megaparsecs, and the diameter of the nuclear region would have to be less than 1 kiloparsec.

II. The first Redshifted Quasar 3C273 is that Blue shifted?

The Table 1 shown below embeds the table 1 of Dr Schmidt in the first 4 columns. The remaining columns show how the quasar is blue shifted for the same wavelengths. I.e., the same wave lengths of his observations were used in this paper to show this same quasar 3C273 is Blue shifted. To support further on this, the spectrum observations made by other three more authors were also discussed in this paper. The checking of the first Redshifted Quasar 3C273 for a possibility of blue shift was tried mainly because of the observation of Dr. Schmidt saying this Quasars 3C273's spectrum is in the "blue continuum" [1]. The Quasars are known for some of the irregularities in the spectrum like some spectral lines match exactly with the some elemental lines with some blue / redshift ratio while some other prominent lines don't match for the same ratio.

Basically many astronomers in their published papers said that sodium line, Carbon line CIV etc., are blue shifts other lines. There are observed variation in quasars in the lines w.r.t other lines in the known spectrums. If the quasars are taken as blue shifted such variation will be very very less or even cease to exist. To explain such phenomenon Bigbang based cosmologists take the help of million light years length of sodium with a velocity of jet at 50000000 meters / second in the case of this 3C273. How such length of sodium can exist I don't know.

Many of these papers talk about such blue shifts. These references can be found at ADS [2,3]. For this, go to ADS search page try searching title and abstract with keywords "Blue shifted quasars". If you search with "and's i.e., 'Blue and Shifted and Galaxies" [use "and" option not with "or "option] you will find 248 papers in ADS search. I did not go through all of them. Some of the papers will be discussed here later in this paper.

In the Table 1, in addition to the original values given by Dr. M. Schmidt, four new columns were added. These columns show the possible blue shift of '(-0.143122)' of the Quasar 3C273 and the resulting wavelengths after the blue shift. SDSS website gives different possible wavelengths in angstrom units in their webpage on 'Algorithms - Emission and absorption line fitting' [4]. These wavelengths were chosen as they will be more authentic and accurate. Please note there are some slight differences in the numerical values in wavelengths as given by Schmidt and SDSS webpage.

Table 1. Wave-lengths and Identifications as given by Dr. M. Schmidt

Table 1: Observations in this paper

l

l/1.158

l0

l / 0.856878

l0 from SDSS

3239

2797

2798

Mg II

3780.00

H_theta+19

3799

4595

3968

3970

Hg

5362.49

Mg+186

5177

Note 1

4753

4104

4102

H d

5546.88

Mg+370

5177

Note 1

5032

4345

4340

H g

5872.48

Na-23

5895

5200-5415

4490-4675

6068-6319

Na-OI

Note 2

5632

4864

4861

H b

6572.70

H_alpha+8

6565

5792

5002

5007

[O III]

6759.42

SII+27

6732

6005-6190

5186-5345

7008-7223

blue continuum

Note 3

6400-6510

5527-5622

7468-7597

blue continuum

Note 3

Note 1: Later measurements of this QUASAR 3C273 at wavelengths 4595 and 4793 show dips or flatter curves instead of peaks (absorption spectra instead of emission spectra).

1. Dr. M. Schmidt's paper "3C 273: A Star-like Object with Large Red-shift", published in Nature 197, 1040 (1963)

http://www.nature.com/physics/looking-back/schmidt/index.html

2.http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-abs_connect?db_key=AST&db_key=PRE&qform=AST&arxiv_sel=astro-ph&arxiv_sel=cond-mat&arxiv_sel=cs&arxiv_sel=gr-qc&arxiv_sel=hep-ex&arxiv_sel=hep-lat&arxiv_sel=hep-ph&arxiv_sel=hep-th&arxiv_sel=math&arxiv_sel=math-ph&arxiv_sel=nlin&arxiv_sel=nucl-ex&arxiv_sel=nucl-th&arxiv_sel=physics&arxiv_sel=quant-ph&arxiv_sel=q-bio&sim_query=YES&ned_query=YES&adsobj_query=YES&aut_logic=OR&obj_logic=OR&author=&object=&start_mon=&start_year=&end_mon=&end_year=&ttl_logic=AND&title=blue+shifted+quasars&txt_logic=AND&text=blue+shifted+quasars&nr_to_return=200&start_nr=1&jou_pick=ALL&ref_stems=&data_and=ALL&group_and=ALL&start_entry_day=&start_entry_mon=&start_entry_year=&end_entry_day=&end_entry_mon=&end_entry_year=&min_score=&sort=SCORE&data_type=SHORT&aut_syn=YES&ttl_syn=YES&txt_syn=YES&aut_wt=1.0&obj_wt=1.0&ttl_wt=0.3&txt_wt=3.0&aut_wgt=YES&obj_wgt=YES&ttl_wgt=YES&txt_wgt=YES&ttl_sco=YES&txt_sco=YES&version=1

3.http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/2012/05/blue-shifted-quasars-in-ads.html

4.Algorithms - Emission and absorption line fitting of SDSS http://www.sdss.org/dr7/algorithms/speclinefits.html

INTRODUCING NEXUS: A QUANTUM THEORY OF SPACE-TIME, GRAVITY AND THE QUANTUM VACUUM

Hie

It is well known that it is notoriously difficult to quantize gravity. I have proposed an alternative approach to Quantum Gravity which has provided answers to fundamental questions such as Dark Matter and Dark Energy without resorting to exotic particles and hitherto unknown scalar fields. You can download my paper from this website www.scirp.org/journal/ijaa and provide a constructive critique

Best regards

Stuart Marongwe

Mutasim, (& Stuart)

There are ~7000 blueshifted galaxies, most in two groups nearby and around a plane tilted wrt the Milky Way. Ave velocity is 200km/s, highest 8000km/s. Many are quite small (satellites). There are many more with a blushifted half (rotating towards us).

The full list can be found on the JPL's NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED). A good analysis from 2009 is here; Blogspot; Fitted Planes.

The peculiar pattern is consistent with the predictions of a cyclic cosmological model which also predicts the CMB peculiar anisotropies, just confirmed by Planck, described in a model of 'discrete fields' (DFM) and in my essay here three years ago (2020 vision). Similar cyclic cosmologies have been suggested by Dicke, Peebles, Einstein, Penrose and Turok among others, many which the findings support, resolving the 'pre Big Bang' problem.

Stuart,

I'll try to find some time for a quick look and comment. Do check out and cemment on my well supported essay this year revealing an apparently powerful QM aspect of the DFM. http://fqxi.org/community/forum/category/31419?sort=community 'The IQbit'.

Best wishes

Peter

I am checking it now. Its good to share different views of reality.

Stuart

Isn't a stationary light-conducting matrix at variance with Michelson 1881 and Michelson and Morley 1887?

Eckard

MOND ACCELERATION DERIVED FROM NEXUS

Here is something that is bound to raise your eyebrows. If you read the published version of my paper you will find that I derive Hubbles law from Nexus in form v=H/k which is the induced constant rotational velocity by a graviton (Dark Matter).H is the Hubble constant and k is graviton wave vector in the nth quantum state. it can also be expressed as v=H/nK where K is the ground state wavevector K=H/c and c=speed of light.

Therefore the acceleration induced by a graviton in the nth state on a test particle is v^2xk or H^2/nK. Thus the highest induced acceleration is by the ground state graviton where n=1. This is H^2/K = Hc ~ MOND acceleration.

Can two electrons exchange a photon at unlimited distances?

This paper examines what the universe would look like if there was a distance limit to the quantum electrodynamic absorption and emission of photons.

It uses Hubble's limit as the limit and the results are a very plausible alternate history of the universe.

http://monadpad.com/bigbang.pdf

I would like to propose an alternative model of the origin and evolution of the universe. It starts from the assumption that the universe is finite with a spacetime boundary. In the Big Bang model we implicitly assume the existence of a time boundary. The general theory of relativity introduces the concept of spacetime so that time and space do not have a separate independent existence. This implies the existence of a space boundary as well as a time boundary.

All that exists in the universe lies with this spacetime boundary so it makes no sense to talk about "before the beginning" or "outside of the space boundary". It is the expansion of space at the boundary which is the cause of the general expansion of space which is observed. Going back in time towards time zero in this model means that we are contracting towards a zero volume, zero energy universe which is more satisfactory than the hot big bang singularity which proposes higher and higher energy densities as you approach time zero.

In this expanding universe the total energy must remain at zero so that the change in spacetime curvature associated with the expansion of space must lead to matter formation. Another way of looking at this is to consider the Schwarzschild relationship between the amount of mass in a region and its radius: r = 2Gm/c2. As the universe expands there is a requirement for the formation of matter arising from the gravitational potential energy of space.

This matter formation appears from observations to have taken place when the universe was 378,000 years old since the cosmic microwave background radiation has a redshift of z = 1,100. In this model the CMBR is directly associated with matter formation. The process of galaxy formation is proposed as the initial formation of galactic black holes due to the release of tension in the fabric of spacetime. Then star formation follows as a result of the galactic black-hole formation. The material in the disk or sphere of the galaxy causes the motion of stars in the galaxies to be as observed. No dark matter. No dark energy.

This idea is explained a little more fully in:

universe

Richard

The website link in the previous post did not work:

This one does:

Universe

The document is also available at:

The evolution of the universe

Richard

Richard,

I may reply more fully later as I have myself being fooling around with this idea.

You said, "...Changes in spacetime curvature can lead to matter formation with the total energy of the universe remaining at zero".

One of my proposals is that the matter-energy content of the universe has been increasing with its radius. Since increase in radius translates to reducing spacetime curvature which you propose can lead to matter formation this appears to agree with my thinking.

You did not consider another guide to our cosmological beginnings which is thermodynamics. If the second law applies, then in the beginning entropy must be zero, which also agrees with your model's "in which energy density tends to zero as time tends to zero". In agreement with the third law, temperature too will be zero at time zero even if hot immediately thereafter.

Lastly, if you add an infinitesimal drop or fluctuation in energy to a system at absolute zero, i.e. T = 0, what could happen considering the thermodynamic equation dS = dE/T?

My calculation indicates an initial temperature 1032K in accord with the Big bang model and an increase in entropy to an equilibrium value which seems to tend towards infinity.

Akinbo

Hi Akinbo,

In the spacetime boundary model, spacetime is defined to exist within the boundary so the origin point of time zero, volume zero does not lie within the defined universe. We can talk about an evolution from any point within the spacetime boundary but at time zero, volume zero the rate of passage of time is stopped so that no event could occur.

Now the way we have to treat the concept of energy in this closed system of the universe is to consider a conservation law which includes mass, energy and spacetime curvature. The equations of general relativity equating mass energy distribution to spacetime curvature can be turned into a conservation law. The total of mass, energy and spacetime curvature must always equate to zero.

At a time before matter formation we have an expanding empty space due to the expansion at the boundary. Before matter formation we do not have any meaning to the concept of temperature or any forms of energy related to matter so we have an expanding universe where the only present energy form is the changing spacetime curvature due to the expansion at the boundary.

As described in the document The evolution of the universe this ultimately must lead to matter formation to balance the total energy equation. As I see it the laws of thermodynamics would only start to apply when matter exists within in the universe. The cosmic microwave background radiation was emitted during the matter formation era and has a redshift of z =1,100. This implies that the initial period during which there was no matter within the universe lasted approximately 378,000 years.

Can we apply the laws of thermodynamics to a galaxy formation era in which galaxies are formed directly from the stored energy of spacetime curvature? Before any galaxy formation event we would have zero entropy and zero energy and zero temperature. After the formation of a galaxy we can give meaning to the thermodynamic concepts of energy, entropy and temperature.

If we exclude energy components due to spacetime curvature from our energy definition for the purposes of thermodynamic calculations then the galaxy formation event would appear as a sudden jump in energy and an increase in entropy. The evolution of the universe from a thermodynamic perspective can be viewed as a continuing process of energy release from spacetime towards the formation of mass and energy with a corresponding increase in entropy.

Richard

Richard,

From your paper: "As the universe continued to expand the mass of each galaxy will then increase", "The implication of the spacetime boundary model of the universe is that there is a definite relationship between the volume of the universe and the mass contained within the universe. This relationship is modelled using the Schwartzchild Radius", "Taking the boundary of the universe to be at the Schwartzchild radius implies a linear relationship between the mass in the universe and the radius of the universe following the initial formation of galaxies"...

I cannot but agree with your model. You may want to view my humble contributions on this A and B. A "little voice" tells me we are right.

Akinbo

Akinbo,

Thank you for taking the time to look at my paper and comment. I had a look at your paper A to see the different approaches that arrived at a similar conclusion.

The main starting point for the spacetime boundary model has been an instinctive rejection of the finite with no boundary hypothesis underlying the big bang theory. How can a finite universe with an increasing volume have no space boundary? I have read all the explanations of this and none of them make sense to me.

So I adopted a finite plus spacetime boundary assumption to see where it leads. This first thing that this does is to invalidate the cosmological principle since a universe with a space boundary could not be spatially homogeneous and isotropic. This means that the Friedmann equations cannot be used as these equations assume that the universe is spatially homogeneous and isotropic.

However, the advantage of the space boundary hypothesis is that it gives us an explanation for the expansion of space and also it allows the consideration of variation in spacetime curvature as a component of the total energy equation comprising mass energy and spacetime curvature. I do not think one could apply this approach to total energy conservation if the assumption is that the universe is finite with no boundary and spatially homogeneous and isotropic.

There is also a different perspective on the nature of mass and spacetime which fits well with the spacetime boundary model.

This can be found at:

The unification of physics

The nature of mass

Richard

I updated the paper on the unification of physics and its new address is:

The unification of physics

Richard