Science > Physics > Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
24 Mar 2007 04:41:16 PM |
| Object: |
Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe |
Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe.
By Louis Nielsen, Denmark http://www.rostra.dk/louis
The discovery of the accelerating Universe could be an indication of a
cosmic decreasing gravity.
Observations of supernovae, belonging to distant galaxies, show that
they are situated at distances that are greater than what would be
expected according to current cosmological models. This must mean that
the galaxies in question have moved faster than expected.
The analysis of the observations shows that the rate of expansion of
the Universe appears to vary with position. That is, more distant
objects are receding from us faster than nearby ones.
That is, the expansion of the Universe was faster in earlier epochs
than now.
To save the traditional cosmological models the scientists try to
introduce different solutions, supported by new and old effects, such
as 'dark matter', 'dark energy' and the re-introduction of the
'cosmological constant' in Einstein's general field equations, etc.
But maybe the accelerated expansion of the Universe is a consequence
of a cosmic decrease of gravity.
According to my theory "Quantum Cosmology with Decreasing Gravity"
Newton's
gravitational 'constant' G is a decreasing quantity. (Read more in my
treatise).
The decrease of G with cosmic time T is (in the continuous
approximation) given by the equation:
(1) (1/G)* (dG/dT) = - (1/3)*(1/T) (dG/dT is the time derivative
of G)
In (1) T is the actual age of the Universe.
We note that G does not decrease linearly with the age of the
Universe. The relative decrease of G had been faster when the Universe
was younger. When the Universe came into being, during the first
cosmic quantum time intervals, G decreased extremely fast,
corresponding to what in the standard cosmological theory is called an
'inflation phase'. In our epoch the decrease of G is very slowly, so
slow that it has not hitherto been possible to measure directly.
If we could measure the relative decrease of G with very high
precision then the age of the Universe could be calculated from
equation (1).
Due to a decrease of the cosmic gravitational forces, the distance
between two gravitating mass systems, for example two galaxies, will
increase as the Universe ages.
As the relative decrease of Newton's gravitational 'constant' is not a
linearly function of time, this is also not the case for the increase
in distance between two gravitational attracting systems.
If we assume that the variable Hubble parameter H has connection to
the decreasing gravitational 'constant' according to the relation:
(2) H = - (1/G)*(dG/dT) = (1/3)* (1/T)
we get for the radial velocity v of an object the alternative Hubble-
relation:
(3) v = - (dG/dT)*(1/G)*D = (1/(3*T))*D
In (3) D is the distance to the object.
According to (3) v depends on both the distance to the object and the
actual age of the Universe when the light was emitted.
As our knowledge about the physical conditions of objects in the
Universe is mainly obtained by analysis of the light emitted by the
objects, it is also necessary to take into account the gravitational
conditions when the light was emitted. For instance the gravitational
shift of wavelength depends of the strength of the gravitational field
in the position from which the light is emitted.
Best regards
Louis Nielsen, Denmark
http://www.rostra.dk/louis
.
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe |
25 Mar 2007 05:30:04 PM |
|
|
wrote:
According to (3) v depends on both the distance to the object and the
actual age of the Universe when the light was emitted.
As our knowledge about the physical conditions of objects in the
Universe is mainly obtained by analysis of the light emitted by the
objects, it is also necessary to take into account the gravitational
conditions when the light was emitted. For instance the gravitational
shift of wavelength depends of the strength of the gravitational field
in the position from which the light is emitted.
Probe seeks changes in fine-structure constant (Mar 23)
http://physicsweb.org/article/news/11/3/18
Cosmologists in the US have proposed a new way to measure the
fine-structure constant as it was some 13 billion years ago -- and see
if its value differed from that measured today. The method, which has
yet to be verified using astronomical observations, involves measuring
how hydrogen atoms absorbed photons from the cosmic microwave
background. It could provide further evidence that this fundamental
constant of nature -- which defines the strength of the electromagnetic
interaction -- is not actually a constant after all (Phys. Rev. Lett. 98
11301).
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe |
25 Mar 2007 09:02:38 PM |
|
|
Electromatic interaction is just wave orbit timming.
Like charge is orbit against wave and oposit charge is wave with the
orbit.
Concutivity is orbit to orbit with te least direction change .
Space is not expanding , time is expanding as lines in time are
dispalced in pices in another direction .
You might think time is this o that but its Gods active force.
You are the center of a time line in evry direction . A point in one
direction is not at the same time as the same point in the other
direction.
No two points in space are at the same time.
You cant react with a photon at c with no wavelength ..its a strait
line.
But as the atoms parts orbit they chop lines up into dots and send the
energy it sideplaced but did not react with in another direction..in
time.
Time is the thing that overlapped.
God ejected 1 photon from evry point in space.
time colided with time is what taoulk place.
the stars outside the universe shine photons IN TIME ..at c.
c is multiversal.
No two photons can be in the same place at the same time ,,,but they are
all stait lines .
Time became the strait line .
At the edge of te universe and passed you as a strait line ..
Time is displaced and changed directions.
Time its self does have a direction .
Change time dont change time ..it changes the energy exchange .
Mass is the energy exchange in time .
It displaces time ,,in effect energy rates.
energy is not the veritable factor befor a BB.
Gravity is not yet a factor befor the BB that could not take place.
Time at some point overlapped and more energy is in the same place at
the same time.
Mass is a product of time and disasembeld by time.
at c ,,,shure you can go faster then c ..but ot in this time ...getting
to c will out you in the next universe as soon as c .
But you dont have time.
Time is what changed ,,,not energy not anything else.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe |
24 Mar 2007 10:07:14 PM |
|
|
Gravity dont decrease ..unless mass does.
accelerateted is overlapped time.
at the edge of the universe time is a strait line .
hubble time overlapped.
The iniverse dont acceletate ...its time making this curve in what looks
like speeds.
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?=" |
|
| Title: T.J., You should think in terms of energy, not speeds or angles. |
24 Mar 2007 11:10:25 PM |
|
|
Hi T.J., You wrote something like:
" The accelerateted expansioin of spacetime is overlapped time.
at the edge of the universe time is a strait line.
Hubble time overlapped. The Universe doesn't acceletate...
It's time making this curve in what looks like speeds. ".
You should think in terms of energy, not speeds or angles.
The known Universe is redshifting, losing energy, getting " spent ".
We're just part of that... spending, consuming.
***** is entropy personified, it's " spent " energy, a clock tick.
Consuming more just means dying that much sooner.
Gravitational fields are a function of pressure and density,
not just mass. Newton modeled it has a distance from a point mass.
Louis Nielsen seems quite on target to me,
as it allows for the ever-Minkowskian Universe we have observed
while, at the same time, explaining the accruel of spacetime
as cosmic energy gets " spent ".
i.e. Cosmic energy has redshifted,
diffused into the fifth spatial dimension,
which could be called " mass ",
e.g. the " r = 2 * M ", in Planck units.
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: T.J., You should think in terms of energy, not speeds or angles. |
25 Mar 2007 05:05:11 PM |
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Mar_24_10_@Cotse.NET...
Hi T.J., You wrote something like:
Did you type all that in your self or do you use a random word generator
like Brad Guth?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: T.J., You should think in terms of energy, not speeds orangles. |
25 Mar 2007 05:01:50 PM |
|
|
No enegry is lost .
red shift is an energy exchange .
Yet the same energy was ejected ,,not less.
Time is the only componet of the energy exchange that changed.
No two points are at the same time.
Do you think that atom ejected that photon at c ? shure it did..
But 13 billion light years away it will take a week for the photon to
eject.
That photon ejected at c and will pass you at c at what wave length ?
The star in front of it we cant see ,,it left this visible universe .
But its photon ejected at c and passes you at c. That time wount react
with your time.
The nuecleus orbits will cut these lines in time up into dots. The pice
displaced changed direction Thats TIME that changed directions and is
gravity.
Gravity is a push to less energy.
Pushed down the energy slope .
orbiting atom parts change orbits in te energy slope and then the atoms
canter of mass is not at the center of gravity and the atom pushes its
center of gravity to the center of mass.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Black" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe |
24 Mar 2007 08:01:31 PM |
|
|
On Mar 24, 2:41 pm, wrote:
Cosmic Decreasing Gravity and the Accelerated Universe.
By Louis Nielsen, Denmark http://www.rostra.dk/louis
The discovery of the accelerating Universe could be an indication of a
cosmic decreasing gravity.
Observations of supernovae, belonging to distant galaxies, show that
they are situated at distances that are greater than what would be
expected according to current cosmological models.
You call the models without a cosmological constant or dark energy
"current models." The discovery in question is old enough now that I
don't think that term is accurate anymore.
Observations of supernovae give us the apparent (measured) and
absolute (inferred from other measurements) luminosities of the
event. The ratio of the two depends on the current distance to the
object, and on the geometry of the universe. CMB observations show
that space is pretty close to flat. We can also observe the redshift
of the supernovae, which tells us how much the universe has expanded
between then and now. Combining these, we can calculate the distance
to the supernova when it exploded and how far away it is now. Your
statement above is a bit ambiguous, but it is correct if you're
talking about the current distance being unexpectedly large.
This must mean that
the galaxies in question have moved faster than expected.
Yes, if you mean they have moved faster than expected in the time
between the light emission and the present day.
The analysis of the observations shows that the rate of expansion of
the Universe appears to vary with position. That is, more distant
objects are receding from us faster than nearby ones.
That sounds like Hubble's Law, which we've known a long time before
the supernova measurements.
That is, the expansion of the Universe was faster in earlier epochs
than now.
It's hard to tell what you mean because you don't specify whether
you're talking about the recession rate at constant distance, or the
recession rate for a given object. The observations indicate that the
recession rate of any given galaxy is currently increasing.
To save the traditional cosmological models the scientists try to
introduce different solutions, supported by new and old effects, such
as 'dark matter', 'dark energy' and the re-introduction of the
'cosmological constant' in Einstein's general field equations, etc.
But maybe the accelerated expansion of the Universe is a consequence
of a cosmic decrease of gravity.
It's not enough to decrease the gravitation that ought to be slowing
down the recession rates of galaxies; you'd have to actually make it
reverse sign. If you did this by changing G there would be an obvious
problem.
According to my theory "Quantum Cosmology with Decreasing Gravity"
Newton's
gravitational 'constant' G is a decreasing quantity. (Read more in my
treatise).
Theories of gravity where G can change are nothing new, and you should
avoid the term "my theory" anyway.
--
Jim E. Black
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
