Maybe space isn't expanding at all!

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by JukriS, Sep 27, 2014.

  1. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210


    The soft cover book is out of print since 1997, only one run of 600 books of 136 pages with pictures, but you can still buy a copy for $9.00 (I think I still have copies in my attic.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) Hope to have a new version printed in 2015, but it will remain online free. The online version is generally kept up to date.

    I run a foundation that solicits grants for our research. It's called the Pantheory Research Organization. Research is ongoing as long as the funding lasts. Most of the funding, however, still has come from my personal finances which are also limited. Usually just myself and another person works on a project. Hopefully with bigger grants the projects can become bigger and more well-known. Here is one of our latest papers:

    http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/32603/19463

    Aside from this lifelong work, most of my job time until semi-retirement has involved contract Engineering work, which was my bread-and-butter profession. Now most of my additional income involves Real Estate investments.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    I think you have to go with less well-known individuals. The most well-known theorists are the biggest targets for all kinds of promotions. They become battle hardened. I intend to work with astronomers who might have interest and can test my equations. If continued interest results I can broaden my base. I also have planned experiments to test my theories if/when I can get the financing. Some expected results would be quite contrary to mainstream predictions. If so this would provide a lot more ears for my model and more probably grant funding.

    You and I both talked to one of those TOE guys together here in this forum. I liked a lot of his ideas because they were similar to my own.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    He claimed what he was saying was fact, however, which is not the best approach for any theory promoter IMO, not even of mainstream theory.

    Thanks for your nice note concerning the misspelling of my name. It's just the name-calling which one has to endure from time to time, when expressing alternative concepts/theories, like I do.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2014
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    In other words you are an amateur cosmologist and physicist.
    Got it.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Or inotherwords dyw , your just behind the times

    Ahh.... Never mind
     
  8. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    How so?
    Or is this just another inane attack on me?
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Ahh... On you , and some others here , lets face it , your ridged in your guided , by others thinking
     
  10. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    Wrong again.
    Please show that Forrest Noble's "ideas" have any validity.
    Please, also, show that he's not (as he claimed and I disputed) an amateur.
     
  11. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I mentioned no one
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Really, you are so paranoid!
    By your thinking, we should never listen to our parents and teachers as a kid, never read a book, ignore all those obviously more wise and Intelligent then you.
    Fact is river, you and I and all of us, learn by absorbing other people's ideas and thoughts, and the results of their implementation.
    As I have told you before, there is nothing wrong with people having alternative hypothesis on cosmology, but there is plenty wrong with paranoid people, stooping to ignore mainstream cosmology, for no other reason, then it is mainstream.
    And by the same token it is foolish to believe everyone that has an alternative idea is correct, simply because he thought of it himself.
    It is factually impossible to be a lone independent thinker, not reading, not taking notice of giants of the past, and pretend or delude yourself that you are going to achieve greatness.
    Most all cosmological ideas were at one stage "alternative thinking"...They then ran the gauntlet, underwent peer review and advanced to mainstream thinking.

    You have a lot to learn.
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    The fact is that I'm open to reading about different theories about anything

    And who is to say who is more intelligent than anybody else , really

    There are many , many , many , extremely brilliant people who slip through the cracks of our educational system because they are BORED

    There is no imagination of different ideas , thinking , understanding , approach to the problem , on this website

    And when it does happen , they are torn apart by people who have not read the book , its preposterous

    The imagination is confined in the parameters of the past , its nonsense and detrimental now and to our children of the future
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2014
  14. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Conformity is the imagination of the techs. Of science
     
  15. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    There is no point in having " alternative " general thread if all the responses are ill informed

    Read this or that book , then lets discuss point by point or page by page

    This I can accept

    Otherwise I won't
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543



    Rubbish.....Some may slip through, but by the same token [an issue to keep on avoiding] If anyone comes to a science forum such as this, and claims to rewrite 20th/21st century physics, or claims to have a Toe, that is indeed preposterous.
    In plain simple language, I don't believe anyone with a genuine alternative hypothesis is going to come to a science forum, and yes, if he or she does, he or she can expect to "run the gauntlet"just as present accepted incumbent theories have.
    You have just reinforced my original statement about your paranoia.
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543

    You have it arse up. It's not the responses that are ill-informed...It's the original hypothesis [or ToE] that is ill informed, and in most cases, so ill informed, that no detailed reading of it is needed.
    [Check out the latest by Hans [ Jukris] Christain Anderson.
     
  18. JukriS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    Stephen Hawking dont understund expanding densers / concentrations



    Every system have inside movement / energy / pushing force and which that pushing force every system can get more and more movement from outside, because it can slow down that movement / energy / pushing force from outside.

    And with that new energy / movement / pushing force it can get more and more movement which coming from outside!

    Of course some inside movement pushing same time out and this is pushing force also and with that pushing force expanding densers / concentration / condensations can push away other expanding systems!

    Same time there is all behind movement and this all behind particle / denser dont expandind any more and thats why inside visible universe expanding denser moving all a time more and more all behind movement / energy / pushing force!

    There is other reason also why there is moving all a time more and more all behind denser / movement / energy and that i already told some of my videos!

    So, i tell many things why and how visible universe particle / densers expanding!

    people who believe, there is expanding space, dont tell for us anything at all!

    They dont tell what is dark energy! They dont tell where is coming from! they dont tell what happening for expanding space when it expanding!

    Love
     
  19. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    Yes, this is the basis of my own theory also. Space is not expanding, instead matter is very slowly getting smaller. Space just appears to be expanding from our relative perspective. The classification of such theories is called scale-changing theories. There have been a number of them. It only takes a small decrease in the size of matter over time to produce the galactic redshifts we observe. I calculated this rate to be about a 2.2% reduction in diameter every billion years. This rate is not very much or very fast. In my model the decrement, the part of matter being discarded, becomes a part of the background field, which we presently call the Zero Point Field. In time this field creates new matter from the lost portions of existing matter. This creates a relatively constant density of matter in the universe. Both the conservation of matter and energy are preserved, and accordingly the observable universe is neither expanding nor contracting. This kind of model is called a steady-state model. But unlike Hoyle's et. al. well-known model, space would not be expanding as in his model and the BB model since galactic redshifts are explained by the changing size of matter. If you follow this new creation of matter process backward in time you end up with just one point particle similar to the BB model, to start the universe. But unlike the BB model, the process of evolution forward in time, is very slow and simple. The universe would instead by countless trillions of years older instead of just 13.8 billion years, but not infinite in age or extension.

    Of course no inflation is needed and the model explains observations readily without any need for dark matter or dark energy. I've already written a paper providing evidence and explaining observationally, and mathematically why dark energy does not exist which I have posted again below. The non-existence of baryonic dark matter is even easier to explain and understand IMO, also with supporting mathematics and plentiful observational evidence contrary to existing gravitational models and mathematics.

    http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/32603/19463
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2014
  20. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Please explain how this decrease in size can result in a redshift.
     
  21. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    You don't really expect a real answer, do you?
     
    origin likes this.
  22. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Just curious to see what the response is....
     
  23. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    There are three generally equal factors involved. The primary reason related to this thread is that space would measure to be expanding from our perspective using our shrinking rulers. This relates to the measured lengths of EM waves. I think it is easier for most people to understand that from a relative perspective, shrinking matter and expanding space are identical and would appear the same to us. There are mathematical difference, however, that I explained in my above posted paper concerning the measurement of space and distances.

    The second reason for redshifting of galactic light is that matter in the past would have been relatively larger. Larger atoms would produce longer wavelengths as long as proportions of everything remains the same over time. Longer wavelengths are redder. The third equal reason is that the rate of time in the past would accordingly have been slower. The frequency of EM radiation is wave-lenghts per unit of time, the second. If a second was slower in the past then there would have been more wavelengths per second of the same wavelength, which would be a higher frequency, hence distant wavelengths would measure to be redshifted because the rate of time would be faster now.

    This is the explanation according to my model, but other "shrinking-matter" models would at least include the first one or two reasons. If you use a search engine for "shrinking matter, cosmology" you will find all kinds of discussions on it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2014

Share This Page