SIMPLE MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE

If you want to see a simple model of the universe, backed up by observations published by others, look at the pages on my web site at:

http://inventing-solutions.com

You may be surprised by the removal of many of the mysteries and the identification of two critical assumptions.

Sol

It's lovely.
But why limit yourself to reformulating Newtonian gravity?
Have you considered a reformulation of Einstein's equation instead?

Einstein covers many aspects of physics other than gravity and very successfuly.

However Einstein was led by his opinion or wish that the universe is stable and thus introduced the Cosmological constant.

He call this his greated blunder after Hubble measures red shift increasing with star distance and that apparently the universe was expanding. Hubble later said that the assumption the red shift measured velocity may not be accurate.

Someone else may wish to reevaluate Einstein's contribution to the Newton theory of gravity but I believe that only a generalization including a minor increase with distances outside our solar system is needed.

Including the generalization into the interpretation of gravity lensing might be considered, but the accuracy of such observations will be complicated by other factors such as the distribution of related matter.

Probably only one form of dark matter-black holes-could be used as a energy source, using the well-known Penrose process. But then who knows-theoretical physicists are well known for coming up with weird new hypothetical sources of energy (after all, Dirac conceived of the anti-particle whilst developing a relativistic wave equation for the electron).

Relating stuff:

http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/redshift.htm


Quando propositio verificatur pro rebus, si duae res sufficiunt ad eius veritatem, superfluum est ponere tertiam

Thanks for the reference on the red shift.

My interpretation of the red shift is that it contains several components only seriously observed outside our solar system.

One of my points is the understanding that Newton's law of gravity is based upon good explainations of observations of mass attraction within our solar system.
However when distances become small (such as within atoms) other forces (nuclear) become apparent. Einstein modified the application of Newton's law of gravity for use in conjunction of the motion of mercury -

When the distances become very large, comperable to the diameter of galaxies, (about 3 kiloparsec) the extensions of the gravitational constant appears and the gravitational constant in an extended form -
G = G(newton) + A*r + b*r*r
is able to explain the observations of Zwicky and the later observations of Rubin which are incorrectly advanced to support massive amounts of dark matter. In addition to showing its existance by supposed gravitational effects, this supposed dark matter does not emit light, but even more surprising does not reflect light from nearby stars nor cast shadows (eclipse) across visable entities such as is the case in our solar system with planets and moons that do not emit light but influence light.

Another contribution to the red shift is related to the energy needed to excape from stars near the gravitational well of massive black holes in quasers. This result in puzzles created by the incorrect determination that these quasers are much further than thay really are. The computed massive energy output is overestimated, the computed transverse velocity of quasers is greater than the speed of light, and adjacent, apparently connected quasar and nearby galaxy show different red shifts and apparently lage differences in distances (see Arp).

Much of this will be included in my new web site saisenberg. com when I have time to populate it.

I would like comments and your help in sharing it with others so that I can try to answer objections.