Yes, I like it. About time the mainstream took this way of thinking seriously. I was always impressed with the fractal modeling of spiral galaxies too: "Fractal Universe - Vortex - Spiral Galaxy - 2013"
That's not a mainstream theory. And it's not going to be taken seriously by anybody involved in the perpetuation of mainstream theoretical models.
The WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey: the transition to large-scale cosmic homogeneity http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1205.6812 This research rules out Fractal Cosmologies.
But their paper contradicts the latest findings from the Planck research group: Therefore the fractal element to the creation of structure is still an avenue worthy of investigation. Discoveries from Planck may mean rethinking how the universe began (Jul 26 2013)
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! This theory qualitatively predicts that the glowing spokes on dust disk of a star are satellite plasma vortices. In relation to comets, this theory predicts the coma's vortex with the gas tail of the comet points inward directly to the barycenter of the Solar System (BOTSS), which is supposedly a spinning dual-core magnetic Ring Center of the Solar System located dynamically around the Sun.
The study ruled the fractal association out. Your article has nothing to do with fractals. Inference from you means nothing more than you wanting it to be a certain way.
One study rules it out and another one rules it in. If the fractal element of structure occurred at the beginning just before the Big Bang, then the nature of this structure would be lost due to a rapidly increasing entropy after the implosion and recoil of the two opposing mirror-matter mega-structures. The vast amount of time elapsed as well as the wraparound effect of gravitons to produce Dark Energy all contribute to a homogenous looking universe on the galactic scale from our current point of view. I'm sure that further research will prove the tell-tale signs of a fractal beginning to it all which some researchers are claiming to see. The data of any new research has to be analyzed by both sides before any assertions can be made with confidence. This is happening as we speak and the results will be announced in a few months in one particular case.
I have a theory of everything. There is only the solar system. Around this system, there is a large screen with holes. Through the holes to the light makes its way to us. These holes we call stars. How do you?
You're just spewing your own personal nonsense. Analyzed by both sides? What is that supposed to mean? You mean the research needs to be analyzed by scientists on one side and cranks on the other side? The research results ARE the analysis.
There are 19 citations for the WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey. This looks informative. An Introduction into the Theory of Cosmological Structure Formation. Christian Knobel. http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.5931
Yeah, I thought of that once. The stars are just holes in the blanket that God throws over our cage.:sleep:
