FAQ
It is currently Mon May 29, 2017 7:05 pm


Author Message
armf
Post  Post subject: Big bang or shrinking matter, whith fits best?  |  Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2016 2:07 am

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:40 pm
Posts: 1

Offline
The big bang theory was largely acepted to justify the redshift of the emission lines in the past, till 1990s, despite the fault to explain the singularity. In the early 90s, cosmologists suggest the universe could be expanding at an accelerated rate, due the excess of dimming observed in the distant SN1As. No one could justify such acceleration, then they infer it to a misterious "dark energy".
Since then the big bang theory becomes questionable.
The fact is that both the singularity and the dark energy break the laws of physics.
Rather than changing the reference frame to justify or prevent such unexplained events, belivers in BB chose advocate the existence of such fanciful dark hypotesis, to keep standing the bb theory.
If something appear to be moving but it is not, we must change the reference frame, ie, the observer (we) may be moving.
This implies, if the universe is not expanding, the matter (atoms) could be shrinking, giving the illusion of an expanding universe.
A very tiny rate of shrinking the atoms, coud be imperceptible in our measurement devices, but could be enough to justify the observed redshift of the deep space objects.
According with the "shrinking matter theory", the Planck constant varies (decreases) along the time at a rate of 2.4 parts per 10^(11) per year, in the present time. This rate is about five thousand times smaller than the accuracy of such constant today. This denotes the consistence of the shrinking matter theory.

The exact formula to define the "Planck constant" in any time is:

h(f) = ho((t+Kz) / Kz)^(1/2)
or
h(f) = ho (1+Z)^(1/3)

h(f): Planck constant in the past (or future)
ho : Planck constant in our local frame (at present)
ho = 6.626 070 40 (10)^(-34) Js
The accuracy of ho is 81(10)^-42 Js
Z : observed redshift
t : time in giga years (Gyr)
Kz: constant = 20.658 023 305 151 55 (for Ho = 71 km/s/mpc)
Ho: Huble constant
The unit of the Kz constant is Gyr.
To take the result in the future the time "t" or the Kz constant must be set as negative value.

The time "t" or the distance "d" can be defined by the fomula:

t = d = Kz (1+Z)^(2/3) - Kz

t: time (Gyr)
d: distance (Gly)

The size of the bodies (and atoms) can be defined by the formulae:

r(f) = r(o) (1+Z)^(2/3)
or
r(f) = r(o) (t+Kz)/Kz

r(f): size of the bodies (and atoms) in the past (or future)
r(o):size of the bodies (and atoms) at present
To take the result in the future the time "t" or the Kz constant must be set as negative value.


The Graphic 01 presents the comparative evolution of the distance (Gly) or time (Gyr), for the shrinking Model hypothesis A “Time shrM A”, the shrinking Model hypothesis B “Time shrM B”, and the standard Model “Time stdM”.

GRAPHIC 01 google "shrinkingmattertheory"


The graphic 02 presents the comparative evolution of the absolute magnitude μ.
The evolution of the expected μ to the Shrinking Matter Theory, hypothesis A is in red color.
The evolution of the expected μ to the Shrinking Matter Theory, hypothesis B is in green color.
The evolution of the expected μ to the Standard Model (expanding universe) is in black color.
The observed evolution of the absolute magnitude μ is represented by square blue points, which were extracted from Betoule et al 2014, Table F1, page 30, “http://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.4064v2.pdf “.

GRAPHIC 02 google "shrinkingmattertheory"


The dark energy has been imputed in the standard model to justify the diference between the square blue points and the black curve, which represent the observed absolute magnitudes and the predicted observed magnitude in the standard model (expanding universe), respectively.
The curve which best fit to the observational data is the hypothesis A of the Shrinking Matter Theory “shrM A abs mag”, in red. No need for dark energy.
The "shrinking matter theory" also covers the origins of the CMB, The unresolved CXRB, and the gravity.
For further information google "shrinkingmattertheory"


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: Big bang or shrinking matter, whith fits best?  |  Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:01 am
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4780
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
armf wrote:
The fact is that both the singularity and the dark energy break the laws of physics.


really ? you're using the overblown language of the media when they don't understand the topic they're reporting on

the singularity and dark energy are merely indications that our understanding of physics is incomplete - but any physicist worth the name will acknowledge that

in short, at this stage the unexplained items you mention are just that : anomalies which may or may not resolve themselves with a better understanding of the issues involved - it is far from clear that they are a fatal flaw

on top of which, your hypothesis of shrinking matter may in your view explain a few items better than the Big Bang theory, but does it do better at explaining ALL observed phenomena ? after all, that's what makes one scientific theory win out over another : it's the OVERALL explanatory power that matters, not just a few cherry-picked items

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Print view

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
Jump to:   
cron

Delete all board cookies | The team | All times are UTC


This free forum is proudly hosted by ProphpBB | phpBB software | Report Abuse | Privacy