| Tired of seeing ads? Click here to upgrade to Elite Membership! |
Mathematics Forum
|
| Author | Message / Information |
| truth2k Quote | Reply | | Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth posted on: 11/13/2006 3:29:48 PM From http:astro-ph/0512614 Gravity whose nature is fundamental to the understanding of solar system, galaxies and the structure and evolution of the Universe, is theorized by the assumption of curved spacetime, according to Einsteins general theory of relativity (EGR). Particles which experience gravity only, move on curved spacetime along straight lines (geodesics). The geodesics are determined by curved-spacetime metric. In the last year, I proposed the mirrored version of EGR, the flat-spacetime general relativity (FGR), in which particles move along curved lines on flat spacetime. This puts gravitational study back to the traditional Lagrangian formulation. The Lagragian on flat spacetime is simply taken to be the curved spacetime metric of EGR. In fact, all acclaimed accurate verification of general relativity is the verification of FGR, because relativists when confronting GR to observational data, calculate time, distance, or angle by directly using the coordinates in Schwarzschild solution or in post Newtonian formulation. For example, two famous tests of general relativity are about angles. All mainstream textbooks and papers calculate the angles by directly using the coordinate phi. However, only when spacetime is flat does there exist one coordinate system which has direct meaning of time, distance, angle, and vice verse. This is the famous Riemann theorem when he pioneered the concept of curved space. According to the theorem, all coordinates on a curved space are merely parameters. Real angles and distances have to be calculated by employing coefficients of the spatial metric. If we do follow the geometry of curved spacetime (EGR) then the deflection of light at the limb of the sun is 1.65 arcseconds (Crothers, 2005). The publicly cited value (1.75 arcseconds) which best fits observational data is predicted by FGR. Therefore, the more claims are made that classical tests of general relativity fits data with great accuracy, the more falsified is the curved-spacetime assumption. That is, the claim is specious to EGR. Relativists made three specious claims as collected in the present paper. However, FGR predicts observationally verified results for solar system, galaxies, and the universe on the whole. Because FGR uses the single consistent Lagrangian principle, it is straightforward to show that the possibility is less than one billionth that the assumptions of curved spacetime, black holes, and big bang are true. An experiment is proposed whose results will completely decide the fate of curved spacetime assumption. ---------------- (iv) The Possibility of Curved Spacetime, Black Holes, and Big Bang is Less than One Billionth. You have probably noticed that my FGR is based on very simple principles. Now I calculate the probability that FGR is wrong. FGR generalizes special relativity (e6, event 6). Einsteins general relativity does not generalize SR (special relativity). Because SR is well verified in high energy physics, the probability is less than one hundredth that the requirement, a gravitational theory must generalize SR, is false. My model of the universe predicts many observational facts. Its single principle is that the universe is evolving (e7). The probability is less than one hundredth that the universe is not evolving (e7 is false). My model of the universe involves the single function of time: B(t). The function is arbitrary except satisfying some conditions. Redshifts require increasing B(t) with time, the condition (36). Decreasing speed of light requires that B(t) satisfies the condition (40). The simple conditions (36) and (40) guarantee that the existence of the unique inertial frame of the universe (e1), the redshifts (not blueshifts) of galaxies (e2), the Hubble redshift-distance law (e3), the decreasing light-speed which resolves big bang difficulties (e4), and the accelerating universe (e5). These predictions of independent observational cosmological facts based on the two conditions of single arbitrary function are certainly not an accident. Therefore, the probability that my model of the universe is not scientific truth is less than one millionth. Because these observational facts and the principles are independent events, the probability that FGR is false is less than one billionth: 1/1000000 x 1/100 x 1/100 x < 1/1,000,000,000. That is, the possibility that the assumptions of curved spacetime, black holes, and big bang are true, is less than one billionth |
|
herbert
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/14/2006 4:38:06 AM And the possibility that this article contains any relevant information is thereby demonstrated to be nil. Or even worse. It is the demonstration for an up until now undemonstrated conjecture that negative information entropy does exist has been proven convincingly. |
|
truth2k
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/14/2006 10:58:07 AM The probability is correct but its calculation is incorrect. However, I should feel shamed? No, the shameless establishment maintains the biggest hoax for over 90 yrs. They are so bold that they can make joke at the holy universe!!! You are probably an innocent victim of the hoax. |
|
Euler
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/16/2006 12:57:50 AM Oh yes! The "establishment" of curious minds and its vexing hinderence of the human soul!! I just have one suggestion- seek professional help. |
|
truth2k
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/16/2006 8:21:46 AM I realized that even my calculation of the probability is correct. Anyone who wants to challenge me, needs to study Probability Theory first. I am always wondering why many people do not know trigonometry much and published books about general relativity! |
|
Euler
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/16/2006 8:52:43 PM Yes, 1/100*1/100 etc does work out, but where are these numbers coming from? I mean, using your "logic" and "probability theory," I can claim, arbitrarily, that the probability of string theories validity is 1/100, and the probability that curved space time is 1/100, so the probability of the juxtaposition of the two is 1/10000- but this has no meaning without explaining why the respective probabilities are 1/100. |
|
truth2k
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/17/2006 8:27:29 AM I know Euler is smart. Five rooms each room with one black ball and 99 white. You happened to find out all 5 black ones. My theory is consistent black balls. No man-made painting black. The establishment is always painting. For simplisity, I attach my email as follows: -------- One side of Einstein field equation is spacetime curvature and the other side is mass energy tensor. I don`t think it has thermal connection. Thermal physics is the macroscopic behavior of many-body system while Einstein equation is based on two body system. That is, it requires the phenomenon of atractive two-bodies. Galaxies have no such phenomenon and relativists have dark matters to fit in. The universe is `accelerating`, and relativists have dark energy to fit in. The meaning is explained as follows: People find that the proportional cooefficients between redshift and distance increase with the age of the universe, which indicates that, according to the dogmatic Doppler redshift explanation, the expansion of the universe is accelerating. Relativists feel panic, because Einstein equation needs the phenomenon of atractive two-bodies and the universe would be decelerating due to attraction. Therefore, they have dark energy which counteracts the attraction! Big bang is crazy! Yours Jin wrote: I am told that Einstein's field equation has implications of thermal dynamics...is this true? >From: jin he >To: >Subject: Re: excellent work! >Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 18:24:14 -0800 (PST) > >What I did is the kinematics. I have not proposed the dynamics which should >connect kinematics with mass-energy distribution. > > Such dynamics should have some connection to statistical mechanics or >thermal dynamics. > > Ironically, the big bang model of the universe is solely based on >Einstein field equation which has no connection to statistical mechanics or >thermal dynamics at all. > > I am learning too. > Yours > Jin > > > >wrote: > How do the first two laws of thermodynamics fit into this? Don't get me >wrong, I agree with you, I just want to learn more. Thanks! > > > >From: jin he > >To: > >Subject: Re: excellent work! > >Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 17:36:07 -0800 (PST) > > > >Hi, > > > > Yes. I take Hubble's law to be inviolate. > > However, I gess you are very concerned about that real data shows much > >deviation from it. > > > > Hubble law is the linear relation between redshifts and distances. > > According to my theory the redshifts are mainly from `pressure` gravity, > >type-I redshift. > > However, there are other sources of redshifts, one is the common > >redshift from large gravitational mass (type-II, i.e., Einstein > >gravitational redshift), the other is the dogmatic doppler redshifts, > >type-III. > > > > I accept that there is spatially in-homogeous mass didtribution which > >gives type-II; > > there is temporally in-homogeous mass didtribution which gives type-I; > >Because the motion relative to the unique inertial frame of the universe >is > >always existent, type-III is allowed. > > > > I believe Halton Arp quasar-galaxy associations are real. The quasar has > >strong mass and contributes much more type-II redshift. > > > > The establishment is scared of Arp, scared of light-speed anisotropy, > >because any investigation into the fields will destroy the dogmatic >theory. > > > > Thanks for your communication. > > > > Yours > > Jin > > > > wrote: > > I have a question, do you take Hubble's law to be inviolate? > > > > > > >From: jin he > > >To: > > >Subject: Re: excellent work! > > >Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:05:57 -0800 (PST) > > > > > >Hi, > > > > > > Thanks. > > > Your words are the reward! > > > > > > Jin > > > > > >wrote: > > > Hello, Mr He. I've come across your work on the astro-ph site and I > > >found it > > >to be amazing. I am only a amateur when it comes to physics (Music >theory > > >major) because I have never taken to the big bang, etc. I found the >world > > >of > > >physics to be very alienating and biased with no room for ideas that do > >not > > >fit conventional thought; so I left the field. > > >You efforts are well worth it and if you stick with it I know that they > > >will > > >be rewarded. Keep it up! > > > > > >Thanks, > > > > > > |
|
Euler
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/17/2006 10:24:57 AM Always more words- never any development... |
|
Euler
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/22/2006 3:02:07 PM Oh! and pertaining to your "holy universe" comment- the probability that the universe works as described by an "holy" creature on earth is nonexistant- since no evidence exists which sorts out the mangled vines of contradiction with which they are built... |
|
truth2k
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/25/2006 10:04:53 PM Modern Euler is no longer working hard. Not learning more but rejecting more. |
|
Euler
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/26/2006 9:27:13 PM Rejecting more is an intrinsic characteristic of learning more. |
|
Euler
Quote | Reply | |
Possibility of Big Bang is Less than One Billionth
replied on: 11/26/2006 9:30:16 PM i.e.- before a concept is learned it has an infinite collection of possible outcomes; however, once it is learned it has a single outcome- the one which has been learned. |
|
LinkBot
|
Gamers Wanted is looking for people to write game reviews and post news, |
|
|
| Tired of seeing ads? Click here to upgrade to Elite Membership! |
ChatArea.com Help & News Forums | Terms of Use | Contact ChatArea.com | Advertising
Powered By ChatArea.com - Get your free Society today! © Copyright 2003 Wewp!