sol aisenberg

July 2nd 03, 12:59 AM

A NEW THEORY OF THE UNIVERSE

PROVIDING A SIMPLE ANSWER TO THE MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE UNIVERSE

This is a presentation of my theory that can simplify the model of the

universe. In order to prevent this theory from being classified as

speculation, supporting information based upon observations by others will

be included. My theory is that many of the beliefs about the universe are

wrong and needlessly complicated.

For decades (starting in about 1930) the scientific community has been

concerned about problems and mysteries in the understanding of the universe.

One problem is finding dark matter, many times larger than the visible

matter. Another problem is the apparent acceleration of the expansion of the

universe, and the associated postulated dark energy and repulsive force on

galaxies.

According to my new hypothesis, the problems are caused by two fundamental

ASSUMPTIONS, which are commonly used without proof. One is that the

attractive force of Newton is valid without modification at very large

distances. The second ASSUMPTION, again without proof, is that the red shift

and the Hubble constant can be used to measure the velocity of remote stars

rather than just the distances.

We will provide a number of supporting arguments for the new hypothesis, and

they are based upon observations reported by others.

Initially, my analysis of the constant velocity rotation curves of spiral

galaxies as reported by Vera Rubin has lead to my new hypothesis that Newton

's gravitational theory and constant, G, has an additional attraction term

that increases with distance. It provides a simple extension of the

gravitational force of Newton and Einstein that is only significant for

large distances.

My new hypothesis is that the gravitational constant, G, can be generalized

and expanded into a simple power series in terms of distance, r, and in the

form G = Gn + A*r where Gn is Newton's gravitational constant and where A

can be proven to be non zero when evaluated with observations from spiral

galaxies. When asked where the term A*r comes from, the answer is that comes

from the same place as Newton's gravitational constant.

SUPPORTING ITEM #1: Thus according to my hypothesis is that the inverse

square attractive force between masses is augmented at very large distances

by another force that decreases much slower according to A/r, where r is the

distance and "A" is a constant. The constant, A, was evaluated by using the

published observations for the constant velocity outer rotation curves of

spiral galaxies, and was proven to be non zero because it described the

observed motion without needing dark matter.

At the transition radius for spiral galaxies, Rs, where the rotation

velocity curves become constant, the Newtonian force and the long range

force become approximately equal. Preliminary analysis of data from spiral

galaxies NGC2403 and NGC3198 using a spiral Galaxy transition radius Rs of

2.7 kpc plus the known value of Gn gives a preliminary value for A = Gn/Rs =

1.18 x 10 exp-14 /sec*sec.

Thus this hypothesis, consistent with published observations, will show that

there is no need to invoke dark matter to explain rotation of spiral

galaxies.

SUPPORTING ITEM #2: This hypothesis for additional long range gravity will

also explain the unusual motion of remote groups of spiral galaxies as

earlier described by Fred Zwicky. Previously the concept of dark matter was

introduced as an explanation, and prior to the dark matter proposed for

spiral galaxies.

Because of the elegant simplicity of this assumption compared to the need to

invoke massive amounts of dark matter, it provides a beautiful alternative.

According to William Ockham's razor, the simplest explanation is preferred

when it is consistent with past observations and with future predictions.

SUPPORTING ITEM #3: As an unexpected result of the enhanced gravitational

hypothesis we found that due to the additional attractive gravitational

force there was a change of potential energy that becomes significant for

light traveling large distances - and this contributes to the red shift of

the light. Integrating the force over distance gives the energy change, and

when the integral is expanded in a simple power series, it shows that the

energy change and red shift is a linear function of travel distance. This is

confirmed by observations showing a linear plot of red shift for remote

stars, and where the distance is determined from observations of Supernovas

Type 1a.

SUPPORTING ITEM #4: This provides additional SUPPORT by explaining the

"TIRED LIGHT" concept of Fred Zwicky, which earlier was presented without

acceptable physical reasons for the loss of photon energy with travel.

Zwicky was correct in proposing "TIRED LIGHT" and energy loss in connection

with the red shift, and there is now a physical explanation. He should have

been taken more seriously.

Thus the red shift (and blue shift) has a component due to of travel

distance in addition to the velocity component. For large distances, the

travel component dominates.

SUPPORTING ITEM #5: Examination of the history of the use of the red shift

for very remote stars as a way of measuring receding velocity we found that

there was only another unproven ASSUMPTION BY Hubble and others. We learned

that the original papers (Hubble and Humason, 1931) had a footnote that

indicated that it is not certain that the large red shifts should be

interpreted as a Doppler effect but for convenience can be interpreted in

terms of velocity and referred to as apparent velocities. This assumption

was incorrectly converted into evidence of actual velocity and led to

serious beliefs about the expanding universe and subsequently the

acceleration of the expansion.

SUPPORTING ITEM #6: Another problem is the large decrease in the Hubble

constant as measurements are made to include the more remote stars.

Our hypotheses and the resulting equations predicts that the Hubble constant

relating red shift to distance will be larger for the closer stars and will

decrease to an asymptotic value for the more remote stars that can be

measured with more modern techniques. Observations show that the early

Hubble constants are about a factor of five greater than modern values.

SUPPORTING ITEM #7: The Very high precision measurement within our solar

system appears to support our hypothesis. Observations of Pioneer 10 and 11

probes indicated that they were slowing down faster than predicted by

Einstein's general theory of relativity. "Some extra tiny force - equivalent

to a ten-billionth of the gravity at Earth's surface - must be acting on the

probes, braking their outward motion." Analysis by John D. Anderson and his

team at JPL ruled out a number of possible explanations of this extra force.

Our hypothesis predicts a very tiny force within solar system distances, and

it is too small to significantly influence the motion of planets but can

slightly influence space vehicles.

A serious error in the current theory of the universe is the assumption that

red shifts of remote stars are only due to velocity rather than including

red shifts caused by travel distances. This assumption suggested the current

theory of the expanding universe, plus the acceleration of the expansion. It

is also related to the model of the Big Bang, the concepts of the

cosmological constant and dark energy to power the acceleration of the

expansion. Before we speculate too much on the origin of the universe, and

the end of the universe, perhaps we should first understand the present

observations of the universe.

SUPPORTING ITEM #8: The meaning of the dark sky (Olber's paradox) and the

Cosmic Microwave Background CMB may also be reexamined from the point of

view of the new explanation for "tired light". Our hypothesis predicts that

when light from very remote stars reach us, their energy loss due to the

large travel distance has decreased the energy of the electromagnetic

photons below of the visible range, and where some are in the microwave

range (CMB). The slower photons essentially come uniformly from all

directions with slight irregularities due to irregularities in the

distribution of stars.

If considered seriously, the new hypothesis could result in a new, correct,

and simplified view of the universe and could help future work of those in

the field. The hypothesis may only be accepted by a new generation of

physicists.

I have emailed to a number of recognized experts, inviting them to look at

the preprint provided on my web page. I would prefer that my theory is

proven wrong rather than just ignored.

A draft of a more detailed preprint including details and equations for the

new hypothesis and the many implications are presented at:

http://inventing-solutions.com/new-universe.htm. You are free to share this

information with your colleagues.

A short description of my credentials as a physicist is available at:

http://inventing-solutions.com/sa-short.htm.

Sol Aisenberg, Ph.D.

..NEW THEORY

PROVIDING A SIMPLE ANSWER TO THE MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE UNIVERSE

This is a presentation of my theory that can simplify the model of the

universe. In order to prevent this theory from being classified as

speculation, supporting information based upon observations by others will

be included. My theory is that many of the beliefs about the universe are

wrong and needlessly complicated.

For decades (starting in about 1930) the scientific community has been

concerned about problems and mysteries in the understanding of the universe.

One problem is finding dark matter, many times larger than the visible

matter. Another problem is the apparent acceleration of the expansion of the

universe, and the associated postulated dark energy and repulsive force on

galaxies.

According to my new hypothesis, the problems are caused by two fundamental

ASSUMPTIONS, which are commonly used without proof. One is that the

attractive force of Newton is valid without modification at very large

distances. The second ASSUMPTION, again without proof, is that the red shift

and the Hubble constant can be used to measure the velocity of remote stars

rather than just the distances.

We will provide a number of supporting arguments for the new hypothesis, and

they are based upon observations reported by others.

Initially, my analysis of the constant velocity rotation curves of spiral

galaxies as reported by Vera Rubin has lead to my new hypothesis that Newton

's gravitational theory and constant, G, has an additional attraction term

that increases with distance. It provides a simple extension of the

gravitational force of Newton and Einstein that is only significant for

large distances.

My new hypothesis is that the gravitational constant, G, can be generalized

and expanded into a simple power series in terms of distance, r, and in the

form G = Gn + A*r where Gn is Newton's gravitational constant and where A

can be proven to be non zero when evaluated with observations from spiral

galaxies. When asked where the term A*r comes from, the answer is that comes

from the same place as Newton's gravitational constant.

SUPPORTING ITEM #1: Thus according to my hypothesis is that the inverse

square attractive force between masses is augmented at very large distances

by another force that decreases much slower according to A/r, where r is the

distance and "A" is a constant. The constant, A, was evaluated by using the

published observations for the constant velocity outer rotation curves of

spiral galaxies, and was proven to be non zero because it described the

observed motion without needing dark matter.

At the transition radius for spiral galaxies, Rs, where the rotation

velocity curves become constant, the Newtonian force and the long range

force become approximately equal. Preliminary analysis of data from spiral

galaxies NGC2403 and NGC3198 using a spiral Galaxy transition radius Rs of

2.7 kpc plus the known value of Gn gives a preliminary value for A = Gn/Rs =

1.18 x 10 exp-14 /sec*sec.

Thus this hypothesis, consistent with published observations, will show that

there is no need to invoke dark matter to explain rotation of spiral

galaxies.

SUPPORTING ITEM #2: This hypothesis for additional long range gravity will

also explain the unusual motion of remote groups of spiral galaxies as

earlier described by Fred Zwicky. Previously the concept of dark matter was

introduced as an explanation, and prior to the dark matter proposed for

spiral galaxies.

Because of the elegant simplicity of this assumption compared to the need to

invoke massive amounts of dark matter, it provides a beautiful alternative.

According to William Ockham's razor, the simplest explanation is preferred

when it is consistent with past observations and with future predictions.

SUPPORTING ITEM #3: As an unexpected result of the enhanced gravitational

hypothesis we found that due to the additional attractive gravitational

force there was a change of potential energy that becomes significant for

light traveling large distances - and this contributes to the red shift of

the light. Integrating the force over distance gives the energy change, and

when the integral is expanded in a simple power series, it shows that the

energy change and red shift is a linear function of travel distance. This is

confirmed by observations showing a linear plot of red shift for remote

stars, and where the distance is determined from observations of Supernovas

Type 1a.

SUPPORTING ITEM #4: This provides additional SUPPORT by explaining the

"TIRED LIGHT" concept of Fred Zwicky, which earlier was presented without

acceptable physical reasons for the loss of photon energy with travel.

Zwicky was correct in proposing "TIRED LIGHT" and energy loss in connection

with the red shift, and there is now a physical explanation. He should have

been taken more seriously.

Thus the red shift (and blue shift) has a component due to of travel

distance in addition to the velocity component. For large distances, the

travel component dominates.

SUPPORTING ITEM #5: Examination of the history of the use of the red shift

for very remote stars as a way of measuring receding velocity we found that

there was only another unproven ASSUMPTION BY Hubble and others. We learned

that the original papers (Hubble and Humason, 1931) had a footnote that

indicated that it is not certain that the large red shifts should be

interpreted as a Doppler effect but for convenience can be interpreted in

terms of velocity and referred to as apparent velocities. This assumption

was incorrectly converted into evidence of actual velocity and led to

serious beliefs about the expanding universe and subsequently the

acceleration of the expansion.

SUPPORTING ITEM #6: Another problem is the large decrease in the Hubble

constant as measurements are made to include the more remote stars.

Our hypotheses and the resulting equations predicts that the Hubble constant

relating red shift to distance will be larger for the closer stars and will

decrease to an asymptotic value for the more remote stars that can be

measured with more modern techniques. Observations show that the early

Hubble constants are about a factor of five greater than modern values.

SUPPORTING ITEM #7: The Very high precision measurement within our solar

system appears to support our hypothesis. Observations of Pioneer 10 and 11

probes indicated that they were slowing down faster than predicted by

Einstein's general theory of relativity. "Some extra tiny force - equivalent

to a ten-billionth of the gravity at Earth's surface - must be acting on the

probes, braking their outward motion." Analysis by John D. Anderson and his

team at JPL ruled out a number of possible explanations of this extra force.

Our hypothesis predicts a very tiny force within solar system distances, and

it is too small to significantly influence the motion of planets but can

slightly influence space vehicles.

A serious error in the current theory of the universe is the assumption that

red shifts of remote stars are only due to velocity rather than including

red shifts caused by travel distances. This assumption suggested the current

theory of the expanding universe, plus the acceleration of the expansion. It

is also related to the model of the Big Bang, the concepts of the

cosmological constant and dark energy to power the acceleration of the

expansion. Before we speculate too much on the origin of the universe, and

the end of the universe, perhaps we should first understand the present

observations of the universe.

SUPPORTING ITEM #8: The meaning of the dark sky (Olber's paradox) and the

Cosmic Microwave Background CMB may also be reexamined from the point of

view of the new explanation for "tired light". Our hypothesis predicts that

when light from very remote stars reach us, their energy loss due to the

large travel distance has decreased the energy of the electromagnetic

photons below of the visible range, and where some are in the microwave

range (CMB). The slower photons essentially come uniformly from all

directions with slight irregularities due to irregularities in the

distribution of stars.

If considered seriously, the new hypothesis could result in a new, correct,

and simplified view of the universe and could help future work of those in

the field. The hypothesis may only be accepted by a new generation of

physicists.

I have emailed to a number of recognized experts, inviting them to look at

the preprint provided on my web page. I would prefer that my theory is

proven wrong rather than just ignored.

A draft of a more detailed preprint including details and equations for the

new hypothesis and the many implications are presented at:

http://inventing-solutions.com/new-universe.htm. You are free to share this

information with your colleagues.

A short description of my credentials as a physicist is available at:

http://inventing-solutions.com/sa-short.htm.

Sol Aisenberg, Ph.D.

..NEW THEORY