#1
|
|||
|
|||
NEW UNIVERSE MODEL
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Space Shuttle | 3 | May 22nd 04 09:07 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | May 21st 04 11:44 PM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Space Station | 0 | May 21st 04 08:02 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Policy | 0 | May 21st 04 08:00 AM |