Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by J Raymond Redbourne on November 4, 2002 20:24:02 UTC

So we see that the math for Relativity leads us into some admitted impossible paradoxes (Twins, etc.), and some ignored paradoxes. These cannot be blithely ignored, even tho' professionals try to sweep them under the rug. You may do so as well, but you're not kidding me. Relativity's math does not work, except where forced and factored with unjustified constants.

I answer your demands, for the simple reason that it gives me "first disclosure" publicly; not because your approval is important. What is important to me on these forums, is that I am challenged on issues that have not yet occurred to me, and I get to pick them up as new Topics on my website. Meanwhile, anyone visiting this site anonymously, gets to compare your posts to mine. And then, I have repeated this so many times, that people are starting to take me seriously.

You may have noticed that Aetherists are quite reasonable, and gathering strength. And most of the time they don't use mathbabble the way Relativists do.

So onward into Aether Math:

Firstly; Hubble used mechanical logic, not math, to decide the universe is expanding. This gives me the right to use mechanical logic as well. I say the aether really is the wave medium for light waves, and that light particles do not exist. In which case the Wave Dispersion taught in elementary university physics, and demonstrated in non-mathematical ripple tanks, is my reference. Wave-Dispersion-rate of water waves is already defined mathematically. I don't need to regurgitate it.

But this Wave Dispersion of starlight explains the General Redshift of Starlight using basic mechanical physics, without the need of inventing an expanding universe stretching light particles at the source or in transit.

The universe is most likely in stable orbit about its own center of mass, exactly as are the solar system and galaxy. This provides a "Static Model" to make Einstein happy, and forgive him his suggestion of a cosmological constant. Orbital centrifugal force does even better; being automatically adjusting. No mysteries so far...right?

Math: The General Redshifting-Rate of Starlight, as already defined by comparison to Cepheid Variables in other galaxies, actually defines the Wave Dispersion rate of light as it travels through the aether. But there is a kicker: the apparent Re-Acceleration of the apparent Expansion is explained by wave dispersion being nonlinear with distance, combined with energy transfer lags from Thermodynamics. I have roughly graphed these relationships, but I must leave it to legitimate mathematicians to actually put the discipline to it.

By "legitimate", I mean: Design Engineers, not Theoretical Physicists.

Nevertheless; the mechanics and basic math are well-known, and perfectly logical.

So then, the Wave-Dispersion General Redshifting of Starlight; ie: all electromagnetic waves;- has been demonstrated to everyone's satisfaction, except the really frightened and resentful.

But Wave Dispersion does not stop until it has reason to.

Premise: I say the universe is a great ball of aether wandering unleashed through the Greater Void. It touches nothing, and so no energy can be drained from it.

The aether is a 3-D continuous taut-elastic fabric. It is kept internally fluffed up, and therefore tensioned, by the e-m waves vibrating through it. E-M waves are merely aether compression/rarefaction mechanical waves, just like sound in air. The aether periphery is as the periphery of a raindrop. The e-m waves reach the periphery, stretch-tension the Aether-Lines-Of-Force (ALOFs) outward, then the ALOFs snap back back in, thereby reinjecting the e-m wave by reflection of sorts. By this, Conservation is satisfied.

As such the e-m waves continue to wave disperse all the way down to the Ultra-Low Resonant Frequency of the Aether-Lines-Of-Force, Lattice Fabric. I have no idea what that value is. But the CMBR peaks are likely harmonics of the basic Fundamental Frequency. But the Cosmic Microwave Background, is 'way above the Fundamental Frequency.

COBE's CMBR results and Maxwell's Equations should be the guide for the intrepid mathematician schooled specifically in electromagnetics.

At the Fundamental Resonant Frequency, the e-m waves are vibrating as a note on a guitar string, unable to wave disperse farther. By this, Conservation is satisfied.

And the mutual shading of any two bodies in the universe, from these waves, provides Quantum Gravity, among other things. QG pushes things together.

The math for this is already provided by assorted sources. The gravity Near-Effect is per the Newtonian relationship, except I say it is a trig function, not inverse as the square of the distance. Or perhaps compounded trig functions, along with celestial body density/volume/Power Wave absorption curves.

The gravity Permanent Effect math is as illustrated by the Spiral Galaxy Stars' Orbital Velocities Distribution Curve, for which the bizarre Dark Matter has been invented as an "explanation". (Hardly mathematically proven).

I really do wish I had the math power to finish putting it all together, but I do not.

Senselessly demanding that I provide the completed math is of no avail. But I am willing to entertain anyone seeking to shoot down the mechanics.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins