ACG52

Nor with physics.

It can change it's energy.

Combining Pyramid Power and Tesla. Impressive leap of imagination.

Push Gravity again, using neutrinos as the mysterious push particles. "Original matter"? Hydrogen does not break down into other elements.

Nonsensical word salad. This is garbage.

There's really no point in trying to argue rationally with a UFO nut. It's like trying to argue with a 9/11 conspiracy nut.

The only thing superluminal is the level of crackpot idiocy embodied in this thread.

But to compare their ages they must be brought together in the same FOR. In order for that to happen, one twin, the traveling twin, must undergo non inertial motion, and it's that which breaks the symmetry between them. that's why there's no paradox.

Observers in different frames will NOT agree on what they observe. That's what relativity tells you.

This is argument from incredulity. Interesting but not germain. Again, the BB was not an explosion. It was not a sudden release of energy propelling matter into a pre-existing space. There was no pre-existing space. The BB happened, and is still happening, everywhere at once. Every point in space is expanding away from every other point (outside of gravitationally bound entities) What a drag, isn't it? It would be so much easier if you could just know, without having to learn.

So it looked just like you saw in the movies?

The Big Bang was not an explosion, propelling matter outward from a central place. The BB is the expansion of every point in space from every other point in space. There is no spherical shape, and there is no center of the universe. When it is said that the universe is flat, it means that the value of mass density is just what is needed to keep the universe expanding forever, as opposed to contracting into a big crunch. When being used on a local level, a flat universe means one undistorted by gravitational fields, where Euclidean geometry is true and the angles of a triangle total 180 degrees.

So you turn around in circles and get dizzy. Nothing paranormal about falling down.

The universe is expanding because there is more space being created between everything.

The nonsense get's worse. And will continue to do so.

. That's one of the more humorous pieces of silliness I've seen posted here lately. . Can't show it by that paper. The author is a particle physicst working almost exclusively for the last 20 years with cosmic ray interactions with the atmosphere. His paper on arxiv was apparently rejected by Physics of Atomic Nuclei. But since I don't accept your premise, why would I try to find evidence to support it? You made the extraordinary claim, you supply the evidence. And the paper you submitted certainly isn't sufficient. Take your word for it? You must be joking.

Citation please.

The pearls on a string analogy only works directly along the line of movement. When looking in ANY direction, along the entire sphere of the observable universe, we see the same degree of redshift, correlated with the distance. Your model just doesn't match observation. Not to mention the CMBR, or the ratio of the primordial elements. You seem to have read of the Great Attractor and how the local group is moving in the direction of Virgo, and somehow managed to coflate that with cosmic expansion.

Because it can't be explained by a huge body in space. If that were the case, everything would be moving in the direction of the body. Instead, we see everything moving away from everything else. Given that your initial premise defies observations, your entire thesis is bupkis.

As I recall you squinted at a light bulb through a glass of water. and thought you saw things. That 'double split [sic] experiment'?

You wanted experimental confirmation of the invariance of light. I did the research you were too lazy to do, and spoon fed you the links. All you had to do was read and understand them, but I guess that's where it fell apart. I didn't realize that not only did you need it spoon fed you, but you wanted it to go through a blender first.

Yes. We see it. They have things called telescopes, which actually look at the light from stars. This is meaningless nonsense.

The electron drops down an energy level emitting a photon and the difference in the energy level of the electron is in the photon

If you're not going to bother to look at anything which answers your request because you're too lazy, and wouldn't understand what you're reading, I'll simply put you down as another relativity denying crank.

Given that this directly contradicts over a hundred years of experimental results (here, I'll spoon feed them to you again http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html ) and that you seem to be relying on something you're calling 'logic', this simply is a case of relativity denial due to incredulity. i.e I can't understand it, so it can't be.