Maartenn100

An alternative hypothesis to explain the observation of 'the expanding universe' following Hubble's Law First of all, I want to say that this is a hypothesis of mine. It's a result of long thinking, but that's not an argument at all of course. Please be not too hostile, when you destroy it :wink:(with arguments). Thank you. Some true premisses: Observations of time and space are always relative (referenceframe dependent) Space and time are like two sides of a coin: when we observe a distortion of space, we must observe a distortion of time and vice versa. (spacetime is one united entity) For example: when we observe a spaceshrink of a hypothesised accelerating spaceship, closer and closer to the speed of light (relative to us), we know that we should measure a timedilation (relative to our clock). And: when this very fast spaceship slows down again, the shrinked ship will stretch while time will contract again, relative to our idea of timeflow. Gravity and relative measurements of space (and time) in the gravitational field Gravitation is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between two massive bodies. (Newton). So the more distance (space) between two heavy objects, the less gravity. Gravitational timedilation tells us that gravity has an influence on clocks. So, the timeflow of the clocks in the empty regions of space between massive attracting bodies goes faster, relative to our clock, when these bodies are moving away from eachother. Because the (influence of the) gravity between them becomes weaker. And this 'deduced' difference in timeflow is aligned with the observation of more space-expansion. Because: An observation of spaceshrink (lengthcontraction) is measuring (relative) timedilation, so (relative) timecontraction means an observation of space-expansion. (see Special Theory of Relativity) My general conclusions: When we observe a region of space between bodies in the sky, there will be an invisible timeflow outthere between these bodies, ticking faster then our clocks on Earth, Therefore, we observe a space-expansion of our idea of normal space between these bodies. And because of this observed expansion, the gravity between these bodies becomes weaker, so the influence of gravity on the time in the region of space between them becomes weaker. This will let us observe more expansion of space. We know that there must be more timecontraction because of this weaker gravitational attraction, and because of this increased timecontraction, relative to our rulers, we observe more space-expansion. And because of this observation of space-expansion we observe more timecontraction ad infinitum. An observer will always use the timeflow of his own clock (his own referenceframe) and the measurements of his own ruler, as the standards for observing dilation, contraction, curvature or expansion of space and time elsewhere. That’s not only for observers with relative different speeds, but also for observers in relative different fields of gravity. So, when we observe a 'relative heavier' field of gravity (then ours), we can assume a timedilation (by gravity), therefore we also observe a (relative) curvature of (our idea of normal) space outthere. And when we observe a 'relative weaker' field of gravity (then ours) we can assume a timecontraction (by gravity), relative to our idea of 'normal timeflow, therefore we also observe a (relative) expansion of (our idea of normal) space outthere. a youtubevideo to explain it better Thanks for potential feedback . Maarten Vergucht

I do not send my idea to scientific magazines, because I don't think they will accept my idea. But I think I have a good alternative to explain our observation of expanding space. The observed velocity-distance-relationship is an unobservable gravitational timestretch/distance relationship. The observed velocity of recession of galaxies, proportional to their distance (Hubble) is an observation of expanding space, because of an invisible timestretch relative to our clocks due to a weaker and weaker gravitational attraction between these receding galaxies, further and further away from each other. The gravitational timedilation is becoming less weaker, when galaxies are further from each other, then when they are close to each other. We can call this ‘gravitational timestretch’ of imaginary clocks in the empty regions between them. So, the observed velocity-distance relationship is also a field of gravity-distance relationship. It’s crucial to mention that the empty region of space must be of remote galaxies, because locally, we always measure normal properties of time and normal properties of space. In our own referenceframe, all laws of physics are as usual. (relativity principle). The difference in timeflow is small. We can say, that there is a stronger field of gravity between two remote galaxies closer to each other then between remote galaxies further away from each other. Therefore, we know that the empty space between galaxies closer to each other have a slower timeflow then galaxies further away from eachother. We are part of Earth, a solarsystem, a galaxy with a black hole in the centre of it, the Virgo cluster and the Local Group. The gravity of these objects are slowing down our clocks, relative to clocks in the empty regions of space without matter. But to us, our time is ticking as usual, wherever we are. And our space doesn’t seem to be distorted. conclusion The observed space-distortion is due to the difference between clocks on Earth and the invisible clocks in empty space between remote galaxies because of the difference in gravitational timedistortion. If the timeflow between remote galaxies or stars is faster than our clock, we see a space-expansion, when the timeflow between remote galaxies or stars is slower than our clock, we see a spaceshrink. Locally, we do not observe such differences, because the difference in timeflow is too small and our idea of time in our own referenceframe is always the standard to observe space- and timedistortions elsewhere. We will always observe space- and timedistortions elsewhere. Summary: Observed space-expansion is due to a gravitational timestretch relative to our clock and observed space-shrink is due to a gravitational timedilation relative to our clock. But when the difference in timeflow between clocks on Earth and clocks in the empty regions of space between remote galaxies is almost the same, we do not observe distortions of space. Testable predictions? When we leave our solarsystem and our galaxy, the influence of the gravitational timedilation of our galaxy on our clock will decrease. But according to us, our clock is still the standard for observations elsewhere. Our time and our idea of space is the norm for observations of distortions elsewhere, wherever we are. Which means: we observe a spaceshrink of the space between stars in our galaxies closer to the centre of our galaxy then further away from the centre. We observe a decreasing of ‘the expanding universe’ when we leave our galaxy. When we are further and further away from our Local Group in the voids of space, and we look back, we will see galaxies coming back together. We will see ‘a shrinking universe’. When we are closer to the black hole in the centre of our galaxy, we will observe ‘an increasing expansion of the universe’ because the difference in timeflow will increase. Our timeflow will always be the standard for observations of space- and timedistortions elsewhere, so the observed expansion rate will be higher when we are closer to the centre of the black hole. The math I only like to think about space and time and I was obsessed by the question of observations of time and space. But I invite you to find the mathematical equation, who will explain the relationship I described here in words with the proper well-defined terms. Maarten Vergucht, Belgium. Obsessive thinker about our observations of time and space. This article supports my theory that 'the universe an sich' is not expanding. It's just a relative observation of space.

No, but you quoted me wrong. You forgot the 'therefore....' premisse: all laws of physics must be the same, wherever an observer is in the gravitational field. (principle of relativity) Ergo (deduced idea): observations of space- and time-distortions must be elsewhere. (otherwise, his observations of time and space and the laws of physics would not be the same in his coördinatesystem) So, an observer will never see a space-expansion or a space-stretch in his laboratory. He will never discover 'dark energy' in his environment. Because he must measure space and time the same, wherever he is. (principle of relativity)

I like to think, and I want to avoid fallacies. i was, during a few years in my life, obsessed with the question: "how do we observe time and space". I was looking for answers via logic reasoning. And I discovered Einstein last year, even if I did not want that. But I necessarily must confront myself his ideas about time and space, to answer the question: "how do we observe time and space?" So, I walked through the spaceships of Einstein's thoughtexperiments and stood in heavy fields of gravity to observe the nightsky. I did a lot of thoughtexperiments. And I came to the conclusion that 'the observer' will always, wherever he/she/it goes have the same idea of time and space. I derived other conclusions from it, and came to a final conclusion: the observer must be the backbone of the coördinatesystem. Real existing observers are measuring devices, telescopes, gps-systems, human beings, animals. And I think, their existence obey laws of nature. To be clair, I do not think that 'I know it better'. I just had another perspective and started my reasoning from there on. And this perspective can give you feedback about what you think about 'observing expanding space' and 'observing time and space' in general. I only want to share my conclusions, logically derived from some premisses, to give feedback about what I discovered about nature. I derive from the principle of relativity for being in different fields of gravity: The laws of physics must be exactly the same in his referenceframe, wherever the observer is. Therefore, the observer measures space- and timedistortions elsewhere. For example, the observer in a very fast spaceship near the speed of light, will have a normal idea of time. He will also observe normal properties of space. Nothing is shrinking, dilating, stretching. Because the laws of physics must be the same, wherever he is. (in every frame of reference) Therefore, he will measure lengthcontractions and timedilations elsewhere. Do you see the resemblance for observers in different fields of gravity? Our clock is dilating here on Earth relative to clocks of hypothetical aliens in the voids of space. (without matter). But according to us, our time flows as usual and we do not measure spaceshrinks at all. Nothing wrong with time and space in our coördinatesystem. Because the laws of physics must work as usual. Therefore, the timeflow of thé aliens is stretching. And their space is expanding according to the observers here on Earth. An observer cannot afford himself space- and timedistortions in his own referenceframe, because the laws of physics must work exactly the same. So, he will project space- and timedistortions elsewhere. So, the existing observer, is the backbone of the coördinatesystem. And wherever he is, the laws of physics work properly. No spaceshrinks or timestretches. When he is repositioning himself, his observations of space- and timedistortions elsewhere are repositioning themselves too. His normal ticking clock and normal spatial observations in his coördinatesystem, are the norm for observing distortions of space and time elsewhere. So, when you are in a void region of space, where 'the universe is expanding very fast", you will not observe such an expansion of space, because of the principle of relativity: the laws of physics must be the same for you, wherever you are. Maarten Vergucht obsessed with the question (duration: two years): how do we observe space and time?