Steady state theory

[ACG52]

This thread belongs in Speculations.

[alpha2cen]

Is this logic exact?

A) Universe expansion, CMB-->Big Bang theory ---> Universe accelerated expansion ---> Big Bang theory + Dark Energy

 

B)------ " --------------------->Big Bang theory -------------------------> " ----------------------------> New theory of beginning

Which one is correct ?

Which one gives the answer? Answer B) is speculation.

[MigL]

I must have missed something.

 

Where is the solid evidence that spiral galaxies should create new matter at the centre of the galaxy ?????

 

You had better notify NASA, CERN and all scientific journals that the law of conservation of mass-energy has been falsified. This is a paradigm shift in the way we understand and do physics !!!

 

The above is obviously sarcasm, the following is not.

 

ACG52 was right, you need to get a clue and stop spouting nonsense.

Edited August 12, 2012 by MigL

[alpha2cen]

Is this logic exact?

A) Universe expansion, CMB-->Big Bang theory ---> Universe accelerated expansion ---> Big Bang theory + Dark Energy

 

B)------ " --------------------->Big Bang theory -------------------------> " ----------------------------> New theory of beginning

Which one is correct ?

Which one gives the answer? Answer B) is speculation.

 

The New theory in the paragraph means other new theories of the beginning of the Universe.

 

Till to find out what is the Dark Energy, we do not know which theory is exactly correct.

At the present we think Big Bang theory is more reliable.

The theories are here

A) Big Bang theory + Dark Energy

B) Parallel Universe

C) Steady state theory

D) Holographic Universe

E) Another theory1 of the beginning of the Universe.

F) Another theory2 of the beginning of the Universe.

..

etc..

Edited August 12, 2012 by alpha2cen

[EMField]

Who says it is everywhere? Just how far out do you think we have actually measured the CMB? From orbit, and if those rays were coming from our galactic neighborhood you would never know because they have never measured it anywhere but from near earth orbit. Kinda like telling me how many neutrinos leave the Sun and change flavor en-route when they have never measured a single neutrino in the vicinity of the Sun, but by god we are 100% sure it has to be this way. Even now voyager is undergoing events never predicted by standard cosmology, but it was predicted by other theories.

[FunkyAce07]

Maybe there is a black hole.... if that is the case maybe it is more dense and so the centrifigual force of our sun's orbit cannot overcome the gravitational pull.... If We our sun steadily orbits further and further from the galactic centre then wouldn't that mean that the black hole, assuming that's what is in the center, is just less dense and our centrifugal force from the orbit is escaping the black hole's gravitational pull... I'm unsure how that means that there is some sort of matter being created between the two.... wouldn't you need to record more distances than just that between our sun and the center... how about a couple other floating rocks relatively the same amount of mass/speed (centrifigual force) as our own sun at varying distances from the center.... then you could record to find roughly how close to the centre our sun would orbit at a constant distant.... I could only assume within a certain range our sun would spiral inward, one point it would be a constant orbit and then anything further than that point it would have a outward spiraling orbit which. The further the sun would orbit away, the more the sun would accelerate away from the centre constantly making each orbit longer and longer while the distance between the two would grow faster and faster as it breaks free from the orbit.

 

 

Interesting idea... I just read more of the posts. Not sure how new stars have come into being from the centre... If everything had an outward spiral away from the center then it sounds like the center would have no gravitational force.... so then there would be no spiraling orbit because there should be no orbit if there is no gravitational force in the center right? I don't understand...

 

 

[EMField]

Here, try this for starters, give you the basics:

http://hozturner.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/gravity-force-solved.html

[David Levy]

Hi FunkyAce07

 

 

 

There is a supper massive black hole at the center of the Milky way galaxy. This black hole has a mass of several millions sun mass. It is like a supper massive natural accelerator which has incredible power & gravity. Hence, its power is billion over billion time stronger that the best accelerator worldwide – CERN. If a man made accelerator had succeeded to generate Anti matter, then by definition, this natural accelerator has the capability to generate new atoms and matter which is needed to keep the expansion of the galaxies in the universe.

 

Therefore, the center of the galaxy maintain its dense and its gravity force as the stars are moving outwards.

 

 

Edited August 17, 2012 by David Levy

[ACG52]

Therefore, the center of the galaxy maintain its dense and its gravity force as the stars are moving outwards.

 

 

You've never explained what causes outward star movement. Saying it's the creation of matter in the center is no explanation. What force causes outward movement?

 

Indeed, if there was matter creation in the galactic center, it would only increase the gravitational force and would pull stars INWARD.

Edited August 17, 2012 by ACG52

[EMField]

The same force that causes quasars and proto-galaxies to be ejected from galaxies. You don't believe that galactic clusters just happen to be aligned by mere chance do you?

[David Levy]

Milky Way Galaxy is a disc shape system;

 

Let's look at two examples for disc shape system;

 

 

Moon - The moon orbits the earth in a disc shape system. We all know that it moves outwards. Do we know why?

 

Mars - By Wikipedia: "Landforms visible on Mars strongly suggest that liquid water has at least at times existed on the planet's surface". Inorder to enable liquid water, it must have been in a similar zone location as the Earth today. Therefore, in the past it was closer to the sun. As a direct outcome - in the solar system all the stars are moving outwards!!!

Edited August 17, 2012 by David Levy

[alpha2cen]

How about this concept? Higgs field becomes weak.

My link

 

Particles behavior at the beginning.

My link

 

Neutron speed and decay rate

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/68318-single-neutron-decay-rate-is-constant/page__view__findpost__p__697297

Edited August 17, 2012 by alpha2cen

[ACG52]

Moon - The moon orbits the earth in a disc shape system. We all know that it moves outwards. Do we know why?

 

 

Yes, we do. Tidal deformation transfers angular momentum to the moon, and as a result, it's orbit increases.

 

Mars - By Wikipedia: "Landforms visible on Mars strongly suggest that liquid water has at least at times existed on the planet's surface". Inorder to enable liquid water, it must have been in a similar zone location as the Earth today. Therefore, in the past it was closer to the sun. As a direct outcome - in the solar system all the stars are moving outwards!!!

 

No, in order to enable liquid water, it must have had an atmosphere. Given an atomosphere, Mars can sustain liquid water right where it is.

 

And you've never explained what force is moving the stars outward. Nor any mechanism to generate matter. Or are you just waving your hand and saying, 'here a miracle happens'?

Edited August 18, 2012 by ACG52

[EMField]

Milky Way Galaxy is a disc shape system;

 

Let's look at two examples for disc shape system;

 

 

Moon - The moon orbits the earth in a disc shape system. We all know that it moves outwards. Do we know why?

 

Mars - By Wikipedia: "Landforms visible on Mars strongly suggest that liquid water has at least at times existed on the planet's surface". Inorder to enable liquid water, it must have been in a similar zone location as the Earth today. Therefore, in the past it was closer to the sun. As a direct outcome - in the solar system all the stars are moving outwards!!!

 

Yes we do know why they are disc shaped:

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/node73.html

[MigL]

I'll repeat it again, and maybe this time you'll at least attempt an answer.

 

If matter is created in the centre of active galaxies, then mass-energy is being created in clear violation of a basic conservation law which is a paradigm of physics. This law of conservation of mass-energy is a direct result of the continuous symmetry of the action in a time transformation ( Noether's theorem ).

Notice that the big bang event can get around this conservation law because there is no time symmetry since space-time structure only comes into being at the big bang, ie. there is no time before t=0.

[EMField]

I'll repeat it again, and maybe this time you'll at least attempt an answer.

 

If matter is created in the centre of active galaxies, then mass-energy is being created in clear violation of a basic conservation law which is a paradigm of physics. This law of conservation of mass-energy is a direct result of the continuous symmetry of the action in a time transformation ( Noether's theorem ).

Notice that the big bang event can get around this conservation law because there is no time symmetry since space-time structure only comes into being at the big bang, ie. there is no time before t=0.

 

So theory says if charge q1 moves from point A to point B in a straight line it requires x amount of energy (or work) to do so and the system reduces overall charge by q1/x. Simplified, but you can look up the math if you want the exact formula in more complex form, I am too lazy to do it for you

 

Now if this same charge q1 moves 20 times the distance in a circular orbit from point A to point A it requires no energy to do so, because otherwise the math would imply it gained energy out of thin air.

 

Well duh, we do it every day in generators. But, but, but, you say, we put energy into the system, and yes we do, but then according to the rules of electricity, none of this force is actually used up. Granted transmission lines are not perfect conductors so some of the energy escapes the system, but even so, it remains relatively constant even while working itself along the lines.

 

So aether to be or not to be, because out of thin air is not allowed. Unless it is in a circle, then somehow that just means it takes no work at all, not that energy is gained somehow. Do not poke too closely there, your theories might shatter. Better to believe no work is magically not being done, than the opposite. Because when the public finds out the worth of the garbage they peddle all to keep a theory standing that has no right to. To keep you paying for something that can be created out of thin air, or accept an aether.

 

But, there is still one possible out. Electromagnetic induction. An electric current is created when a conductor moves through a magnetic field. http://en.wikipedia....netic_induction

 

How, out of thin air? It just so happens magnetic fields cause things to circle, but well, as we know it takes no work to move in a circle, so this electric current is gained by these particles how? Fine, let us not look for an aether, let us first discover what makes up an electric and magnetic field. It is kinda a warping and bending of space-time, the brilliant man did get that right, not his fault fanatics followed up and twisted it all in his name.

 

But you can be sure this space-time is composed of exactly what makes up this electric and magnetic fields, two forces at complete opposites. One is work, the other just allows work to well, work without working as long as it goes in a circle, oh but dang, going in a circle in the magnetic field creates work, but no, that can't be right, but, but, but.....

 

So really you shouldn't be talking about energy conservation when your laws on charge contradict each other.

Edited August 18, 2012 by EMField

[uncool]

So theory says if charge q1 moves from point A to point B in a straight line it requires x amount of energy (or work) to do so and the system reduces overall charge by q1/x. Simplified, but you can look up the math if you want the exact formula in more complex form, I am too lazy to do it for you

Good, because the above is false. It does not take energy to move; it takes energy to accelerate.

=Uncool-

[alpha2cen]

Energy source is a problem.

How about this two step?

1)Unseen particle(or energy) creation ---> 2)unseen particle( or energy) to mass(Steady State or On Big Bang)

Energy creation at some place in current Universe is very epoch-making theory, it will be almost impossible.

Problem of 1) step is where is the unseen particle (or energy) from.

Edited August 19, 2012 by alpha2cen

[Ophiolite]

. Even now voyager is undergoing events never predicted by standard cosmology, but it was predicted by other theories.

Such as? I do hope you are not referring to the Pioneer Anomaly. This was put comfortably to bed last year as a thermal effect. The absence of spin stabilisation of the Voyager craft and consequent frequent use of thrusters generated too much noise to detect any anomaly that might have been present.

[CaptainPanic]

!

Moderator Note

EMField,
You have been warned before (here and here) not to post your theories about the charged universe in someone else's thread all the time. I have spotted your theories in at least 3 different threads now.

It is not against the rules to discuss your theories, but it is against the rules to derail other threads with your own theories. If you want to discuss them, make your own thread.

Do not reply to this mod note. If you have problems with it, use the report button at the bottom left corner of this post.

Btw, this was your last warning.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Electric universe posts have been moved to a new thread http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/68478-i-believe-the-universe-is-electric/ Discuss the topic there.

[David Levy]

To:CaptainPanic

 

I do appreciate EMField fruitful replies.

Please let him keep with his overview and theories which are very interesting and relevant to the thread.

 

Thanks

Edited August 21, 2012 by David Levy

[EMField]

I can't, because it is impossible to have a scientific discussion of the universe when 99% of it and the affects it causes are ignored, and then 96% of it is attributed to fairy dust to account for the 99% and the affects it causes that were ignored in the first place.

 

What is plasma?

 

What does plasma do in space?

 

According to "STANDARD" theory it just sits there, yet every laboratory experiment with plasma shows just the opposite. Plasma coalesces subatomic particles into atoms and dust, and eventually planets, stars and galaxies. It forms filaments.

http://apod.nasa.gov...fGeissinger.jpg

http://www.nasa.gov/...829_946-710.jpg

http://i.ytimg.com/v...LsSoc-4K4/0.jpg

http://images.astron.../m87jet_hst.jpg

 

It does this through the EM forces, the same force you base your atom on, the CMB on. The photon: the very particle (or wave) that defines the entire meaning of velocity and time, yet you then ignore this EM phenomenon in every theory but that of the atom. The very force that pervades the universe that you base the CMB on to back up theory is an EM event. Why Einstein titled his first paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies", which was promptly misunderstood by everyone. Just please put the electro back into electromagnetic.

 

And I only have one answer for Black Holes or an expanding space-time:

http://www.cscamm.um...hwarzschild.pdf

Edited August 21, 2012 by EMField

[EMField]

But you are welcome to browse by anytime.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/index.php

[David Levy]

So, let's summarize the outcome:

 

1. Steady state – This is the correct theory!!! (with some adaptation)

 

2. Mass creation – in the center of the spiral galaxy. Starting from hydrogen to all the known atoms and molecules– including water and silicates. No need for supernova for generating all the known atoms and molecules.

 

3. Star birth – Each star collects its matter which had been generated – as a snow ball.

 

4. Disc Shape system –In any disc shape system the stars are moving outwards!!! Therefore, also the Earth is moving away from the sun and the sun is moving away from the galaxy center.

 

5. Dark matter - The spiral arms are responsible for the high speed of the stars in the galaxy. Therefore, there is no need for dark Matter.

 

6. New spiral galaxy - A new spiral galaxy is generated from some sort of a seed (which might be a megnator or quasar).

 

7. Universe expending -Each new spiral galaxy is drifting away from the Mother' spiral galaxy. Therefore, at the far end of the universe, the galaxies are moving at ultra high speed, and also the galaxies are moving in all directions.

 

8. Big Bang – It's a pure fantasy.

 

9. Universe life – The life of the universe is much... much longer from 13.75 Billion years. It is billion over billion life years.

Edited August 26, 2012 by David Levy