You say to yourself hey you sure change your mind alot, gravity is caused by a curvature or a pressure or an absorbtion or magnetism... The speed of gravity is this, this speed of gravity is that, which is it?
The truth is, I don't know, I don't know if I ever will PROVE anything. I am throwing out ideas for myself and others and see if they stick. I'm definately in the recent habit though of covering all what if's. Re-thinking the mechanics of every known model to see if perhaps now at a later time I agree with them. But I still have doubts about all theories presented, and the very mechanics of each unique model presents conflicts with known phenomenon or believed behaviors that go along with them, not limited to but including the speed of light, the bending of light and so forth. But that is what is complicating things, the linking of several keys particles and their behavior with gravity. I have no doubt that a correct complete theory of gravity will encompass all particles and explain all phenonmenon that is intertwined and related to such, and that is quite beyond my capability and interest at this time.
May 24 2004
- From space.com
"If you've ever wondered how big the universe is, you're not alone. Astronomers have long pondered this, too, and they've had a hard time figuring it out. Now an estimate has been made, and it’s a whopper.
The universe is at least 156 billion light-years wide.
In the new study, researchers examined primordial radiation imprinted on the cosmos. Among their conclusions is that it is less likely that there is some crazy cosmic "hall of mirrors" that would cause one object to be visible in two locations. And they've ruled out the idea that we could peer deep into space and time and see our own planet in its youth.
First, let's see why the size is a number you've never heard of before.
Stretching reality
The universe is about 13.7 billion years old. Light reaching us from the earliest known galaxies has been travelling, therefore, for more than 13 billion years. So one might assume that the radius of the universe is 13.7 billion light-years and that the whole shebang is double that, or 27.4 billion light-years wide.
But the universe has been expanding ever since the beginning of time, when theorists believe it all sprang forth from an infinitely dense point in a Big Bang.
"All the distance covered by the light in the early universe gets increased by the expansion of the universe," explains Neil Cornish, an astrophysicist at Montana State University. "Think of it like compound interest."
Need a visual? Imagine the universe just a million years after it was born, Cornish suggests. A batch of light travels for a year, covering one light-year. "At that time, the universe was about 1,000 times smaller than it is today," he said. "Thus, that one light-year has now stretched to become 1,000 light-years."
All the pieces add up to 78 billion-light-years. The light has not traveled that far, but "the starting point of a photon reaching us today after travelling for 13.7 billion years is now 78 billion light-years away," Cornish said. That would be the radius of the universe, and twice that -- 156 billion light-years -- is the diameter. That's based on a view going 90 percent of the way back in time, so it might be slightly larger.
"It can be thought of as a spherical diameter is the usual sense," Cornish added comfortingly.
(You might have heard the universe is almost surely flat, not spherical. The flatness refers to its geometry being "normal," like what is taught in school; two parallel lines can never cross.)
Hall of mirrors
The scientists studied the cosmic microwave background (CMB), radiation unleashed about 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had first expanded enough to cool and allow atoms to form. Temperature differences in the CMB left an imprint on the sky that was used last year to reveal the age of the universe and confirm other important cosmological measurements.
The CMB is like a baby picture of the cosmos, before any stars were born.
The focus of the new work, which was published last week in the journal Physical Review Letters, was a search of CMB data for paired circles that would have indicated the universe is like a hall of mirrors, in which multiple images of the same object could show up in different locations in space-time. A hall of mirrors could mean the universe is finite but tricks us into thinking it is infinite.
Think of it as a video game in which an object disappearing on the right side of the screen reappears on the left.
"Several years ago we showed that any finite universe in which light had time to 'wrap around' since the Big Bang would have the same pattern of cosmic microwave background temperature fluctuations around pairs of circles," Cornish explained. They looked for the most likely patterns that would be evident in a CMB map generated by NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP).
They didn't find those patterns.
Don't look back
"Our results don't rule out a hall-of-mirrors effect, but they make the possibility far less likely," Cornish told SPACE.com, adding that the findings have shown "no sign that the universe is finite, but that doesn't prove that it is infinite."
The results do render impossible a "soccer ball" shape for the universe, proposed late last year by another team. "However, if they were to 'pump up' their soccer ball to make it larger, they could evade our bounds" and still be in the realm of possibility, Cornish said. Other complex shapes haven't been ruled out.
The findings eliminate any chance of seeing our ancient selves, however, unless we can master time travel.
"If the universe was finite, and had a size of about 4 billion to 5 billion light-years, then light would be able to wrap around the universe, and with a big enough telescope we could view the Earth just after it solidified and when the first life formed," Cornish said. "Unfortunately, our results rule out this tantalizing possibility."
May 26 2004
William Gaede: Jan 2003 What is an Object?
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V10NO1PDF/V10N1GAE.pdf
Reginald T. Cahill: Jan 2004 Gravity as Quantum Foam In-Flow
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V11NO1PDF/V11N1CA1.pdf
Absolute Motion and Gravitational Effects
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V11NO1PDF/V11N1CA2.pdf
The Creation of the Universe
There is no question that there is or was a being or multiple beings, "God" if you will, that created it all. That is the most absolute positive thing I know. I often wonder though how long it took them to create it. Everything that humans know and have figured out about physics, the creators had to also figure out and know. How long did this take? How many test Universes were before the one we live in? Probably the greatest invention was the manufacture and implementation of the function of gravity. At what point was everything said to be satisfactory how it was and what if anything was flawed or missing in retrospect?
The Universe as we know it is quite fascinating and mysterious but think about some of these test Universes what they would have been like.
Surely noone would believe that the creators knew the details, behaviors and mechanics of anything or everything before having created it. Like a puzzle you don't know the solution to the puzzle before you are introduced to the puzzle, or you don't know the solution to the puzzle until you have over a period of time experimented by trial and error or devised a method of solving it or figure out if it even has a solution.
Eventually an ingenious puzzle will be made and every piece fits together. This however took time and experimentation in what I would call test Universes. I can't concieve of any other possibility.
While you may or may not have the same ideas of pre-Universe, you can almost bet that this Universe is not a test one. Everything is too complex and perfect, and the age of it is well past that of any experimental one, agreed?
It is also quite evident that the purpose of the planets and everything is to support life, I mean what would be the point of a bunch of dead big rocks floating around? Common. I don't have the meaning of life, but even if I did, would you believe me? It's quite simply really... admire and enjoy the world around you. That is the meaning of life. That is for all purposes what reason God has for the creation of the Universe, just as you would admire and find curiosity in nature, so too does God.
June 7 2004
I think now would be a good time to list references and links of interest that
I have come accross that did not make it into this journal previously.
WOLFRAM RESEARCH
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/letters/
ARTIFICIAL BLACKHOLES
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0523/p25s02-stss.htm
BINARY COMPANION THEORY
http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org./index.shtml
PAIR'S BINARY PULSAR DISCOVERY IN UMASS RESEARCH EARNS NOBEL
http://www.boston.com/globe/search/stories/nobel/1993/1993j.html
CIRCULAR CAUSALITY
http://members.hometown.aol.com/_ht_a/naturyl/texts/pantexts/dejavu.html
NOBEL LAUREATES IN PHYSICS
http://www.nobel.se/physics/laureates/index.html
STRUCTURE OF MATTER
http://www.nobel.se/physics/educational/matter/1.html
ORIGINAL ALBERT EINSTEIN DOCUMENTS
http://www.alberteinstein.info/gallery/gtext3.html
SCIENCENET Q&A
http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/browse/physresources.html
JPL CALENDAR
http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/calendar/
SPACE GENETICS
http://www.oocities.org/Area51/Nebula/3735/index.html
GALILEO AND EINSTEIN UNI VIRGINA
http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/lecturelist.html
The Mathematics of Fermat's Last Theorem
http://www.mbay.net/~cgd/flt/fltmain.htm
The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html
COLORING THE UNIVERSE
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/color_universe_020625-1.html
HOWSTUFFWORKS SCIENCE
http://science.howstuffworks.com/index.htm
MAGNETICS
http://my.execpc.com/~rhoadley/magindex.htm
SANDIA
http://www.sandia.gov/
ELECTRIC COSMOS
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/index.htm
Chris Hillman
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/wrong.html
HYPERPHYSICS GSU
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html
MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS AND ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES
http://www.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109N/more_stuff/Maxwell_Eq.html
Paul Bourke
http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/
ELECTRICITY William Beaty
http://www.amasci.com/ele-edu.html
SPECIAL RELATIVITY Walter Babin
http://www.wbabin.net/
ELECTRONIC JOURNALS
http://www.iop.org/EJ/
John K Harms
http://www.johnkharms.com/index.html
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
http://www.sciam.com/
PLASMAS
http://www.plasmas.org/topics.htm
THE INFINITE UNIVERSE
http://www.eitgaastra.nl/
APERION
http://redshift.vif.com/journal_archives.htm
arXiv
http://www.arxiv.org/
ASTRONOMY PICTURE OF THE DAY
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html
QUANTUM THEORIES
http://www.heaven-words.com/index.htm
SLOAN DIGITAL SKY SURVEY
http://www.sdss.org/
SWINBURNE
http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/
CONSTANTS
http://physics.nist.gov/
2DF GALAXY REDSHIFT SURVEY
http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/2dFGRS/
ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNALS
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/issues.html
IEEE
http://www.ieee.org/portal/index.jsp?pageID=home
5TH STATE OF MATTER THEORY
http://www.5th-state-of-matter.info/5th-state.html
HIGHWIRE STANFORD U
http://highwire.stanford.edu/
LIGO GRAVITATIONAL WAVE OBSERVATORY
http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/
BOARD ON PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY
http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bpa/index.html
INTERNET PUBLIC LIBRARY PHYSICS
http://www.ipl.org/div/subject/browse/sci54.00.00/
QUARKS AND THE COSMOS
http://books.nap.edu/books/0309074061/html/index.html
PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
http://prl.aps.org/
PHYSICSWEB
http://physicsweb.org/
SUPERSTRINGS
http://physicsweb.org/article/world/16/11/8
PHOTON TRAP
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/27mar_stoplight.htm
QUANTUM CHART
http://www.pa.uky.edu/~fu/liu/compts.html
RED NOVA
http://www.rednova.com
LAWS OF MOTION
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/motion.html
THE LAWS LIST
http://www.alcyone.com/max/physics/laws/
Paul Marmet
http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/
QUANTUM PHYSICS MODEL
http://www.tshankha.com/index.htm
ZERO-POINT ENERGY
http://users.erols.com/iri/ZPENERGY.html
ASTRONOMY 162 UTENN
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/index.html
GRAVITY PROBE B
http://einstein.stanford.edu/
NEWSCIENTIST
http://www.newscientist.com/
Nigel Cook
http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/
NATURE SCIENCE NEWS
http://www.nature.com/
EUREKA
http://www.eurekalert.org/
SOS MATH
http://www.sosmath.com/index.html
MIT OPEN COURSEWARE
http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html
CHEMISTRY
http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1/home.html
