Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[MRC_Hans]

That might be an idea.

For instance, I now have a nice spreadsheet for calculating the surface gravity of objects. I have been speculating, in a Sci-Fi vein, how large a planet could be, and still have roughly Earth gravity, and actually I had expected that it would require some pretty exotic properties, but that is far from the case: A planet twice the radius of Earth, and nearly the same density, has 1G of gravity. But obviously, this function cannot be linear.

Hans

... Ahhh, I found the error. The gravity calculation is OK, but I made an error in the density calculation. Will look into it.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

OK corrected it. The "big Earth" has a density of just under 3. Pretty exotic. I don't think a solid planet can get down there.

But, it makes more sense.

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

That might be an idea.

For instance, I now have a nice spreadsheet for calculating the surface gravity of objects. I have been speculating, in a Sci-Fi vein, how large a planet could be, and still have roughly Earth gravity, and actually I had expected that it would require some pretty exotic properties, but that is far from the case: A planet twice the radius of Earth, and nearly the same density, has 1G of gravity. But obviously, this function cannot be linear.

Hans

It is pretty simple to find out a planets gravity on the surface, divide said planet by the size of the earth, and times that by its average density to the earth's. As in the moon, numbers are rounded for ease. 2,000 / 8,000, = .25 times density .65 = .1625 which is about 1/6 gravity on the surface. But don't forget that is only surface gravity. The moons weight is about 1/80th of the earth's so its so-called gravity-well is only 1/80th of earth's, that is why it is much easier to leave the moon than the earth.

So that planet being 2 times the size of the earth, even at .5 the density would have a 4 times gravity-well of the earth's and harder to get away from.

Paul

 

[MRC_Hans]

Yeah, a larger planet, even with only the same surface gravity, will have a much higher escape velocity. I assume that, all else alike, it will also have a far denser atmosphere.

About surface gravity: Even a huge planet like Jupiter has only, well I don't remember the exact number, but the 'surface' (Jupiter doensn't really have a surface) gravity is less than 3g.

I must find and include the formula for escape velocity.

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

Yeah, a larger planet, even with only the same surface gravity, will have a much higher escape velocity. I assume that, all else alike, it will also have a far denser atmosphere.

About surface gravity: Even a huge planet like Jupiter has only, well I don't remember the exact number, but the 'surface' (Jupiter doensn't really have a surface) gravity is less than 3g.

I must find and include the formula for escape velocity.

Hans

3g for Jupiter and about 1/318th of that for the earth at the same distance.

See if you can find the formula, if not, I'll figure it out.

Paul

 

[Paul]

Oxford Reference Online has this:

v >√(2MG/r)


Jupiter is apparently 59.6 kps

 

[MRC_Hans]

Cool. I have a book about all this somewhere. But I have a lot of books, so...

Did we ever find the gravity curve inside a spherical object?

I was thinking, perhaps we should start a new thread. Sooner or later, Bjarne will return and spew bovine flatulence here.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

I have revised how the expanding Universe must be understood, and tried to explain why caused the BigBang, which only can have been a BigChrunch.

Here we go:

Unification of the General Relativity (GR) and the expanding Universe.
Before reading this chapter is is recommended to read the chapters "Quantum Physics" and ”Inertia RAM". > http://www.science27.com
The stretching property of space responsible for gravity is also responsible for the expanding Universe. Hence these 2 properties, (which in fact only is one and the same property) must mathematically united.
This mean time is also changing proportional with the deformation of the Universe.
This must force us to completely change our understanding of how the expanding Universe affects several phenomena's.
This theory predict that the reason for a BigBang is a BigCrunch, and that such cycles repeats itself.

The Expanding Universe, Supernova's and BigBang
The Sun consumes / absorbs /contracts space.
Hence the space "density" is stretching towards the Sun, due to the space-consumption of the Sun. This mean space between Earth and the Sun can be compared to a stretched rubber band.

When the Sun suddenly would disappear, it can be compared to that rubber band suddenly would release its stretch / tension.

The result (when the process is completed) would be that; we would only be able to measure that time was ticking faster in that area where once was the Solar system..

Properly distances as well as the meter stick around the Sun is now stretching towards the Sun.
When the Sun suddenly disappeared distance and the meter stick wail most likely shrink because not only space/distances is stretching but most likely also everything in it. But this is not irrelevant of this context.

A supernova explosion is (off course) causing the same result as described above. A supernova explosion happens because space is extremely compact and hence also extremely strong affecting central space in a very narrow area, inside a collapsing star.

The more compact a object get, the more it challenges the strong interaction (the strong force). Finally the tension will increase to a such extend that the interaction can no longer keep space contracted, - and a nuclear explosion is a result. (In the chapter; Quantum physics we will look deeper into how the strong force is responsible for contracting space).

The same law of nature is responsible for a BigBang. So soon the Universe (or a Supernova) gets too compact (in the inner central area), - central space is affected so strong that the strong interaction (the strong force) is outplayed/equalize and a nuclear explosion the result. .

Space is resisting to be consumed / contracted / absorbed.
The resistance to be absorbed (by matter) is the "force" responsible for outplaying the strong interaction, and therefore also responsible for the nuclear explosion we call; Bigbang. .

A BigBang is releasing gradually stronger stretch/tension on space towards the centre of the huge gravitational field we call the Universe.

The question is off course: - what should cause the Universe to become more compact and challenge the strong interaction (strong force) before a BigBang?

Before answering that question, - It is necessary first to let us take a closer look at what happens after a BigBang has taken place.

When the strong interaction is outplayed (for a while) space that before was stretching towards the centre of the Universe is "free" , and hence in a process of release to a the state that is; the natural tension-free state of space.

Matter is following the release of space that mainly is concentrated in the center of the "object" we call the Universe. This release happens with the speed of light.

In the moment space is completely released, - matter (galaxies) will still have a huge speed away from the centre and hence continue to move away from the centre, like a arrow shout from a bow.

This matter will therefore continue away from the centre where the explosion once took place, but only for a while. Resistance against motion (RAM) will slowly cause this matter to decelerate, and finally stop, as well as return to the centre of the Universe du to the gravity.

In this process matter reach fast speed, and be ripped apart top plasma. Near the centre matter will amass and hence cause increasing gravity. Plasma will most likely begin to circulate around a central point of the Universe. A self-perpetuating process will lead to matter from further and further distance will speed up. .

Notice; so long there are not a relative big amount of mass near the centre of the Universe the centre of the Universe, - RAM will prevent matter to reach extreme speed. Therefore after first a certain amount of matter have reach the central area, this will cause matter approaching with almost the speed of light. So soon this happens the gravity of the Universe will increase dramatically simply because of the speed of approaching matter.

The increasing gravity due to speed of matter, will force the Universe to contract much more, maybe hundreds of times so much as today.

Centrally where matter (plasma) is orbiting matter is much more compact as before. All this is what leads to huge tension on central space in the central area of the Universe. - This leads to a BigBang.

Space itself is not really "expanding" due (to first phase) of a BigBang. But consumed / absorbed (elastic stretch) of space is just released in the moment the strong interaction is outplayed and no longer can keep space contracted / bound as matter.

Even after the tension of stretches space is released, - matter will continue to move outwards in billion of years. (read the chapter RAM Intertie and you can calculate when matter will will stop and return into a new BigCrunch.

Matter in motion away from the centre is the reason to that a huge billion light-years empty hole (found in the Universe). More > http://www.physorg.com/news107109720.html

The idea that the Universe once was a "small point" is not correct...

Because a BigBang is a result of the same law responsible for Supernovas, - the Universe do not need to shrink to the size of a pea, - a BigBang will happen long time before reaching such a small size.

Even today 13,7 billion years after the BigBang, - matter is probably still moving away from the central area of the Universe where Bigbang once took place.

Large parts of the matter , and maybe all the matter of the Universe, where once much closed to the centre and much closer to each other, but also effected of much larger gravity. Also after a BigBang matter was effected by much stronger gravity because the the pullback of the gravity effect (stretched space) took billion of years.

Cosmological Redshift
If the above mentioned scenario is true, time was ticking much slower before the BigBang, - but also much slower right after the BigBang, - simply because the gravity effect on space was huge also long time after the Bigbang, - before the space tension was "normalizing".
If the laws of nature always are the same to any time, we must expect that the EM frequencies are the same "per second" even though the "second" never is the same length.

Therefore when we receive light created in a different time, - the faster ticking time today, - can explain why light created in the past is redshiftet.

Simply because when light created billion of years ago, is received by an observed today, - it is understood in a total different (faster) time-perspective, - because the strong gravity effects from the past is now almost gone, and hence time is faster.

Originally light wasn't redshiftet, but the faster ticking time today is changing that perspective...

So it is not the expanding Universe that is causing redshift, but it is time that was ticking proportional slower in the past, both because the Universe was more compact but also especially because that speed of moving matter was much faster in the past.

THIS seems to be how to understand cosmological redshift.

• Photons do NEVER lose energy.
• Photons do NEVER gain energy.

Photon absorptions spectra are "time stamps" send from different space-time.

Other Problems this theory can Solve
This theory also solves the problems that we have in fact never objective confirmed that space really is expanding.

For example the distance to the Moon is not increasing due to the expanding space. The reason for that is simple, space does not expands, - but it is only stretching towards a space vacuum (we call gravitational fields) and sometimes released from such tension, by huge gravity/strong-force explosions. . .

This theory also solves the problem what really tricker Supernova Explosion as well at BigBang Explosions.

THIS is a consequence of uniting stretched space (the curvature of space) (GR) with the so-called expanding nature of the expanding Universe..

In fact in both cases we are only speaking about properties of gravity.... Nothing else..

 

[ferd burfle]

No.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Bjarne: You make no sense. Your assumptions are provably wrong, your logic is fatally flawed, and you don't really know what you are talking about.

You live in your own fantasy world. In that fantasy world, you are the hero of science and have solved the problems that have baffled mankind for a century.

In the real world, you haven't even understood basic physics, and you are just typing nonsense.

I feel sorry for you, and I have tried to help you, but you don't want to listen.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

Your assumptions are provably wrong

Prove it

you are the hero of science and have solved the problems that have baffled mankind for a century

Thank you...

 

[MRC_Hans]

Prove it

I did.

Thank you...

No.


Hans

 

[Bjarne]

You live in your own fantasy world

When it comes to BigBang (and a lot more) I think we all live in a fantasy world , - right ?
So what exactly make yours fantasy better than mine?
The difference is that my fantasy is connected with a simple innocent coherent main thread, that explains the basic nature of gravity.
This can only (when it is correct) bring light to BigBang.

 

[Paulhoff]

The difference is that my fantasy is connected with a simple innocent coherent main thread, that explains the basic nature of gravity.

No, Einstein’s theory on gravity works and continues to work time and time again, and you have not show anything wrong with it.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

No, Einstein’s theory on gravity works and continues to work time and time again, and you have not show anything wrong with it.

Paul

This is also not my mission, just to extend it (to comprehend the expanding Universe, and properly also that distances, and the meter stick also is changing when times does) - and trying to understand what is the curvature of space really, except a clumsy blind expression…

 

[MRC_Hans]

When it comes to BigBang (and a lot more) I think we all live in a fantasy world , - right ?

Not really. Not knowing everything is not the same as knowing nothing.

So what exactly make yours fantasy better than mine?

Min builds on facts.

The difference is that my fantasy is connected with a simple innocent coherent main thread, that explains the basic nature of gravity.
This can only (when it is correct) bring light to BigBang.

No, it does not. It builds on lack of understanding. It is not connected with what we observe in the real world.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

This is also not my mission, just to extend it (to comprehend the expanding Universe, and properly also that distances, and the meter stick also is changing when times does) - and trying to understand what is the curvature of space really, except a clumsy blind expression…

Only problem: You don't understand the simplest things. And you refuse to learn.

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

This is also not my mission, just to extend it (to comprehend the expanding Universe, and properly also that distances, and the meter stick also is changing when times does) - and trying to understand what is the curvature of space really, except a clumsy blind expression…

Extend, you don't even know that he did, let alone extend it.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

Not really. Not knowing everything is not the same as knowing nothing.

All you know when it comes to BigBang is the EM-spectra gets redshift, But you don't know why.
Some people do believe that it is caused by Doppler Effect, (DE) but DE can only be caused by speed.
This means; if DE should be to blame galaxies should move away from us with gradually greater speed, the further these are from us.

Simple logic contradicts such possibility.


For example;
............................... X………………(Y)……………………………………………………………………………………(U)………………(W)

Let us say we (X) receive 3 photons from the same direction.
One photon from a galaxy (Y/redshift z1), - and another photon from galaxy (U/redshift z9) and one photons from (W/redshift z10).
We (X) cannot blame our speed for the 3 difference z-values, - since our speed must be the same seen from the perspective of all 3 photons hitting us.

So if DE should be correct, - the conclusion MUST be that galaxy “W” must have a speed 9 times faster as galaxy “Y”, and galaxy “U” 9 times faster as “Y”.

But this cannot be true because, because then 3 photons send from galaxy “X”, and “U” moving towards “W” will off course also result in a z1 and z10 redshift, and hence “we” “should” then be moving 9 times faster as “U” etc…..

As you “should” could see, - this is a contradiction, and hence impossible. But still many believes in this silly idea.


The other possibility is; -
that the redshift should happen because the size of the wavelength must be affected when traveling; this option is not bad, but also not good.
It must means that photon must lose energy extremely slowly, except is also time is changing proportional too.

Don’t say it is impossible to get me to change my mind. I have just done that.
Until recently I thought that time must tick gradually slower when the Universe is expanding. It is opposite time is ticking faster.

Bjarne’
So what exactly make yours fantasy better than mine?
Hans
Min builds on facts.

• What facts ?
• What evidence ?

Bjarne
The difference is that my fantasy is connected with a simple innocent coherent main thread that explains the basic nature of gravity.
This can only (when it is correct) bring light to BigBang.
Hans
No, it does not. It builds on lack of understanding. It is not connected with what we observe in the real world.

You cannot observe what happens to a photo when traveling only measure the spectra have change long time after it was created.

The fact that the sky is blue doesn’t prove it is because of the oxygen in it.

In the same way you cannot know what happens to time and distances due the expanding Universe, and whether these ingredients also are affected by the expanding Universe or not.

Furthermore it is a fact you even don’t know why the Universe is expanding and when it will stop.

You have simply no idea at all, which mean in reality you have no support from science when it comes to what you really are dealing with.

How can you and "we" try to tell me what we know ?


At least..........

• You should know that the Universe is a huge field of gravity and therefore also that the expansion somehow must effect the background gravity.
• You should based on the Pound-Rebka experiment also be able to understand that when a photon is moving to a faster moving time zone, you will have (gravitational) redshift.
• You should also be able to understand that when the Universe since BB have change its gravity, that too have affected time.
• You should easy could imaging that a Big Crunch would cause matter to reach a huge speed.
• You should also be able to understand that photons created long ago, very well could bring a message trying to tell you how strong /different gravity and time was looong ago.
• You should also could see that it seems like gravity could be huge right before the BB, excactly like it is when a Supernova goes off.
• You should be able to see that a Big Crunch (huge gravity due to speed) could be the cause of a BigBang.
  

Try to put all these fragment together, - and finally add the fact that matter consumes space proportional with the strength of gravity, - that would tell you why the density of space could contract (is consumed/absorbed) a lot , -before a BB - simply due to strong speed of matter /// huge gravity....

Tell me now, - how does your universe now look like ?

A question of coherent thinking my friend..

A question of right brained thinking my friend.

A question to follow a simple innocent main thread to its final consequence added with all we know...

But you know we cannot demand right brained thinking from left brained persons...

That could be big part of the problem.

Left brained prefer a defragmented incoherent picture of the world.

It's not much to do about it.

 

[MRC_Hans]

All you know when it comes to BigBang is the EM-spectra gets redshift, But you don't know why.
Some people do believe that it is caused by Doppler Effect, (DE) but DE can only be caused by speed.
This means; if DE should be to blame galaxies should move away from us with gradually greater speed, the further these are from us.

Simple logic contradicts such possibility.

For example;
............................... X………………(Y)……………………………………………………………………………………(U)………………(W)

*snip*

As you “should” could see, - this is a contradiction, and hence impossible. But still many believes in this silly idea.

Just because you don't understand it, it doesn't have to be silly.

Actually, it is rather complex, but I can try to help you with a simple analogy:

Take a rubber band, preferably a long one. Now, take a marker and make three spots on it, one near one end, one in the middle, and one near the other end. the firsts one, in one end, represent the Earth and the others, two galaxies at different distance. Now, take both ends of the rubber band, and slowly stretch it. You will observe that the 'galaxy' at the far end of the rubber band is moving away at always twice the speed of the 'galaxy' in the middle of the rubber band, but they are both moving at constant speed.

Don’t say it is impossible to get me to change my mind. I have just done that.

You make up new dreams form time to time, but you refuse to learn facts.

• What facts ?
• What evidence ?

The facts and evidence that you have carefully ignored in all the postings here and on the Danish forum. If you want to find out, just read it all again.

You cannot observe what happens to a photo when traveling only measure the spectra have change long time after it was created.

That sentences makes absolutely no sense.

The fact that the sky is blue doesn’t prove it is because of the oxygen in it.

Water vapor. Not oxygen. We can prove why it is blue.

In the same way you cannot know what happens to time and distances due the expanding Universe, and whether these ingredients also are affected by the expanding Universe or not.

Nonsense.

Furthermore it is a fact you even don’t know why the Universe is expanding and when it will stop.

You have simply no idea at all, which mean in reality you have no support from science when it comes to what you really are dealing with.

Wrong. We are not sure, but we have good and consistent theories. This is what you don't understand: An incomplete, but consistent theory is far far better than pure speculation.

Try to put all these fragment together, - and finally add the fact that matter consumes space proportional with the strength of gravity, - that would tell you why the density of space could contract (is consumed/absorbed) a lot , -before a BB - simply due to strong speed of matter /// huge gravity....

All your fragments are more or less gibberish. You simply have to choose:

Take the trouble to read the book from page one and try to understand it.

Or forget about trying to explain physics.

A question of coherent thinking my friend..

Bjarne, your fantasies are not coherent. They contradict themselves.

A question of right brained thinking my friend.

More like half-brained, I'm afraid.

Let me give you just one example of how incoherent your fantasies are:

1) You say that a ball-shaped object is best at 'creating gravity' and that different shapes with the same mass create less gravity.

2) You say that your gravity model can explain 'dark matter'.

3) A galaxy is a flat disk with very low density (only slightly above a vacuum), so it should not be able to create much gravity, compared to its mass.

4) Yet, what we observe is that its rotational speed indicates a greater mass than explained by the observable matter.

So YOUR model has even greater problems with dark matter than the accepted law of gravity.

Hans