Bjarne, one good thing is that you are willing to rethink your ideas. However, you need to go deeper, you need to realize what the basis for your ideas are.
Originally, your space wind (SW) was supposed to be the real gravity, the explanation for dark matter, etc.
No, never.
BASIC
Original the basic idea was that matter pulls space-density from both in inwards and outwards direction and that this was
and is still how to understand how a basic
field of gravity works.
It is a mystery why the magnitudes of black holes are proportional to the surrounding mass in central galaxies.
To find out whether there was a simple explanation the silo measurement was executed, but didn’t solve anything.
If there really are huge amount of compact mass inside such holes (which I find have to believe) we don’t know how it got there.
Maybe RR could contribute to solve that.
Before the attempt to understand more about central gravity mysteries, the central
basic parts of the theory was
and still is, that space is not a big nothing, but rather a big “something”, and that we have not understood what the that “something” is .
It is not enough just to claim that space curves, - because
what then curves and how.
Furthermore the existing theories have totally failed to explain the how mass attraction really works.
Which mean that the
expression “curved space” obviously couldn’t be a sufficient .
Basically everything is made of space and energy.
Space is a flexible "something".
Matter is “not matter as such” (you should have heard that before) but matter is still that "basic-something" just “compressed to something you call matter.
We know matter and space must be connected, - and what I just wrote seems to be the only possible explanation.
This was and is still the
basic main thread.
If this really is so, how would the Universe now look like? – There are several main threads to follw.
SpaceWind (SW).
One of the consequences is now that space is not “just” a “dead” curved something, but rather a elastic flexible something.
Between two bodies elastic space-density is lacking.
Space must be seen like a flexible and elastic “structure” , - so far so good.
But can energy be transmitted between such space matter connections. ?
The first thoughts that strike was YES, this are what pull moons and planet rotation.
Relativstic Resistance RR
Another of the main thread threads are; now when the structure of space is; a elastic structure, wowen into the structure of matter, - matter can impossible move without resistances from its elastic "ocean".
We
know resistance against acceleration is true, it
must be misunderstood if that resistance not should apply for constant speed / all the time.
I am sure that RR is the last missing piece fully to understand the cause of ice ages.
In that area of science there are also a couple of mysteries too, that this theory obviously is able to solve.
The challenge here is; how to understand absolute motion, even though there according to the holy book (that have failed plenty times) not should exist absolute “speed”.
This leaves two very strictly possibilities, either SW is not necessary or it is an equalizing force.
I need more data to be able to take the final decision.
SW cannot be very much stronger as RR, - -
Look I respect the objective scientific methods,.
In my universe it is all right to speculate but it is first science when it is proven.
It is not everywhere on the planet everything is like that.
I believe SW is true. NASA too seems to confirm that KE can be transmitted between objects; they have given up the ideas that the atmosphere can be to blame, and several other ideas. So what is left except space itself? But the problem is that planets not seesm to be affected by larger speed, and this sets a limit for how strong SW possible can be.
RR is a different story, here lays probaly the key, so that also the planets and moons) can be involved in the same law of nature.
The most promising in this theory is hence to test whether RR is misunderstood;
This can be done by testing whether there is a variation of the distance to the moon by perigee/apogee during each 4½ periods where after these cancel out.
Without the size of the moons orbit get larger or smaller.
Data from the LLR can be compared to calculation.
I have found a Russian programmer maybe he will do the job.
He participates in world championship in programming and is also an astrophysicist.
Before handling over to him I am now checking everything one time more. This is what I am doing now.
Knowing exactly what happens in the orbit of the moon will probaly solve all the questions according to RR, SW directions of RR etc.
Now it is receding beyond the 13th decimal.
No RR in the orbit of the e.g; Earth is 4.93 * 10-9 m/s2, - the Moon
5.77* 10-12 m/s2 but such values can only be
calculated not measured.
Now is the time to show that YOUR brain is not made of concrete and rethink the whole thing: What is the reality about your ideas.
The reality is still the same RR is true and SW counteract, but only maximum equally.
SW cannot be much stronger as RR if we shall respect reality in every aspect, - so long I am willing to that there are no concrete in my camp.
I have gone this far with you, so I'll offer to help you trough this part, but you must be willing to learn, and you must take the first step:
What is space wind made of?
The universe is shortly spoken; an elastic soup.
Probably only speed is to blame for that that the elastic thin soup forms small “particles” with higher density, - made of the soup.
And these forms small balls in the soup. But the balls are made of the same thin elastic soup.
Only energy/speed of the balls / particles in and through the soap makes the difference.
The balls absorb soup-density, so soup density is missing around the balls.
Call that “space vacuums”, - “stretching space”, - “deformed space” – “curved-space” or whatever you prefer.
So this is what space wind is made of, - stretching elastic soup.
Can you transmit energy through such “space vacuums” / mass-attraction- connection” ? I geuss so. For me the Universe is not only chaos.
I have gone this far with you, so I'll offer to help you trough this part, but you must be willing to learn, and you must take the first step:
First you must understand where the theory is today. I am far from sure you have understood that.
BIGBANG
According to the discussion whether BigBang and the Expanding Universe is like we
believe these to be, I can shortly say, that since this theory states that space already possess a
stretching property,
there are no reason to invent a such twice.
Whereby the so-called Expanding Universe must be force into the framework; where "expending / stretching space already exist, whereby so-called dark energy automatically become a already existing property of general relativity.
Following the dark energy trace back to where it comes from, shows that the opposite to dark energy must have existed 13,7 billion years ago, and that opposite something can only have been extreme gravity.
I think we one day will discover a galaxy at the edge of the universe that emit large amount of gamma rays burst, after a while, maybe 1000 yeras , maybe 10,000 years it will be gradually less transparence and the burst gets dimmer and more and more impossible to discover.
It could happen tomorrow or after 2 million years, already there are plenty of such that appeared in the horizon too long ago, - more will follow, and one day the chock will come.
This will be the day when the BigBang speculation falls. - I mean without higgs ( the god particle) it is already death. Just a little push more an the biggest joke in the universe will fall into nothing that it always was.
