Re: An explanation for the increasing expansion

From: brodix (brodix_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 09/13/04 

Date: 13 Sep 2004 10:23:04 -0700

Old Man,

 As you seem to have a fair amount of patience, I'll say that I'm not
trying to be particularly ignorant, but obviously I'm no expert. So
from that perspective, I'm making a very basic observation;
Gravity/mass causes "positive" curvature of space, as the matter
within its vicinity falls into it. As gravity increases the density of
mass, it causes heat/radiation/light and whatever other forms of
energy to radiate back out across at least 15 billion light years of
space. As E=mc2, then presumably it is the constituent energy of that
collapsing mass which is being dispursed. So we have two basic
directions here. Mass is contracting, energy is expanding. We accept
that collapsing mass is positive curvature, yet the expanding energy
is assumed to not have any opposing equivalent effect and therefore
galaxies must be traveling away from each other in otherwise flat
space. Yet it is said that the force of this expansion is in inverse
proportion to the positive curvature of space. Why would these two
forces need to be in inverse proportion?
>
> There's no empirical evidence for "negative mass" or "repulsive gravity".
> Note that "negative mass" is distinct in concept from "anti-charge" such
> as that of an "anti-electron" (positron) for which there is indisputable
> empirical evidence. Anti-particles are observed to have positive mass /
> energy, and, according to GTR, positive energy gravitates attractively,
> whilst negative energy, such as that due to binding energy (nuclear mass
> deficit), gravitates repulsively.
>
> If elementary particles of negative mass existed, there's no logically self-
> constant argument against their being observed in high energy particle
> physics experiments.
>
 The proportion of empty space between galaxies is enormous, relative
to the size of galaxies, so the comparative effects in similar volumes
of space would mean that gravitational curvature in the vicinity of
galaxies is far far greater then the force of expansion, so even if
normal light causes negative curvature, its effects in the vicinity of
galaxies would be overwhelmed by gravity, so that light passing
through this space would still be positively curved, as is the space
it is traveling through.
>
> On the largest of scales, matter distribution is observed to be homogeneous.
> On that scale, space is observed to be homogeneously flat.

As I heard it originally reported, this was due to gravity and
expansion balancing out, just as the need for Omega to equal one
predicts.
>
> That some galaxies are independently calculated to be older than
> the Universe, is a chronic problem for BBT. The news isn't new or
> ignored. One can hope for a better theory, but, at present, there's
> no empirically viable alternative that comes close to matching BBT's
> comprehensive success.
>
 Not to be blunt, but as the saying goes, even a broken clock is right
twice a day. Big Bang Theory still needs Inflation theory and adds up
to a universe that is nintysix percent invisible.

> Hubble was off by more than a factor of ten, but brodix isn't even
> wrong.
>
 I assume you are not agreeing with me so this is saying I'm not even
in the ball game, but I don't think I'll hire any cosmologists to do
my books.

regards,

brodix

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What is gravity, I have no clue
    ... so all things warp, and warping is what gravity is, warping around ... mass in the fabric ... energy, and the formula does not work. ... Why is it that spiral galaxies have a lot of dark matter and elliptic ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: "Einsteins Unfortunate Legacy #2"
    ... revealed to be a force resulting from the release of mass energy due to ... However, as to the assertion re gravity quoted above, I would like to ... work titled "The Quantum as a Physical Entity". ... the energy of expansion and contraction ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Flaw in Stowe/LeSage Heating
    ... Including binding energy. ... > measure of two units of mass of different chemical compositions. ... So LeSagian interaction couples to binding energy as in GR? ... LeSagian gravity? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Mass vs distance
    ... Planck mass are lower at the bottom of the hill, ... In a spacetime with a timelike Killing ... null infinity, and in between them, there is energy radiated ... they climb out of a gravity well. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!
    ... > force when the conversation is about gravity. ... >> What makes you think you can isolate a quantum Aether unit? ... >> Mass is just a dimension. ... the kinetic energy is equal to half the ...
    (sci.physics)