Authors: Roger Ellman
There is general agreement that the universe began with an outward "explosion" of matter and energy at a "singularity" followed by its on-going expansion -- the "Big Bang". This paper analyses the mechanics of that beginning and two alternative theories related to it: - The Hubble - Einstein theory that that beginning created space itself, expanding and carrying the universe's matter and energy with it such that the velocity, v, of recession of any distant astral object from us is directly proportional to its distance, v = H0.d, where H0 is the "Hubble Constant", and - The Universal Decay theory that the length, [L], dimensional aspect of all quantities in the universe [e.g. distance [L], speed [L/T], gravitation constant, G, [L3/M.T2] etc.] is exponentially decaying while the material universe is expanding outward within passive, static "space". The Hubble - Einstein theory has been accepted by consensus for many decades. The Universal Decay theory was first propounded in "The Origin and Its Meaning"1 in 1996 and has since been validated by the Pioneer 10 and 11 "anomalous acceleration" as well as by the theory's success in accounting for "dark matter" and "dark energy"2. The same centrallydirected, distance-independent acceleration of (8.74 ± 1.33) x 10-8 cm/s2 that is the Pioneer "anomalous acceleration" supplies the "additional gravitation" that "dark matter" is sought to supply and is part of the on-going contraction and decay of all length, [L], dimensions. The mass of the universe is calculated and the universe's "Schwarzschild Radius" evaluated. The velocities and distances of cosmic objects in general are calculated and plotted from the end of the "inflation" to the present. It develops that there is a theoretical limit on how far back into the past can be observed regardless of the quality of our instrumentation.
Comments: recovered from sciprint.org
[v1] 25 Feb 2007
Unique-IP document downloads: 0 times
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.