Authors: Stephen H. Jarvis
Following on from the previous series of papers regarding the golden ratio algorithm for time [1-12], more specifically papers 11  and 12  in continuing with the explanation of the redshift effect, the idea of cosmology is measured with a new understanding of the redshift effect according to the golden ratio time-algorithm, namely the general description of the universe of stars according to the new appreciation of the redshift effect. To address this, first the idea of cosmology is introduced and what cosmology in contemporary terms seeks to deliver, and how such theories of cosmology have been arrived at. Secondly, the current problems in cosmology are discussed, namely any absences of theory that are required to explain observed data, and any absences of data that are unable to account for current theoretical models. Thirdly, a key flaw in modern cosmology central to the redshift effect is highlighted that appears to lead to all known cosmological and astronomical discrepancies faced by cosmology and astrophysics. Fourthly, a solution to this issue is proposed in line with the previous series of papers [1-12], namely the golden ratio time-algorithm as a new understanding of the redshift effect. Then, a new cosmological model is forwarded, after which anthropological evidence for this new cosmological model is presented. The standard for the cosmological model being presented in this paper is a standard that uses “all” astrophysical data with a cosmological theory that is complete, entertaining “no” assumption or “fixes” that have no astrophysical data.
Comments: 23 Pages.
[v1] 2019-11-04 20:03:05
Unique-IP document downloads: 24 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
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.