[15] **viXra:1107.0062 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2014-12-22 15:01:52*

**Authors:** D.T. Froedge

**Comments:** 18 Pages.

The presentation here is based on the presumption that the total energy of a particle and photon in a gravitational field is localized and conserved. A mass particle thus entering a static gravitational field has an increasing velocity, but a decreasing rest mass, or a mass defect. The total energy is conserved. This also means that as a photon rises in a gravitational field there is no loss of energy, and therefore a photon escapes the most intense field, precluding the formation of a black hole. Since there is no energy change in an accelerating particle technically gravitation is not a force. It will be shown that such a theory of gravitation can be developed, that properly predicts known dynamic, has proper covariant transformations, the proper Shapiro velocity, and does not require formulation in curved space. Noether’s theorem definitively shows that contrary to all other forces, energy cannot be conserved nor localized in a Riemannian gauge field representation. It is presumed here that this is a flaw in GR, and it is asserted here that Noether’s theorem is not an indicator of a physical reality, but an indicator of the approximate nature of GR. This can best be tested in the observation of the properties of objects cited to be black holes. There are points of this development that are testable, and provable or disprovable in experiments on Black Holes and, Event Horizons.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[14] **viXra:1107.0058 [pdf]**
*submitted on 29 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Ranganath G Kulkarni

**Comments:** 20 pages, Published in the General Science Journal

The energy density of free space is constant and negative. Energy,
which comes from free space according to the law of energy creation, is created at
a constant rate. Matter or energy that is created contains equal amounts of positive
and negative energy. Therefore, the total energy of the body is zero. This law offers
insights on the beginning and end of the universe, as well as how this cycle
continues.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[13] **viXra:1107.0047 [pdf]**
*submitted on 24 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Meir Amiram

**Comments:** 4 pages

I describe a universe in which all universal matter is of zero rest mass and is traveling
at the speed of light (this class of universe is hereinafter abbreviated ALSU). In this
universe motion through space is a result of constant rate repetition of discrete swift
microscopic leaps averaging to a smooth-like motion at C in the macroscopic scale.
All matter in this universe is composed of EMPs (see Article 1), and the difference
between photons whose speed of light is recognized in the macroscopic scale of
reality and between particles whose speed of light is not recognized as motion in the
macroscopic scale, is in the symmetry of their EMP based structures. While bosons
have semispherical structural symmetry, fermions have spherical structural symmetry.
Photons thus follow geodesic lines in their motion, while other elementary ALSU
particles are exercising their microscopic light speed leaps, frenetically joggling
around a local mid point, with the directional leap of each EMP in their construction
being cancelled out by a consequent leap of another EMP moving in the opposite
direction. In such a universe particles and photons are on an equal footing, they are
constructed from the same building blocks, have the same speeds, the same ticking
rate of time, the same zero rest mass and the same light speed mass per each EMP
participating in their construction. The physicists residing in this ALSU unfortunately
live in the macroscopic world, and are thus unaware of said equal footing. Since they
are able to recognize only the macroscopic averages of the microscopic light speed
leaps of particles, they mess up everything: they relate to fermionic particles as if they
are at rest, to their light speed masses as if they were rest masses, and to small
differential values in the particles' light speeds as absolute small speeds.
Consequently they invent relativity theories, and finally become confused of the
inconsistency of such theories with the quantum realm. I guess you will not be
surprised to find out that according to MCS Physics this hypothetical universe is the
one in which we happen to reside.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[12] **viXra:1107.0043 [pdf]**
*submitted on 21 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Javier Bootello

**Comments:** 6 pages, Comments and annotations are welcome

This article presents a gravitational potential, which could explain some astronomical singularities: the
secular increase of the eccentricity of the Moon and the increase of the Astronomical Unit. This potential is also
consistent with the solution to the unexplained anomalous precession of the perihelion of Mercury, which was the first
success of General Relativity, event which is near to reach its first centenary.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[11] **viXra:1107.0036 [pdf]**
*submitted on 20 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Roald C. Maximo

**Comments:** 5 pages

It has happened sometimes in the history of scientific development, that a misinterpretation of a
phenomenon or an experiment by a renowned scientist, will spread thereafter under the mantle of his
authority without anyone bothering to verify the veracity of those arguments and check for its correctness.
With time it becomes so settled that any attempt to deny it will meet with strong opposition. The word of this
or that distinguished scientist is irrefutable and only a fool would dare to question it.
This kind of attitude has caused serious harm to the scientific development over the centuries and led
research in many areas astray. The last century has not been different.
I'm coming back again and again to this issue, always in a somewhat different and more explicit mode
because this is an emblematic case of what has been said above.
In two previous papers1 we got to demystify the phenomenon of stellar aberration and show
that there is nothing magic with light and, as has been demonstrated, there is no violation of the constancy
of the speed of light in applying Eddington's rain drops analogy. Since there is a straight correlation, as will
be readily shown, between the phenomenon of light aberration and the M/M experiment, we shall start
making a rapid pass through it.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[10] **viXra:1107.0035 [pdf]**
*replaced on 10 Sep 2011*

**Authors:** Sangwha Yi

**Comments:** 7 pages

[This paper deals with] the differential coordinate transformation in the general relativity theory.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[9] **viXra:1107.0032 [pdf]**
*submitted on 17 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Michael Harney

**Comments:** 5 Pages.

The Hubble sphere model uses a single equation of frequency versus distance to
describe the linear and non-linear cosmological redshift data. The non-linear portion of the
cosmological redshift curve is what has been interpreted as Dark Energy, an unnecessary
phenomena that can easily be described by the interaction of Hubble spheres, where the
gravitational and electromagnetic forces are limited to the range of the Hubble radius. Analysis
of Type Ia supernovae data reveals the simple, 3rd-order polynomial predicted by the Hubble
sphere model.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[8] **viXra:1107.0028 [pdf]**
*submitted on 15 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Gocho Sharlanov

**Comments:** 5 Pages.

In the article the "ether" is considered to be the "warped space-time of the Universe"
itself. Unambiguous results for the presence of anisotropy of the speed of light are obtained up
to now.
The approach in this paper is that fairness requires that experiments have to be related
to the reference system, associated with the space itself, where the Earth moves and warps the
space around. The results:
- Constant speed of light in time-spatial domains with equal gravitational potential.
- Explanation of the anomaly in the acceleration of Pioneer 10 and 11 at escaping from
the Sun's gravity with "acceleration of the speed of the electromagnetic radiation"
emanated from the spacecrafts.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[7] **viXra:1107.0027 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2013-02-28 18:09:43*

**Authors:** Glenn A. Baxter

**Comments:** 36 Pages

The Special Theory of Relativity is disproved here using simple high school algebra. The theory of relativity is LACED throughout and therefore clouds modern scientific thinking. As with Aristotle’s theory about everything being made of earth, air, fire, and water, or that a heavier canon ball will fall to earth faster than a lighter wooden ball, said theories standing for over 2000 years, Dr. Einstein’s Special Relativity is also wrong and has stood intact for over 100 years.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[6] **viXra:1107.0025 [pdf]**
*submitted on 14 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Bertrand Wong

**Comments:** 10 Pages.

This paper takes a look at the formulating of the unified field
theory and the theory of everything. It shows how a unified field
theory and theory of everything may be obtained. It also brings
up a number of new and controversial concepts relating to nature.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[5] **viXra:1107.0024 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2012-10-30 08:08:54*

**Authors:** Sergey G. Fedosin

**Comments:** 17 Pages. Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 2012, Vol. 1, No. 13, P. 1 – 15.

The essence of mass and its relation to the relativistic energy is considered. It is assumed that the rest energy is equal to the total binding energy of the body and can be found through the energies of fundamental fields associated with the substance of the body. Mass as a measure of inertia is calculated by relativistic energy and relativistic momentum. The conclusion is made that after radiation of energy from a system the mass of the system must not decrease, but increase. The opposite case is heating of bodies by external sources, which must be accompanied by an increase in entropy and decrease in the mass of the bodies. On the basis of strong gravitation the mass defect of atomic nuclei is explained. Conclusions of the general theory of relativity and the covariant theory of gravitation with respect to the mass and energy of gravitational field are opposite – in the general theory of relativity, relativistic energy and mass of a body are reduced by the mass-energy of its own gravitational field, and in the covariant theory of gravitation the mass-energy of the gravitational field increases the relativistic energy and body mass.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[4] **viXra:1107.0021 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2012-05-17 20:44:11*

**Authors:** Hartmut Traunmüller

**Comments:** 23 Pages. Withdrawn in order to be replaced by several more narrowly focused papers

Current doctrines relevant to cosmology are criticized for not being well founded, not being based on definitions and unquestionable first principles alone or violating such principles. This concerns inertia as an action of space in classical mechanics and general relativity, simultaneity in special relativity, creation out of nothing, and the plethora of means that guard the Big Bang paradigm against falsification (dark matter, cosmic inflation, dark energy, size evolution of galaxies, etc.). It is shown that a kinematic spacetime theory characterized by Lorentz symmetry can be derived from geometry alone. The foundation for a dynamic spacetime theory is also laid. It is characterized by a substratum that expands since it is pulled into gravitational potential wells. This expansion explains the cosmic redshift, Olber's paradox and the finiteness of gravitational forces in an infinite world. The apparent magnitude of type Ia supernovae, the angular size and the surface brightness of distant galaxies are shown to compare favorably with the new approach. It is suggested that the energy that is lost by redshifting light is the source of the CMBR. The cosmic energy cycle, whose existence the approach implies, and the super-Newtonian cohesion of galaxies and clusters remain yet to be understood.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[3] **viXra:1107.0016 [pdf]**
*submitted on 6 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Alfredo G. Oliveira

**Comments:** 21 pages, 7 figures

This work presents a critical yet previously unnoticed property of the units of some constants, able
of supporting a new, self-similar, model of the universe. This model displays a variation of scale
with invariance of dimensionless parameters, a characteristic of self-similar phenomena displayed
by cosmic data. The model is deducted from two observational results (expansion of space and
invariance of constants) and has just one parameter, the Hubble parameter. Somewhat surprisingly,
classic physical laws hold both in standard and comoving units, except for a small new term in the
angular momentum law that is beyond present possibilities of direct measurement. In spite of having
just one parameter, the model is as successful as the ΛCDM model in the classic cosmic tests, and
a value of H_{0} = 64 kms^{-1}Mpc^{-1} is obtained from the fitting with supernovae Ia data from Union
compilation. It is shown that in standard units the model corresponds to Big Bang cosmologies,
namely to the ΛCDM model, unveiling what dark energy stands for. This scaling (dilation) model is a
one-parameter model that seems able of fitting cosmic data, that does not conflict with fundamental
physical laws and that is not dependent on hypotheses, being straightforwardly deducted from the
two observational results above mentioned.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[2] **viXra:1107.0010 [pdf]**
*replaced on 5 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** A. Rozenkevich

**Comments:** v1 in Russian (6 pages), v2 in English (6 pages)

A mathematical derivation of geometry is rigidly rotating disk dust, taking into account special relativity.
Based on this formula are defined geometric forms a rotating disk, sphere and torus.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[1] **viXra:1107.0001 [pdf]**
*submitted on 1 Jul 2011*

**Authors:** Bertrand Wong

**Comments:** 5 pages.

Special Relativity Theory (SRT) has two postulates, one stating that the laws of physics are the same for
all observers, and the other stating that the speed of light is the constant 186,000 miles per second, regardless of
any reference frames. As a result of these postulates, SRT renders predictions such as: 1) No object can travel
faster than 186,000 miles per second (the speed of light itself); 2) On approaching the speed of light, a moving
object contracts in length in the direction of motion, while 3) a clock traveling with the object slows down; 4)
The mass of an object multiplied by the square of the speed of light gives energy ( E = mc^{2} ); i.e., mass could be
converted to energy and vice versa; 5) Observers do not agree on the simultaneity of events - two events that are
simultaneous for one observer might not be simultaneous for another.
There are evident inconsistencies among these predictions. There is also a philosophical problem relating
to the nature of reality. Could there be more than one reality in Nature; that is, can reality be subjective, and
only a matter of interpretation? This paper explores the evident inconsistencies and the philosophical problem
by developing arguments and providing numerical examples.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology