[21] **viXra:1307.0130 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-25 01:33:37*

**Authors:** U.V.S.Seshavatharam, S.Lakshminarayana

**Comments:** 2 Pages. Open letter to the science community

In this letter an attempt is made to emphasize the major short comings of modern or standard cosmology

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[20] **viXra:1307.0128 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-24 09:50:55*

**Authors:** Khrapko R

**Comments:** 4 Pages. A translation from Russian http://www.mai.ru/science/trudy/articles/num18/article6/auther.htm (2005)

Roche’s paper “What is mass” advocates a historical predecessor of mass. It impedes teaching because presses on inadequate concept of mass.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[19] **viXra:1307.0125 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2013-07-26 03:48:52*

**Authors:** Radwan M. Kassir

**Comments:** 10 pages, 6 figures, PDFLaTeX―[v2]: Added discussions to S.4.0

The implication of the Fitzgerald length contraction hypothesis on the time dimension is considered. Originally set as an ad hoc interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment null result, the hypothesis is expressed in terms of a space transformation equation inferred from the Galilean transformation, leading to a time conversion exhibiting a contractive property.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[18] **viXra:1307.0093 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-19 02:37:10*

**Authors:** S.V. Akimenko, V.V. Demjanov

**Comments:** 5 Pages. 5 Engl.+5 Russ. version

In the article was found a second solution of the problem about the force acting on a point-like particle moving in a time-dependent potential field, is mathematically equal with early known solution. Is considered the question of the possibility of interpreting of this force, how of force of gravitational field from externals of inert a bodies (in the spirit of Mach's hypothesis about the external induction of the inertial of mass of point-like particles). Here formulated by experimental problem of identifying in studies for the celestial mechanics of this small additional of gravitational of force, which may be are achieved by the use of modern radio-physical of methods.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[17] **viXra:1307.0090 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2015-01-17 10:57:57*

**Authors:** Gene H Barbee

**Comments:** 41 Pages. Comments appreciated genebarbee@msn.coom

Historically, a culture’s cosmology was an explanation of the origin and a justification for its most significant beliefs. Scientists are actively engaged in understanding new observations regarding our universe. There is agreement that achieving a new level of understanding may require an extension to what has been observed to date about fundamental interactions, matter and energy. This paper is a summary of work by the author building on the best measurements made by physicists, astronomers and cosmologists. Of specific interest are the topics of force unification, gravitational theory, definition of space and time, dark energy and cold dark matter. Of course these are technical matters but the author addresses what this means to life and what it is reasonable to believe regarding philosophy’s “enduring questions”. The following documents are summarized:
A Top-Down Approach to Fundamental Interactions [1]
Starting with data from WMAP [11] that allows an estimate of the number of protons in the universe (exp(180), where exp stands for natural number 2.712^(180) the author explored how this number is used by nature to represent fundamental particles. This reference described models for the neutron and proton mass based on Shannon type information theory. In addition, it proposed a way of unifying the electromagnetic, weak, strong and gravitational forces.
On the Source of the Gravitational Constant at the Low Energy Scale [18]
This document summarizes arguments for a low energy gravitational scale and offered an understanding of the weak and long range character of gravitation. Physics has struggled with the reconciliation of general relativity with the other fundamental interactions (strong force, weak force and electromagnetic force). The reason for the difficulty is that general relativity and gravitation is the geometry of space and time and does not appear to originate at a reasonable energy at the quantum level. The accepted gravitational theory had the energy scale far above the energy of a proton. The author proposed a lower energy scale and offered a relationship between the quantum scale and the scale of the universe that appears to resolve this conflict.
On Expansion Energy, Dark Energy and Missing Mass [2]
This document summarizes and extends this theoretical groundwork to the field of cosmology.
Information from the proton mass model is applied to the beginning, expansion of the universe and observables from the field of astronomy. The fundamentals of space and time are described including the relationships that accurately model expansion, temperature, gravitational history and helium abundance. Results from an expansion model are compared to values reported in WMAP analysis and CMAGIC studies [14]. Three models of expansion are compared and a proposal regarding dark matter is discussed. Reference 2 analyzed the kinetic and potential energy changes during expansion and showed that there is no dark energy (dark energy fraction is 0). Furthermore, information is presented that questions the WMAP conclusion that only 0.046 of the universe is normal protons. Based on this document, it appears that the baryon (proton) fraction is 0.5 and the cold dark matter fraction is 0.5.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[16] **viXra:1307.0089 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2015-01-07 13:06:56*

**Authors:** Gene H Barbee

**Comments:** 21 Pages. Feedback appreciated genebarbee@msn.com

The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe WMAP [3][7] and similar projects led to expansion curves and cosmological parameters that are becoming generally accepted. The author developed expansion equations that agree with WMAP but are thought to be more fundamental. A unique cellular approach was used that allowed the kinetic energy and potential energy to be calculated. There are two components of expansion. The second component develops later and according to new calculations requires negligible kinetic energy. The concept of critical density (H= (8/3 pi G rhoC)^.5) incorrectly assumes that density characterizes kinetic energy for this component. Critical density (omega total=1) according to year 9 WMAP parameters [7] is composed of density fractions: omega dark=0.718, omega mass=0.235 and omega baryons mass=0.046. The low value for baryons (protons) leads to a problem known as missing mass. One goal of this paper is to reanalyze mass fractions with the new understanding that the energy associated with omega dark may be negligible. Based on a model of the proton [1], the author uses 10.11 MeV/particle as the kinetic energy (KE) of expansion. This energy is adequate to expand one half of all mass to 6.2e25 meters and provides further evidence that mass fractions quoted above might be incorrect. Using the WMAP procedure, equality and decoupling were re-analyzed with omega baryons=0.5. Results indicate that the measured CMB spot radius and temperature anisotropy are consistent with the higher baryon content. The author believes that the correct cosmological density parameters are omega dark energy=0, omega baryons=0.5 and omega dark matter=0.5.
Literature regarding primordial nucleosynthesis shows production of He4, deuterium and trace amounts of other elements without accounting for He4 fusion energy. The author’s expansion model with initial kinetic energy 10.11 MeV/particle has a temperature curve that starts at 7e10 K decreases to temperatures consistent with He4 fusion then increases to account for He4 fusion energy. Subsequent expansion decreases the temperature to 2.73 K indicating that 10.11 MeV correctly anticipates the addition of 1.63 MeV He4 fusion. Implications for deuterium primordial abundance are discussed.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[15] **viXra:1307.0082 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2014-11-20 23:30:45*

**Authors:** Gene H Barbee

**Comments:** 27 Pages. Please contact genebarbee@msn.com feedback welcome

Accurate estimates regarding the number of neutrons in the universe are now available due to the COBE, WMAP [8] and PLANCK projects. There are approximately the natural number e (2.71828) to the power 180 (exp(N)) protons in the universe (Technical endnote 1). The author explored the possibility that this number is fundamental to physics. Probabilities similar to the field of information theory developed by Claude Shannon [16] and others were used as tools to develop an information based approach to energy. Considering the probability of one neutron as 1/exp(180) a “top-down” model lead to information anchored fundamental energy values. A model of the neutron and proton was developed that lead to unification of the fundamental interactions (forces).
A cosmology model the author describes as “cellular cosmology” defines space associated with each proton that geometrically combine into the universe. The relationship between large scale space and proton size space (cells) gives a small factor equal to 1/exp(90) identified as the gravitational coupling constant. A key field energy (2.732 MeV) extracted from the proton model is associated with the radius r=7.22e-14 meters. The source of gravity is the inertial force mv^2/r*(1/exp(90)) on a proton of mass m=1.67e-27 kg where r is the above radius and velocity v is associated with a kinetic energy of 10.11 MeV (v/C=0.145). The author considers this quantum gravity and the proton mass 938.272 MeV the energy scale for gravity. This is much lower than the Planck scale energy 1.2e22 MeV. This approach to gravity reconciles general relativity with the three other fundamental interactions. A “Force Table” is presented for the hierarchy of interactions sourced from the proton model and comparisons to published data are carried out.
Radius r=7.22e-14 meters expands and is the source of space around us.
Time counts forward based on fundamental time 2*pi*r/C*number of cycles.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[14] **viXra:1307.0077 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-17 04:34:16*

**Authors:** S.Kalimuthu

**Comments:** 6 Pages. This is a new concept.

According to the predictions of Einstein’s general relativity theory, time and space were created only at the big bang. Albert Einstein concluded in his later years that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. But according to Hindu philosophical cosmology, space and time are eternal. Modern physics is also exploring pre – big bang era. In this work, the author attempts to show that the present time contains both future and past time.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[13] **viXra:1307.0071 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2013-10-21 12:23:52*

**Authors:** Fredrick W. Cotton

**Comments:** 8 Pages.

The electromagnetic constitutive tensor can be used to introduce a classical form of spin. For charged particles at rest, with no external forces, the spin does not affect the energy density of the particle. The particle solutions satisfy a non-Riemannian form of the Einstein-Maxwell equations.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[12] **viXra:1307.0070 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-15 16:32:35*

**Authors:** Fernando Loup

**Comments:** 40 Pages.

Warp Drives are solutions of the Einstein Field Equations that
allows superluminal travel within the framework of General
Relativity. There are at the present moment two known solutions:
The Alcubierre warp drive discovered in $1994$ and the Natario
warp drive discovered in $2001$. However as stated by both
Alcubierre and Natario themselves the warp drive violates all the
known energy conditions because the stress energy momentum tensor
is negative implying in a negative energy density. While from a
classical point of view the negative energy is forbidden the
Quantum Field Theory allows the existence of very small amounts of
it being the Casimir effect a good example as stated by Alcubierre
himself.The major drawback concerning negative energies for the
warp drive is the huge amount of negative energy able to sustain
the warp bubble.Ford and Pfenning computed the amount of negative
energy needed to maintain an Alcubierre warp drive and they
arrived at the result of $10$ times the mass of the entire
Universe for a stable warp drive configuration rendering the warp
drive impossible.However Harold White manipulating the parameter
$@$ in the original shape function that defines the Alcubierre
spacetime demonstrated that it is possible to low these energy
density requirements.We repeat here the Harold White analysis for
the Natario spacetime and we arrive at similar conclusions.From
$10$ times the mass of the Universe we also manipulated the
parameter $@$ in the original shape function that defines the
Natario spacetime and we arrived at arbitrary low results.We
demonstrate in this work that both Alcubierre and Natario warp
drives have two warped regions and not only one.We also discuss
Horizons and Doppler Blueshifts.The main reason of this work is to
demonstrate that Harold White point of view is entirely correct.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[11] **viXra:1307.0069 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-15 20:21:08*

**Authors:** Sony Fermino dos Santos

**Comments:** 3 Pages.

The behavior of the electrons in crystals exhibits some properties well known from solid state physics, like an upper limit for the particle velocity and an effective mass, which goes to the infinity as the particle velocity goes to that limit. This reminds us the relativistic mass. Indeed, both effective and relativistic masses have the same dependence on the velocity. The result is applicable to a general lattice – quantized space could be one –, which suggests that special relativity can be a consequence of a quantized spacetime. Even that is not the case, a similar approach could be used in the search for the Quantum Gravity.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[10] **viXra:1307.0064 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-13 20:00:23*

**Authors:** John Shim

**Comments:** 3 Pages.

This is a brief, informal discussion of what I see as the key problems of Special Relativity, many aspects of which have been touched directly or tangentially, arrived at by different paths and partly expressed in numerous papers on this forum and in other criticisms of it. I provide no formal justification for my views, other than what I have given in other papers on this forum. My purpose is rather to get at what I see as the essence of Einstein’s mistakes, as well as the physical behavior that Special Relativity, ironically, to some extent uncovers, but at the same time completely misrepresents. It seems to me that the question of the more correct nature of this underlying physics is the issue that both critics and defenders of Special Relativity must ultimately face. Einstein’s errors are too numerous and egregious, in my view, to remain much longer generally denied. But until they are recognized, no truer understanding of the underlying physics can be achieved

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[9] **viXra:1307.0056 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-11 11:08:34*

**Authors:** Thomas Neil Neubert

**Comments:** 25 Pages.

This Toy Universe is constructed from geometry, force, dimension, particle and such. Of necessity, it steals liberally from the standard theories of physics. It would be impossible to build a somewhat credible Toy Universe from scratch. This Toy Universe is conceptually sufficient to accommodate many ideas from the standard theories of physics; but ultimately it is an incomplete and an incorrect metatheory. Nevertheless, it gives physical insight into how a more complete metatheory of our universe might be built; and why such an explicit metatheory is desirable.
The current Standard Model of Cosmology has an implicit metatheory. We will not try to explicate that standard metatheory; such a task would be too contentious. Our intent is to sketch this Toy Universe, as a metatheory, that can be built one descriptive Axiom at a time; and held in one’s mind.
Hopefully, this Toy Universe will stimulate discussion on why and how to construct metatheories. As well, this Toy Universe offers insights into how various non-local cosmic phenomenon might emerge simply by reinterpreting current theories’ equations within the framework of a different metatheory.
Finally, every Toy Universe must make predictions that are accountable to the real universe. This Toy Universe is not a flight of fantasy; its Toy Predictions are falsifiable by experiments in the real universe. Because to learn from a Toy Universe; it must be breakable in the real universe.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[8] **viXra:1307.0050 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-09 11:48:15*

**Authors:** John Frederick Sweeney

**Comments:** 30 Pages.

Space, the fundamental reality, can only exist in one state
of Aikantha, the coherent state of three - dimensional, cubic
resonances. The Universe remains in the Aikaantha state, fluctuating between the two values of the e logarithm and π /10. The latter value implies a circle with many trigonometric equations related to the Square Root of Five, or the Golden Section. In addition, this forms the basis for Base 60 Math in the Qi Men Dun Jia Model, and thus the icosahedron with its 60 stellated permutations. The value of π /10 thus limits the bounds of visible matter, and gives rise to Pisano Periodicity of the icosahedron. At the same time, the author dispels the current "comic book" notions of black holes: the Aikantha state is the state of black holes, yet misunderstood by modern science.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[7] **viXra:1307.0049 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2013-07-10 07:47:36*

**Authors:** V.V. Demjanov

**Comments:** 12 Pages. Engl. (12) + Russ. (12)

Is given convincing experimental proof of dependence of the sensitivity **M**ichelson **i**nterferometer (MI) to the detection of velocity *υ* "aether wind" from *relativistics structure* of the refractive index *n* of the optical medium. Appeared, that sensitivity of instrument MI to detection *υ* is dependent from "inertial" of part of index (*n*^{2}–1), induced by polarization particles. When in light-carrying medium MI is absent particles (*n*=**1**.), sensitivity to detection *υ* y MI is zero, since (*n*^{2}–1)=0. Neglect of *relativistic nature* of the index (*n*^{2}–1) in the interpretation of experiments on the MI cited (of those, who interpreted these experiments using the formula Michelson) to the underestimate the speed *υ* in **1**./(*n*^{2}–**1**.)^{1/2} times. For air (*n*=1.0003) the value *υ* always was underestimated of a ~ 40–fold. In this nobody noticed error Michelson (including Lorentz, Einstein, and all, who agreed with them in 1927 at a conference in Pasadena) is the essence took place in the 20^{th} century of falsification experiments of Michelson type, as the alleged "negative". The latent of the form of relativistic structure (*n*^{2}–1) still can not find a reasonable of classical of explanation phenomenon of the angular aberration of light rays in the experiment by Bradley.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[6] **viXra:1307.0048 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2015-12-18 15:27:59*

**Authors:** Sylwester Kornowski

**Comments:** 4 Pages.

Here, within the Scale-Symmetric Theory (SST), we calculated temperature and energy density in radiation of the cosmic neutrino background. Presented here model leads to N(effective) equal to 3.4065 and this result is consistent with the Planck-spacecraft 2013 results and is close to the central value: 3.36. Calculated here the today temperature of the cosmic neutrino background is 2.008 K - we can compare it with the Cosmological-Standard-Model value that is 1.945 K.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[5] **viXra:1307.0046 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-09 03:17:47*

**Authors:** Emmanuil Manousos

**Comments:** 5 Pages.

The law of selfvariations determines quantitatively a slight increase of the masses and electric charges as the common cause of quantum and cosmological phenomena. More specifically, the cosmological data are condensed into one equation, the only unknown being the rest mass of the material particles. This equation predicts and justifies the entirety of the cosmological data. In the present Letter we present the prediction of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. We also predict that the early Universe underwent a phase of atomic ionization.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[4] **viXra:1307.0043 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-08 13:47:08*

**Authors:** Zbigniew Płotnicki

**Comments:** 107 Pages. Every paragraph of "Proof that special relativity is false" is in two languages: English // Polish

This article contains proofs that theory of special relativity is false and my Diophantine equations solutions.

I am presenting this mathematical work mainly to attract attention to my proof that special relativity is false.

I have worked on diophantine solutions for more than two years. I can prove that my work is completely independent from the work of others and that two years ago I had solution to (as I call it) general case for solutions without little Fermat theorem and simple case with little Fermat theorem, which is much more than others achieved, but I didn’t want to publish it until it would be complete. I sent it to the Polish profesors of mathematics and to myself so I really can prove and document that I had it two years ago. I sent it for example on 10/26/2011 to polish full professor PhD. Edmund Puczylowski from Univeristy of Warsaw and I can prove it with my correspondence with him (I gave full content of this document that I sent to him in Appendix 1). I sent also some diophantine solutions (the simplest case with use of little Fermat theorem) to full professor PhD. Jerzy Tiuryn from Univeristy of Warsaw on 02/23/2011 and I can prove it too.

I’ve searched the Internet and found very little work on this matter:

Wolfram – nothing.

Wikipedia: Fermat Last Theorem/Diophantine equations – single special case;

http://cp4space.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/moda-ch12.pdf – that does not define all solutions

But what I’ve seen is that:

There is given really very little solutions in comparison to my solutions,

There are not all solutions of (as I call it) “general” or at least “simple” case of presented equations for the cases like for example: ua^x+wb^y=vc^z

There is not proof that presented solutions are all such (wich I call “complex not derived”) solutions for any case, like for example: ua^x+wb^y=vc^z,

There is not proof when there exist such (complex not derived) solutions,

There are not solutions for simultaneous equations

There are not solutions for rational exponents

As I know work of others contains only case of solution when
SUM_(i=1..n)(c_i/d*a_i^(x_i))=b^z=(SUM_(i=1..n)(c_i/d*l_i^(x_i))^(t*lcm(x)+1)
or even only SUM_(i=1..n)(a_i^(x_i))=b^z=(SUM_(i=1..n)(l_i^(x_i)))^(t*lcm(x)+1)
which is very little. And does not show how to solve equation without solving qz=t*lcm(x)+1, so this algorithm to solve equation has not complexity O(1) while my has O(1).

There is no solution given for any case (especially for general case) to equations that has coefficient not equal to 1 on the right side.

Which all and much more I’ve done in this article.

If my Diophantine equation solutions are not enough I also give a inverse function to Li(n) function. I think it should be enough.

I named this kind of Diophantine equation that I’ve described in this article after my surname, because I need to refere to them in this article.

Finally I can present part of my work. Thanks for reading. I have more and I will publish it in my book that should come out next year.

Please, give me an endorsement on arxiv (on physics, math), if you can. My username on arxiv is at the end of abstract in the document.

(and let me know at my e-mail address which is at first page of the document)

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[3] **viXra:1307.0035 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2013-10-10 07:48:59*

**Authors:** ChiYi Chen

**Comments:** 9 Pages.

In this paper we firstly present an explicit dynamical equation which satisfies the general principle of relativity under the framework of classical mechanics. In light of this fact, the necessity of Einstein's equivalence principle for the gravity being geometrized should be reexamined. Especially, Einstein's (strong) equivalence principle claims that the inertial force is equivalent to the gravitational force on physical effect. But in fact the new dynamical equation proves that the essence of the inertial force is the real force exerted on the reference object, which can actually be all kinds of forces such as the gravitational force, electromagnetic force and so on. Therefore, in this context we only retain the numerical equality between the inertial mass and gravitational mass and abandon Einstein's (strong) equivalence principle. Consequently, the candidate for the standard clock should be corrected into the mathematical clock which duplicates the real clock equipped by the observer himself. Then an adjusted physical picture for how to convert the gravitational force into a geometric description on space-time is presented. On the other hand, we point out that all cosmological observations are made by the observer at the present time on the earth, instead of any other observers including the comoving observers in the earlier unverse. On this basis, we introduce an extra factor $b(t)$ in $FRW$ cosmological metric to depict the gravitational time dilation effect since the local proper clock may run in a faster and faster rate with the expanding of the universe. In this way, we may obtain a positive value of $\rho+3p$ and avoid the introduction of dark energy in the current universe.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[2] **viXra:1307.0028 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-05 09:39:50*

**Authors:** A.W.Beckwith

**Comments:** 4 Pages. will be heavily amended. A start to an analysis

The following question is asked, how does one get a scaled dimensional value to a non zero graviton mass in the present era, from primordial initial conditions of the universe? Using Valev generated mass of the universe values, as well as a Valev valued radius of the universe in the present era, we derive a massive graviton mass of about 10 to the – 62 grams or nucleongmeVm3829102~102−−××<which puts severe constraints upon the relic graviton wavelength. In doing so, we affirm that the initial gravitons are massively redshift expanded, while also putting severe constraints upon the Hubble parameter. Doing so means using the Visser stress energy tensor for massive gravitons. The results so obtained are consistent with massive redshift stretching of primordial EW (or earlier) GW production. If relic GW and gravitons are not forced to be ultra low frequency, then Lavenda’s questions as to the soundness of inflation have to be revisited

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[1] **viXra:1307.0008 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2013-07-01 13:07:14*

**Authors:** Miroslav Sukenik, Jozef Sima

**Comments:** 2 Pages.

In our model of Expansive Nondecelerative Universe it is supposed nonstationary nature of gravitational field. It allows to localize its energy density. An attempt to localize the energy density of a Schwarzschild wormhole leads to a conclusion that its intensity would be inversely proportional to the third power of distance. It thus follows the impossibility of existence of wormholes from our model.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology