[25] **viXra:1805.0357 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-19 17:47:00*

**Authors:** Andrew Beckwith

**Comments:** 9 Pages. If endorsed as acceptable by Corda, this will be submitted as a would be talk to Marcel Grossman 15, before May 30

We find that having the scale factor close to zero due to a given magnetic field value in, an early universe magnetic field affects how we would interpret Mukhanov’s chapter on ‘self reproduction of the universe’ in in his reference “Physical foundations of cosmology” terms of production of inhomogeneity during inflation and its aftermath. The stronger an early universe magnetic field is, the greater the likelihood of production of about 20 new domains of size 1/ H, with H early universe Hubble’s constant, per Planck time interval in evolution. One final caveat to consider. What may happen is that the Camara (2004) density and Quintessential density (Corda et al.) are both simultaneously satisfied, which would put additional restrictions on the magnetic field which in turn affects structure formation. In time, once Eq.(16) of this paper is refined further, the author hopes that some of the issues raised by Kobayashi and Seto as to allowed inflation models may be addressed, once further refinement of these preliminary results commences . We close as to how fluctuations in the Hubble expansion parameter, H, as given below may affect structure as given in reference [10] below. We close with statements as to the value of in a gravitational potential proportional to and how this adjustment affects the 3 body problem.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[24] **viXra:1805.0345 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-18 04:51:36*

**Authors:** Christian M. Wackler

**Comments:** 8 Pages.

The question whether light moves with constant or variable velocity is indubitably of the utmost importance. Preliminary reflections concerning the nature of that movement contrast the hypotheses of propagation and emission. As a brief historical examination reveals, alleged evidences in favour of the invariance postulate turn out to be erroneous or inconclusive and supposedly decisive tests methodologically invalid. An emission theory based on Michael Faraday's idea of ray vibrations is shown to be in accordance with observation. The question whether the speed of light depends on the velocity of its source has thus not been settled experimentally since only a kinematic test, to date never conducted, can give an unambiguous answer. Juxtaposed to seemingly similar but defective designs Wilhelm Wien put forward in 1904, such an experiment, amending a set-up suggested by Herbert Dingle, is proposed.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[23] **viXra:1805.0305 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-15 14:51:04*

**Authors:** George R. Briggs

**Comments:** 3 Pages.

Abstract: In studying the accuracy of HCE8S theory in predicting mc^2 values for the particles, I have made several minor changes which have improved predictions considerably yet in strange ways

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[22] **viXra:1805.0304 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-15 16:37:07*

**Authors:** Frederik Vantomme

**Comments:** 8 Pages. Is Stephen Hawking’s End of Pi-day a coincidence?

I propose to rewrite the volume equation for the non-euclidian spherical

Universe in terms of *tau* instead of π. Written this new way, a truly elegant

equation and deeper structure becomes visible. Further, I postulate

that the Universe *is* the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, i.e. that the 3

dimensional Universe we live in is the derivative-surface of its 4 dimensional

hypersphere volume.

[21] **viXra:1805.0298 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2018-05-18 08:58:14*

**Authors:** Alexandre Harvey-Tremblay

**Comments:** 7 Pages.

We show that cosmology is best explained as a thermodynamic cycle involving time, space and entropy. In this representation, the classical laws of physics (inertia, special relativity, general relativity and dark energy) are emergent from the entropy of space-time. These laws comprise a group whose origin is not explained in quantum field theory, and/or not derived in the classical limit of a quantum field theory (h/S to 0$). The representation also produces an (emergent) arrow of time which, when acting on these laws, enforces the cosmological horizons that bound the observable universe by limiting the rate of entropy production.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[20] **viXra:1805.0289 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-15 03:34:29*

**Authors:** Zbigniew Osiak

**Comments:** Pages.

Wykazałem, że wartość prędkości światła w Czarnodziurowym Wszechświecie jest tym mniejsza, im silniejsze jest pole grawitacyjne. Podałem wzór na czas przelotu światła z Ziemi do danego punktu Czarnodziurowego Wszechświata.
###
I showed that the speed of light in the Black Hole Universe is the smaller the stronger the gravitational field. I gave the formula for time of travel of light from the Earth to a given point of the Black Hole Universe.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[19] **viXra:1805.0288 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-15 03:38:00*

**Authors:** Zbigniew Osiak

**Comments:** 3 Pages.

I showed that the speed of light in the Black Hole Universe is the smaller the stronger the gravitational field. I gave the formula for time of travel of light from the Earth to a given point of the Black Hole Universe.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[18] **viXra:1805.0280 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-13 08:14:03*

**Authors:** Ayman Kassem

**Comments:** 134 Pages.

This is a model characterised by its simplicity , it explains the events
running from the big bang to the present day and scales from the
planck scale to the size of the universe , all these in terms of one
sub particle and a set of four fundamental forces along with their
subsequent interactions
This is a bottom up approach instead of the usual top down one
the interaction at the planck scale level holds a determinant role
in the play of forces at a cosmological level

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[17] **viXra:1805.0273 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-13 11:26:04*

**Authors:** Laszlo G Meszaros

**Comments:** 3 Pages. None

By using Einstein's procedure to determine whether or not two spatially separated events occur at the same time, it is shown that simultaneity does not depend on the observer's reference frame, but the assessment of simultaneity does. Thus Einstein's claim of relative simultaneity is unsubstantiated.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[16] **viXra:1805.0251 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-14 11:21:36*

**Authors:** Edward G. Lake

**Comments:** 26 Pages. First draft

Einstein’s “Gedanken” experiments (thought experiments) - particularly his train-embankment thought experiments - were apparently intended to explain Special Relativity logically and in layman’s terms, but they were written in an incredibly convoluted way, which seems to have resulted in them being misinterpreted by almost everyone. This is the simplified logic of Einstein’s key thought experiments.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[15] **viXra:1805.0247 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2018-05-15 23:15:28*

**Authors:** Julian Williams

**Comments:** 127 Pages. A much revised and more consistent combination of the original Part's I & II with all equations hyperlinked.

We form the fundamental particles with mass borrowed from a Higgs type scalar field, but energy also borrowed from the spatial component of zero point fields. At high energies this is from local invariant fields but at cosmic wavelengths from the receding horizon. We explore relating this with gravity and find that it only works in an exponentially expanding flat on average universe. This may relate with the present discrepancy in the different ways of measuring the Hubble parameter. We also relate gravity with what we define as a "Spherically symmetric 4 volume action density" at cosmic wavelengths,invariant in all coordinates.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[14] **viXra:1805.0231 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-11 14:32:18*

**Authors:** Bertrand Wong

**Comments:** 6 Pages.

It is felt by many that faster-than-light particles (tachyons) exist though none has been detected so far; this lack of evidence raises some doubt as to whether such particles exist. However, it may not be possible to detect these faster-than-light particles even if they exist. Is there any possibility at all in detecting these particles, if they exist? This paper ponders the existence of tachyons and introduces some possibilities for their detection.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[13] **viXra:1805.0200 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-09 04:30:48*

**Authors:** Zbigniew Osiak

**Comments:** Pages.

W ramach czarnodziurowego modelu Wszechświata podałem zależność poczerwienienia światła docierającego do Ziemi od odległości galaktyki będącej źródłem tego światła. Liniowy fragment wykresu tej zależności koresponduje z obserwacjami Hubble’a. Nieliniowa część przedstawia gwałtowny wzrost poczerwienienia.
###
Within the framework of the black-hole model of the Universe, I gave the dependence of the redshift of light reaching the Earth versus the distance of the galaxy that is the source of this light. The linear fragment of the graph of this relationship corresponds with Hubble’s observations. The non-linear part represents a sharp increase of the redshift.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[12] **viXra:1805.0199 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-09 04:38:52*

**Authors:** Zbigniew Osiak

**Comments:** Pages.

Within the framework of the black-hole model of the Universe, I gave the dependence of the redshift of light reaching the Earth versus the distance of the galaxy that is the source of this light. The linear fragment of the graph of this relationship corresponds with Hubble’s observations. The non-linear part represents a sharp increase of the redshift.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[11] **viXra:1805.0172 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-08 08:01:50*

**Authors:** Henok Tadesse

**Comments:** 8 Pages.

Inertia of a body is due to electromagnetic interaction of the body with all matter in the universe. If there is coil B nearby a current carrying coil A whose current is varying with time, voltage and current will be induced in coil B, whose magnetic field will in turn act on coil A, creating a back EMF in coil A, resisting changes in current in coil A. Inertia is fundamentally the same phenomenon. Inertial mass of a body varies with the distance of the body from celestial objects. Inertial mass also varies with absolute velocity. This theory may resolve some long standing mysteries in physics.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[10] **viXra:1805.0166 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-08 11:56:17*

**Authors:** G. N. N. Martin

**Comments:** 4 Pages.

There is a fundamental incompatibility between the logic of causality and that of measurement: causality is defined at a point, whereas measurement is defined over a volume. This problem is illustrated by Schrödinger's wave equation for an electron, where the wave equation describes the evolution of the electron by describing the evolution of the wave at each point, but measurement is made on the electron as a whole.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[9] **viXra:1805.0163 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-08 15:55:06*

**Authors:** Branko Zivlak

**Comments:** 6 Pages. 16 formulas

Escape velocity from the E.G. Haug has been checked. It is compared with orbital velocity formula for an ideal circular path. The formulas are simplified so that we have only one variable that contains the Planck values and the mass of the central body. In the case of an arbitrary star, the values of these velocities are determined during its compression to the black hole. Unlike the standard and relativistic formulas that are approximations for a weak gravitational field, Haug's formula is exact for a weak and strong gravitational field. The relationships between formulas showed the importance of the golden ratio below the Schwarzschild radius.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[8] **viXra:1805.0149 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-07 08:10:19*

**Authors:** Hartmut Traunmüller

**Comments:** Pages.

This is a summary of the cosmological model that emerged in the paper "Towards a more well-founded cosmology". The theory on which the model is based explains the velocity c, the cosmic redshift and the phenomenon of inertia; it predicts the observable relation between the redshift factor (1+z) and the magnitude of distant standard candles (SNe Ia etc.) as well as the observable angular sizes of distant objects (galaxies etc.). It predicts inertia to be reduced at small accelerations - as observable in galactic dynamics and phenomenologically described in Modified Newtonian Mechanics. It honors conservation of energy and the perfect cosmological principle.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[7] **viXra:1805.0144 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2018-05-08 06:01:25*

**Authors:** Sangwha Yi

**Comments:** 5 Pages. Thank you for reading

In IJTP-D-18-00281 or preprint “General relativity and the representation of
solutions”(Sangwha Yi write) in researchgate ,we found new general relativity theory (we
call it Data General Relativity Theory;DGRT). We treats the data of Hawking radiation
by Data general relativity theory

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[6] **viXra:1805.0132 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-06 07:20:02*

**Authors:** Yury Rabyshko

**Comments:** 29 Pages.

The article gives a brief exposition of the solution of cosmological problems. The problem of stability and shortage of mass in galaxies, huge velocities of galactic clusters is solved. The law of formation of fundamental constants, the law of nonlinear expansion of the Universe, the law of gravitational interaction is found. Proof of the hypothesis of large Dirac numbers. This is the English version.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[5] **viXra:1805.0129 [pdf]**
*replaced on 2018-05-06 21:50:34*

**Authors:** William O. Straub

**Comments:** 7 Pages. Fixed minor typo in Eq. (5.6)

An overview of the fundamentals of gravity waves intended for undergraduate physics students, curious high schoolers, and brilliant 4th graders, utilizing the traditional linearized form of Einstein’s field equations.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[4] **viXra:1805.0128 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-06 09:29:50*

**Authors:** Peter Cameron

**Comments:** 2 Pages.

This note proposes a topic to the upcoming 7th Conference on Applied Geometric Algebras.
It conjectures that exact impedance quantization of the fractional quantum Hall effect,
claims of gravitational wave echoes recovered from LIGO/VIRGO data, and mixmaster tidal
oscillations of Professor Thorne’s wife share causal origins in quantized impedance networks
of Geometric Wavefunction Interactions of the particle physicist’s Clifford algebra.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[3] **viXra:1805.0126 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-05 17:41:51*

**Authors:** Rodrigo de Abreu, Vasco Guerra

**Comments:** 27 Pages.

The twin paradox is considered in a one-way trip. Usually it is considered in a two-way trip. In the usual formulation, the problem, the relative ageing of the twins during the one-way trip, is hidden by the total ageing of the twins in the round trip. It is shown that if we know the relative ageing of the twins during the one-way trip there is no paradox and therefore the allegedly necessity to consider acceleration or the change of the frame argumentations does not emerge. It is also shown that the problem of simultaneity is irrelevant since in a one-way trip the twin can age slower or faster than the stay at home twin and therefore the asymmetry must have an explanation different of the standard explanation based on the time dilation effect. It is shown that Special Relativity is enough to solve the twin paradox. The twin paradox is a classical case of a not well formulated problem (an ill-formulated problem)

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[2] **viXra:1805.0119 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-04 13:07:04*

**Authors:** Adrian Ferent

**Comments:** 157 Pages. © 2015 Adrian Ferent

“Because Einstein’s STR is wrong, the scientists at CERN get wrong measurements”
Adrian Ferent
“If you add more energy than the energy at rest, you do not have a proton anymore, you have only energy”
Adrian Ferent
“If the kinetic energy Ek calculated at CERN is 7452 times the rest energy of a proton, they do not collide anymore protons at CERN”
Adrian Ferent
“At CERN they collide protons with 7 TeV and they measure particles with 900 MeV. Where are those 7 TeV?
Adrian Ferent
My Special Theory of Relativity (STR) explains that the proton can not have a kinetic energy higher than the rest energy, 938 MeV.
“Because Einstein’s STR is wrong, the scientists at CERN get wrong measurements”
Adrian Ferent
Infinite!
You learned from Einstein, from your professors, from your books that at the speed of light the energy is infinite!
“The energy at the speed of light is not infinite, the energy is E = m0c^2”
Adrian Ferent
Here is the trouble and all physicists followed him:
“Einstein did not understand Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity”
Adrian Ferent
At CERN the scientists say that the protons have the energy 7TeV with a speed v = 99.9999991%•c; they calculated using Einstein’s wrong STR.
Lorentz factor = 7453
The rest energy of a proton is 938 MeV.
The kinetic energy of the proton Ek = 6.99 TeV. My STR explains that the proton can not have a kinetic energy higher than the rest energy, 938 MeV.
“The total energy, must be smaller than E = m0c^2 “
Adrian Ferent
But the kinetic energy Ek calculated at CERN is 7452 times the rest energy of a proton.
“If you add more energy than the energy at rest, you do not have a proton anymore, you have only energy”
Adrian Ferent
“If the kinetic energy Ek calculated at CERN is 7452 times the rest energy of a proton, they do not collide anymore protons at CERN”
Adrian Ferent
From these results Einstein’s equation for the kinetic energy is wrong, and the Lorentz factor is wrong.
The Lorentz factor is right only if the speed is smaller than v = 0.786•c; at CERN the speed is much higher.
“The speed in the Lorentz factor must be smaller than v = 0.786•c, than
v = 2.358×10^8 m/s”
Adrian Ferent
“Because the speed in the Lorentz factor must be smaller than v = 0.786•c, it means the Lorentz transformations are wrong”
Adrian Ferent
If I consider 1 proton has the rest energy of 1 GeV, scientists say at CERN 1 proton has the energy of 7000 protons (7TeV). This means when they collide 2 protons they obtain 14000 protons (14TeV).
That is why at CERN the measurements are wrong, because of Einstein’s wrong STR.
This is the proof that Einstein’s STR is wrong and my STR is right.
Measurement accuracy at CERN: when you want to measure very accurate 1 gram of gold, you do not use 7000 grams to measure 1 gram of gold.
Did they measure 1 TeV the proton energy at Fermilab (Tevatron), 7 TeV the proton energy at CERN (LHC) or only they calculated these energies with Einstein’s STR?
Because my solution for STR: for v = 0.999999991•c at CERN the Lorentz factor is wrong! Einstein’s STR is wrong.
Lorentz transformations are wrong.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology

[1] **viXra:1805.0086 [pdf]**
*submitted on 2018-05-02 10:03:13*

**Authors:** Stephen J. Crothers

**Comments:** 12 Pages. Presented on the 17th of April 2018 at the Ohio Meeting of the American Physical Society, Columbus, Ohio. http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/APR18/Session/Y13.6

When Einstein formulated his Special Theory of Relativity he tacitly assumed that it is possible to construct systems of clock-synchronised stationary observers consistent with the Lorentz Transformation. Such systems of observers are essential to the Special Theory. By mathematically constructing an infinite system of stationary observers and forcing it to comply with the Lorentz Transformation, it follows that the observers cannot be clocksynchronised. Conversely, by mathematically constructing an infinite system of clocksynchronised observers and forcing it to comply with the Lorentz Transformation, it follows that the observers cannot be stationary. Only one element of each of the said sets of observers has the deceptive appearance of satisfying Einstein's assumption. It is this element which Einstein incorrectly allowed to speak for all observers by virtue of his assumption; but clearly not all observers are equivalent. Furthermore, a system consisting of a single observer cannot be clock-synchronised or stationary with respect to anything. Einstein defined time by means of clocks. In so doing he detached time from physical reality because time is perceived and understood by the motion of celestial bodies, which is independent of the hands of a clock.

**Category:** Relativity and Cosmology