วีดีโอ

General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. Dilation explains dark matter. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of G.R. predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. A graph illustrates its squared nature, dilation increases at an exponential rate the closer you get to the speed of light. There is no singularity at the center of our galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that dilation is occurring there. In other words that mass is all around us. This is the explanation for galaxy rotation curves. The "missing mass" is dilated mass. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. To date, 6 very low mass galaxies have been confirmed to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal.

An entertaining and easy-to-understand dialogue about the cosmic microwave background radiation alignments is the stage play, "Axis of Beginning."

Very interesting analysis and conclusion. Thanks prof Sarkar.

I'm not sure how much I understood of it, but that was fascinating nonetheless.

{LIVE Science; Forums, History and Culture; Culture History & Science; What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?} The LINE hypothesis proposes that one difference between a universal instantiation event (UIE) and any universal transition event (UTE) is the quantity of fundamental elements initially created. The UIE is the instantiating event which may create an amount of fundamental elements that is calculable from a correctly conceived standard model of particles. The UTE is one of many transition events subsequent to the UIE and is driven by circumstances of the prior contraction phase. The UTE phase will not have an instantiating amount of energy as does the UIE. Nor will a UTE express the instantiating metaverse states which produces a UIE equivalent amount of fundamental elements such as hydrogen helium and lithium. The LINE hypothesis predicts that the UTE will produce circumstantially less of the fundamental elements, ergo; hydrogen, helium and lithium than predicted for the UIE. Calculations that estimate the quantity of initial fundamental hadronic elements currently do not anticipate the potentially numerous subsequent UTE cycles which create the current post UTE state of the universe. Predictably, this is because a UIE is more energetic than a UTE. Also, because the UIE involves more fundamental levels of the metaverse information states called the solutions of state (SoS) and their metaverse processes that are not achievable during any UTE phase. These differences create different outcomes. Given that today both the UIE sand UTE are considered to be the same ‘big bang’ event, calculated expectations that assume ‘big bang’ (post UIE-pre UTE) fundamental element quantities, will contradict measurements taken within any subsequent UTE expansion phase. So, if a contradiction between calculated expectations and observation of initial fundamental particle quantities is found to exist within ones’ current universe, The LINE hypothesis suggests that this is the indicator that this is a cyclic universe older than one universal transition cycle. Why would the current calculated population of pre-fusion fundamental particles not reflect the current measured quantity? This is because the calculated quantities may consider universal constants that were forged not during any prior UTE, but during the UIE. There are universal constants that are instantiated during the UIE which may remain unchanged through each UTE. During each UTE, some, not all, universal constants become reinstantiated. Therefore, such indigenous fixed universal constants will yield an accurate calculated particle population created only in the UIE phase. Subsequent UTE phases will not create a fundamental particle population that is consistent with this calculated quantity. Such fixed universal constants may determine the existence of the types of matter (hadronic, leptonic, debytonic etc.) that will exist within the new verse. Such matter types will populate all future cycles of the current verse, in any quantity. Such fixed-constants do not determine the quantity of matter created by each UTE phase. It falls to other non-fixed constants reinitialized during each UTE together with the informational content and circumstances of the prior contraction phase to determine the details of the next universal expansion. The LINE hypothesis proposes that UTE’s instantiate galaxoids that typically evolve into galaxies. This places a minimum limit on the initial state (mass, size, gravitation, etc.) of galaxy formation to that of a typical galaxoid. Below this minimum only the central primordial black hole exists, having any possible size. Such primordial black holes that do not form a galaxoid could still rarely, circumstantially seed a new galaxy. After each UTE, galaxoids circumstantially emerge with different accumulations of information as its’ encompassing WOF halo. WOF halos having different masses and densities encompassing a central black hole forms galaxoids that begin their long evolution into galaxies. Hence, because galaxies don’t evolve from dust, galaxies will be observed to have larger than expected initial masses and sizes and will appear more evolved at the earliest observable stages of universal expansion. Nimble minded astronomers and cosmologists will not need to think very deeply to identify one non-fixed constant, namely the Hubble constant. Explainable by the LINE hypothesized description of the UIE and UTE metaverse phenomena is the current observed inconsistencies in measurements of the value of the Hubble constant. Inconsistent estimates for the value of the Hubble constant derive from calculations based upon properties of the current CMB compared to calculations from measurements of stellar luminosity profiles. Inexplicably, each give sufficiently different values for the Hubble constant to raise concerns. The LINE hypothesis proposes that the discrepancy in the current estimates of the Hubble constant is a consequence of the UIE which produced the universal first-light now referred to as the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The CMB encodes not only aspects of the UIE’s first-light but the current CMB also encodes the transition-light of all subsequent UTE phases. This is because aspects of the first-light will survive each UTE. Consequently, an improperly decoded CMB will not accurately describe the current post UTE universal expansion profile described as the Hubble constant. The original (post-UIE, pre-UTE) CMB would predict the correct Hubble constant only for features observed within the initial phase of universal evolution. CMB profiles subsequent to the first-light of the initial universal expansion is called transition-light. Elder CMB’s will have been imprinted by the transition-light of each subsequent UTE. Additionally, stellar luminosity profiles are informed only by the previous universal event. Each, on its face, will inform a different value for the Hubble constant if not correctly considered in calculations and measurements taken within any phase of universal evolution, not only for the Hubble constant, but for any dynamic property of this universe. {LIVE Science; Forums, History and Culture; Culture History & Science; What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?}

New subscriber here keep it up!!! You should use a service such as "Promo sm"!!