Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Big Bang Theory and Black Holes not accepted by Einstein

Expand Messages
  • Bill Hamilton
    I was tipped off to some physics by Dr. Hal Puthoff that makes some interesting revelations. Now, I know why he signed the letter endorsing equal time for
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I was tipped off to some physics by Dr. Hal Puthoff that makes some interesting revelations.
      Now, I know why he signed the letter endorsing equal time for alternate cosmologies.
      I also signed this letter.

      Bill Hamilton
      AstroScience Research Network
      http://www.astrosciences.info/
      "I don't see the logic of rejecting data just because they seem incredible." Fred Hoyle


      A fundamental unknown of the Big Bang theory is the size of the universe at the instant of the Big Bang. Estimates of the initial size of the universe vary enormously.

      In 1947, the famous nuclear physicist, George Gamow, postulated that our universe had the density of nuclear matter at the instant of the Big Bang. Gamow considered this to be the greatest possible density of matter. This is the matter contained within the nucleus of the atom. One teaspoon of nuclear matter would weigh one billion tons.

      Our universe expands at a rate of about 20 kilometers per second (km/sec) per million light years of galaxy distance. If the universe expands uniformly at this rate, a galaxy 15 billion light years away should recede at 300,000 km/sec, which is the speed of light. This galaxy presumably cannot be seen, and so 15 billion light years is regarded as our observational limit. Our observable universe is considered to be a sphere with a radius of 15 billion light years.

      If we apply the Gamow postulate that the initial universe had the density of nuclear matter, our present observable universe (30 billion light years in diameter) would have begun as a sphere about the size of the orbit of the planet Mars around the sun.

      Nevertheless, modern cosmologists claim that the initial universe was very much smaller than this. From computer studies of the Einstein General theory of Relativity, they have concluded that our observable universe was initially "smaller than a dime". In fact most cosmologists now endorse the "inflation" concept postulated by Alan Guth, which predicts that our observable universe was microscopic in size at the instant of the Big Bang. The Guth concept predicts that our observable universe was initially "one trillionth the size of a proton". The diameter of a proton is about one billionth of the wavelength of light.

      Although these predictions of modern cosmologists are based on the Einstein theory, they are grossly inconsistent with the conclusions of Albert Einstein. In 1945, Einstein recognized that his theory seemed to imply an infinite density of matter at the moment of creation. Einstein rejected this interpretation, and insisted that his equations would not apply under conditions of extreme density of matter.

      Einstein also rejected the "black hole", which had been derived from his theory in 1939. Analysis of the Einstein equations appeared to show that an extremely massive and dense star should collapse "indefinitely" until its density becomes infinite. This star would be surrounded by a spherical surface, called an "event horizon", over which the speed of light is zero. Light theoretically cannot escape from within the event horizon, and so the star was called a "black hole". Einstein never accepted the black hole concept.

      Insight into this enigma is provided by the gravitational theory of Huseyin Yilmaz, which was published in the prestigious Physical Review in 1958. Yilmaz discovered a rigorous solution to the relativistic principles established by Einstein. Since the Yilmaz theory applies the principles of the Einstein theory, it is a refinement of the Einstein theory. It does not yield the predictions of infinite density of matter that have been derived from the Einstein equations.

      The great complexity of the tensor equations of general relativity have disguised the weaknesses of the Einstein theory. Einstein strongly opposed the non-physical concept of the black hole. However, after Einstein's death computer studies have proven that a massive dense star must collapse into a black hole of essentially infinite mass density if the Einstein equations are to be satisfied.

      If Einstein had lived to experience these computer studies, one cannot believe that he would have accepted their non-physical consequences. He certainly would have realized that there is something wrong with his gravitational field equation. Albert Einstein was scrupulous in demanding that his theories must be consistent with physical evidence.

      The weaknesses of the Einstein theory have been corrected by the Yilmaz theory of gravitation, which is an extension of the Einstein theory. The Yilmaz theory adds to the gravitational field equation of the Einstein theory a tensor to characterize the energy and stress of the gravitational field. This allows the theory to yield multi-body solutions that apply under intense gravitational fields. As a result the non-physical predictions that have been derived from the Einstein theory are eliminated.

      Applying the Einstein theory is extremely difficult, because one must solve its very complicated gravitational field equation. This tensor equation represents ten independent simultaneous equations. For a general physical model, these ten equations can have millions of terms.

      The gravitational field equation of the Yilmaz theory is more complicated than that of the Einstein theory because it has an additional tensor that characterizes the energy and stress of the gravitational field. Nevertheless, the Yilmaz theory is very much easier to apply than the Einstein theory, because one does not have to solve its gravitational field equation when implementing the theory. The Yilmaz theory is applied by calculating the gravitational potential of the physical model. The Yilmaz theory proves that the gravitational field equation is automatically satisfied when the gravitational potential is properly specified.

      Cosmological Implications of Yilmaz Theory

      Universe [1] applies the Yilmaz theory to cosmology. It shows that the big bang and black hole concepts are merely non-physical consequences of mathematical weaknesses in the Einstein theory. These science-fiction concepts are eliminated with the Yilmaz theory. The Yilmaz theory also shows that the anomalous redshift of a quasar is produced by a strong gravitational field, not by velocity. This indicates that quasars are very much closer that is generally assumed, and are radiating much less energy.

      A cosmology model has been derived from the Yilmaz theory. It assumes a constant average density of matter throughout the universe, which does not change with time. Equations derived from this model demonstrate that the universe should expand locally approximately in accordance with the Hubble Law. The Hubble expansion is a local relativistic effect produced by gravity. It is not the result of a big-bang explosion. Over very large distances the universe does not expand. Thus the Yilmaz theory predicts that relativistic effects should distort space in such a manner that the universe expands locally about every point in the universe, yet the size of the universe does not change.

      In order for the density of the universe to remain constant as the universe expands, the Yilmaz cosmology model requires that matter be continually created to offset the expansion. This creation of matter represents the conversion of energy into matter. Energy is transmitted across the universe and is converted into mass to form diffuse matter in space. This diffuse matter forms new stars and galaxies. By this process the universe stays forever young, even though it is infinitely old.

      The Yilmaz cosmology model predicts that the age of the universe is infinite. Our universe has always been approximately like we see it today. Nevertheless it is continually changing, and so it does not grow old and die.

      Well, I was happy to hear that. I have ordered the book on this.

      Adrian Bjornson, The Scientific Story of Creation,
      Addison Press, 2002, ISBN 09703231-2-3, (272 pages, 35 illustrations).

      Bill Hamilton
      AstroScience Research Network
      http://www.astrosciences.info/
      "I don't see the logic of rejecting data just because they seem incredible." Fred Hoyle


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.