Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: captcass on 14/02/2018 20:01:27

Title: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 14/02/2018 20:01:27
Events are always undergoing acceleration as they evolve forward in the time dilated continuum. Therefore, when we look out into space beyond the solar system, and back in time, we are also looking down a time dilation gradient into slower time. The observer’s invariant relative rate of time is always faster than that in frames in the perceived past, and we find that as D → ~13.9 Gly, the difference in the rate of time, denoted here as "dRt", → 1 s/s, recessional V → c, and lateral V → 0, just as it does near the event horizon of a black hole. Slower time results in lower frequency and the Hubble shift.

(What follows in " " is my modification of 5/19/18)
"The Big Bang theorists say it is the accelerating expansion of the universe that Doppler shifts the light, but this is incorrect. They say recessional velocities can exceed c because the objects are not moving “through” space, but are embedded within an expanding space. This is also an incorrect view.

   Einstein's tensor only contains spacetime elements, i.e., x,y,z and t, and is the actual description of the evolution of events that "describe" the "effects" of gravity. The Lorentz contractions are visual and depend on relative motion, regardless of its cause. Therefore, as recessional  velocity appears to accelerate, relativistic effects are manifested, regardless of the cause of the recessional velocity. The object gets smaller and time dilation increases. As recessional V → c the dRt → 1 s/s and time appears to stop and events are no longer visible. It is not possible to see them accelerate past c. To us, they cease to exist at c when time appears to stop, regardless of the cause of the apparent recessional velocity.

   So the dilation gradient being used here is real and present. This means we have two choices. Is the shift a Doppler effect in an illogical universe that began with an undefined singularity and is accelerating into infinite expansion, or is it a simple, logical, time dilation effect due to the passage of time having a logical minuscule acceleration component?

As noted further down in this thread, I noted that when the acceleration is proportionately added to the proper and coordinate time elements of Einstein’s field equations, based upon their individual relative rates of time, singularities and infinities are avoided because the geodesics are slightly distorted:

Where t1 = coordinate time and t0 = proper time, the time elements Δt1 / Δt0 become: ((((Δt1*(((1 +((Δt1 / Δt0) * (2.2686*10-18)))) / ((Δt0 * (1 + (Δt0 * 2.2686*10-18).

For each second of Δt0 this becomes: ((Δt1*(1 + 2.2686*10-18 Δt1)) / ((1 + (2.2686*10-18))

This manifests as a net acceleration of the proper time relative to the coordinate time as the dilation gradient deepens and Δt1 → 0. As per my paper, this prevents the subsequent formation of a singularity in a Big Crunch scenario both within a black hole, where we instead see the ever-tightening spiraling evolution, or the universe as a whole, which we see spiraling off in all directions in the galaxies, as explained in the paper.

Obversely, as Δt1 → ∞, infinite divergence is impossible as Δt1 is always divided by a sum > 1; i.e., ∞ / (1 + 2.2686*10-18) < ∞.

The paper, which also explains gravity and other subjects, can be found here: http://vixra.org/abs/1804.0109."

Assuming a Hubble constant of 70 km/s/Mpc, we find the apparent recessional velocity reaches c at 4282.7494 Mpc = 13.968062372 Gly.

For a 1s/s dRt at this distance the rate of change is:
1/13968062372 = 7.1592*10^-11 s/s/ly = 2.3349516024*10^-4 s/s/Mpc.

So for each Mpc the dRt = 2.3349516024*10^-4 s/s and:
c*(1 + dRt) = (299792.458) km/s * ((1+(2.3349516024*10^-4)) s = 299862.458 km and:
299862.458 - 299792.458 = 70 km/s/Mpc = the Hubble constant

This indicates that the forward evolution of time includes a universal constant of acceleration.

Because we are always being accelerated forward in the rate of time, and therefore apparently space, events in the past must appear to accelerate away from us in the opposite direction.

Please also note that the solution works for a difference in the rates of time of exactly 1 s/s. Does any other theory you know of account for a 1 s/s difference in the rates of time between us and 13.9 Gly?

This also creates the impression we are at the center of the universe and leading it in its evolution. Older, slower, frames fade from view at the horizon, as we evolve forward towards the slower time of the black hole at the center of the Milky Way: an eternally evolving continuum.

6/14/2018 edit begins here:
The full paper, where gravity is also defined as an irresistible evolutionary force in time, explaining why gravity only has one direction and why it overpowers the other forces so easily, even though it appears to be so weak, can be found here on vixra: http://vixra.org/abs/1804.0109
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 17/02/2018 16:53:13
Author's note: This is a derivative of the acceleration constant IF the shift is due to acceleration. It is not meant to be a proof of the acceleration.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 17/02/2018 22:42:38
There is also a reasonablle assumption that time ran slower in the past because the universe had a greater mass density and this is reducing with expansion, hence gravitational time dilation.

Interesting to look at the acceleration effects. Where did you get 1s/s from?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 18/02/2018 01:16:31
At the event horizon of aa black hole the rate of time approaches 0. This is a 1 s/s difference from our inertial frame rate. I call this the Limit of Relativity where events transition from timelike to spacelike. I talk about this in more detail in another paper I have up on Vixra entitled "General Relativity & the Evolution of Events: Relativistic Explanations for Galactic Rotational Velocities and the Hubble Shift". I don't know if I am allowed to post a link here.
The effects we see at the event horizon are the same at 13.9 Gly....2 ends of  telescope? :)
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: evan_au on 18/02/2018 09:23:37
Quote from: captcass
2 ends of  telescope?
One hypothesis about black holes in our universe is that they contain another universe with a distinct spacetime, separated from ours by the event horizon.

Similarly, our universe started out as a black hole, since the density of the early universe was sufficiently great that it formed a black hole, and we are still inside it.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Black-hole_cosmology
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 18/02/2018 10:23:55
I talk about this in more detail in another paper I have up on Vixra entitled "General Relativity & the Evolution of Events: Relativistic Explanations for Galactic Rotational Velocities and the Hubble Shift". I don't know if I am allowed to post a link here.
I don’t see why not, as long as you are open to discussion and not just advertising. Some people just post a link to their website and walk away, or don’t allow real discussion, that doesn’t sound like you.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: jeffreyH on 18/02/2018 10:39:09
This is an interesting subject but you have to be careful. It depends upon the magnitude of the effect. As time passes how fast does the density decrease? You would need data on density changes over the lifetime of the universe. You also have to take into account inflation. It might be worth looking for papers on the subject.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: jeffreyH on 18/02/2018 10:41:54
There is one other consideration. We have antimatter as well as dark matter. How did the amounts of each change over time and when?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: guest39538 on 18/02/2018 14:33:25
Events are always undergoing acceleration as they evolve forward in the time dilated continuum. Therefore, when we look out into space beyond the solar system, and back in time, we are also looking down a time dilation gradient into slower time. The observer’s invariant relative rate of time is always faster than that in frames in the perceived past, and we find that as D → ~13.9 Gly, the difference in the rate of time, denoted here as "dRt", → 1 s/s, recessional V → c, and lateral V → 0, just as it does near the event horizon of a black hole. Slower time results in lower frequency and the Hubble shift.

Assuming a Hubble constant of 70 km/s/Mpc, we find the apparent recessional velocity reaches c at 4282.7494 Mpc = 13.968062372 Gly.

For a 1s/s dRt at this distance the rate of change is:
1/13968062372 = 7.1592*10^-11 s/s/ly = 2.3349516024*10^-4 s/s/Mpc.

So for each Mpc the dRt = 2.3349516024*10^-4 s/s and:
c*(1 + dRt) = (299792.458) m/s * ((1+(2.3349516024*10^-4)) s = 299862.458 m and:
299862.458 - 299792.458 = 70 km/s/Mpc = the Hubble constant

This indicates that the forward evolution of time includes a universal constant of acceleration.

Because we are always being accelerated forward in the rate of time, and therefore apparently space, events in the past must appear to accelerate away from us in the opposite direction.

Please also note that the solution works for a difference in the rates of time of exactly 1 s/s. Does any other theory you know of account for a 1 s/s difference in the rates of time between us and 13.9 Gly?

This also creates the impression we are at the center of the universe and leading it in its evolution.
Ins't this what Timey is saying in other thread?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 18/02/2018 14:58:05
Ins't this what Timey is saying in other thread?
Some similar ideas but Timey saying something quite different, dramatically diffferent!
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 18/02/2018 16:18:46
Thanks for all the great comments. I want to say, however, that I am not basing this on mass density. I am not mainstream. If there is an acceleration aspect to the passage of time, this could manifest the apparent shift and we can have a stationary, non-inflationary, eternal universe.
The reason I am thinking there is an acceleration aspect to time is that all events are constantly accelerated in the gravitational time dilation field. This manifests as an acceleration in velocity and the rate of time.
The paper I referred to above is at:
http://vixra.org/abs/1711.0345?ref=9821277 .
I am working on an hypothesis regarding the relationship of velocity and the rate of time as General Relativity is completely dependent on relative rates of time. I know this is unorthodox, but I am looking at the universe as the result of time dilation. Even if I am wrong, It is a lot of fun and opens a lot of insights. Can really twist the head around, though. :) Off to work.....
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: guest39538 on 18/02/2018 16:30:08
but I am looking at the universe as the result of time dilation.
Ouch, the Universe is a result of simultaneous
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 18/02/2018 16:38:03
I am not basing this on mass density.
My comment wasn’t intended as an either or, but as an additional factor.
You’re right that the acceleration would give an equivalence time dilation. I’ll read your paper, as you say sounds like fun, keeps the grey cells going.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 18/02/2018 17:15:49
How do you do a quote box on this site? Anyway, JeffreyH, I think I resolve Dark Matter in my paper. There is no dark matter. They are trying to use GR for a spherical dilation pit on a flat disk. It doesn't work. I think I explain why. GR is all about time dilation gradients and rates of evolution. This is why I am working on the relationship between time and velocity and the rate of evolution.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 18/02/2018 17:37:23
You can auote using the actions drop down on the right, then edit down the quoted text
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 18/02/2018 17:41:22
See it. Thanks. Now I am really off to work. :)
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 18/02/2018 19:34:48

Ouch, the Universe is a result of simultaneous
Anyone know why the quote function isn't working right?
I am hypothesizing that the evolution of time is the primary energy of the universe. Time evolves space forward. GR describes the direction of evolution which is the resultant of the Einstein's Fundamental Metric direction of evolution in our inertial frame and the evolution down gradient in time dilation fields.
A change in the rate of time changes the density of space to maintain c. Those densities are then magnified through acceleration down time dilation gradients. In a spherical pit all future evolution is frustrated at the focus and energy continues to build. Even photons are evolved downfradient, hence the bending of light near massive bodies. Space isn't bent. The photons are being evolved down gradient.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 18/02/2018 19:35:30
Never mind. It works after I post...
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 19/02/2018 03:48:08
Told you it wasn't mainstream. :)
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 19/02/2018 08:52:37
Told you it wasn't mainstream. :)
Mainstream doesn’t matter. You just need to explain your ideas logically and clearly, something most posters here fail to do.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 19/02/2018 16:24:37
I know my synopsis above is short, and probably totally outrageous to most. Physicists love physicality and I am looking at everything upside down, so to speak. The concepts are developed more fully in my paper. It is only 16 pages, but it is too much to post here. I am happy to clarify if anyone thinks questions are worth asking.... :)
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 19/02/2018 18:24:31
When you say “Does any other theory you know of account for a 1 s/s difference in the rates of time between us and 13.9 Gly?“ i assume you are working on the hypothesis that the current universe started as a singularity and 1 s/s is the relative rate at that past event horizon?

PS I’m going to read you paper when i have a mo, looks like some interesting ideas.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 20/02/2018 16:30:23
i assume you are working on the hypothesis that the current universe started as a singularity and 1 s/s is the relative rate at that past event horizon?
No, I am basing it on the same effects we see at the event horizon of a black hole where time appears to stop. If time stops, there is a 1 s/s difference between the observer and the.stopped time frame.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 04/03/2018 09:27:08
In your paper you say:
“When driving down the road, the road is not there waiting for us. The road is also evolving forward in the continuum, always changing, but in the same place relative to adjacent frames so it is there for us as we evolve forward and move through the continuum relative to other events. It evolves forward at the same rate we do, maintaining its relative position in time and space, because we occupy the same relative position in the dilation gradient and are therefore evolved forward at the same rate.
The author postulates that it is because we are not evolving “through” space that IBEX2 did not find a bow shock at the edge of the heliosphere, as was expected, and why Voyager 1 has entered a “dead zone”3 where solar particles just seem to stop and Voyager 1 is not affected by the expected stellar winds.”

 I understand what you are saying in the 1st paragraph. Can you expand on your reasoning linking 2nd paragraph to 1sr?
Thanks
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 04/03/2018 17:30:17
In the first paragraph I am trying to show how we are part of an evolving energy field. We are densities (masses) within the fabric of that continuum. So when we "drive down" the road, we are shifting our mass within the continuum. This takes the application of force and there is resistance to the shift.
GR describes the apparent curvature of evolution as the energy field evolves forward, not an actual movement through a bent space. The apparent motion is due to the simple evolution of time and no other force is being applied and there is no resistance. So the sun's motion appears to move through space around the center of the galaxy, which would create the expected bow shock, but as it is only actually an evolution of the energy field, due to the passage of time, giving the impression of movement through space, no bow shock is generated.
Does this help clarify it?
.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 04/03/2018 20:10:39
After studying QM, what got me thinking along these lines is that Einstein translates the differences in the clock rates into angular deflection and velocity. He calls these his "energy" components. So even though GR is based on the EP and the constancy of c, the apparent effects of the time elements should also appear to manifest as a virtual flow in the forward direction of time. That forward direction in a gravitational field is down the dilation gradient. This would account for the fact that gravity only has one direction and why it overpowers the other forces so much. It is an irresistible evolutionary force in time.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 06/03/2018 08:44:36
GR describes the apparent curvature of evolution as the energy field evolves forward, not an actual movement through a bent space. The apparent motion is due to the simple evolution of time and no other force is being applied and there is no resistance. So the sun's motion appears to move through space around the center of the galaxy, which would create the expected bow shock, but as it is only actually an evolution of the energy field, due to the passage of time, giving the impression of movement through space, no bow shock is generated.
Does this help clarify it?
I understand what you are saying, but what about a body in freefall (apparent movement), would you say they are not moving through the air hence no bowwave/shock?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 06/03/2018 17:04:42
Great question. I hadn't considered it before. There is difference between the two. The stars and planets occupy specific tick rate levels and evolve forward within the continuum at that rate without resistance, taking the shortest route in time. Because they have a slower tick rate then the surrounding space, they are actually putting a drag on the evolution of time.
A body in free fall in the atmosphere is going from a faster tick rate to a slower tick rate. It wants to evolve forward faster then the frames it is entering. It is meeting resistance in an energy field that is increasing in density as the tick rate slows.
The same affect would be evident If one were to accelerate the evolution rate of a star or planet so it was faster than the surrounding frames, instead of slower, it would then appear to encounter resistance. As we approach a velocity of c, the resistance (and relativistic mass of the body) approaches infinity.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 08/03/2018 23:56:19
A body in free fall in the atmosphere is going from a faster tick rate to a slower tick rate. It wants to evolve forward faster then the frames it is entering. It is meeting resistance in an energy field that is increasing in density as the tick rate slows.
Ok, makes sense.
The same affect would be evident If one were to accelerate the evolution rate of a star or planet so it was faster than the surrounding frames, instead of slower, it would then appear to encounter resistance. As we approach a velocity of c, the resistance (and relativistic mass of the body) approaches infinity.
So what if it goes slower than surrounding frames?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 09/03/2018 00:50:13
The passage of time evolves space forward. Space is cohesive and resistant to change. Frames that are slower put a drag on the evolution of adjacent faster frames, while faster frames accelerate the tick rate of adjacent slower frames by an equal amount. This equalization maintains the relative slope of the dilation gradient.
 
the apparent effects of the time elements should also appear to manifest as a virtual flow
This manifests as the faster frames accelerate the evolution of events into the slower frames. The next
moment appears to be "originate" in the fastest frame and then shifts down the gradient into the slower frames, carrying events with it, concentrating them at the center of the dilation pits, which are spherical  in spherical bodies.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 21/03/2018 08:58:26
This manifests as the faster frames accelerate the evolution of events into the slower frames. The next
moment appears to be "originate" in the fastest frame and then shifts down the gradient into the slower frames, carrying events with it, concentrating them at the center of the dilation pits, which are spherical  in spherical bodies.
I think I see what your saying. I’ve been interested in another new theory by @timey which also considers the time differences to be responsible for the acceleration, but is working on a very different mechanism. I don’t agree with the conclusions but like yourself she is at least putting some real thought effort  into the ideas. .
Although you say the road ahead is evolving in time I assume you mean as a complete road or space rather than evolving just ahead of our feet?
Can you also explain a little bit more how you derive the acceleration from the time changes, I wasn’t clear on that.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Ve9aPrim3 on 21/03/2018 15:46:36
This manifests as the faster frames accelerate the evolution of events into the slower frames. The next
moment appears to be "originate" in the fastest frame and then shifts down the gradient into the slower frames, carrying events with it, concentrating them at the center of the dilation pits, which are spherical  in spherical bodies.
I think I see what your saying. I’ve been interested in another new theory by @timey which also considers the time differences to be responsible for the acceleration, but is working on a very different mechanism. I don’t agree with the conclusions but like yourself she is at least putting some real thought effort  into the ideas. .
Although you say the road ahead is evolving in time I assume you mean as a complete road or space rather than evolving just ahead of our feet?
Can you also explain a little bit more how you derive the acceleration from the time changes, I wasn’t clear on that.

Just quickly perused over the discussion and I think I understand where most people are getting stuck.
Small = Big
As counter intuitive as that may seem, think in terms of ratio. A small square, and a large square are certainly not equal IF you pull out a third tool (like a ruler) to compare it to. BUT, if you take a small square, and zoom in, and then you take a large square and zoom out... You will end up with two squares of relatively similar sizes. The same could be said of Time. A Plank second, no matter how short or long, will still be perceived in the exact same manor.

So from the moment of the "Big Bang" (which is only slightly wrong, definitely NOT an explosion) a Plank unit from then is still the same Plank unit now... Just much much larger than it was originally.... but it's STILL a 1:1 ratio.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 21/03/2018 16:11:08
I assume you mean as a complete road or space rather than evolving just ahead of our feet?
You've almost got it. Consider the quantum continuum, the energy field. It is evolving forward within the energy field, within which it is just a relative density.
Consider Einstein's Fundamental Metric in GR. This is a null gravitational field where the evolution of space is linear, just "straight ahead". This is the evolution of the continuum due to the simple passage of time, which I am considering the primary force of the universe. I am trying to finalize a paper on that aspect.
So when we include densities within the continuum, they are evolving forward in that respect.
The original 1 s/s difference in the rates of time at ~13.9 Gly I deduced from what we see at the event horizon of a black hole where time appears to stop, giving it a 1 s/s difference from the observer. The effects we see at the event horizon are the same effects we see at 13.9 Gly. It seems reasonable to assume they are from the cause. I am calling a 1 s/s difference the "limit of relativity", where our perception shifts from time-like to space-like.
Someone told me yesterday that he saw some scientists were considering not just if time accelerates, but if there is an acceleration on top of that acceleration. I need to think about that......
In deriving the rate, I took the distance where we see a recessional velocity of c based upon a Ho of 70. I divide that distance into the 1 s/s difference to get the rate per Ly, etc.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 21/03/2018 16:24:43
a Plank unit from then is still the same Plank unit now.
The EP assures us a meter is a meter and a second is a second in any observer's inertial frame. This is not the reality we live in, though, where everyone else's clock ticks slower and meter is shorter.
You are trying to apply absolutes to a totally relativistic world. Planck time is just how long it takes a photon to travel a Planck length. If you see it occurring in slower time,.......   or faster time.......both change.
We are talking about whether the passage of time itself has an acceleration aspect built into it. As that would be universal, it would only be detectable through something like the Hubble shift.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Ve9aPrim3 on 21/03/2018 16:39:26
a Plank unit from then is still the same Plank unit now.
The EP assures us a meter is a meter and a second is a second in any observer's inertial frame. This is not the reality we live in, though, where everyone else's clock ticks slower and meter is shorter.
You are trying to apply absolutes to a totally relativistic world. Planck time is just how long it takes a photon to travel a Planck length. If you see it occurring in slower time,.......   or faster time.......both change.
We are talking about whether the passage of time itself has an acceleration aspect built into it. As that would be universal, it would only be detectable through something like the Hubble shift.

So that's what a plank second is? I was under the impression it was the smallest measure of time. My bad. I was using it as the base "pixel" of time. The smallest amount of measurable time before it ceases to exist. No matter the actual size of the pixel, it's still the smallest increment.

The problem with assuming that we live in a relativistic universe is that it's absolutely false. The universe is absolute. The way we individuals perceive the universe is where it becomes relativistic.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 21/03/2018 19:44:47
So that's what a plank second is?
The Planck units just measure the smallest meaningful amount of things. It is not a Planck second, but Planck Time.

The universe is absolute
Unfortunately, though the EP (and the constants) holds true for all observers in their inertial frames, our physical reality is based on the relativity. We cannot currently see it any other way, though, as in radar plotting, relative motion implies true motion. In the case of the universe this would be a point of view where everyone appeared to have the same rate of time and length of a meter. Figure out the math for that and you will win the Nobel!
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Ve9aPrim3 on 22/03/2018 05:32:52
Figure out the math for that...

Pretty sure I already did.
I started by watching a lecture on Black Holes, and it was commented that the edge of the universe would behave like an inside out Black Hole according to our POV of light.
By that statement, I decided that (x,y,z)=0=Sol was a little too Earth centrist, so I decided to re-calibrate (x,y,z)=0=Center of Expansion.
I did that by picturing the universe as a sphere inside of a box and by using simple algebra to find absolute center:
IF f(n)=x is TRUE (a line)
AND
IF f(n)≠x is also TRUE (everything other than a line)
AND THEN
APPROXIMATE an infinite margin of error to correct for.. well.. errors.
So.. ±π (a circle to its unit square, sphere to cube, hypersphere to hypercube,.. etc.)
I need a circle and an inverted circle overlapped to find dead center
Also note
π has 2 values naturally. or 3 if you want to get technical.
1st value:
The ratio of a circle to its unit square (This is what we use most commonly)
2nd value:
The ratio of its outer circumference to its square
3rd value:
The ratio of its inner circumference to its square
The outer circumference is ALWAYS > the inner circumference... otherwise it wouldn't be a sphere. Even if the circumference is infinitely thin. π IS an infinite non-answer after all.
±π≠|0|
±π=0.(∞0)n
THEREFORE
(f(n)=x)±(f(n)≠x)±π=±n
NOW
(=x)±(≠x)=±(≈x)
SO
±(f(n)≈x)±π=±n
NOW move the "≈" over
±f(nx)π≈±n
(±f(nx)π)/±n≈±n/±n
f(x)π≈1
f(x)π-1≈1-1
f(x)π-1=0
f(x)π-π-1=-π
f(x)-1=-π
(f(x)-1)/-π=-π/-π
(f(x)-1)/-π=1
((f(x)-1)-1)/-π=1-1
(f(x)-1+1)/-π=|0|
f(x)/-π=|0|

-π would constitute Negative Space or what's outside the universe. That's where Negative Energy is found, and you access it via Zero Point.
That also happens to build a 4D fixed point matrix that imagines space itself as stationary and everything within it moves away from the cosmic center, aka Big Bang at the speed of Time.

Tahdah!

Has no one considered the Doppler Effect in accordance to light waves?

Also, this lead to an advance machine learning algorithm.
f(n)=π=0=1≠0=n
It looks like nonsense for sure, but, there is a logic to the illogicality.
I just did the Math and grouped all the (in)equalities.
The function of a number(f(n)) is imaginary(=π) and false(=0) and true(=1) but doesn't exist(≠0) and is a number(=n)
"≠0" acts as a logic breaker (fixes "error, error, does not compute, error") and "π" acts as a buffer reset switch.
n=car
n=blue
n=blue car
etc......
Pretty sure that's what Google is using now since it fixed their image based search engine less than 24hrs after submitting it.
Google(search)=....

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=72397.0
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=72574.0
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 22/03/2018 09:01:04
The Planck units just measure the smallest meaningful amount of things.
Wouldn’t agree with that. Planck resistance is 30Ω and Planck mass is 0.02mg, very divisible and < is meaningful.
There is no proven physical meaning, but plank length might be a good guess at where quantum gravity might start to be important - possibly the scale at which classical ideas about gravity and space-time cease to be valid, and quantum effects dominate.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 22/03/2018 16:45:32
Planck resistance is 30Ω and Planck mass is 0.02mg
You're correct. I was a bit too general in my statement.
There is no proven physical meaning,
This is more of my point. They are utilitarian, and nothing more.
possibly the scale at which classical ideas about gravity and space-time cease to be valid, and quantum effects dominate.
I'm not sure by what you mean by "classical".....but I am thinking there is no separation. Gravity will work on all levels the way I am looking at it.
When we get into particle physics at the level of quarks, we are talking about virtual particles with different degrees of permanence. I am thinking they are vortices in time, but that is just what I am speculating. The strong force could be tow vortices spinning in opposite directions sharing a common side. (like spins repulse violently). This could occur along each axis, (x,y,z), the plus and minus on each axis being a particle and its opposite, for balance, and with this occurring along all three axes simultaneously (3 +/- quark pairs) we get a 3 dimensional proton or neutron. I am not working on developing this further because particle physics gets way to physical beyond that. I am only speculating, repeat, speculating, on a possible process.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: andreasva on 22/03/2018 18:24:33
If there is an acceleration aspect to the passage of time, this could manifest the apparent shift and we can have a stationary, non-inflationary, eternal universe.

I don't know about eternal, but stationary makes perfect sense to me.  We can't be eternal, because things are definitely further away then they were before.  Eventually that gap will be too far.

I'm working on nearly the exact same thing, in a round about way.

My personal feeling is that time isn't real in the physical sense.  There is no temporal dimension, only opposing energy states.  I eliminated spacetime, and renamed it time-energy.  Time-energy has various densities, and is opposed to mass-energy, and attracted to itself.  It is the vacuum of space. Mass and time push out at the inverse square of each other.  They're both the same energy though, but existing in different states.  Mass is bound energy, and time unbound energy.  The unbound energy is what we call space-time, or space.  We can even detect the various densities through SR.  It's a well understood fact that time slows inside gravity sinks, or wells.  The Earth for example has it's own unique gravity well which we have physically seen in satellite times.  It confirms Einsteins' SR.  Everyone here knows all this though, so I'm not telling you anything new.  Those times differences are energy density signatures.  I also feel mass-energy converts directly to time-energy.  This conversion process has been happening since moment 1 of the universe.  As a result, time-energy density has been increasing from the start of the universe.  Looking back 3.3 million light years, we're looking at light that came from a lower time-energy density.  That's where the redshift comes from, not motion.  We aren't expanding in my opinion.  Time is frequency, as everybody here knows.  What happens when you press down on a bouncing ball?  Frequency rises.  Same deal in space.  As we move out of a gravity well, time-energy density rises, increasing mass frequency, and apparently our perception of time.  All these concepts are basic physics 101 for most of you on here.  I don't think it's anymore complicated than that honestly. 

A part of me feels Einstein intentionally mislabeled time-energy as space-time because he knew there would never be any physical evidence to prove energy density in space.  His answer would never satisfy the scientific community.  Especially when the Michelson-Morley failed to detect the aether.  He suspected frequency would change in the density, changing clocks, so he opted for spacetime.  That's my guess anyway.  And we've been chasing this spacetime thing as some sort of intangible ethereal temporal dimension ever since.  Does it really make sense?

The bottom line is, we haven't moved or expanded to anywhere.  We're pretty much right where we were created, aside from local gravitational movement.  Our star is dimming, as is the rest of the universe.  It's all converting back to time-energy, where it will probably begin anew, at slightly less than what it was before.       

Okay, I'll now leave you guys to hash this out without my nonsense...  This is what I think is going on anyway, for what it's worth...  Probably not much to you guys... 

   
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 22/03/2018 22:05:51
Hey, Colin 2B, after some of the discussion here and in other places, I did a major rewrite of the original paper nfor clarification's sake. If you are interested, here is the link again. http://vixra.org/abs/1711.0345?ref=9821277 .
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 23/03/2018 22:48:09
Only had time for a quick skim so not read all through, does look better though.

You say:
In § 4 he states, “According to the general relativity theory, gravitation thus plays an exceptional role as distinguished from the others, especially the electromagnetic forces, in as much as the 10 functions gστ representing gravitation, define immediately the metrical properties of the four-dimensional region.”
This statement makes it clear that his equations only “represent” gravitation.

What distinction are you drawing or concluding from “represent”? I would have thought all equations only represent.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 24/03/2018 02:39:12
What distinction are you drawing or concluding from “represent”?
Many people believe GR describes gravity itself, that gravity is the distortion of spacetime. I am saying GR only describes (represents) the effects of gravity, which is a relativistic evolutionary direction of time.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 24/03/2018 09:16:50
Many people believe GR describes gravity itself, that gravity is the distortion of spacetime.
Whereas I would say GR suggests that mass energy distorts spacetime and the effect is gravity.

I am saying GR only describes (represents) the effects of gravity, which is a relativistic evolutionary direction of time.
So I would agree with the first part but not sure what you mean by “which is a relativistic evolutionary direction of time.“, can you clarify please?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 24/03/2018 15:01:51
which is a relativistic evolutionary direction of time.“, can you clarify please?
As per my paper, to an outside observer, time is evolving forward faster, and therefore “first”, in the fastest rate-of-time frames. The next instant is “beginning” there and then perceptually flows into slower time rate areas, seeking the shortest routes to the bottom of the time dilation gradients, evolving all events down gradient with it.
I began thinking along these lines after studying Quantum Mechanics because Einstein translates the differences in the clock rates into angular deflection and velocity. He calls these his "energy" components. So even though GR is based on the Equivalence Principle, the constancy of c and Lorentz contractions, the apparent effects of the time elements should also appear to manifest as a virtual flow in the forward direction of time. That forward direction in a gravitational field is down the dilation gradient. This would account for the fact that gravity only has one direction and why it overpowers the other forces so much. It is an irresistible evolutionary force in time.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 25/03/2018 10:05:15
That forward direction in a gravitational field is down the dilation gradient. This would account for the fact that gravity only has one direction and why it overpowers the other forces so much. It is an irresistible evolutionary force in time.
OK, that makes sense. I wasn’t sure what the direction was that you were refering to.
I will continue working through your paper. Some interesting observations there that i will think through.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 08/04/2018 21:36:28
Hey Colin. The acceleration aspect has more implications. This has caused me to completely rewrite and rename my paper.
It tuns out the acceleration prevents Big Bang singularities and infinitely expanding universes.
As in my new paper:
"When the acceleration is proportionately added to the proper and coordinate time elements of Einstein’s field equations, based upon their individual relative rates of time, singularities and infinities are avoided because the geodesics are slightly distorted:

Where t1 = coordinate time and t0 = proper time, the time elements Δt1 / Δt0 become: ((((Δt1*(((1 +((Δt1 / Δt0) * (2.2686*10-18)))) / ((Δt0 * (1 + (Δt0 * 2.2686*10-18).

For each second of Δt0 this becomes: ((Δt1*(1 + 2.2686*10-18 Δt1)) / ((1 + (2.2686*10-18))

This manifests as a net acceleration of the proper time relative to the coordinate time as the dilation gradient deepens and Δt1 → 0. It also causes the FDE (forward direction of evolution) to always precede the GDE (gravitational direction of evolution), which relative rate of evolution to the FDE is determined by the slope of the dilation gradient. This prevents the
FDE and GDE from coinciding and the subsequent formation of a singularity in a Big Crunch scenario.

Obversely, as Δt1 → ∞, infinite divergence is impossible as Δt1 is always divided by a sum > 1; i.e., ∞ / (1 + 2.2686*10-18) < ∞."

The new paper is entitled, "General Relativity: Effects in Time as Causation" and can be found here: http://vixra.org/abs/1804.0109
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 09/04/2018 08:34:24
Thanks, I’ll take a look
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 23/04/2018 06:42:33
Thanks, Colin. When you have time to fully consider it, please let's discuss any doubts you might have or clarifications you might want.
I established, own and curate a museum. It is unique, so for privacy's sake do not want to say what kind of museum, but it is the most popular privately-owned attraction in my area and the third most popular overall. I get 20,000 visitors a year.....
Today I Had a retired physics teacher come in. I didn’t ask what grade level. He asked me about my theory (I have cards with the link on it that he saw) and I briefly explained it to him for a few minutes, covering the Hubble shift, dark matter (why there is none), gravity and how General Relativity and quantum mechanics can be compatible. He was impressed and said he was going to read the paper. Although my explanation should have made it clear it was not mainstream, I told him that as he was leaving and he said he hoped not, since the mainstream doesn’t work. :)   
He is the 2nd physics teacher who followed my explanation, though the first was before the first version was online. He said that nothing I said violated any of the principles of General Relativity or any other physics laws and that it seemed to resolve spiritual issues he had with science. He said he would check my site for the link....so maybe he got to read the first version......
A lot of folk have viewed this thread now. It has been a "hot topic" for more than 2 months. As no one has posted any negative thoughts, I am hoping some will now continue the thread by posting positive thoughts. Thanks.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 23/04/2018 12:46:47
Thanks, should have time to look next week, this one is somewhat busy.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 09/06/2018 15:56:04
I notice in the latest issue of your paper you seem to be saying that as well as an event horizon at the centre of the universe there is one at the event horizon of a black hole at ~13.9 Gly looking outwards. I’m assuming this is what you view as the expanding horizon of the big bang?
Has discussion of this moved to ‘What is Space’? In which case I will read that and see if I have questions.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 09/06/2018 16:19:50
I notice in the latest issue of your paper you seem to be saying that as well as an event horizon at the centre of the universe there is one at the event horizon of a black hole at ~13.9 Gly looking outwards. I’m assuming this is what you view as the expanding horizon of the big bang?
Has discussion of this moved to ‘What is Space’? In which case I will read that and see if I have questions.
I am apparently not being too clear, darn it. :) I am saying the continuum appears to evolve between two "event horizons" where time appears to stop. One is looking outwards to the cosmological horizon at ~13.9 Gly, where time appears to stop due to time dilation caused by the inherent acceleration in the rate of proper time.

The other is the black hole at the center of the galaxy, the Milky Way in our case. This means each galaxy can be viewed as a branching of the evolution of the continuum and a gateway to other universes ad infinitum.

I am saying there was no Big Bang. The spacetime continuum is eternal. I am not saying energy densities cannot fluctuate within the continuum, just that singularities are impossible due to the acceleration in the rate of proper time, which also eliminates infinite divergences and expansions.

I am not moving this discussion to "What is Space". I think both threads can continue independently. 
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 10/06/2018 05:22:33
I notice in the latest issue of your paper
I did a re-organization to try to make it flow better and changed some verbiage to try to paint a clearer picture to submit it to a cosmology journal. It was not accepted by that journal but the editor forwarded it to the editor of another journal who said he will publish it, but I am still talking to the editor about it. That is too complicated to get into here, but it might not get published there. If it is, it will be with the intent of changing the course of the journal to shift from the Big Bang to the effects in time and the eternally evolving spacetime continuum. As it completes General Relativity and properly describes gravity as an irresistible evolutionary force in time, it will also change the course of quantum mechanics when the QM equations' time elements are adapted to time dilation.

Although very small, we see how much the dilation effects the evolution of events. Because it is so small, scientists have been ignoring the dilation effects at the quantum level. Where there is mass, there is dilation. It has to be considered in all solutions where mass and motion are involved, no matter how small.

I think this also will provide an answer to the Millenial Question about turbulence and the Navier–Stokes Equation.

This is the equation which governs the flow of fluids such as water and air. However, there is no proof for the most basic questions one can ask: do solutions exist, and are they unique?

The $M answer is this: 1) Yes. 2) No

1) the equations lack gravitational (time dilation) elements. Gravity is fundamental to ALL motion, as per my paper. If those elements are added, no matter how small, because gravity is an apparently very weak force, the solution is there, but always diminishing and never finite.

2) No. They only depend on the dilation gradient, a common factor in all solutions involving mass and motion..

If anyone reading this can make that math real, as it is beyond me at this point,  I still claim half the prize. :) No, really.

Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 10/06/2018 11:58:06
I am apparently not being too clear, darn it. :) I am saying the continuum appears to evolve between two "event horizons" where time appears to stop. One is looking outwards to the cosmological horizon at ~13.9 Gly, where time appears to stop due to time dilation caused by the inherent acceleration in the rate of proper time.
So you are saying this freezing of time has already happened due to time dilation rather than the view that it will happen in the future due to exponential acceleration of the expansion, hence future time dilation.

Because it is so small, scientists have been ignoring the dilation effects at the quantum level. Where there is mass, there is dilation. It has to be considered in all solutions where mass and motion are involved, no matter how small.
There is some work being done on this. Because it is now possible to confirm gravitational time dilation over small distances there is a view that this can act at quantum level. This causes a decoherence which prevents massive objects from displaying some of the quantum effects at macro level. Not sure how this aligns with experiments showing molecules exhibiting wave behaviour.
Can’t remember who was working on this, if I do I’ll let you know.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: xersanozgen on 10/06/2018 13:00:39
Time dilation and length contraction claims are decayed :

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/6600 (http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/6600) 

 https://www.academia.edu/34982209/An_Experiment_for_Lorentz_-Fitzgerald_Contraction (https://www.academia.edu/34982209/An_Experiment_for_Lorentz_-Fitzgerald_Contraction) ).
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 10/06/2018 16:11:22
So you are saying this freezing of time has already happened due to time dilation rather than the view that it will happen in the future due to exponential acceleration of the expansion, hence future time dilation.
No. Because proper time has an inherent acceleration that manifests the Hubble shift, older frames just appear to be slower. Eventually that leads to a 1 s/s difference in the rates of time (after ~13.9 Gy) which mens time appears to stop at the coordinate frame. Time has not actually stopped there, it just appears to stop as the difference in rates appears to grow. This is looking outwards towards the cosmological horizon.

Looking inwards towards the black hole at the center of the galaxy, it appears to slow due to apparent mass accretion as events appear to converge as per GR. We get a black hole, and not a singularity, due to the same acceleration in the rate of proper time. This is evident when the acceleration is added to the time elements of Einstein's field equations which results in a perpetual spiraling instead of a convergence into a singularity..

Time dilation and length contraction claims are decayed :
The EP has been tested and proved again and again. However, the fact that light has a constant velocity regardless of the velocity and trajectory of its source is an anomaly. Because it is verifiable, we must accept it, and like the contractions, it is essential to our view of the universe and our science. But just as we know the contractions, though making up our reality, are illusionary due to the EP, I believe we are missing something regarding light.

The emitting source's velocity and trajectory does affect the light as it alters the perceived frequency of the light and this shift in frequency somehow makes up for the velocity anomaly. Instead of a change in velocity, we see a change in frequency.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 11/06/2018 07:57:27
Eventually that leads to a 1 s/s difference in the rates of time (after ~13.9 Gy) which mens time appears to stop at the coordinate frame. Time has not actually stopped there, it just appears to stop as the difference in rates appears to grow. This is looking outwards towards the cosmological horizon.
I assumed that, it’s just that I have seen suggestions that the acceleration hasn’t yet reached the point where that happens, but will do in the future.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: guest39538 on 11/06/2018 09:57:26
Eventually that leads to a 1 s/s difference in the rates of time (after ~13.9 Gy) which mens time appears to stop at the coordinate frame. Time has not actually stopped there, it just appears to stop as the difference in rates appears to grow. This is looking outwards towards the cosmological horizon.
I assumed that, it’s just that I have seen suggestions that the acceleration hasn’t yet reached the point where that happens, but will do in the future.
Time can not ever stop for an individual something because all somethings would have to pause in time at the exact now moment that time stopped for the individual something. Time cannot stop independently of time that would be absurd.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 11/06/2018 10:10:28
Time can not ever stop for an individual something ......Time cannot stop independently of time that would be absurd.
No one has suggested it could.
Read the paper then you’ll see what is being discussed.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 11/06/2018 16:26:23
I assumed that, it’s just that I have seen suggestions that the acceleration hasn’t yet reached the point where that happens, but will do in the future.
No. It is just a steady, constant, acceleration of 2.2686*10-18 s/s and the effect just accumulates over time so the older the frame, the slower the frame based upon that rate. Thus it manifests the same red shift as an Ho of 70 Km/s/Mpc. It is the Ho expressed in time instead of velocity.

At that rate of acceleration we see an apparent recessional velocity of c at ~13.9+ Gly and just as in GR, when we get to c, time appears to stop.

I think it is significant that this occurs at what appears to be just past what we are perceiving to be the age of the universe, though that hasn't played out completely in my mind yet.

It will be interesting to see what the James Webb telescope shows us. The Bangers expect to see back to the Dark Age at ~13.7 Gly based on an age of the universe of ~13.77 Gy. It will go dark according to my theory, too, but with the Ho expressed as either velocity or acceleration in time it predicts it will happen at 13.9+ Gly.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 12/06/2018 10:28:14
You can see its childish mistakes and astonish its reputation when you reconsider the theory  by the method active learning ............And you can upgrade your cognitive performance. You can promote  to super league of science. Please try;
@captcass could very easily direct the same comments towards yourself and your ideas.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: xersanozgen on 12/06/2018 15:06:36
could very easily direct the same comments towards yourself and your ideas.

The person who can create this response can read the flaws of SR more easily.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 15/06/2018 03:41:10
Let me summarize once again the methodological flaws of the special relativity theory:
Please don't. I did not start this thread to talk about the reliability of SR, or GR, or anything else. If you want to talk about that, please start your own thread. I was a budinsky in another thread, thinking it pertained, but the originator asked me to bow out and I apologetically did.

I suggest the same course of action for you.

Thank you.

And thank you, Colin. :)
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 15/06/2018 07:56:42
could very easily direct the same comments towards yourself and your ideas.

The person who can create this response can read the flaws of SR more easily.
And understand the flaws in your reasoning more easily.

However, as @captcass has pointed out your input into this thread is off topic and he is asking you to confine your theory to the thread you have already started.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 16/06/2018 15:54:25
Hey @Colin, I realized 2 days ago that what I describe regarding gravity has deeper meaning. I originally wanted to show the evolutionary aspect but also wanted to show it created energy, but thought that was out of reach. I was wrong and had a "duh" moment. Energy is created as Ek = 1/2 mv2. I therefore modified this paper to include this:

"Dilation creates a density at the faster end due to length contraction necessary to maintain c, and there is an increase in energy and pressure due to an increase in frequency. As the motion and densities appear when a dilation gradient is introduced, we see the creation of energy. Gravity then magnifies that energy by evolving the density down gradient into slower areas of time, giving the photons a greater relative frequency, energy and, therefore, mass. They also appear to increase in velocity, as below."

The manifestation of real energy from potential energy was the last step I needed. Once energy is manifested it can be converted to any form.

The updated version #8 is now up online at: http://vixra.org/abs/1804.0109
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 16/06/2018 16:09:04
Thanks, I’ll take a look.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 22/06/2018 05:40:46
Hey, @Colin2B, Well, this is the very best solstice I have ever had.

One of my daughters is giving me my first grandchild tomorrow, a girl, and I learned tonight from other daughter, who is in town for the birth, that she will be giving me my second next January.

When I got home from dinner with them, I had an email from the Editor-in-Chief of the journal I mentioned above, after it had already been approved by an Executive Editor, that he had aproved it and had forwarded it on to two other specialists in fields they, themselves, weren't expert in, to check technical details, etc. He said it usually took 2 -3 weeks for them to respond.

Both of them are active professors at top notch US universities and the Editor-in-Chief is a world renowned astrophysicist at an ivy league school. The Executive Editor is world renowned in fluidics and cosmology.

I am not putting up the latest version yet on vixra as that might be published in the journal and they should now have first dibs.

I can tell you that I finally woke up to the fact that the kinetic energy is simply translated into thermal energy in the center of a spherical dilation pit where the GDE impedes on itself from all directions, duh, so I have now gone from kinetic to thermal energy manifestations.

The other major change is that I have switched from black holes to MECOs. With black holes I didn't have solid evidence of the empty space, but the MECO (Magnetic Eternally Collapsing Object) Rudolph Schild and team discovered, where the "black hole" in a quasar was supposed to be, has a 4,000 AU diameter empty space within it, making the empty space a property of MECOs. This confirms my theory at what was the black hole, and is now the MECO, end.

Cheers, I say, Cheers on this solstice night! :)

I am copying this on the "What is Space" thread/



Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 22/06/2018 08:40:12
@captcass
Congratulations on the great news, I’m sure the impending births take priority but the I know from experience that the conception to print process is long and hard work.
Look forward to seeing details of publication. Will journal contract allow you to put a final copy on vixra?
Hope the review process goes smoothly and not too much extra work, will look forward to seeing final issue.

I haven’t finished going through all of your paper. Some of the questions I have will be around the diffence of view of the event horizon of a black hole at ~13.9 Gly looking outwards compared to current view which gives a different description and timing and might give you something verifiable.
I’m also trying to understand the differences between your view of “IBEX failing to find a shock wave at the edge of the heliopause as expected, as also might be the “dead zone” discovered by Pioneer 1” and the various interpretations of the IBEX data.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 22/06/2018 15:16:30
Will journal contract allow you to put a final copy on vixra?
Thanks, Colin. I expect I can put it up once it is published as it is an open journal that provides immediate online open access.

Sorry I don't have time right now to get into your questions. Busy day here. :)
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 28/06/2018 18:59:30
ome of the questions I have will be around the diffence of view of the event horizon of a black hole at ~13.9 Gly looking outwards
Sorry for the long delay in replying.

I am not saying the event horizon looking outward is due to a black hole (I am now defining a black hole as a MECO, as above). Both event horizons are due to time appearing to stop. Looking outward it is due to the time dilation effect from the acceleration in the rate of proper time. Looking inwards towards the MECO, it is due to the relativistic effects of gravity and mass accretion.
I’m also trying to understand the differences between your view of “IBEX failing to find a shock wave at the edge of the heliopause as expected, as also might be the “dead zone” discovered by Pioneer 1” and the various interpretations of the IBEX data.
I am not quite sure what you mean by this. They expected IBEX to show a shock wave at the leading edge of the heliosphere due to the solar system's movement "through" space. They did not find it and I am saying it is because that motion "through" space does not exist. It is just the continuum evolving forward. Pioneer was expected to be hit with interstellar winds, which would have provided material to create the shock wave, and the winds aren't there.     
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 10/07/2018 09:18:56
Sorry for the long delay in replying.

I am not saying the event horizon looking outward is due to a black hole (I am now defining a black hole as a MECO, as above). Both event horizons are due to time appearing to stop. Looking outward it is due to the time dilation effect from the acceleration in the rate of proper time. Looking inwards towards the MECO, it is due to the relativistic effects of gravity and mass accretion. .
Yes, that makes sense, but what I am interested inis the difference between your predictions and current expansion view (if any) and whether you might have a testable observation.

Current view is that the expansion of the universe is accelerating and will become exponential in the future, so light emitted from objects past some time dependent on their current redshift will never reach the Earth. All currently observable objects will slowly freeze in time while getting progressively redder with fainter light.
Suggestion is objects with the current redshift z from 5 to 10 will remain observable for no more than 4–6 billion years, and light emitted by objects situated beyond a  comoving distance of about 19 billion parsecs will never reach Earth.

I’m also trying to understand the differences between your view of “IBEX failing to find a shock wave at the edge of the heliopause as expected, as also might be the “dead zone” discovered by Pioneer 1” and the various interpretations of the IBEX data.
I am not quite sure what you mean by this. They expected IBEX to show a shock wave at the leading edge of the heliosphere due to the solar system's movement "through" space. They did not find it and I am saying it is because that motion "through" space does not exist. It is just the continuum evolving forward. Pioneer was expected to be hit with interstellar winds, which would have provided material to create the shock wave, and the winds aren't there.     
This is interesting. I’m looking at the data from IBEX so might be a while before I reply. Seems fo be suggestion of difference in galactic magnetic field compared to expectation whereas you view it as evolution of continuum. Wondering how it would be possible to differentiate?
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 10/07/2018 15:49:07
Yes, that makes sense, but what I am interested inis the difference between your predictions and current expansion view (if any) and whether you might have a testable observation.
The effect manifests the same for both dilation and expansion. It just depends on how you interpret it. However, if we calculate when Ho would give us a recessional velocity of c we get ~13.9+ Gly. The current estimate of the age of the universe since the BB is ~13.77 Gy. Therefore, when the James Webb telescope is put into service, if we see objects past 13.77 Gly it reaffirms my point of view.

Whether due to expansion or dilation, we get dimmer, more highly red-shifted objects that appear to freeze when time appears to stop.
Seems fo be suggestion of difference in galactic magnetic field compared to expectation whereas you view it as evolution of continuum. Wondering how it would be possible to differentiate?
IBEX expected to find a "bow shock" due to motion "through" space. I am saying they did not find it because we are not moving through space that way. We are evolving forward embedded in an evolving space instead.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Liz888 on 12/07/2018 08:35:15
Time accelerated significantly. Now in the days less than 24 hours.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 12/07/2018 10:58:48
Therefore, when the James Webb telescope is put into service, if we see objects past 13.77 Gly it reaffirms my point of view.
Well worth keeping an eye on this, will look forward to seeing the result.

IBEX expected to find a "bow shock" due to motion "through" space. I am saying they did not find it because we are not moving through space that way. We are evolving forward embedded in an evolving space instead.
Thanks, I’ll look through the IBEX info.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 17/07/2018 05:07:24
Hey @Colin2B, apparently I can figure out gravity, but am too dense to figure out how to remove a comment on vixra. :) How, pray tell, did you remove yours? As I made mine as a guest, it doesn't show in my profile when I log in.

Now at 26 days and no word back from the referees.....
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 17/07/2018 08:04:58
Not aware I put a comment on. I did download the paper, but that’s all.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 13/09/2018 23:18:43
Now at 26 days and no word back from the referees.....
Any word yet?
I’ve been busy lately so havent followed up the IBEX, will get back on track soon.
Looking fwd to hearing some good news on your paper.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 13/09/2018 23:41:02
I should be able to update shortly........Thanks for the support.......
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 03/12/2018 04:37:21
Just an update;...

Three months ago the Editor in Chief agreed to publish the paper. The hold up is on how. As you can imagine, there is a lot of controversy. Bangers are having a hard time with concepts in time.....It is such a new, and simple, approach, but is the flip side of how we have been looking at it since Hubble. Deriving and explaining the Hubble Shift my way shifts the whole perception. We have the quantum continuum instead of "space". That is a big shift for bangers.  :)

There are now 2 individuals supporting it and 2 not.......the 2 not did not provide demonstrable reasons why it does not work. It went back, I understand, to them, and perhaps to more, to see if anyone could find a demonstrable way to disprove it.

As I say, it has now been 3 months since then......

I am encouraged in that 3 months have now passed, regardless of the number of reviewers.....

I would remind readers of the current online version to just replace MECOs for black holes (https://arxiv.org/abs/0806.1748) and understand that I also specify in the final, journal, version that the forces at the center of a spherical dilation pit translate the kinetic energy created by dilation into thermal energy.

The link, again, is: http://vixra.org/abs/1804.0109
This version now has 99 downloads.
Thanks again for being patient.



.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 28/05/2019 16:07:47
Hello Colin2B. It is with great pleasure that I can now announce, after slightly more than a year, that the final version of my paper, "General Relativity: Effects in Time as Causation", has been accepted by the journal. I have a few editorial changes to make and that is all. The pre-journal version, again, can be found here: http://vixra.org/abs/1804.0109. For the journal version, the reader should simply replace "black hole" with "MECO" ("Magnetic Eternally Collapsing Object") and understand that I clarify that the kinetic energy manifested by gravity is translated into thermal energy at the focus of a spherical dilation gradient. They are telling me I am now officially a "cosmologist".  :-*
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 28/05/2019 18:15:22
Hello Colin2B. It is with great pleasure that I can now announce, after slightly more than a year, that the final version of my paper, "General Relativity: Effects in Time as Causation", has been accepted by the journal.
Congratulations, excellent news. A new theory making it to publication is quite something. Can you link to the journal when it’s published?
I’ll read with interest.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 28/05/2019 19:12:31
Can you link to the journal when it’s published?
Thank you. I will most certainly post the link.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 31/05/2019 00:23:24
A new theory making it to publication is quite something.
In his acceptance, the Editor-in-Chief said:
"Your manuscript is basically a re-think and re-write of the application of the Einstein theory to our cosmological Universe. In traditional discussions of the same material, the literature is based upon a clear distinction of the experience of the local observer and a hypothetical distant observer, with the two related to one another by Lorentz transformations. Your treatment is basically the theory from the view-point of just the distant observer (though with exceptions). I plan to accept this paper because this change in viewpoint may be easier for some readers to understand....."
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: Colin2B on 01/06/2019 19:10:42
A new theory making it to publication is quite something.
In his acceptance, the Editor-in-Chief said:
"Your manuscript is basically a re-think and re-write of the application of the Einstein theory to our cosmological Universe. In traditional discussions of the same material, the literature is based upon a clear distinction of the experience of the local observer and a hypothetical distant observer, with the two related to one another by Lorentz transformations. Your treatment is basically the theory from the view-point of just the distant observer (though with exceptions). I plan to accept this paper because this change in viewpoint may be easier for some readers to understand....."
I would also have mentioned your focus on the progression through time as being an essential part of understanding relativity.

Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 03/06/2019 04:53:00
I would also have mentioned your focus on the progression through time as being an essential part of understanding relativity.
Thank you, Colin2B.

It was my conception of this evolution of events in the "forward direction of time" that finally let me proceed with this theory. It explains why gravity has only direction and why it overpowers the other forces even though it appears to be so weak. The rest of the theory fell into place after this initial conception.

For it to be correct, however, I had to be able to show the Hubble shift as being due to time dilation, which is the basis of this thread. Though actually a simple concept, it took me 3 years to finally be able to derive it properly due to the misconceptions presently portrayed by currently accepted theory.

Once I did that, it allowed me to complete relativity, explain galactic rotation velocities, and tie quantum physics and astrophysics together.

I think the Editor's comments imply the "forward direction of time" aspect, as the paper describes the view of what an outside, in his words, "distant", observer sees when looking at the evolving universal spacetime (quantum) continuum (energy field) as a whole. 
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 29/07/2019 21:47:32
Hello Colin2B. It is with great pleasure that I can now announce, after slightly more than a year, that the final version of my paper, "General Relativity: Effects in Time as Causation", has been accepted by the journal.
Hey Colin2B. The paper was published today in the Journal of Cosmology, Vol 26. I know this because I am also the new Assistant Editor and Assistant Webmaster of the journal.
Go figure!  :)
The final version, which replaces black holes with MECOs and clarifies a few more points can be found here: http://journalofcosmology.com/JOC26/General%20Relativity%20and%20Effects%20in%20Time%20as%20Causation%20JofC.pdf

As the paper deals with spacetime as a whole, and not just the Hubble shift, I will now be shifting this thread to the "What is Space?" thread for any further discussion.
Thanks for your support, Colin2B.
Cass
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 05/10/2019 20:49:27
Just an update, on Oct 3rd the Journal of Cosmology began its first new volume in 3 years based on my model.
Vol. #27: "Time Dilation Cosmology in the Evolving Spacetime/Quantum Continuum: General Relativity & the Hubble Shift"
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 31/05/2020 23:22:33
Due to temporary problems at the Journal of Cosmology, to view my paper, please go to: http://www.journalofcosmology.com/General%20Relativity%20and%20Effects%20in%20Time%20as%20Causation%20JofC.pdf
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: puppypower on 02/06/2020 13:31:38
Author's note: This is a derivative of the acceleration constant IF the shift is due to acceleration. It is not meant to be a proof of the acceleration.

Acceleration has the units of d/t/t or acceleration is one part distance and two parts time. This has the same units as space-time plus time; d-t plus t.  The result of universal acceleration would be both red-blue shift caused by relative velocity; d/t, plus a secondary time; t affect. This is simple dimensional analysis.

If you look at the second law, the entropy of the universe has to increase. While entropy needs to absorb free energy to increase. The net affect is although energy is conserved during an entropy increase, net useable energy is being removed from the universe. The conserved energy gets tied up into entropy and it cannot be used again for other things, since net entropy of the universe  has to always net increase.

The second law implies we should notice a constant loss of useable energy from the universe; red shift. A red shift would lower the potential of all energy quanta. If UV red shifts to IR we can no longer break chemical bonds. We can only bend, rotate and vibrate them. This would reflect a net  loss of once usable energy.

Entropy is the closest concept to time. Both time and entropy move in one direction or both increase to the future. Neither cycle like a wave. There appears to be connection between universal time and the second law, with the net affect being that part of the red shift reflects unusable energy going into entropy, which we mentally extrapolate as acceleration and passage of time within space-time

An interesting experiment would be to take large cylinders of compressed gas, at ambient conditions into space. We open the values and allow the gas to expand into space. An expanding gas will get colder as the heat energy is absorbed by entropy. If we did not tell anyone what we were doing, but have them look at the cylinders into space though an IR sensitive telescope, it will look like a moving red shifting  object due to relative motion. Maybe dark energy did this, since the energy absorb into entropy becomes dark; net unusable.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 02/06/2020 15:38:40
Acceleration has the units of d/t/t or acceleration is one part distance and two parts time. This has the same units as space-time plus time; d-t plus t.
This is true of acceleration through space, not an acceleration in the rate of time.
The proof that the acceleration in time exists within living things is right outside your window. Trees (all plants) grow "up", against the gravitational direction of evolution. The only way to move "up" in a gravitational field is through acceleration.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 12/06/2020 16:33:58
There is a webmaster problem at the Journal of Cosmology. I have been assured this will be sorted out shortly.

In the meantime, my paper can still be found in its original location at http://www.journalofcosmology.com/JOC26/General%20Relativity%20and%20Effects%20in%20Time%20as%20Causation%20JofC.pdf 
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 24/06/2020 20:05:35
I am very sad I must make this post, but I find I now must do so, even though I have been hoping things would be different by now.

After my paper was published in the Journal of Cosmology, I became the webmaster, Public Information Officer and acted as the defacto managing editor, receiving and screening papers before I forwarded them to the Editor-in-Chief and Executive Editor.

Unfortunately, the Executive Editor, Carl Gibson, who is in his mid-80's, is having what one could politely call "end of life issues". As the server account where the journal is hosted is in his name, he has managed to gain total control of the journal and has begun deleting papers he feels do not belong in the journal, even though the papers went through the review process and the authors had paid their Reviewer and Publication fees.

Needless to say, this is causing great consternation for the Editor-in-Chief, Rudloph Schild, who is struggling to find a solution to the problem.

I have been targeted by Carl because I refused to post a political rant by him, at the insistence of Rudolph Schild, who, of course, does not want political papers in the journal. It is currently the only paper in Vol. 27, which used to be dedicated to my model of the universe.

Today he had his new assistant webmaster change the name of my paper so the remaining links to it in Vol. 26, where it first appeared, do not work.

6/26 update:
They restored my link within the journal on 6/26. The new link is http://journalofcosmology.com/JOC26/General_Relativity_and_Effects_in_Time_as_Causation_JofC.pdf

The paper can always be found through a link from my thetruecosmology.com site and directly through this link here: https://www.thetruecosmology.com/General%20Relativity%20and%20Effects%20in%20Time%20as%20Causation.pdf. This is the pre-journal version which contains spiritual verbiage in the "Origins of Spacetime" section that Prof. Schild had me remove or modify for the journal version.

I am asking everyone to not trash the Journal of Cosmology due to these problems, but I suggest no one send in fees or submit papers until the situation has been resolved. It is a sad situation, more than anything else, and all papers will be restored once the situation is resolved.
Title: Re: Is the Hubble Shift due to time dilation?
Post by: captcass on 09/09/2020 18:29:07
Regarding my last post, one of the papers removed from the Journal of Cosmology, by Franklin N. Williams of the Theory Research Institute, is a Mathematical Way to Derive Values for the Universal Constants relating them to the fine structure constant alpha, (a), as a Continuous Equation Involving pi,(π), and the Square Root of 10, The fine structure constant, a, is an integral part of all constants involving mass and matter, if not in whole, then in part or exponential fractions. The only constants lacking the fine structure constant are the "elementary charge, 'e'", and the "permeability of a vacuum, 'µo'". It is also apparent that, according to the 2014 NIST values for all the universal constants, if alpha changes over time, then so will all the universal constants change proportionally. The changes range from one tenth to three one-thousandths, or smaller, of one percent of the values found in the 2014 CODATA Bulletin.

This is a significant paper and the Editors at the Journal of Cosmology desperately wanted it back, but everything came to a halt at the Journal of Cosmology due to the issues with the Executive Editor.

I finally told Frank I would put it up on my thetruecosmology site and do a press release for him (my astrophysicist/astronomer email list is extensive, as is my newspaper editor list).

When he said OK, and I thought about it, I thought his paper would be better in a journal so I began the Journal of Modern Cosmology on 8/28, to Explore Alternatives to the Big Bang, LCDM/CDM and Standard Model Cosmologies. It is peer reviewed and free and open access to all. I began it with just the latest version of my paper and Frank's paper as they were both peer reviewed and accepted by the Journal of Cosmology. The new journal can be found here: https://www.journalofmoderncosmology.com . 

I have also done a 36 minute video explaining some of the aspects of my model. https://www.thetruecosmology.com .