0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Physics now bases its Big Bang model on an empirical rationale using quantum observational data taken in our earthbound setting. I submit there is an alternative approach they should use instead, namely a rationale based on the likeliest first causal processes in space. Understanding a basic force like gravity must be based on how it originated, and that could not have been in our earthbound type of settingThe likeliest place to start forming a first causal model would be space. -I submit that the origin of the universe involved two substrates: space and units of space. (Had to be "units" because we know that in our world, forces are mediated by units - atoms, photons, etc.)
Space can't just "oscillate".
I did not believe in God before, I do now scientifically and morally.
captcass should start his own thread about the Ether,
I hoped to elicit responses from quantum theorists, such as "isn't the CMB conclusively proof of the afterglow of a Big Bang," or the like, from quantum theorists, which I could counter from the perspective of my own Ether Model. The other ether models being posted would prevent any chance of that....
mad aetherist - In my model of ether, gravity is explained by using the model of how ether originated.In my model, the first thing that happened was not a "Big Bang," but rather there was a universal oscillation of space. Eventually, oscillational fatigue of pairs of neighboring oscillating point=localities of space led to their falling together in Yin-Yang fashion. Then, inasmuch as such pairs of elemental point-like units would necessarily have had to reversibly revert to singleton units, they would then have fallen out-of-phase with all the other points that were still oscilating, and this would have broken the perfect symmetry of original, oscillating, space.In this model, "original" space was free of forces, and oscillated because of its inherent self-compatibility. With this kind of model, the oscillating elemental "point" units would have required tiny adjoining "empty" portions of original space, to provide the necessary "room" for oscillatory motion to occur.Once the elemental units had transitioned from oscillation to vibration, these tiny portions of space would have remained, and provided the "room" for vibrations to occur. (Energic vibratory resonations between elemental ether units would have begun, as the outward vibrations, having just transitioned from oscillations, of the newly-arising ether units, came into contact with each other.)As for gravitation, these persisting tiny "empty" portions of space between elemental ether units would have been the main factor to produce gravity. -Inasmuch as, inside a pair of neighboring, gravitationally-attracted, solid bodies, their elemental ether units are at a high state of magnetic energy, due to their resonant connection to the atomic and quantum magnetic forces existing inside the bodies, inasmuch as the larger energy units are made up of the elemental ether units, the elemental units would be at a higher energy level, than would be the elemental ether units outside the bodies, because in the space outside them, the level of energy is less. However, in the region of space between the bodies, and just outside their surfaces, due to the interactions between elemental ether units inside the two bodies with the adjacent ether units in nearby space, the tiny "empty" spaces between the elemental ether units would be more actively vibrating with each other, compared to elemental units in the spatial regions further from the bodies. Thus, there would be less "empty" spaces between ether units, resonating with each other, in the "auric" space between the two bodies, than between the ether units outside the bodies in other directions. Thus the two bodies would be gravitationally attracted toward each other, because the ether matrix between the bodies has "contracted."