[timey (OP)]

Well we can start with Dark Energy:
Dark Energy isn't necessary in my model because the universe is not expanding.  Although distances between masses, i.e. galaxy clusters are becoming greater, this is because the masses themselves are slowly becoming closer together.

Now for Dark Matter:
Dark matter isn't necessary in my model because gravitational acceleration is 3rd time dilation related.
This completely changes the outlook on gravitational attraction.
With just 1 or 2 bodies m orbiting a central body M at a particular radius, at that radius their movement will be slowed down by the 3rd time dilation.  If one calculated the orbital velocity via the 3rd time dilation, comparatively one would say that the m's velocity was increased at radius from main body M, not decreased.
When there are multiple bodies of m at each radius from main body M, as in the galaxy spiral, the 3rd time dilation will not be increasing the length of a second at same rate due to a greater mass distribution.
Again - if we calculated velocity speeds via the 3rd time dilation at that radius, we would find that the orbital speeds at each radius from main body M would be proportional to the 3rd time dilation of open space caused by mass distribution at that radius.

If you are all good with above, next we should address my model's rendition of Big Bang theory, and how my model gives physical mechanics for an inflation period that is analogous to Alan Guth's rendition but gives actual physical cause.

In reply to your further posts:
If Freidmann considered a temporal dilation that was equal everywhere then this differs from my model in that the temporal dilation of my model is dilated in space and contracted near mass, and it is the physical cause of gravitational acceleration.  i.e. already included in the Einstein equation.

[Mike Gale]

...the rate of time anywhere is a reaction to energy, and different rates of timing are occurring simultaneously as a reaction to their energy state.

OK, you are proposing that clock speed depends on clock mass as well as gravity and velocity. I presume Einstein's light clock defines the speed limit since light is massless. SR is therefore sacrosanct. That leaves GR, which is consistent with observation. You have to discard some part of it in order to accommodate this new effect without changing the result. The discarded part would have to depend on clock mass in the opposite way. It's a zero sum game. If I say A=B+C and you say A+D=B+C+D, we have said the same thing.

[timey (OP)]

Erm no - I'm saying that mass energy is causing time dilation, and that temperature energy, or potential energy increases will increase that rate of time.  All masses will run at differing rates of time, but that when subject to external energy, i.e. temperature energy or potential energy, that all different mass values will be affected equally, thereby upholding the equivalence principle that all is equal in every frame.

So a ceasium atom, or an ion, or an FE57 will all be equal in relation to each other at each gravity potential.

The 3rd time dilation will not register on any clock, and is inherent to the g-field to the value of M, surrounding M, and this time dilation affects how m moves in the g-field surrounding M, and in outer space.

This effect that affects movement in the g-field is not a new effect.  This 3rd time dilation is just giving a physical cause to an effect that is being accounted for already in the Einstien equation, this being gravitational acceleration.

[timey (OP)]

I should add that velocity will also affect the time dilation for mass, and that any value of mass will be affected equally by a velocity, as per how temperature energy and potential energy will affect all mass equally, where this velocity related time dilation is connected to kinetic energy.

[Mike Gale]

A temporal dilation that eludes every conceivable clock is no different than the celestial teapot. It may well be that the timing mechanism, which is responsible for atomic decay, is subject to a mass-dependent temporal dilation. That doesn't change the observable, which is that atoms of different masses decay at different rates. I am reminded of Feynman's account of a Q&A session with some famous physicist of yore. I can't remember who it was, but he was fielding questions on Kepler's laws of planetary motion. The prevailing view of the time was that angels pushed the planets around in the orbits of Copernicus and someone asked what happened to them. In deference to Newton's spooky action at a distance, he pointed out that Kepler's theory was consistent with the angel hypothesis except that they pulled instead of pushing.

[timey (OP)]

It is not a celestial teapot if one can observe the physical results, these being the motions/velocities in space.

And it would be impossible to measure an 'open space' with a clock because a clock is mass.
If one were looking to measure the scenario with light, just look to the frequency of light reducing with the longer seconds of space at increasing h from M, and the increasing frequency of light in the shorter seconds at decreasing h from M.

A clock at rest with respect to the g-field, it's frequency increases in the higher gravity potential.
Lights frequency decreases in the higher gravity potential.
Light has no mass and will not gain potential energy at h from M.

[Mike Gale]

But you're proposing an untestable mechanism for an observable, which is already fully accounted for. Remember Laplace's retort to Napoleon when asked why he neglected to credit God in his book on cosmology? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-Simon_Laplace#I_had_no_need_of_that_hypothesis)

[timey (OP)]

Gravity is very far from being fully accounted for.  Everyone knows 'what' it does, but not 'how' it does it.

Giving the acceleration of gravity a physical cause that then negates the need for Dark Energy and Dark Matter is a double bonus surely?

[Mike Gale]

Einstein's cause is spacetime dilation. You can propose a mechanism by which mass causes dilation, but it turns into an infinite regression like the turtles hypothesis. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down)

[timey (OP)]

No - the g-field causes the temporal dilation of space and the g-field is caused by M, where the g-field of M affects the motions of m...

The moon is an m in relation to Earth's M, and the planets are m's to the Sun's M.
The Sun is an m in relation to distribution of mass on the radial to central M of Galaxy.
All M's of Galaxy clusters are slowly being pulled together.

[Mike Gale]

That's what Einstein is saying. The difference is that he makes no hypothesis about how mass energy incurs dilation. He just observes that it does and that it doesn't depend depend on 'm'.

[timey (OP)]

That's right, and gravitational acceleration doesn't depend on m either.

[Mike Gale]

Then what do you mean by "m in relation to M"?

[timey (OP)]

Because M is denoting the value of gravity potential at h from M, and the value of the g-field at h from M.

[Mike Gale]

Sure, but what's 'm' got to do with it?

[timey (OP)]

pe=mgh, where pe/m then makes pe equally distributed to m.
Now you have an energy to frequency of electron transitions relationship for m at h from M.

[Mike Gale]

Gravitational potential and gravitational field are the same thing. They are measures of potential energy per unit mass. The value of 'gh' from GR applies to all masses.

[timey (OP)]

That's right - the difference being in my model that anything that is massless is not affected by gravity potential energy.  Therefore space itself and light are only affected by the 3rd time dilation, and do not experience GR time dilation.

The third time dilation is what causes m to decelerate m<<<M, and accelerate m>>>M.
The 3rd time dilation is what causes energy to become stretched out over a longer wave length L<<<M, and causes energy to become compressed into shorter wavelength L>>>M.
(L being for light)

[Mike Gale]

But light is demonstrably affected by gravity.

[timey (OP)]

The 3rd time dilation is caused by gravity.
Anywhere where light is demonstrably affected by gravity can be described in terms of a 3rd time dilation related acceleration/deceleration.