blog

The Moon/Earth Paradox

Wed, 27 Apr 2011 05:13:02 +0100

The earth gains approximately 2-3 tons of material from space each day.

Accordingly, the earth gains in gravity over time.

Yet, the moon moves away from the earth approximately 1/4 inch each year.

Why?

Simplest solution to this theory

Sat, 21 Feb 2009 12:06:16 +0100

If atoms are shrinking over time (not such a leap of imagination, as atoms are mostly empty space), then all redshift is easily explained by the increasing distance between galaxies, instead of 'expanding space'. Again, according to big collapse theory, space does not expand, it is only an illusion created by galaxy shrinkage relative to each other.

Prediction: If we can observe other lunar objects around other planets, such as the two moons of Mars, moving away from Mars at the same rate/size as the moon is moving away from the earth, this would indicate a constant of atomic shrinkage. This is a prediction that could be observed within several years.

Further ideas about local shrinkage of galaxies

Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:59:47 +0100

Fact: Black hole bodies absorb matter.
Fact: Each galaxie has a super massive black hole bodie at it's center.
Fact: Galaxies on occassion collide, and absorb each other, forming a larger galaxy.

Assumption:
When two supermassive black hole bodies meet, it is reasonable to assume they absorb each other, creating a more massive super massive black hole body, with stronger gravity than both had before collision.
Assumpton:
When two similar sized galaxies combine, eventually they must return to the size both were initially as more matter is pulled into the supermassive black hole.

If all of the above is correct, and it likely is, then this is further support for galaxian shrinkage over time, creating larger distances between galaxies, and resulting in red shift.

This would help replace the idea of an 'expanding universe'.

Alternative Cosmology Group

Sat, 21 Feb 2009 12:07:19 +0100

The point of this website isn't to prove that I am correct. Chances are excellent that I am not.

The point is to get people thinking.

To raise questions about a theory that over time, requires more unproven concepts for support.

Here is an excellent website that discusses problems with BB theory, and provides alternatives:

Alternative Cosmology Group

The Mystery of the Rapidly Expanding Universe Explained

Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:49:59 +0100

Perhaps the most elegant part of this theory, is that it explains why galaxies move faster as they get farther away.

It's simple really. Ultra simple.

Assuming Big Collapse Process Theory is correct, imagine two galaxies, ours, and one 100 million light years away. Now a third, another 100 million light years away. Label them A, B, and C. A is 200 million light years away from C. (distances are arbitrary, for sake of illustration)

A is our milky way.
A appears not to move at all.
B appears to move away from A.
And C appears to move away from A even faster than B does.

Yet, C is moving away from B at the same rate that B is moving away from A!

From the vantage point of C, A appears to be moving away from C faster than B is moving, exactly the reverse.

So while all galaxies remain in relatively the same area they originally formed in so long ago, they give the illusion of moving away from each other, faster and faster the farther and farther out we go... because of local shrinkage of galaxies.

Mystery solved?

The Main Point

Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:08:50 +0100

The main point of this entire website, is that just because it appears that galaxies are moving away from us, doesn't mean that they are.

The very real possibility that everything remains relatively where it was when the subatomic particle accretion mass collapsed in our local physical universe exists because of culmulative shrinkage of galaxies over time, producing the illusion that space between them is expanding. It is the same space as before, just less of it in galaxies and more of it between them.

Red shift is created because as spatial distance between galaxies increases, it takes a cumulatively longer time for light to traverse the same distance. The distance between all galaxies increases as black holes continue to accret matter.

Prediction: Galaxies start out much wider than they are today, and continue to shrink over time as the central black hole body eventually consumes everything within the galaxy. (Of course, galaxies can grow when two or more of them combine, but then they begin to shrink again)

Inflationary period

Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:10:54 +0100

Big collapse process theory says that the inflationary period was a time of rapid cooling when the visible universe first formed inside the subatomic particle accretion mass.

Because the universe is well balanced, only a small difference in temperature can result in rapid collapse of a local area to form a visible universe with matter. This happens very quickly, typical in a fraction of a second.

Time/Space

Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:16:49 +0100

Big collapse process theory says that time always exists within the visible universe, because things move and change relative to each other. Within the subatomic particle accretion mass however, nothing changes relative to anything. Therefore, because of lack of change, no time exists. Time is not an entity in itself, but a result of relative movement.

Big collapse process theory claims that time is an illusion caused by movement and change. Where there is no time, there is no movement. The center of a black hole body also has no time.

Big collapse process theory claims that space is an absolute, present everywhere, even inside of black hole bodies.

For all practical purposes, Einstein's equations hold, and space/time are in fact a very good way of imaging the concept.

According to Stephen Hawking

Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:21:08 +0100

According to Stephen Hawking the microwave background predicts a hot dense state at the beginning of the universe.
Big collapse process theory states that a hot dense state always exists, within the subatomic particle accretion mass.

Professor Hawking readily admits that his calculations which support a singularity do not allow for the universe to begin, only what the universe will do once it is in motion. Big collapse process theory easily explains how the universe process creates the visible universe, and physics never break down, as they do in the big bang event theory.

In Hawking's own words: "The theory of relativity breaks down in the strong gravitational fields of the early universe. It has to be replaced by a more complete theory. Quantum theory is important when the universe is planck size, and quantum theory has to be taken into account."

Big collapse process theory says that the universe is never planck size, therefore quantum theory is not needed to rectify Einstein's equations in regards to the creation of the universe. The only place quantum theory needs to be rectified with relativity, is in the black hole body.

How many scientists object to the big bang?

Wed, 04 Feb 2009 19:27:38 +0100

Quite a few actually.

http://cosmologystatement.org/