« Two weeks of peace and quiet | Main | Moscow, Music and Mongols on the Mississipi »

May 01, 2005



Any hints on the latest thoughts of the implications of the appearent lack of Plank scale "foaminess"? For example see: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0503078


RE: quantum foam space. My Jan '04 paper "Solution to a problem with general relativity" CERN EXT-2004-007 (http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=706468&ln=en) states: "It was proposed that a mechanism of gravity should be developed to rigorously test all of the consequences of the physical fluid model for the fabric of space."

Hubble made the experimental error of saying H = velocity/distance which leads to cosmological problems today; the observable fact is time past, since distances can vary while the light comes to us. Individual galaxies are accelerating away in the space-time we observe in which distance is linked to time-past. We see and are affected by the past; the higher speeds refer both to earlier periods in the evolution of the universe and to greater distances.

This means:

(1) recession speed in big bang divided by time past we are seeing = constant acceleration,
(2) F=ma so constant outward force of big bang,
(3) Newton's 3rd law so inward force towards every point. The force/area or pressure acting inward thus goes as inverse square law with correct strength to within 1.65% if using consistent supernova-observation data published in Physical Review Letters and other peer-reviewed journals on the expansion rate and observed density (although the errors are about +/-20% in the data, not the 1.65% coincidence). See proof at: http://nigelcook0.tripod.com/

I've only had this published in Electronics World and on CERN Doc server, it was suppressed by PRL, CQG, etc. The popular model of general relativity, as causing a flat surface like a rubber sheet to curve is unhelpful since physical space fills volume, not surface area. This surface manifold model of space has stifled progress in physics.

The comments to this entry are closed.