**This is an invitation for you to submit your own Cosmology hypotheses for publication on this website.**

You should get thoughtful responses from the several thousand readers of this website.

You may wish to send a complete Cosmology idea – or a more limited hypothesis such as your original ideas on Tired Light, Measuring Distances, Intergalactic Electron Density, or the Dark Matter controversy.

You can email your hypothesis or add it as a reply to this post.

While it is not required, let me respectfully strongly suggest you to fill out a Physical Cosmology Hypothesis Application Form – so others can rapidly understand the outlines of your work.

With my best wishes,

David Dilworth

by James B. Wright

In the telephone conversation between Ross Anderson, of Atlantic, and Dr. Tim Maudlin, of NYU, entitled “What Happened before the Big Bang?” I was intrigued by his statement “Physicists for almost a hundred years have been dissuaded from trying to think about fundamental questions.”, and “The asking of fundamental physical questions is just not part of the training of a physicist anymore.” The result of this training is the reaction you get if you suggest to a physicist that the Big Bang as is the Expanding Universe. But could not the Cosmological Redshift be caused by something other than a Doppler frequency shift? It could, indeed, but because of the Physicists having accepted space as a pure vacuum they couldn’t find the answer.

And the answer is perfectly logical and not at all complicated. The scientists have calculated that this space has the characteristics of permeability (µ) and permittivity (ɛ), and that these characteristics determine the speed of light (C), which in turn, determines the wavelengths (λ) of light. So we set up a test range on the moon (which we suppose to be in a vacuum) with a light transmitter and a light receiver a mile away. There will be N waves of light at frequency (F) traveling through that one mile of space. Now, if we imagine that the space around the moon actually contains some sort of medium, and that that medium is becoming slowly more dense causing its µ and ɛ to increase, then C will steadily decrease, λ will gradually shorten, and N will be gradually increase. Consequently, fewer waves will exit the one mile path than enter it, each second, and the light seen at the receiver will be lower in frequency than the light being transmitted, which is fixed, of course. Move the receiver two miles away and a similar frequency shift will occur over the second mile, adding in a compound fashion to the first one-mile frequency shift.

So we not only have a redshift but we have a compound redshift, precisely as we observe in the Cosmological Redshift. Our problem is now to determine what this medium can be, and how it could continually increase in density without becoming bogging down after a while? But it certainly does change the appearance of our Universe, with the Big Bang and the Expanding Universe being discarded. Before using the evidence at hand to answer this question it may be helpful to use a philosophy available to us to see what we may be able to find that could be useful.

In her philosophy of objective reality Ayn Rand starts it all off with the axiomatic concepts of Existence, Consciousness, and Identity. We must exist having a consciousness with which we may identify that which exists. This is self-evident. Miss Rand builds her whole philosophy using these concepts, insisting on causal chains. I use only Existence (openly) to establish a starting point in the science of Cosmology, here again insisting on causal chains.

“Existence Exists.”, as a self-evident axiom. Our Earth, our Solar system, the Universe, all exist and have existed for the tens of billions of years that our telescopes reveal. And, if we rule out any such thing as Creation or Annihilation, Existence must have existed for an eternity past, and will exist for a future eternity. Similarly, it must extend outward from here to the infinite reaches of space. It is infinite and eternal, which, of course, rules out any sort of a beginning or an end. And, now we may re-examine the evidence which we’ve collected without the need to make it fit into a limited but Expanding Universe. We will observe that the Galactic Clusters which fill this Universe in some hundreds of millions, or more, can be expected to extend outward into an infinite ocean of such clusters. Nothing new or unusual should be anticipated “out there” that’s not already found within our Universe. And, our Observable Universe should be seen as a very adequate sample of Existence.

One more conclusion we should be able to draw from our Universe, with its hundreds of billions of stars in more hundreds of billions of galaxies all apparently being burned up. Unless there were mechanisms at work taking the ashes of these old galaxies and renewing them as new galaxies, we wouldn’t be here asking these questions. We’d be down some “black hole” somewhere. And the Galactic Clusters are those mechanisms, scattered as they are throughout the Universe and into the endless ocean of Existence.

Gravity is a universal force, a Prime Mover at work everywhere. It builds the galactic clusters, which starts with (say) two galaxies and growing to perhaps three or four thousand galaxies, drawing in not only the galaxies themselves, but also the gaseous masses within the galaxies and the dark masses within the clusters’ outer boundaries, all moving inward towards a center-of-gravity for each cluster. And as these masses are being drawn in from the surface of the cluster towards its center they undergo a continual compression until, in time, the central volume develops into a massive spiral galaxy called a Seyfert.

These masses, the ashes of the thousands of galaxies all being moved in toward the central Seyfert galaxy, causing it to eventually reach the point where its central pressure and temperature becomes critical and a nuclear explosion occurs, and after some billion of years of growth another explosion occurs, etc., etc. These explosions expels two quasars in opposite directions, usually at escape velocity, and these quasars evolve into normal galaxies (per H. Arp), only to become fuel for more galactic clusters. This transformation must be 100% efficient, resulting in the Universe appearing essentially as we see it today, for all of eternity.

Pausing at this point, it is helpful to envision these galaxy clusters as they are located in the Universe. If the Universe has 200 billion galaxies and a galactic cluster has 4 thousand galaxies we may roughly estimate that there are about 50 million such mature clusters spread homogenously throughout the Universe, each doing its job of galactic renovation in its own locale. And, of course, this mechanism will be at work throughout all of Existence.

A Gravitational Lens results from the formation of a Galactic Cluster. Ideally, a Galactic Cluster is a rough sphere of some 4 thousand galaxies and their masses of gas, and the Dark Mass, all being drawn inward toward a center-of-gravity. At the surface of the sphere one may envision wisps of the various masses, starting their journey inward quite slowly. As these masses move inward their density increases gradually until the cluster reaches the critical mass at the center of its Seyfert. Now, if we look outward at the whole of the sphere we find that we have just described a Luneburg Lens, one that is being perpetually rebuilt as the masses are continually moving inward to the nucleus of the Seyfert. And if light is transmitted through the lens, from (say) a Quasar far beyond the cluster, it is refracted inward to a focal point (the Observer) on the far side of the Lens. While gravity forms the lens out of the Dark Mass it is the lens that focuses (bends) the light.

Now, note that the light passing through the mass of the Lens is affected by the constant increase in the density of that mass and so undergoes a redshift. Note also that the mass in the path of the light is constantly being replaced with fresh mass coming in from outside that space as it flows towards the center of the cluster so that there isn’t the problem discussed earlier, of a build up mass. The Cosmological Redshift is solid and is essentially unaffected.

Attention must be paid to the energy mass that leaves the stars along with the stellar winds. For the Sun it is reported that 96% of this mass is solar wind and 4% of thie mass is energy. Energy has mass? We now look at the planets that surround our Sun and are awash in these Winds and Energy.

In high school we were told that “a moving charge generates a magnet field”, and proceeded to build a solenoid and then, by passing a DC electric current (a flow of negative charge) through the turns of wire on the solenoid, made an electromagnet having the usual North and South Poles. One ampere flowing through each of (say) one thousand turns of wire gave us 1000 ampere-turns towards a magnetic field. We also found that this same effect could be envisioned as 1000 amperes flowing through one turn of wire, say using a sheet of copper with a cross section area equivalent to the cross-sectional area of the 1000 turns of wire. Electrons were the “moving charge”.

Now, suppose we were to imagine the Earth as a single turn solenoid, and that the Earth had an electrical charged on its surface with that charge being the “moving charge” moving around the Earth as it rotated. We would have our Earth working as an electro-magnet generating its own North and South! And, by using the solenoid formulae we would be able to determine the size of the charge necessary to give that electromagnet it’s observed Earthly 0.4 gauss field strength. Furthermore, by noting where the North and South poles were positioned we could determine whether that charge was positive or negative.

It turns out that all planets have charges that are proportional to their surface areas and that, except for the Earth, those charges are all positive. Knowing that our geologists had determined long ago that the Earth had undergone several pole reversals it was concluded that, for now, we were in a pole reversal. (To be revisited later.) [Note that only five of the planets (Earth, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus) had characteristics that allowed their charges to be calculated.]

The fact that all of these planets had positive charges suggested that the Solar Wind must be the source of the charges and must itself be positive. This, in turn, would suggest that the energy mass leaving the Sun was carrying away the negative charge, in some way, and was perhaps intrinsically negative?

So we now may have a negative energy mass leaving the stars as they burn, and a candidate for the “dark matter” of space. It also gives us a tangible medium that allows for the transmission of electro-magnetic waves (TV, radar. light, etc., etc.), and one for magnetic fields as electro-magnetic warps in the dark matter. The dark mass that we “feel” in the galactic rates of rotations is indeed real. We don’t know what this dark mass actually is, any more than we know what gravity is, but we do know some of what these forces do.

We now need the mathematicians and the scientists to try afresh using this new Universe, existing within Existence. They could ask the questions that Tim Maudlin claims they are evading.

James B. Wright, April 24, 2012 S CosmosApr12

James Wright ,

Your paper is very interesting.

I think my mathematics can fit your ideas.

A steady closed forever universe. Dark matter is electromagnetism, homopolar motor.

See my paper June 1 21016 on this page below.

Quaternion Cosmology Hypothesis

Dark Energy and redshift revealed!

Dark Energy is Momentum Energy, cP = cmV where P is Momentum vector and c is the speed of light. Energy is a Quaternion quantity consisting of a scalar part -mGM/r and a vector part cP.

The Law of Gravity is W = -mGM/r + cP = -vh/r + cP =[-vh/r, cP].

The Force F is the first derivative of energy W,

F = [d/dr, Del] [-vh/r, cP] = [vh/r2 – cDel.P, cdP/dr -Del vh/r + cDelxP]

F = cp/r[v/c – cos(PR), -1P + v/c 1R + sin(PR) 1RxP]

Redshift:

At Continuity Condition the scalar part is zero or v/c=cos(PR) and this is the redshift.

Redshift indicates that the gravitational centripetal force (mv2/r=vp/r ) is balanced by the centrifugal force( -cDel.P= -cp/r cos(RP) ) from the Dark Energy, the Momentum vector energy.

Bounded Universe:

At Equilibrium/Boundary/Invariant Condition the Force is zero. At Boundary, cos(RP) = 1 and sin(RP)=0 indicating Momentum vector P is parallel to R .

0 =F = cp/r[v/c – 1, -1R + v/c 1R]

Equilibrium/Invariant Condition requires v/c=1 ot v=c at Boundary and Equilibrium.

The Boundary Condition is v2=c2=GM/r. This means the Boundary size is r=GM/c2.

This is minimum size of the Universe, roughly R= 158E24 meters, 16.5 Giga years, mass M=2.133E53 kg and Hubble Constant =c/158E24=1.898E-18..

Cosmology Hypothesis:

The Universe consists of Quaternions, has a lower bound size and an upper bound velocity, c.

dd: It may be helpful to note that Quaternions are complex numbers defined as the quotient of two directed lines in a three-dimensional space, where the product of two is non-commutative – like division or subtraction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion

David,

Thanks for soliciting New Cosmology Hypotheses and thanks for your comment, referring folks to a Quaternion reference.

I like to think Complex Numbers are a subset of the Four Dimensional Quaternions. In Group Theory, complex numbers are a subgroup within Quaternions. Quaternions should replace Einstein/Minkowski’s four space (space-time).

Excuse me, I’m a reader of quaternion calculus.

I’m interesting in how Maxwell’s theory may expand to explain other fundamental constants and phenomena. Which of your books owns the physical explanations of constant of permittivity and permeability in vacuun?

[email protected]

Thank you for asking.

Can someone please chime in with some suggested reading ?

Electromagnetism.

There is no need to use epsilon and muon

E =cB=zH = zcD =V/r

epsilon = 1/zc

u=z/cd

I discovered that Planck’s Constant h and z are related.

h=qw = zq^2 where z=375 Ohms

q= 25e/3= 4/3E-18C and w=500 E-18 voltseconds (Weber)

Fine Structure Constant Alpha = .5(e/q)^2= .5(e/25e/3)^2=

.5(3/25)^2= .5(.0144)= 7.2E-3

https://www.amazon.com/Quaternion-Electromagnetism-Wardell-Lindsay-ebook/dp/B005JQBHF2/ref=sr_1_2?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1465705904&sr=1-2&refinements=p_27%3AWardell+Lindsay

I’m recently thinking about the dark energy, probably is just a foolish thought… I have imagined the energy, the energy that is responsible for the constant accelerated expansion of our known universe, that it could be created by matter present in the non visible part of universe. I believe that exists mass in the part of the universe that light not yet arrives us. In a perspective that you know that gravitational force and field are instantaneous active things and light takes time to travel, it can be a possible way to think?

If in the moments just after the big bang, if the initial object that originated the explosion had expelled crosts of high density materials that suck the light between the explosion… If there is mass after what we can see…. this mass could be attracting the galaxies?

Thank you for your thoughts Lucas.

I. The Island Universe Hypothesis

A) Strong Relativity – the theory presumes that the vast cosmos we observe is not a singular, unified, coherent entity. Rather it is recognized as a vast collection of only partially overlapping matter-energy systems, inherently unknowable in extent, which does not comprise a unitary system in any physically meaningful sense. It follows that the cosmos cannot be successfully quantified as a unified system. Consequently all reference frames are local and there does not and cannot exist a universal reference frame of any sort. The unitary “Universe”, as presumed by the Standard Model of Cosmology, is a reified human concept that has outlived its usefulness to physical science.

B) Complementary Reference Frames – there are two distinct and complementary types of reference frame necessary when attempting to accurately model physical reality:

1) The three spatial plus time (3D) reference frame of matter.

2) The four spatial dimension (4D) reference frame of electromagnetic radiation..

Thank you for your ideas Bud.

To help everyone understand your ideas in context with familiar “landmarks,”

would you please consider filling out a Hypothesis Application form?

http://cosmologyscience.com/cosblog/references/tools/cosmology-hypothesis-application-form/

Thank you

David,

Most of the questions on the hypothesis Application are not applicable to this proposal because they are based on the traditional assumption that the cosmos can be treated as a singular, unified, coherent entity, an assumption the the IU hypothesis explicitly rejects. I have answered relevant questions in an extended email sent directly as it would not post here – I assume because of a character limit.

The hypothesis is discussed in greater detail at http://ThisIslandUniverse.com.

Thanks,

Bud Rapanault

Might one ore more things of the following be true?

A) Since an overall curvature of the universe appears to exist not, I ask myself, if a Big Bang (whether or not with inflation [1]) was the only possible explanation of the expansion. For now the most distant objects and also the beginning of the cosmos must have been at the place where we see them.

And other models are possible: why not since the beginning a vast deployment?

B) By their speed remote objects in the relativistic way have more mass the farther they are, which makes enhancement of gravitation so that over there the expansion slows down, but not in our neighborhood. Because everything affected by that relativistic extra-gravitation tends to a (spherical) gravitation-points area, it will work there less (compare an object falling through a tunnel through the earth). The overall image for us who look far and back then becomes: most of the time an accelerating expansion of the universe [2], following a gradual constant, but in the region of the gravitation points little acceleration and past them (earlier. more remote) acceleration too.

Observation will prove if this proposal is correct. But maybe already something theoretical in my proposals is wrong. In this case, I ask some expert to tell me in common language [3] what is wrong, to falsify my hypothesis/es.

C) And I ask: does the following hypothesis make sense?: If the expanding cosmos might be so big that the most remote objects are moving away with the speed of light [4], a bizarre consequence would be that the most distant objects must have an infinite mass [5] producing a rather sudden (because when approaching the light speed, relativistic mass-increasement makes a sudden huge jump towards infinity) infinitely strong gravitation wave from all sides to us [6], that in the meantime already must have ‘eaten up’ [7] a large part of the universe.

1] The inflation-theory is meant as an explanation of general circumstances being the same everywhere in the universe, as an answer to the question how can the same information get everywhere so fast. Now the same information is nothing else than quantumechanical behavior, einsteinian relativity, and the standard model, determining a same behavior. Is now e.g. the equality of also the remotest protons to be necessarily explained by assuming inflation of a small particles factory weaving the system? Then the question is: what explains such an attuned system?

Now the observed flatness of the universe shows this must have been an ‘inflation in no time’, that is: non-inflation. We see a vast deploying organisation. The ubiquitous equality of circumstances is by one and the same organising more fundamental instance.

The systemic specified multitude (thus, if I’m right, a vast deployment) is hoped for to be explained by a simplest as elegant as possible formula-and-source (the source obeying the blueprint determined by the formula): a ‘theory of everything’. But even if the task to accomplish this reduction succeeds, the question why just so and not otherwise, especially in rather deviating factors, remains, whereas the explanation that the way the system is organised serves its being an attuned whole does satisfy. (The result of cosmic natural selection in ‘earlier’ chaos? From infinitely many possibilities? This is mere phantasy.) Then the question is what the character of the determining and even attuning factor beyond reduction is. Determining and attuning requires freedom. The amount of freedom accepted in physics at best is some free play (for instance in decaying elements). More freedom never was considered physics. So if it is still a physical question depends on the amount of freedom required. If the answer cannot but be found in more freedom, beyond physics, our question is a meta-physical one.

[2] My question is how this relates to dark energy. Is it included in this or is dark energy just energy that surmounts it?

[3] I am not a physicist, but have always been interested in the development of physics, and astronomy which did not exclude some active thinking.

[4] This is a possibility, in principle, because also we can suppose such a thing when we add up the speeds of two objects flying into opposite directions. At least gravitation must not, as would be the case according to the Big Bang theory, originate when the speed of expansion is lower than the light-speed keeping mass finite because otherwise impossibilising any expansion. More certainty is provided by the consideration that observers distant from us can be assumed to observe objects beyond our event horizon (so in our perspective absorbed in it, see 5), because we hardly can be supposed to be in the absolute center of the universe.

[5] If e.g. you depart from the notion of an infinitely large expanding cosmos, this is to be extrapolated to, but at the same time preventing this notion to be at least our reality, as everything disappears in this giga-black-hole.

[6] Einstein assumed light-speed for gravitation waves. Matter removing with light speed will emit them having lightspeed with regard to us. (My assumption, if I am well informed.)

[7] Behind the light, which also means, that for supertelescopes it not just still is impossible to reach the region of the beginning, but neither it ever will be. For if in the future, when all but the rest of light and all information will have arrived , whether it may be on the point of succeeding or not, the huge gravitation field, that has arisen, when the lightspeed nearly is approached, after having preventend further emission of light, will hit us from all sides, removing first all objects around us.

(I repeat, I am just a layman, but it is something I ask myself and is just a proposal to be judged by experts.)

I am just a kid so I don’t know any of the geometry or mathematics for this hypothesis but I am interested in cosmology fantastically. Can you tell me if this hypothesis is mathematically possible, Thank You!

Distorted Radiation

By Bodee A. Davis

Stephen Hawking believes that something called Hawking Radiation is given from black holes which is one of the ways they eventually die out. Well, I think that when this radiation is given out it is at least a little bit distorted from the tremendous amount of gravitational force stressing the protons inside of the radiation. I thought of this when I was talking to one of my friends while eating lunch and it interested me so I started thinking more about it. I believe that this radiation belongs to a class of radiation that I call Distorted Radiation. I believe that when this radiation is fused it creates Dark Matter which is sometimes believed to have something to do with the expansion of the universe. Eventually, this Distorted Radiation is picked up by another star and that star could possibly fuse it together then causing the growth of the universe which could also explain redshift of galaxies. Our sun, however, does not get as much of this radiation because it is an individual star. I think it could have gotten it before which could explain why Jupiter and the other gas giants are so far away

Dear Bodee,

Thank you for your ideas on Distorted Radiation, your enthusiasm and your willingness to put your ideas out for public scrutiny.

You may now tell others that your idea is now published.

As you might gather, while no advanced math background is necessary to discuss ideas here, some grounding in standard physics ideas is helpful. You might enjoy taking a look at this glossary —

http://www.cosmologyscience.com/glossary.htm

Here are some questions for you that most physicists would need clarified before they could comment on your ideas –

* Can you please define Distorted Radiation – so we can understand how it is different from normal photons ?

http://www.cosmologyscience.com/glossary.htm#Photons

I’m familiar with the ideas of matter being fused, but not radiation.

* What do you mean by “when this radiation is fused ?”

(Here’s a few different ideas about fused matter)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion

Do any of those seem relevant ?

* How is Distorted Radiation “picked up by another star ?”

How might fusing Distorted Radiation cause the growth of the universe ?

With best wishes,

David

Quaternion Cosmology

The operation of the Universe is controlled by Laws of Physics. The Laws can be described in language ala Faraday and in the language in mathematics. Both languages gives a better description.

The Cosmos is a space of 4 dimensions called Quaternions. Quaternions consists of a scalar and three vectors, [scalar, Vector]. Quaternion have angles related to the scalar and vectors. the angle is Arctan Vector/scalar. Scalar [s,] has angle multiple of 180 degrees. Vectors [,V] have angles a odd multiple of 90 degrees. You could say scalars re Bosons and vectors are Fermions. In general Quaterions have both scalar and vectors, Quaternion [s,V], has angles different from multiples of 90 degrees.

Now that we know that the Cosmos consists of Quaternions, we can describe the Laws of Physics. Newton is the father of Physics of the Universe. Deriving Newton’s Laws will be a guide to the Universe in a Quaternion Cosmos. Newton’s Laws are based on velocity and Momentum, W = -mGM/r = vp. Newton found Velocity v=(GM/r)^.5.

This velocity is a critical part of Newton’s Theory. This is the essence of Gravity. In a sense this the definition of Gravity. This is how gravity works. This is not Einstein’s gravity warping space.

My view of Gravity is like Newton, however, my Theory of the Cosmos, is different from Newton and Einstein; my view is that the quantities are Quaternions. The Momentum P=[,P] is the same as Newton, however the velocity V=[c,V] is a Quaternion with a the speed of light is the scalar velocity and v is the velocity of Newton, v=(GM/r)^.5. This Quaternion Law of Gravity is

W = VP=[c,V][,P] = [c0 -v.p, cP + V0 + VxP] = [-vp, cP] = [-mGM/r, cP]

This is the Law of Gravity in the Quaternion Cosmos ! The scalar energy is -mGM/r is identical to Newton’s Law; however in a Quaternion Cosmos, there is a vector energy, cP ! This vector energy is the energy of the Momentum from mV.

This vector energy cP is in fact is the so-called “Dark Energy/Matter”. Einstein thought about a “Cosmological Constant”, that would prevent the gravity collapse ! This concept later evolved into the Dark Energy , the cause of the Universe expansion!

The vector energy cP is also the answer for the Dark Matter in Galactic rotations.

The role of the vector energy cP is seen in Newton’s Force Laws.

Force is rge first derivative of Energy XW

F = XW= [d/dr, Del] [-vp,cP] = [vp/r + cDel.P, cdP/dr – Del vp + cDelxP ]

F = [vp/r + cp/r cos P, 1R vp/r – 1V cp/r + 1H cp/r sin P]

The forces tell the story. The scalar force is the the sum of the centripetal vp/r and centrifugal cp/r cosP. The cosP = cos(P + V)=cos(90 +V)= -sinV, this gives for the scalar force: vp/r – cp/r sinV = cp/r(v/c – sinV). Tan V =v/c gives the scalar is cp/r(tan V – sin V). this is a very small positive, that keeps the orbit stable and not collapsing. This is why gravity does not collapse.

The vector forces are the 1R vp/r the Gradient, the 1V cp/r the Tangent force and

1H cp/r sinP is the curl or rotation vector. The vector forces are the major part of the

Quaternion force, the Quaternion is mostly a vector. The Quaterniom is also mostly a vector in that c>v. In the case of the earth v=29814 m/s less than 300Mm/s, the angle of V is 20.5″ seconds. Thus cp/r (tan 20.5″ – sin 20.5″) is small positive centripetal force.

The Boundary condition is

0 =XW= [vp/r -cp/r, 1R vp/r – 1R cp/r]

The condition at Boundary is v=c and c^2= GM/R and Maximum Energy.

This Boundary says the Universe is Bounded.

Hubbles Constant H=c/R = 62km/s/Mpc = 300Mm/s/150GPm gives R=150GPm !

With this size of the Universe, gives Mass = 2.025E53 kg !

As shown here, the Universe is not expanding but Bounded, There is no Dark Energy but vector energy cP, and there will not be a gravitational collapse.

Dark Matter is the cP ! The Galactic rotation is the result of the electromagnetism. The over gravity rotn is due to inflow of electrons creating a force eVxB=VxP/r !

The gravity rotation of charged suns, create a current I and a magnetic B-field perpendicular to the galactic plane at gravitational velocity. The inflow of electrons will act like a homopolar motor, the home power meter. The force is eVxB= VxP/r this becomes

vP/r = evB

mV=P=eBr = euI

V=(e/m)uI = 176G 1.25u I m/s = 220k Im/s as the over gravity rotation.

P=eBr=euI=ezI/c thus

cP= ezI this is the cP the vector energy, the Quaternion Energy of a Quaternion Cosmos!

The Universe is a Quaternion Universe. The Energy Law is true for gravity and Electricity. W = [c,V][,P]. The velocity of electrons is [c,V] where v= alpha c.

Alpha is the fine Structure Constant where Alpha = ze^2/2h= 7.2E-3. z is the free space impedance z=375 Ohms.

Planck’s Constant h=qw=zq^2 where q= 25e/3 and w=500E-18 Vs.

The rotation would be 220km/s if I is 1 Amp current.

Thus Quaternion Cosmos answers the “Dark Age” of Physics, Dark Energy and Dark Matter. The expansion and redshift are also not real. Hubble’s Constant is a separation constant v=Hd = cd/R = cd/cT = d/T. Where is the Blue shift?

Hubble himself did not accept the expansion model. The Big Bang is a “creation story”.

Dear David,

I just wanted to thank you for helping me think about what types of questions I would need to answer and for leaving some glossaries to help me better understand it.

I will leave the answers to some of the questions that you asked here.

1. Can you please define Distorted Radiation – so we can understand how it is different from normal photons ?

Distorted Radiation is a name I made up to describe the radiation that is created when two atoms that are deformed from strong gravitational forces are fused together.

2.What do you mean by “when this radiation is fused?”

What I mean by that is when the atoms in the radiation is under more gravity and undergoes nuclear fusion.

3.* How is Distorted Radiation “picked up by another star ?”

The Distorted Radiation is emitted as perhaps something similar to a UV ray or light and it travels until it reaches something else such as a moon, planet, or star. Once it gets on a star I think it could undergo nuclear fusion, possibly producing more Distorted Radiation.

Sincerely,

Bodee

David,

Thanks for moderating my Quaternion Cosmolgy.

There is a few typos , but I made a mistake in “minutes” angle rather than seconds.

The line should be;

300Mm/s, the angle of V is 20.5″ seconds. Thus cp/r (tan 20.5″ – sin 20.5″) is small positive centripetal force.

Thanks.

David,

I want to describe how gravity works. I worked out the mathe but most may not read the math. The Universe is Quaternion, a scalar and a vector part. The velocity V=[c,V] means the velocity has a constant part , the speed of light,c , and the vector part V=(GM/r)^.5. Gravity creates the vector part, V.

The Energy is the product of the velocity and the Momentum

W = VP=[c,V][,P]= [-vp,cP]= [-mGM/r, cP] this chows there is a scalar energy, -mGM/r and a vector energy cP. This cP is due to the Quaternion velocity V=[c,V].

The angle of the velocity is arctan V/c and angle of P is arctan P/0 = 90 degrees.

The Force is the first derivative of the Energy W =[-vp,cP] angle (90+V).

e.g. for the earth the velocity is [c,29814] and angle is 20.5″ seconds.

F= XW= [d/dr,Del][-vp,cP]=[vp/r + cDel/P, cdP/dr -Del vp + cDelxP]

F= cp/r[v/c + cos(90 +V), 1Rv/c – 1V + 1H sin(90 +V)]

F = cp/r [ v/c – sinV, 1R v/c – 1V + 1H cosV]

The force equation shows the scalar force v/c – sinV, the centripetal force minus the centrifugal focrce. vp/r-cp/rsinV= cp/r(tanV-sinV). If the scalat force is zero, the orbit is stable, if the force is positive the force is to the center of gravity, if the force is negative the force is away from the center of gravity.

The vector force 1Rv/c is the gradient toward the center, -1V is the tangent force and 1H cosV is the rotation around the center. The force describes the motion.

This force works for the Solar system with sun and planets; the force in Galaxies and in clusters, and the Cosmos in general. The same gravity rules.

The so-called “Dark Energy” is the vector energy cP=cmV. There is no “Dark Matter”.

this cP=ezI where I is the current due to rotating charges.

P=mV=ezI/c gives

V=(e/m)(z/c )I = 176G 1.25u I km/s = 220 Ikm/s or 220km/s per I = 1 Amp current.

This is electromagnetism not Dark Matter. It is cP the vector Energy as electromagnetism energy.

Nuff said ?

Hi David,

Your readers might be interested in a new cosmological hypothesis I call the cosmic quantum — the first quantum particle of the universe — which I developed along the lines of Georges Lemaître’s comment “If we go back in the course of time we must find fewer and fewer quanta, until we find all the energy of the universe packed in a few or even in a unique quantum”, from “The Primeval Atom: An Essay on Cosmogony”.

best wishes,

Richard

Dear all,

Quaternion math goes back to the Irish physicist William Rowan Hamilton who

tried to extend the complex numbers to 3 dimensions. Realizing that this led to

contradictions, he discovered that an extension to 4 dimensions was possible.

Somewhat later, Thomas Graves and Arthur Cayley discovered that an extension to

8 dimensions (octonions) was possible, as well.

Adolf Hurwitz, working at ETH Zurich, published in 1895 a famous paper where

he proved that complex numbers, quaternions, and octonions are the only possible

composite algebras having a multiplicative norm, i.e. having a “vector product”

wherein the length of the product of two vectors equals the product of the

lengths of the vectors.

It is less known that these composite algebras are backed by simple number

identities, noteworthy the 2-squares identity, going back to Diophantes,

the 4-squares identity, discovered by Leonhard Euler, and the 8-squares

identity, discovered by Ferdinand Degen.

The quaternion multiplication rule:

(a0 + ia1 + ja2 + ka3)* (b0 + ib1 + jb2 + kb3) =

(a0 b0-a1 b1-a2 b2-a3 b3 )+

i(a0 b1+a1 b0+a2 b3-a3 b2 )+

j(a0 b2-a1 b3+a2 b0+a3 b1 )+

k(a0 b3+a1 b2-a2 b1+a3 b0 ).

if squared, (a*b)*(a*b)”= a*(b*b” )*a” yields, according to

q*q”= q”*q= (q0^2+ q1^2+ q2^2+ q3^2 ) EULER’s 4-Squares-Identity

(proof by algebraic evaluation):

(v0^2+v1^2+v2^2+v3^2 )(w0^2+w1^2+w2^2+w3^2 )=

(v0 w0-v1 w1-v2 w2-v3 w3 )^2 +

(v0 w1+v1 w0+v2 w3-v3 w2 )^2 +

(v0 w2-v1 w3+v2 w0+v3 w1 )^2 +

(v0 w3+v1 w2-v2 w1+v3 w0 )^2 .

Hence, Maxwell’s equations in 4-space are derivable from a simple

algebraic number identity!

E.g. the gradient δ*A of the 4-potential A is:

(δ0+iδ1+jδ2+kδ3 )*(A0+iA1+jA2+kA3 )=

((δ0 A0- δ1 A1- δ2 A2- δ3 A3 ) +

i(δ0 A1+ δ1 A0+ δ2 A3- δ3 A2 ) +

j(δ0 A2+ δ2 A0- δ1 A3+ δ3 A1 ) +

k(δ0 A3+ δ3 A0+ δ1 A2- δ2 A1 )).

The first line being zero, this equals to the electromagnetic 4-field:

δ*A=i(E1/c+ B1 )+j(E2/c+ B2 )+k(E3/c+ B3 )

in source (E/c) and curl (B) parts.

Source and curl correspond to the two parts of an isoclinic double-

rotation around a point in 4-dimensional space.

The square, (δ*A)*(δ*A)”= (E⁄c)^2+B^2, is twice the energy of

the electromagnetic 4-field.

Electrodynamics can be as simple as that, and this knowledge is more than

a century old. Why was there no follow-up on this road after Hamilton?

I suppose here an ideological reason at work (which is still active in some parts

of the world): some scientists wanted to make physics without metaphysics!

Quaternions (and the 4-squares identity on which they are based) provide for

an exact accountability of entities (the multiplicative norm). Which means

that they obey a built-in metaphysical principle, that being must be conserved

under transformation. A quaternion is furthermore a 4-dimensional rotation

operator, which effects an isoclinic double-rotation of a 4-dimensional vector

on which it operates. A rotation of a rotation is furthermore a rotation again.

Movement within being is necessarily rotation; otherwise being would need to

move with respect to something other – but there is nothing outside being.

Quaternions nicely show how movement takes place within being, and

hence how physics is built upon metaphysics. The beginning of the

20th century was ideologically polarized and not at all favorable to

metaphysical thoughts; metaphysics was just done away as being “non-scientific

Spiritism”. Ernst Mach (who strongly influenced Albert Einstein) had

set physics on a radically positivist track, whereon no absolute state

of movement was admitted, and every measurement was assumed to be relative.

Only with the advent of Quantum Mechanics, absolute quantities

came back to physics again; rotation being an absolute and quantized

state of movement.

Now we are slowly finding our way back to a more realist physics,

built on being, movement and autonomy (life, spirit); all three

present in the Universe. The 2-square, 4-square, and 8-square identities

show how movement is present within being without leading to

contradiction. The more interesting question, however, is, how

autonomy (life, spirit) is present within movement!

This is where mankind’s future research efforts should be directed at!

Because, if we, humans, designate ourselves as living and intelligent beings,

the Universe, which brought us forth, must have life and intelligence in

a far bigger extent than we have!

Yours Sincerely

Edgar Mueller