The  Dynamic  Steady  State  Universe

 Home        Contact       Under Construction

SEARCH THIS WEBSITE

NEW ITEMS:

Theoretical Foundation and Pillars of the Dynamic Steady State Universe (PDF) --- The first complete presentation of all four postulates of DSSU theory. A powerful paper that resolves the cause-of-causes paradox, explains the non-independent nature of time, and reveals the 'supreme advantage'. It includes a concise comparison with standard cosmology focusing on real-world viability.

Space Flow Equations and Expansion-Contraction Rates (PDF) ---This paper explores the mathematical aspects of the two space postulates of DSSU theory —and uncovers some profound consequences.

The Cosmic Background Radiation in the DSSU (PDF) ---The natural explanation of the microwave background radiation applicable to the natural Cellular Universe.
 

The Aether Experiments and the Impact on Cosmology ---The aether has been detected at least 6 times in recent history. Its most recent re-discovery, in 2001, led to the long-sought causal mechanism of gravity ----a discovery, which in turn, is revolutionizing cosmology.

Michelson-Morley and the Story of the Aether Theory Richard Milton's analysis of the historical details involving the misrepresentation, bias and cover-up that hampered the Aether theory.

The History of the Aether Theory ---The historic development of the aether as a scientific theory of space itself. What started as the "fifth element" of Antiquity becomes molded by theoretical constraints and experimental evidence into the dual-dynamic quantum foam ---the Essence of the Universe.
 

The Large Scale Structure of the Dynamic Steady State Universe (PDF)  (Chapter 1 of DSSU Manuscript) --- The postulates and implications of regional space expansion and contraction.

Cosmic-Scale Structural Features Explained (PDF) (Chapter 2 of DSSU Manuscript) ---The Spacing of Clusters ---Sheets of Galaxies ---Supernodes ---Right-angled Walls of Galaxies.

(PUBLICATION PENDING)
Cause of Galaxy Rotation and Aspects of Galaxy Motion
(The consequences of cosmic bubbles of expanding space)
 

An Open Letter to the Scientific Community
(Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004)

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory. ... continues ...

A devastating Declaration of opposition to Big Bang cosmology signed by more than 400 Researchers.

For the full text click on:
CosmologyStatement.org

© Copyright 2005-2009 by
Conrad Ranzan
and
 DSSU Research

All Rights Reserved
  For information regarding permission to reproduce selected material herein, please contact:

D S S U  Research

C. R. C.
Niagara Falls, Canada

8th year on the Internet.
Most recent update: 2009 JAN

0102

Conventional Cosmology Critique

www.CellularUniverse.org

COMMENTS:            On model tinkering in the Ptolemaic tradition

   Every now and then it is enlightening to check on the "progress" of conventional cosmology, which, as everyone knows, embraces the expanding-universe model ---popularly called the Big Bang model.
   The basic Big Bang has a parameter called the scaling factor. Think of it as the radius of the growing universe. It gets bigger as the Big Bang universe gets bigger. Technically it is the derivative of this scaling factor that describes the rate with which the universe is expanding. It is a measure of the speed of the expansion of the expanding universe. Simple enough.
   However, the model holds that the speed changes over time. For many years it was believed that the expansion speed was slowing down. But careful astronomical observations, notably in 1998, revealed that this was not the case. Expansion wasn't tapering off. It seemed to be ramping up! Rather than abandon the model, the experts came up with accelerated expansion. Henceforth they employed an acceleration parameter, which, technically, is the second derivative of the scaling factor. (If you are keeping count, that makes three parameters available for theory manipulation.) As the story goes the universe not only expands but it expands faster and faster. End of story? No. ...

   A few years after that notable crisis of 1998 it was gradually revealed, through even more careful and ever deeper astronomical observations, that uniform accelerated expansion still wasn't the answer. (Now at this stage any conscious-and-rational person would have abandoned the Big-Bang ship especially since there are far superior models floating around.)  Having maintained a tradition of commitment going back as far as the 1920s when Lemaître formalized the explosion-idea, abandonment was not an option. And so the experts now came up with another parameter. Yes, a fourth adjustable factor. Admittedly it is not very original. If you can't connect with the underlying reality of the expansion process at least you can connect with the differential calculus. Ready for this one? The new parameter is the third derivative of (you guessed it) the scaling factor. They call it the jerk parameter and means exactly what it says.

   Now I assure you I am not making this up ---and in a moment I will do more than assure you by providing the reference source.

   The experts even tell us when, in the past of the Big Bang, this supposed jerk occurred. (It corresponds to z = 0.5 or about 5.4 gigayears ago when the universe was 9.2 gigayears old assuming a Hubble constant, H₀ = 20 km/s/Mly. ^[1]) Think about this for a moment; a jerk-event occurred at some particular period of cosmic time. A special identifiable time! What this means is that the BB universe now has no less than three special moments in time during its existence: The beginning time (t=0), the end-of-inflation time, and the jerk time; all in violation of the cosmological principle (strong version)! It means a violation of the generally accepted rule that a real universe must have no special time or place.

   It is little wonder that physicists and cosmologists consider the expanding universe model to be preposterous! Physicist Sean M. Carroll even named his website "preposterous universe." And he goes into some detail in his paper, The Cosmological Constant, available at http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-1.

    Undeterred by considerations of preposterousness and implausibility, a group of experts, using the latest high-z supernovae discoveries, presented their ideas for 'improvements' to the Big Bang. The research paper, ^[2] authored by no less than 19 physicists/astronomers, was published in the Astrophysical Journal, June 2004. (See, Riess et al., ApJ 607, 665 (2004) http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0402512 )

    Their problem can be expressed this way: For a growing collection of remote supernova events the redshift-distance curve does not agree with the magnitude-distance curve (magnitude = apparent brightness). The challenge is to get the theoretical curve (the redshift-distance graph) to agree with the empirical curve (the magnitude-distance graph).

   And that is why the scaling factor derivatives are so useful. If it is mathematically necessary to invoke a fourth or even fifth derivative of the scaling factor, to force-fit the curves, then so be it. The Big Bang, being, as it is, a mathematical model, literally cannot fail.

   What we are witnessing in conventional cosmology is the "keeping up the appearances" in the best Ptolemaic tradition.

 ---C.R. 2008 July

Notes and References

1. ^ Ned Wright's Javascript Cosmology Calculator  www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html
2. ^ Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at z > 1 From the Hubble Space Telescope: Evidence for Past Deceleration and Constraints on Dark Energy Evolution, Riess et al., ApJ 607, 665 (2004) http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0402512

080722

Top of page            Back to DSSU Home Page