Perspective

, Volume: 12( 9)

• View PDF
• Download PDF

What is dark energy? The consequences of a non-geocentric view of the universe

*Correspondence:

Jan Thurlings
Independent Researcher, Netherlands
E-mail: jathu@kpnmail.nl

 

Abstract

The expansion rate of the universe is determined by the speed of light. This determines the size of our universe. This could not have been larger. So the expansion rate could not have been either. Smaller? But we are at a distance from the ‘Big Bang’ of 15 billion gigaparsecs with a corresponding local expansion rate. Indeed, there is a remarkable variation in the expansion rate. But this makes no difference to the expansion rate of the whole. We have an unjustified geocentric worldview as far as the universe is concerned, not as in the past was the case, but because the emerging universe is expected to expand in all directions at the speed of light, the highest, after which mass is added. Arises, which was undoubtedly extra heavy there and then because of the speed. The primordial expansion 1 is thus a surrounding horizon for our perception.

Keywords

Expansion rate; Universe; Cosmic horizon; Mass formation; Cosmology

Introduction

If we now see through our geocentrism in this, it produces spectacular logical consequences. Because what we thus see still does not take into account the fact that much further out in the universe supposed observers have a different event horizon, better: had than we would have had then, as of their state nowadays we don't know anything, but for convenience I say 'have'. After all, it is extremely implausible that we, even though we are the center of our universe, are the absolute centre of the universe. It is true that mass only arose after the 'Big Bang', but other observers can see that beyond our event horizon a part of the universe was born along with it that expands at the speed of light, after which mass is created. Ergo, mass is also located on, yes in (because even what lies beyond it is separated by 0-distance with respect to us, does not move away faster than light, so is at that location) our event horizon (actually a nearby observer finds it at the same moment, but in the space behind them, as the masses coming into existence: to us this seems to coincide with moment zero of time, but doesn''t), which moves away at the speed of light and regarding mass is therefore really is infinite, as not just a black hole, but as super black wall behind the background radiation and arising matter which it commences to swallow up. This now leaves behind a gravitational field that from all sides comes towards us at the speed of light. However, this is preceded by a relativistically very strongly magnified but finite mass less strongly moving away.

The gravitational fields of this as coming to us from opposite directions neutralize each other. If the field is stronger than the gravitational force between another object in our solar system, it pulls it away, but soon it neutralizes the force coming from the opposite side of the field that this field penetrates this effect and the object falls back to its old position. However, this does not happen if a correspondingly stronger field hits the object. This then keeps the object at the same distance from the other. But if the field becomes gradually stronger on and on, and it does, because it comes from an increasingly distant source, which moves away faster and therefore ultimately has a strong increase in mass and therefore gravitation, then the distant object will move away from us. We then also see that the universe is expanding faster and faster, the dark energy. When the field becomes infinitely strong, as a signal from the Big Bang that eventually reaches us, then this means that the continuing distance between a distant solar system and us will not continue until two sundays come together, but: extra shifting, will first disappear into the black wall surrounding us and we? We are torn apart. Nowadays we are close to the (what is then called) Big Bang with our observations, so within the foreseeable future our observation of this will be the same as being torn apart from all sides by an attraction quickly increasing to infinitely strong in all directions. A curious encounter! This then happens everywhere. The picture then becomes: through very heavy mass an increasingly accelerating expansion in its direction, far from noticeable because the gravitational pull from all sides towards us and passing us in my opinion, 'Big Bang' is increasingly a misleading concept. a) What it has always been about is that is not: necessarily the case that in time first there was something and then a flash, but in any case it is, viewed from within, expansion having begun. Counteracts itself in our surroundings, but in the distance it drags galaxies away ever faster. This then explains the acceleration of the expansion. Initially, this gradually slowed down after the primordial expansion because the gravitational fields of each mass, expanding at the speed of light, got an increasing hold on everything. This explains the slower and less rapidly accelerating expansion in the first half of the time that the universe exists. But then, due to the greater distance created by the expansion, this increasing gravitational pull also decreases again, whereby the influence of the enormous gravitational pull of the edge masses has an increasing effect again (i.e. the more distant the edge mass comes from). It now depends on how far this gravitational pull has progressed towards us. For the time being it will remain at the acceleration that we observe today, but it may be that in the foreseeable future the swelling attraction coming from opposite directions will no longer be in relative equilibrium, the infinitely strong attraction of the most distant masses will come close from all sides, the gravity of the mass will suddenly peak and tear everything apart and then absorb it. This has already happened successively with our entire universe in the past, but because we are in fact looking back into the past, we have not yet come to the observation of this event. This information reaches us before the demise of every (note: in the past) object of the universe. The oldest absorption is just after the primeval expansion. In our field of vision everything disappears at the same time. After all, the gravitational field travels as fast as light. This light from the most distant past that still manages to escape from the dark wall is therefore accompanied by the journey of the gravitational field coming from there. If we suddenly see light rapidly becoming super infrared, we may well know what time it is.

Dark energy

We see: This view offers among other things an explanation for what we observe today: Of the strongly decreasing acceleration of expansion in the past and of the very strongly increasing acceleration afterwards, in short: the nature of what is called dark energy. This can be explained as follows: The gravitation of the masses that are located towards us just in front of the infinitely heavy mass, i.e. in reality: were located, therefore also including all the matter of the universe in its past, already successively (which means: in our anyway backward observation at the same time) pulls on all objects. This pulling apart happens as far as considered by itself to an increasing extent, but from the beginning this is counteracted due to the fact that the gravitational fields of all objects spread out throughout the entire universe. The effect of this is reduction of the expansion speed, until due to the distance reached in the meantime this effect weakens in favor of the pull by the promontorium of the Big Bang mass. This is mass which is very heavy due to its speed, but not infinitely heavy, whose gravitation therefore takes the upper hand again, and thus has an accelerating effect.

Note that we see this occurring everywhere equally, i.e. it announces itself to us, but in reality it comes to us from the past. They are nothing other than two faces of gravity. with counteracting effect: from the surrounding edge absorption by the successively large to infinite pulling force, in the middle the inwardly increasing influence of the spreading gravitational fields. The alldevouring is coming, simultaneously with gravity on its way to utter permeation, but still so far from the all- devouring and its signs that the permeation by gravity still prevails. However, it does mean that when we can look back that far, that we will see the ‘Big Bang’ itself, i.e. we are ready for the last, i.e. the first and furthest light to see the infinite pulling force and thereby go towards our end that follows soon.

Note: We can already look very far back to this beginning, so it is about a foreseeable time. Of course, on this scale we have to think in millennia. That it is just around the corner has only a limited chance, so we cannot start shouting: ‘The end of the world is near!’ Still, if this happens at the end of time, when you do not know, you should not be surprised, so not even if were tomorrow.

Consequence

From /the abandonment of what remains of egocentrism it follows that: it could be that e.g. the Andromeda Galaxy or regions of the Milky Way have already been destroyed Others over there or much further down the line, if there were any, will conclude this from us. But we are still here and so are they for themselves! But this does not alter the fact that everyone gets a turn. Paradoxical, however, it is that the infinite gravity first arrives elsewhere and tears away and absorbs all heavenly bodies, as do we for their perspective, while on the other hand, for those who are there and here, both are only later torn apart, into the black hole on both sides. Don't the two systems work against each other? If we assume that each a works according to the laws of nature, it must be the case that they apply to themselves and do not conflict with each other.

Relative to us the distant celestial body flies away from us, and we from the observer there. For each perspective, the other enters the infinite gravitational field. But each of the observers ‘sees’ this differently, at the same moment of cosmic time. So it is strange that one person sees the other being successively torn away backwards, and the latter himself does not yet move. Of course this is a matter of different aspects.

Image

And there is something else paradoxical. Suppose that an intermediary person by means of entnagled particles, which from halfway to the distant celestial body could make a connexion which from halfway to the distant celestial body could establish a contact with somebody there and with me here, and can immediately read what will happen there and enables us to do this too, so I could make simultaneous observation possible. And suppose: I would have established a connection with the distant object that, in my perspective, is busy to be swallowed up. Then for the perspective of where the entanglement takes place this is halfway between the earth and the far object before the absorption of the both of them. But at some time after this absorption because of the connection created by the entanglement still at the same time connects to the object that is the same age as the Earth on the scale of universe time. For the observer on the far object and for us thus there is simultaneous contact, In each other's perspectives thus we are still there. This difference is then a consequence of the standstill in time with the black hole equivalent in which the object is swallowed up. This state remains until universe time common to both of us. This also applies conversely for the observer on the distant object with respect to the earth. So now I come into contact that both is simultaneous as, through the light, not simultaneous with both the destroyed celestial body, that does not continue running in time, and the one that by far has not yet been destroyed of the same age. Isn't it? The answer to this paradoxical coincidence is: The difference is more than just a matter of perspective in the sense of angle of incidence, but of the fact that the same thing can be found in different frames of reference as different aspects of the same object. To illustrate the possibility of such dual behavior, read the thought experiment below this. So does the Andromeda Galaxy still exist? Yes, and yet it has been absorbed possibly and that we will go to see happen to us at the same time, but in reality looking back. as it, in the same way that everything is torn apart. So the picture is: A gravitational field has already destroyed almost the entire universe and what we are describing is the past of our universe that not only has disappeared from our visual field, but also from our perspective, and: that at the same time will disappear from all other perspectives of possible participants. The clock time for them is the same as ours, after all the universe in all perspectives is the same age. So cosmic death is imminent, because the whole universe will completely be destroyed.

Another proof of dual behaviour of the same object

A thought-experiment. Consider two identical banana-shaped spacecraft that can somehow hinge on a rigid post. One of them flies standing, the other on its back, both tapering towards each other. They are invulnerable. They hit each other with their snouts and both flip over. The observers in one vessel see the other shorter than their own, therefore the tail of the other strikes more forward than into their own tail, which makes a stroke behind the other. Everyone therefore sees two strokes, i.e. the same differently. This proves two separate reference spaces (which otherwise fit into each other: a light ray through our space through an object moving away from it, continues to travel at the same speed within it compared to an occupant observer, but therefore not faster for us, this difference is made up for by the clock in the moving object that runs slower for us). Otherwise there would be a paradox. Both see the front blow, the impact, coming out of nowhere. Then everyone sees an impact on himself out of nowhere and one of himself on the other equally out of nothing.

Objections?

Suppose one banana were to cause the other one to explode, what consequences would this have for the observer of the other one who does not see the impact? Well, the identical thing is hit, so he too would see his banana explode, out of nowhere, not because his banana is hit by the tail of the shortened other. So must there be an exploded banana beside an entire one from another perspective? No, one’s own banana hit the other one invisibly. One object has a double aspect here, 'sides', shapes, that collide with one another2, accordingly both the one-sided removal at the speed of light and the being pulled apart, so that in both cases the proper mass becomes infinite and its infinite gravitational force is absorbed into the infinite coming, we ended up with in this article cannot be denied as a consclusion either. (This speculation was prompted simply by the fact that I was investigating the expansion rate, namely when considering 'if you add like this towards the origin, what speed do you get?', whereas I assumed that we are of course not the absolute center. Count your winnings. I was shocked and of course immediately made the connection with the religious notion of the last day, which naturally had made me wonder how such a thing could be possible. I already came up with the thought experiment with the two bananas as a student. It suits me now for the benefit of the above catastrophe theory.

This banana thought experiment supports, mutatis mutandis, part of the solution to the famous clock paradox. This reads: When an object flies past us at a very high speed with an observer and a clock there, we see that clock running slower, i.e. time passing more slowly, and conversely that observer with us. When we return, we see each other's clock running behind. Solution. When landing a fast vehicle, the time of any other adapts itself (very) quickly, no paradox. A paradox is that material clock functions cannot keep up with this in terms of adjustment speed, mutually. No problem this is, if the clocks are vibrating atoms, because their very strongly increasing frequencies can do this. These then become very high, in order to return to the initial speed of the object and then become the old one again, appropriate to this. When standing still on the runway there is an adjustment to the time of this. Something like a hand clock would not be able to do this, because this becomes impossibly heavy due to their very high catch-up speed. But - and now it comes - at a lower catch-up speed, but too high to catch up, the landed clock watcher would see an earlier clock position than his at the other present and the other sees exactly the opposite, or in other words both the same duality

P.S. Something, I wonder: Isn't the constant speed of light also a kind of quantum multilocation, ubiquity as for velocity of frames of reference instead of as smeared in space? Now the spatial ubiquity is a path of decreasing probability towards the edge, while on the other hand the frame of reference ubiquity is 100% probable everywhere. Not exactly a match between quantum mechanics and relativity. But the property of the photon constant speed of light is an extra ‘dimension’ to the property of the photon probability wave. The photon has different ubiquity properties. However, it is not possible to see them as two sides of one function, in other words no further simplification is possible. At some point thie latter will turn out to be the case in the whole of physics, so that we will then be ready to conclude that apparently they are equipped with properties. ‘without Why’ or better: efficient adjustment. Although on the other hand you wonder what use all that botany of particles has. But nevertheless. But let us not stop simplifying too soon, but look for an explanation until it is no longer possible.

Supplement

We know that the object has long since been absorbed into its past, i.e. that there is only (an equivalent of) a black hole. However, the simultaneity of now means that it has not yet been absorbed. Yet it was absorbed, i.e. in our perspective then moved backwards. We will become aware of this when we ourselves go to be torn apart (the speed of the gravity-field and of light that informs us, is the same), by the fact that, because the gravitational field coming from all sides is peaking, the sun, moon and stars are quickly moving away, turning red, after which it starts pulling on us ever harder. So until then we do not experience it. We only know that in our perspective that far past event is while happening comes to us. But from the perspective of the observer there then, nothing is happening yet. The object running away is strongly retarded and then frozen in time in our perspective in the past, but in our perspective this it is lasting. I am aware of the object as currently simultaneously with me and could prod it by means of a stick made by an intermediary person through entanglement, so nothing else than what the object as not pulled away, no past retarded in time and then frozen,

But there can't be two, in this case past, different states in the same place!? Well, so this depends on perspective. In our perspective the black-hole-equivalent is there. The arriving gravitation field is there, granted, but as for a different perspective than the object that has not yet reached the hole by far. The perspective we share with that of the observer on that object therefore is the only perspective for contact neither. No, we notice one state of the distant object as well as the other. This is not contradictory. Through the light we first still observe the object as it is about to be pulled away, while the clock over there has since (in my view) slowed down considerably. The difference is that for the observer who himself is reached by the absorbing gravitational field, among which we ourselves, also a gravitational field is coming from all other sides, so that the absorption takes place to all sides around us: so one is torn apart in one moment.

However, there is another difference yet. First, in my view, the object was pulled early a little into the oncoming gravitational field and as for later I know that it is torn apart.

How this is possible? I hold my pokers, the light and the entangled medium, in two fires. Which prevails? Just watch carefully. The object being torn away has, because the object is in extremely rapid motion and is in an increasingly very strong gravitational field, a lagging clock and which subsequently stands still that does not bridge the distance back to that of the clock of the same observer who has not yet been torn, who mutatis mutandis has not noticed anything about this past, but in his meantime ever since the simulaneous moment of the universe time of that snatching away when the clock stands still in the perspective of somebody on the far object has simply continued .And what do we see directly before the last moment? Well, as well casu quo the other observer with his medium affecting us and continuing to do so until our and his cosmic age of then, when we go to be torn apart as all celestial bodies, also his, moving away with redshift. Although in one perspective all this has already really happened in the past, in the own perspective of all observers anywhere in the universe this happens at the same age of the universe. Then the wave reaches and tears apart everyone in everyone's other perspective. The universe therefore ends at the same time. Before that, all could keep track of these with an entanglement stick. In this perspective the Andromeda Nebula still exists, in the other it may have been absorbed earlier on its clock and at the same time on ours. It is just the aspect of the same\that you look at or should I say that the being torn away is secretly stopped by a pull in exactly the other direction in the other perspective? But that an object in different relativistic aspects can occupy two different spaces at once is confirmed by the thought experiment of the two bananas. Here too the two positions are in the same space only at the last moment, but which precisely proves their separateness, and one mode of appearance does not prevent the other. Otherwise the whole theory of relativity would not hold.