# "The 'Speedup' of the Universe's Expansion at Extreme Distances"

*From*: "Alomor" <alomor@xxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 12:31:21 -0500

"The 'Speedup' of the Universe's Expansion at Extreme Distances"

(See also our sister website reticsessays.com)

Cosmologists seem to be concerned about the fact that, at extreme

distances, the observable universe is expanding at a greater rate than the

nearer portions of the universe. The current explanation seems to be that,

at extreme distances, a repulsive "gravitational" force acts. In a previous

postings the writer assumed that the apparent speedup of the expansion rate

at extreme distances occurred because those distances represented

observations of an early period of time in the formation of the universe

when the velocity of light was greater in absolute terms, causing the

absolute velocity of expansion to be higher. Needless to say, the writer was

not completely happy with that explanation.

The real cause of the expansion anomaly follows from the effects

described by the CORRECTED version of General Relativity. (General

Relativity, as currently accepted, is based upon a sophomoric mathematical

error. Dr. Einstein attempted to develop a tensor solution using the

Principle of Equivalence based upon the following equation:

(dx)^2 + (dy)^2 + (dz)^2 - (Kt*C*dT)^2 = (ds)^2

As any student of integral calculus will recognized, to be mathematically

rigorous the equation used should be:

(Ks*dx)^2 + (Ks*dy)^2 + (Ks*dz)^2 - (Kt*C*dT)^2 = (ds)^2

While it may not be obvious, the first equation does not eliminate the

presence of Ks, it makes the a priori assertion (without supportive

evidence) that, while Ks is there, its value is unity. The second equation

allows Ks to have any value between +/- infinity, including unity. (Using

the same coefficient for each spatial term insures that the result will

always lead to a spatially isotropic solution.)

As a result of the above lack of rigor, Dr. Einstein was tried

unsuccessfully for 18 months to solve the mathematics of General Relativity.

Instead of fixing his error, he finally resorted to the fakery of "Curved

Space" to provide the extra degree of freedom mature requires instead of

providing that freedom by allowing Ks to be other than unity. The excuse

given was "why shouldn't we consider space to be curved, no one can prove it

isn't". (Some scientists!) The table below provides all that is needed to

deal with both the relativistic effects of velocity and of gravity:

Parallel General Revised General

Quantity Velocity Relativity Relativity

Force (F) 1 1 1

Length (L) 1/Bv 1 1/Bg

Time (T) Bv Bg Bg

Space (S) 1 Bg 1

Where Bv is the Lorentz Transformation, (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5, and Bg is the

gravitational equivalent, (1-$). ($ represents the gravitational potential

between an upper and lower elevation.) Unlike the situation with velocity,

the gravitational field DOES have an absolute reference frame. That

reference frame exists at an infinite distance from the central mass.

It will be noted that under General Relativity the transformation for

length is unity and an extra transformation is required to account for the

alleged curvature of space. Under the revised version of General Relativity,

a length transformation analogous to that of Special Relativity is found to

exist, the Principle of Equivalence now WORKS, and space is seen to be FLAT!

The fakery of "curved space" is not required to make the mathematics work!

When one tests the conclusions of General Relativity against the

conclusions of the Revised General Relativity one finds that the difference

in their conclusions is only observable at distances closer than 100 times

the horizon radius of the source of the gravitational field. In other words,

the observations made which allegedly verified General Relativity in 1920

would have to be made in proximity to a neutron star. Short of having access

to Star Trek's Warp Drive, a direct observational distinction between the

two conclusions is not feasible.

Contrary to popular belief, the velocity of light DOES change as one

changes reference frames. This change is hidden from LOCAL observation

because matter uses the LOCAL velocity of light to control the size of its

units of measurement. Their LOCALLY observed, but not necessarily their

EXTERNALLY observed values remains unchanged. (For example, the locally

observed velocity of light is the same in all reference frames. In order for

this to be true, the velocity of light must change in ABSOLUTE terms between

reference frames in proportion to (1-V^2/C^2) since velocity is length

divided by time.

The change in the absolute size of the units of measurement for length

and time required by the relativity concepts requires a corresponding change

in other units of measurement for the Principle of Relativity to be valid.

The relativistic transformations for many physical parameters are provided

in Table 8.13.1 of http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm. If one examines the

implications of this table it becomes apparent that at a lower elevation the

permeability of space is lower. In other words, the proximity of energy, as

represented by a central gravitational mass, reduces the permeability of

space! In turn, the ABSOLUTE velocity of light in the gravitational field is

reduced. The reduction in the ABSOLUTE velocity of light requires the

parameters of matter to change. Part of this change is a reduction of the

ABSOLUTE energy represented by matter. Since energy is a conserved quantity,

in moving to a lower elevation, matter must divest itself of the excess

energy. That divested energy appears as the energy of fall (the force of

gravity times the change in elevation). If one is foolish enough to reject

the idea of the Aether, then the Newtonian requirement that all forces

appear in equal and opposite force components, one must accept that the

mainstream view that Newtonian reaction force for both gravity and

acceleration are "fictitious". If one accepts the concept of the Aether, the

force of gravity exists as a downward "push" acting against the Aether!

There is another effect which occurs and, in conjunction with the

gravitational mass of photons, which must exist if the Law of Conservation

of energy is to be valid, the so-called "dark energy" and the apparent

speedup of cosmological expansion at extreme distances is easily explained.

The mass of a central gravitational object, in terms of the units of

measurement existing at a distance from that object mass, is less than that

represented by the matter content of the central mass. When applied to

cosmology the effect would appear as a speedup of cosmological expansion as

if there was a reverse gravitational force working. The same conclusion

apples to observations of galaxies, hence the concept of "dark matter".

The source material for this posting may be found in

http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997); http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm

(1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE

ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS

TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE

MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS

REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM

THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the

http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on

a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy

as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,

please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you

have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:- einsteinhoax2@xxxxxxxxxxxx If you wish a reply, be sure that

your mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8

years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE

MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by

individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without

questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be

objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.

Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one

exception for which a correction was provided.

.

- Prev by Date:
**"Space, Vacuum, and the Aether"** - Next by Date:
**"Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"** - Previous by thread:
**"Space, Vacuum, and the Aether"** - Next by thread:
**"Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"** - Index(es):