Bigbang Alternative

This is a simple alternative cosmology that I use in my Sci-Fi books.

It uses a stricter implementation of the laws of physics than standard cosmology to provide a very good match to latest distance measurements.

  • The expansion of space is relative. (Not absolute as Bigbang cosmology’s use of General relativity)
  • The observer size is relative as are the laws of physics.
  • Universe is an inertial reference frame for Newton’s laws not our local frame of reference.

The God Kit describes the universe predicted by this model from the point of view of an alien engineer called Merlin. Of particular interest is the “Gas damped” method for building planetary systems, and supernova outside the ISM.

In The Brigadier and the Pit two alien nano-viruses are at war with each other. With all life on Earth due to become collateral damage. Scientists stuck in the middle need to understand who is telling the truth before picking sides.


 Physics in comoving space

Standard cosmology assumes the only absolutes in the universe are the size of the atom and the speed of light.

This alternative cosmology assumes the only absolutes are the size of the universe and the speed of light.
So we are shrinking, space is not expanding.

The known laws of physics are applied strictly, but are assumed to be circular. That is everything is relative with no absolute reference (as required by GR).
All observers are made of matter and are shrinking with matter.

It uses a single inertial reference frame to describe the universe at all scales (QM, atoms, stars, large-scale structure).
In this ref frame the average distance between distant galaxies is constant but matter is shrinking by about 6% every billion years.
Space is not expanding, so photons or moving objects can travel past galaxies that are receding faster than the speed of light in standard cosmology.

The laws of physics define relationships but give no absolutes.
The size of the atom is defined by QM/QED relative to the units of measurements and visa versa but defines no absolute size.
The characteristic wavelength of light emitted by ionised atoms is defined relative to the size of the atoms.
The speed of light is absolute and unchanging, defines the experience of distance relative to time.

Applying the laws of physics as written to matter shrinking you get:
Wavelength of light from matter in the past (z+1) larger than now.   z is the scale difference (redshift in standard cos)

Size of matter in past (z+1) times larger.   —(size atom relative to wavelength emitted)
Time dilation is matter running slower in the past.
Speed matter runs slowed by factor (z+1)  —(speed of light same for all observers)
Etc etc.

This gives SI units in the past:
Time: s’ = (1+z)s
Length:   m’ = (1+z)m
Energy: J’ = J/(1+z)
Mass: Kg’ = Kg/(1+z)
Force N’ = N/(1+z)^2

Distance curves

By assuming the above and graphically matching supernova luminance and angular distance curves to the observed, I get:
z+1 = 1.065^t with t in billions of years.
So absolute / light travel / look back distance =  log(1+z) / log(1.065) in billion light years.
With no expansion of space luminosity distance is:  (z+1)log(1+z) / log(1.065).
Angular size distance is:  1/ atan2((1+z) , log(1+z) / log(1.065))

ZCurve

Distance curves

The very short version.

Basically matter was redder larger and slower in the past by a factor of (z+1), Where z is the scale difference or red shift.

Match to supernova data
Magnitude 1_065

2 thoughts on “Bigbang Alternative

  1. Helder Velez

    Congratulations ! you are almost there. You have to read this paper : A self-similar model of the Universe unveils the nature of dark energy @ http://vixra.org/pdf/1107.0016v1.pdf
    The atom’s scaling: scale equally mass, charge,length, time . Keep constants c,epsilon,G and all equations of physics hold true. An exponential variation on those units (in space units, instead of atomic units) exp(-H0*t) represents the evolution of the universe. A larger atom in the past explains the redshift.

    Reply
  2. Alf

    Please, contact me to my email: alf.g.oliveira@gmail.com.
    Helder Velez told me about your work. I am the author of the paper Helder Velez mentioned above and I believe our colaboration on this matter can be important. By the way, I will be in London next week. Cheers. Alf.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s