The   Dynamic   Steady   State   Universe

 Home    Advance Search    Contact    For Educators (Under Construction)   

NEW ITEMS:


(2017 October): Coming up in a matter of weeks … another powerful research paper … another devastating blow for the Big Bang. (Currently being submitted for peer review. Details to follow.)
 


(2017 Sept): Recently brought to my attention: DSSU material appears on The New Illuminati website accompanied by some amazing graphics.

New Illuminati –The DSSU is The New Cosmology

New Illuminati –Hidden Substrate of Reality
 


(2017 Sept): "Assorted Comments" added to QuestionsAnswersComments.
 


(2017 Sept): Special purchase offer on the book "Guide to the Construction of the Natural Universe". (Mail-in Order Form.)
 


(2017 July): The book The Nature of Gravitational Collapse is now available.
 

The Nature of Gravitational Collapse

Subtitle: How the photon, the particle of light, is responsible for mass, gravity, superneutron stars, and supermassive black holes


—Reveals the truth about stellar and supermassive black holes.


This new work contains 310+ pages, 67 illustrations, references, and index. … Additional details.


(2016 December): “So easy to understand” comment from an Australian engineer.


(2016 November): “Large-Scale Structure of the Dynamic Steady State Universe” now published in the American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol.4, No.6, 2016, pp.65-77. Astract and Links to HTML and PDF.


(2016 June):
Revolutionary research paper:
The Nature of Gravitational Collapse –published in the American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol.4, No.2, 2016, pp.15-33. Abstract and Links:
—Another major DSSU success, as it reveals amazing new insights! The theory has uncovered the mechanism by which mass undergoes a total conversion to energy. Yes, a mass to energy conversion with 100% efficiency!  As everything else in the DSSU, it is a perfectly natural process. Truly amazing!


Have gravity waves really been detected?

Comments updated  2016 June: Comment #19
 


(2016-4-26:)  A mathematical cosmologist claims the values of the Hubble-expansion parameter and the cosmic-background temperature are the most important elements for understanding the real Universe! Letter and response.


(2016 March)  What is the difference between a physical and a mechanical aether? ...
Be aware of the distinctions among the terms commonly applied to aether: Terms such as physical, mechanical, subquantum, and dynamic. Link to new Question & Answer.


The book, Guide to the Construction of the Natural Universe, is  now available at the Niagara Falls Public Library  (Victoria branch). If you live in the Province of Ontario, your local library can request the book from the Niagara Falls Public Library.
 

Participate in a unique exploration of the Cosmos: venture into the sub-atomic realm, even into the sub-quantum realm where the roots of reality reside, and into the domain of cosmic-scale cell-structure and beyond to infinity. Along the way, discover the cause of mass, the cause of gravitation, and rediscover Einstein’s “nonponderable” aether and Heraclitus’ harmony-of-opposites principle. … The book represents the ultimate vindication for all the skeptics who resisted the "preposterous" Big Bang mythology and who refused to join the exploding-cosmos religion.
This new work contains 317 pages, 61 illustrations, references, and index … Available from C-FAR Books.
Or use this mail-in Order Form.

 


My comments on the latest mass media "Official Science" news story:


Do not be misled by the recent reports of the detection of gravity waves.
What the LIGO apparatus measures is the interference from beams of self-generated electromagnetic waves. It seems highly probable that what LIGO actually detected was some vibrational “noise” or some unexplained interference; and NOT gravity waves originating from a distant binary system (in which two extremely massive black holes are supposedly in the process of merging). How the data, the wave patterns, are interpreted is subject to theory and restricted by theory. Naturally the official interpretation must conform to the Officially-sanctioned theory of gravity —Einstein’s general theory of relativity. Thus, the light patterns recorded by LIGO are interpreted via Einstein’s mathematical concept of gravity. The problem is the general-relativity-gravity interpretation, as is well known, ignores the space medium!

Have gravity waves really been detected?
Think about this: The academic experts do not have the cause and mechanism of gravity (Isaac Newton did not, Albert Einstein did not, and today’s big-bang astrophysicists do not). Their theory of gravity is embarrassingly incomplete! So, if they do not yet understand the nature of gravity itself, how then can they claim to be able to recognize the waves that gravity supposedly emits? The experts cannot even answer the simple question: Specifically, what is it that is waving? What is waving back and forth?
    Here is something else the reports fail to mention: The gravity waves that are actually detectable are those associated with the turbulence in the aether flow (the space medium streaming through our Solar System). Australian physicist Reginald T. Cahill has been examining these aether-flow waves for over 15 years. –CR (2016 May)
Updated 2016 June. See Comment #19


(2016 Jan 6) Now published:
Olbers’ Paradox Resolved for the Infinite Non-Expanding Universe
, American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics Vol.4, No.1, (2016 January). Abstract & download links.
Excerpts:
● “The man accredited with discovering universe expansion did not believe that the universe was expanding. Hubble was convinced that the key evidence, the cosmic redshift, was caused by some other factor, something more fundamental than mere expansion.”
● “With the recent discovery of a new cosmic-redshift mechanism, and its theoretical validation, it turns out that Hubble was right.”
● Explains how “an infinite, non-expanding, perpetually regenerating universe" is able to predict a dark night sky.


Press Release (2015 Oct 15):
The Big Bang is no longer a viable hypothesis !

(2016 June) FREE DOWNLOAD:
"DSSU Validated by Redshift Theory and Structural Evidence", Physics Essays, Vol.28, No.4, p455-473 (2015 Dec) —Delivers the coup de grâce to the Big Bang. Abstract & Links.
Both Reviewers enthusiastically endorsed this "well-written and incisive article."
 


(2015-Oct 6) Webpage added for article Cosmic-Redshift Distance Law Without c Without H: Comments & Links  Describes the challenge of getting DSSU papers published.
 


(2015 Aug 20:) Allow me to extend a sincere "Thank You" for the many invitations to join social media and professional networks. Unfortunately I must decline. It’s simply a matter of precious time —there is just too little of it. All my available time is taken up by research, writing, and website maintenance —in fact, two more web domains have been purchased. It is all being done for the purpose of providing the educated and interested public with the ammunition to refute and replace the utterly bankrupt big-bang Worldview. (However, not to give the impression of a total recluse, seclusionist, or misanthrope, I do manage to squeeze in a few delightful hours of ballroom dancing every week or two.) –CR
 


(2015 Aug:) Brief update on the status of the neutrino and its adaptation into the DSSU particle theory. See Section 5 of the Discussion webpage for the article: The Fundamental Process of Energy

(2015 Aug:) The article The Universe Is Infinite (Part 1) has been revised.

(2015 July:) Comments and questions from a 14-year old student.
 


RECENT RESEARCH PAPERS:

"The Nature of Gravitational Collapse"
–Published in American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics. ( Abstract and Links.)
(Note, there is a typo in AJA&A posted version in the Fig-10 caption. It should read: … acceleration is proportional to 1/r2.)
-------------------------
"Olbers’ Paradox Resolved for the Infinite Non-Expanding Universe" –Published in American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics. ( Abstract & download links.)
-------------------------
"DSSU Validated by Redshift Theory and Structural Evidence" published in Physics Essays, Vol.28, No.4, p455-473 (2015 Dec). Abstract.
Both Reviewers enthusiastically endorsed this "well-written and incisive article."
-------------------------
Published in the American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics, AJAA, Vol.3, No.2, 2015:
Ellipticity, Its Origin & Progression in Comoving Galaxies  
Local  high-resolution PDF.

HIGHLIGHTS:
• Provides the first-ever natural explanation for the cause of the elliptical shape of nonrotating galaxies
• Retains the foundation premise of all modern cosmology but rejects the absurd concept of whole-universe expansion
• Takes full advantage of the universe’s cosmic cellular structure and exploits the DSSU theory of unified gravity domains
• Amazingly, the mechanism that stretches galaxies turns out to be the very same mechanism that causes the cosmic spectral redshift!


Published Dec 2014 in the American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics:

"Cosmic Redshift in the Nonexpanding Cellular Universe” —details the actual causal mechanism. Abstract.
Preprint with larger images.
HIGHLIGHTS:
• Entirely new concept for cosmic redshift mechanism;
• Retains the foundation premise of all modern cosmology;
• But does not require whole-universe expansion;
• A redshift based on the DSSU theory of unified gravity & cosmic cellular structure;
• Remarkable agreement with independently established redshift distances.



Higgs Boson Discovered?
After 50 long years of searching, Physicists claim to have detected the Higgs boson, the "particle" that ostensibly bestows the property of mass on all other such particles. Is it now time to celebrate? … Definitely not.
   The question now is this: If the Higgs ‘particle’ is the giver of mass to all other particles, what then gives the Higgs itself its mass?! (Yes, the newly discovered particle has mass, lots of it!) A difficult and embarrassing question indeed. It is like asking:
If God created everything, then who, or what, created God?
   While physicists think they have solved the mass problem, the reality is that they have unwittingly exposed an even bigger problem —the riddle of “First Cause”.
 

Glossary of Terms used in Cosmology and Astrophysics with particular emphasis on DSSU theory.
(Opens in separate Window or Tab)

GENERAL INTEREST ARTICLES:

Mysteries & Paradoxes that Plague Standard Cosmology  (Updated 2015-7)

Cosmology Crisis of 1998 (Revised 2015-5)

Critique of Conventional Cosmology ... comments relating to the 'preposterous' expanding-universe paradigm.
Bafflement —the remarkable admission of a physicist.
The Cosmology Debate That Never Happened   —During the 20th century there was a decades-long debate: The cataclysmic expanding universe VS the stable expanding universe. But there has never been a debate of the dynamic expanding universe VS the dynamic non-expanding universe. (Posted 2011 Oct)

Models of the Universe —Historical, Expanding, and Cellular universes. INCLUDES A USEFUL TABLE FOR COMPARING THEORIES.

The Universe Is Infinite (Part 1) —overcoming a "central" problem of cosmology theories.

The Universe Is Infinite (Part 2) —an explanation of how the universe can always have existed and will always exist.

DSSU, The Non-Expanding Universe: Structure, Redshift, Distance —A long sought-after goal of astrophysicists has been a formulation of cosmic distance that is independent of the speed of light. The goal has now been achieved. The present Paper details the surprisingly simple distance expression and its validating agreement with Supernova data.

Why Copernicus Did Not Need a Force of Gravity —Explores the question of why no one, except Newton, invoked a force. (Posted April, 2011)

Gravity and Lambda —A Story of Opposites (.htm) —A story of opposites in harmony. Key differences between the Conventional Cosmology and the New Cosmology are presented.

Dynamic Cosmic Cell —The Structural Component of the DSSU —Animated image and discussion of the self-sustaining, self-balancing system.

Why Einstein Did Not Receive the Nobel Prize for His Theory of Relativity —“By 1922 Einstein had been nominated about fifty times —most were for his relativity theories.”


Questions & Answers & Comments
 

COSMOLOGY ARTICLES, etc:

(2016 June) FREE DOWNLOAD details:
DSSU Validated by Redshift Theory and Structural Evidence, Physics Essays, Vol.28, No.4, p455-473 (2015 Dec) —Delivers the coup de grâce to the Big Bang. Abstract & Links.
Both Reviewers enthusiastically endorsed this "well-written and incisive article."


The Dynamic Steady State Universe.
This work brings together the main pieces of the cosmic puzzle in a step-by-step construction of the Natural Universe. Published in Physics Essays Vol.27 No.2 (2014 June issue) (PDF download)  "... the arguments are well-made. The article is competent, enjoyable and readable." —Reviewer for Physics Essays Journal


Revolutionary:
Olbers’ Paradox Resolved for the Infinite Non-Expanding Universe
, American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics Vol.4, No.1, (2016 January). Abstract & download links.
Excerpts:
● “The man accredited with discovering universe expansion did not believe that the universe was expanding. Hubble was convinced that the key evidence, the cosmic redshift, was caused by some other factor, something more fundamental than mere expansion.”
● “With the recent discovery of a new cosmic-redshift mechanism, and its theoretical validation, it turns out that Hubble was right.”


"Cosmic Redshift in the Nonexpanding Cellular Universe" (Journal pdf) —details the actual causal mechanism. Published in the American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics, Vol.2, No.5 (2014) Abstract.
Local copy with quality images: (Preprint pdf).
HIGHLIGHTS:
• Entirely new concept for cosmic redshift mechanism;
• Retains the foundation premise of all modern cosmology;
• But does not require whole-universe expansion;
• A redshift based on the DSSU theory of unified gravity & cosmic cellular structure;
• Remarkable agreement with independently established redshift distances.

The Cosmology Debate That Never Happened
What historians call "the greatest cosmological debate in history” was between TWO  expanding universes —two hypothetical models that share the same, I repeat, the same foundational property! If one is to claim some great clash of ideas (let alone the "greatest") then surely there must exist some deep dividing difference! (Posted 2011 Oct)

The Case for a Cellular Universe
—the Story of a Baffling Omission in Modern Cosmology    (Revised 2015)
 

Large-Scale Structure of the Dynamic Steady State Universe published in the American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol.4, No.6, 2016, pp.65-77. Astract and Links.
Highlights:
■ Presents the first 2 of the 4 main postulates that define the DSSU.
■ Space-medium expansion and contraction are perpetually held in balance, thus ensuring a non-expanding universe.
■ Explains how the two dynamic processes of the DSSU’s space medium sustain the cellular structure responsible for the pattern of matter distribution in our Universe.

Cosmic-Redshift Distance Law Without c Without H Comments & Links Simplifying the redshift-distance formula by removing the speed-of-light constant and the Hubble parameter —while maintaining agreement with observational evidence.
 

DSSU Theory:

DSSU Validated by Redshift Theory and Structural Evidence, Physics Essays, Vol.28, No.4, p455-473 (2015 Dec) —Delivers the coup de grâce to the Big Bang. Abstract & Links.
Both Reviewers enthusiastically endorsed this "well-written and incisive article."



Theoretical Foundation and Pillars of the DSSU (Introduction) —This introductory essay gives a thematic tour of historical and modern universes culminating with the Natural Universe.

Currently undergoing revision and updating: 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.
Supplementary Discussion: The Primary Process

 


The Fundamental Process of Energy —A Qualitative Unification of Energy, Mass, and Gravity. (Abstract & Reviews & Links) … This article reveals the secret behind photon confinement. (Contains only a bare minimum of mathematics and mainly in one of the 14 sections.)
PART 1 published in Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #113 (Jan/Feb 2014)
PART 2 published in Infinite Energy Magazine    Issue #114 (Mar/Apr 2014)

Headlined as:
A "Conceptual Unification of Energy, Mass and Gravity"



Dynamic Cosmic Cell —The Structural Component of the DSSU —Animated image and discussion of the self-sustaining, self-balancing system.

Unified Gravitation Cells of the DSSU —Constructing the Universe with Cosmic Gravity Cells

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.
 

ARTICLES on AETHER:

Documentary movie footage in which Einstein states, "There exists an aether"
High resolution .mpg video.
Low resolution .wmv video.


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 sub-quantum medium —the Essence of the Universe. (Updated 2016-2)

Relativity of Time in the Aether-Space of the DSSU —How intrinsic time and relative time are related.

DSSU Relativity –The Lorentz Transformations Applied to Aether-Space —Ranzan
Reprinted by permission of Physics Essays Publication, Physics  Essays Vol.23, No.3, p520. (2010). ABSTRACT

The Physical Nature of Length Contraction —the DSSU Theory of Length Contraction Induced by Absolute Motion.
An easy to follow examination of how the mode by which matter is “conducted” through luminiferous aether causes the matter to contract. A simple derivation of the mathematical expression for this physical phenomenon is presented. There is also a brief discussion of relevant historical aspects and of nonphysical length contraction.
Reviewer's comments: “This is amazing …”  “The paper is interesting …” –Applied Physics Research reviewer. Published in Applied Physics Research journal Vol.5, No.1 (2013 Feb).

Contradiction Divides Two Aether Theories —An exploration into the three parts of the speed-of-light postulate.
Reprinted by permission of PEP, from  Physics Essays Journal (Vol 24, No.3, Sept, 2011) ... ABSTRACT

Basic - level mathematical and graphical exploration of dynamic aether flow: PDF

Here is an external webpage with an extensive list of research papers on the aether-drift experiments, and the larger question of energy in space.

DSSU RESEARCH PAPERS:

DSSU Cosmic Redshift-Distance Relation (htm) —Converting the cosmic redshift into distance for our Cellular Universe using a simple and elegant equation.

Large Scale Structure of the Dynamic Steady State Universe (pdf)  How a dual-dynamic space medium sustains the cellular structure (published in AJAA in 2016).
  —Presents the postulates and implications of regional space-medium expansion and contraction.

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


The Cosmic Background Radiation in the DSSU —The natural explanation of the microwave background radiation applicable to the natural Cellular Universe.

Ellipticity, Its Origin & Progression in Comoving GalaxiesAmerican Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics, AJAA, Vol.3, No.2, 2015.
Local  high-resolution PDF.
HTML version available from AJAA here.

GRAVITY:

"The Nature of Gravitational Collapse"
–Published in American Journal of Astronomy & Astrophysics Vol.4, No.2, 2016, pp.15-33. (Abstract and Links.)
(Note, there is a typo in AJA&A posted version in the Fig-10 caption. It should read: … acceleration is proportional to 1/r2.)



The Processes of Gravitation –The Cause and Mechanism of Gravitation by C. Ranzan –A revolutionary paper on gravity published in the Journal of Modern Physics and Applications Vol.2014:3  (2014).
( Abstract & Reviews & Links. Includes link to hi-resolution PDF) "Revolutionary".



Why Copernicus Did Not Need a Force of Gravity —Explores the question of why no one, except Newton, invoked a force. (Rev 2011-9)

First ever, journal-published paper featuring the DSSU:
The Story of Gravity and Lambda –How the Theory of Heraclitus Solved the Dark Matter Mystery –Ranzan

Reprinted by permission of PEP, from Physics Essays, Vol 23, No1, p75-87 (2010 Mar). ABSTRACT
This is the cure for the fallacious belief in cosmic-scale Dark Matter.

The Story of Gravity and Lambda –How the Theory of Heraclitus Solved the Dark Matter Mystery (Color version) Ranzan Considered "an excellent contribution to the [PE journal]" --professional reviewer.

Unified Gravitation Cells of the DSSU —Constructing the Universe with Cosmic Gravity Cells

 

RELATIVITY ARTICLES:

Why Einstein Did Not Receive the Nobel Prize for His Theory of Relativity (●Abstract ●Links ●Excerpts ●Extras) —“By 1922 Einstein had been nominated about fifty times —most were for his relativity theories.”

Einstein’s Simple Mathematical Trick –and the Illusion of a Constant Speed of Light  (Abridged version with links to Journal-published version. Posted July 2013)

Extended Relativity –Exploiting the Loopholes in Einstein's Relativity. A Logical extension of special relativity. Reprinted by permission of PEP, from Physics Essays Vol.25, No.3 (2012 Sept).
Abstract & Links & Reviews


The Three Components of the Speed-of-Light Postulate.  Published in Physics Essays journal Vol.26,No.1 (2013 March)
Local copy: The Three Components of the Speed-of-Light Postulate (pdf) Absolute vs relative. Variance vs invariance. Another instance of the Heraclitian "Harmony of Opposites." (Reprinted by permission of PEP, from Physics Essays, Vol.26, No.1, 2013).

Relativity of Time in the Aether Medium of the DSSU —Absolute Motion and Intrinsic Time

Resolving a Paradox in Special Relativity –Absolute Motion and the Unified Doppler Equation.
(Posted 2011, July). Reprinted by permission of PEP, from Physics  Essays Vol.23, No.4, p594 (2010). ABSTRACT

How DSSU Relativity Resolves the Speed Paradox (Introductory Discussion)   —Absolute Motion Resolves a (speed) Paradox in Einstein’s Special Relativity. (Supplementary Discussion)

DSSU Relativity –The Lorentz Transformations Applied to Aether-Space (Posted 2011, July). Reprinted by permission of Physics Essays Publication, Physics  Essays Vol.23, No.3, p520. (2010). ABSTRACT

The Key that Extends Einstein’s Relativity (Part 1) —Response to a reviewer critical of DSSU aether-space relativity
The Key that Extends Einstein’s Relativity (Part 2) —How to convert abstract-space equations into aether-space equations

Restoring the Physical Meaning of Energy
Published in Applied Physics Research journal Vol.5, No.2 (2013 May).
LOCAL COPY: Restoring the Physical Meaning of Energy —distinguishing between the apparent energy and the real energy of moving mass.
 

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 or alternate site.

INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM:
This website is mainly concerned with revisionism in cosmology. Those of us involved in replacing the unnatural expanding-universe paradigm are aware of the difficulties involved.
   However, other revisionists have unimaginable difficulties. Consider the ongoing persecution of revisionists in other fields of intellectual pursuit: 
"It makes you wonder —about the immense effort being made by State and State-sponsored organizations with budgets of tens of millions of dollars and thousands of employees and associates to smother and punish these few men and women. Every punishing instrument imaginable is used, every vicious slander conceivable, every flagrant and pervasive form of censorship that law allows, including the imprisonment of simple writers for thought crimes against the State. ... Makes you wonder."Bradley R. Smith (2011)


"Discussing truth is so controversial, so dangerous … In most of the world it is simply illegal.” Gordon Duff, Senior Editor, Veterans Today (2011)

DEDICATION: This website is solemnly dedicated to those individuals who have conducted research in their chosen field and have informed others of their inquiries and suffered the consequences when subpoenaed by the Inquisition or some variant thereof. The dedication extends to those individuals currently imprisoned, and those facing trial and persecution simply for exercising their basic human right of freedom of expression supposedly granted to them under the UN Charter of Human Rights.
"Every year, hundreds of writers and other literary professionals around the world are imprisoned, prosecuted, persecuted, attacked, threatened, forced into exile or even murdered as a result of their work."

ALSO: Be aware of the continuing threat to our precious freedom of expression on the Internet. The threat is serious and relentless. It is described as “… the formal effort to mimic Communist China’s system of Internet censorship.” See The Secret Behind SOPA  (2012-Jan). Update.
More information on threats to internet freedom: https://battleforthenet.com/


Reporter-journalist Arthur Topham, Canadian victim of the Inquisition, arrested (2012) for posting his research.
“Arthur Topham faces prison time for daring to speak his mind on his own website, as he faces criminal charges under Canada’s hate crimes legislation contained in Section 318 - 320 of the criminal code.” –Rights and Freedoms Bulletin Issue No. 204 Feb 7, 2015.
VERDICT: Arthur Topham found “guilty” AND “not guilty” of hate speech by a brain-dead jury!
 –Dr. James Sears, reporting in “The world’s Largest Anti-Marxist Publication” (Issue 2015 December, http://www.yourwardnews.com/backissues.html)
2016 Update: Panel Discussion on The Trial of Arthur Topham


Free-speech crusader Bill Whatcott defies British Colombia Human Rights Tribunal efforts to impose gender language tyranny

“I have no intention on wasting money on a lawyer for the Morgane Oger vs Bill Whatcott case, as human rights tribunals are kangaroo courts and the odds of … getting justice in these biased tribunals is next to zero.” –2017 June (www.freenorthamerica.ca …)



The struggle for freedom and justice in Canada lost its greatest champion, its most dedicated defender. On March 11, 2013, Douglas Christie passed away.



British Maverick Psychologist jailed for publishing his research. … “The ambivalence of librarians getting writers imprisoned quite defies comprehension.” –Simon Sheppard (2013)



The repression of free speech in Canada has degenerated to the point where …

■ Freedom advocates, such as Marc Lemire, are censured for merely expressing their reasoned opinions. Freedomsite, whose motto is “Fighting for freedom against the censorship enforcers”, documents the official persecution.
■ A tenured professor has lost his position for revealing his research and views on history. This is unprecedented. Professor Anthony J. Hall at the University of Lethbridge, Alberta, has been suspended (2016 October 5) without pay.
“… Any thinking person should recognize that there is something deeply wrong when a history professor is persecuted for saying we should be able to examine our history.” –Monika Schaefer 2017
■ A publisher/editor, for expressing his reality-based views, has been denied postal services. Dr. James Sears, publisher and editor of Your Ward News was stripped of Canada Post Mail Service by government order (2016 June).
■ A violin teacher and truth revealer, Monika Schaefer, for posting a video (an apology to her dead mother), has been attacked by various so-called community leaders.

The treatment of violinist Monika Schaefer signals the end of our free and democratic society.” –The American Herald Tribune, 2016 Sept

American Speaker Arrested in Canada for the textual material on his iPad
—2017 June 24
While the invasion continues, the “guardians” of the nation are busy suppressing the freedom of expression: going after deemed violations in what people think and write and say.
 


The Continuing Struggle for Freedom

A ray of hope in the ongoing struggle for freedom. Populist and nationalist movements around the world are gaining ascendancy over the New World Order’s effort to establish global governance and impose tyrannical control over every last square meter of the Earth’s surface. –The Barnes Review Vol.23 No.1 (2017 Jan p70)


For more on Freedom (and Objectivism),
visit: Just Right Media
(Website: http://www.justrightmedia.org)



... about the author ...


© Copyright 2005-2017 by
Conrad RanzanDSSU Research
All Rights Reserved
  For information regarding permission to reproduce selected material herein, please contact:

D S S U  Research
Niagara Falls, Canada
16th year on the Internet.
Most recent update:
2017 Oct 15

Visits since mid-2010 : Hit Counter

2017-10-15

Critique of Conventional Cosmology

www.CellularUniverse.org
 

 

"One seldom sees what one is not looking for, and theory tells experimenters where to look."

 

So warned Timothy Ferris in his popular book The Whole Shebang. … In other words, one sees what one is trained to see!

    In today’s institutes of higher learning, all students of the astro-sciences are indoctrinated with Big-Bang expanding-universe theory. This BB theory plays a dominant roll. It moulds the perceptions of the initiated. The theory, now officially in its sixth decade of dominance, frames the context of everything that astronomers see and detect —regardless of how speculative, how unrealistic, and how unconvincing the ensuing interpretations may be!

Here, look for yourself!  

 

Essays:

1. On Model Tinkering in the Ptolemaic Tradition
2. Baffled by the Preposterous
3. The Cosmology Debate That Never Happened
4. Has the Higgs Boson Been Discovery?

"Sometimes it seems that the only thing expanding faster than the universe is cosmologists' bewilderment."
–George Musser

 

1.   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 it 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.

Professor Sean M. Carroll, promoter of the Preposterous Big Bang universe model.
Image source:  www.thegreatcourses.com

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.

Posted 2008 July
--C.Ranzan

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
     

 
 

"Sometimes it seems that the only thing expanding faster than the universe is cosmologists' bewilderment."
–George Musser, Columnist for Scientific American (1999 Sept p26)

 

2.   Baffled by the Preposterous

 Another Admission of Bafflement

Dan Hooper is a practicing physicist. He has applied his considerable talents to the search for the universe's missing mass and energy ... and the presentation of the details to a broad audience. He has written a book about the 95 percent of matter in the universe that is totally invisible. In his words "This invisible stuff comes in two varieties —dark matter and dark energy. One holds the universe together, while the other tears it apart."

In light of the fact that many hundreds of physicists are involved in this search, and the search has been going on for many years (well over thirty years), there should be much to report. Unfortunately, the search has turned out to be a profound disappointment. Dan Hooper finds himself making the following admission:

 

"The advances made in observational cosmology during the past few decades have been incredible. ... the catalog of distant supernova observations has led to the discovery that dark energy comprises about 70 percent of our Universe's density. These findings are remarkable. Sadly, the attempts to develop a compelling theoretical explanation for these findings have been not nearly as successful." —Dan Hooper, Dark Cosmos p173-4

 

Dan Hooper is talking about dark energy, the stuff that is somehow shaping the universe. Here he expands on the "not nearly as successful" part of his assessment quoted above:

 

"It's fair to say that the theoretical physics community is, at least for the time being, entirely baffled when it comes to dark energy. ..."

 

An understatement if ever there was one. But then, this is not anything new. Actually the theoretical physics community has been "entirely baffled" ever since the adoption of creationism cosmology —ever since the adoption of a speculation (a far-out hypothesis) promulgated as science by Georges Lemaître, way back in 1927 & 1929. Take note, we're not talking about temporary bafflement here. The bafflement goes way back to the time of Edwin Hubble in the 1920s. (Hubble had the wisdom to advise caution before jumping to radical unscientific conclusions.)

The admission is that dark energy, aka Lambda, aka cosmological constant, aka vacuum energy, is shaping the universe BUT how it does the shaping —and even what that shape might be— is a bafflement! ... It is not known what drives this energy nor what shape it leads to. At least that is the sad situation in Academic Cosmology.

What about the other half of the puzzle —the dark matter?

 

"As our search has left us with no known candidate for dark matter, we must turn our attention to the purely theoretical and ... the branch of mathematics ... " —Dark Cosmos p80

 

 Are dark energy and dark matter related?

 

"Dark energy and matter are, as far as we [physicists] understand them, completely unrelated phenomena." --Dark Cosmos p174

 

Dark energy (or Lambda) and material matter are unrelated?!! ... They shape the universe yet are unrelated?!! ... Folks, the admission of bafflement could not be any clearer. ... Meanwhile, in DSSU cosmology the two are intimately linked in true Heraclitian tradition ---involving flux, processes, opposites, and harmony.

Academic Astrophysics/Cosmology seems to suffer from a strange inbreeding of ideas.
 

Consider the following remarkable claim, made in his 2006 book, by theoretical physicist Hooper:
 

 

"The vast majority of cosmologists are convinced that around 14 billion years ago our Universe was in an ultra-hot state that expanded over time to eventually become ... the Big Bang. In fact, I don't believe that I have ever met a cosmologist who disagreed with this assessment." --Dark Cosmos p206

 

I say this is a remarkable claim because these same people admit the model is preposterous and they admit their puzzlement. I'm scratching my head. Something is not right here.
    Physicists are baffled by the model they have pieced and pasted together ---their model of the expanding universe. Big Bang for short. Yet despite the serious and persistent bafflement, they all agree, or so we keep hearing, on the validity of the Big Bang model!! The academic colleagues of Dan Hooper, instead of voicing justifiable skepticism compliantly vote their support!

Now what kind of scientific methodology are these learned scientists using? Seems rather irrational, doesn't it? The average thinking person can't help but conclude that there is something seriously wrong here.

What one is witnessing in academic astrophysics/cosmology is conformism to official dogma. Science writer Corey S Powell calls it "sci/religion" (and calls its practitioners the "Priests of sci/religion"). Others call it "mytho-science." I call it (among other things) the inbreeding of expanding-universe theories. We are witnessing the 80-year-long inbreeding of theories based on the biggest unscientific extrapolation in the long history of science. ...

All the serious models of the universe that have been debated following the introduction of Lemaître's fireball-universe were based on whole-universe expansion. They included general-relativity expansion, steady-state expansion, kinematic expansion, inflationary expansion, negative-pressure expansion, and quintessence expansion, to name the most popular ones. Cross fertilize any of them and you still end up with whole-universe expansion! The expanding universe models have metaphorically reached an evolutionary dead-end.

And what is blatantly obvious in all this is that Modern Cosmology (more specifically, Academic Cosmology) has simply NOT investigated the non-expanding universe. It has never explored the perfectly natural cellular universe!

Giving the last word to Dan Hooper, who despite his bafflement, expresses hope,

 

"Modern physicists hope ... to find not only a more complete description of nature, but also a more complete explanation for it." --Dark Cosmos p5

 

* * * *

Posted 2010 May
---C.Ranzan

References:
Hooper, Dan. 2006. Dark Cosmos: In Search of Our Universe's Missing Mass and Energy (Smithsonian Books, HarperCollins Publishers, New York)
 

 

3.  The Cosmology Debate That Never Happened

During the 20th century there was a prolonged debate between the proponents of the Big Bang hypothesis and those of the Steady State hypothesis. The debate started in the 1920s with the misinterpretation of the red-shifted light from distant galaxies and supposedly ended in the 1990s with the discovery of minute variations in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR).

The debate dealt with the profound consequences of the series of discoveries by Arizona astronomer Vesto Slipher during the years 1912 to 1923, German astronomer Carl Wirtz in 1922, Harlow Shapley in the 1920s, American Cosmologist Howard Robertson in 1928, and Edwin Hubble in 1929 —discoveries that led to the empirical law that the greater the distance to a galaxy, the greater is the redshift of its light. Stated  another way, the empirical relationship meant that the apparent recessional speed of a galaxy is proportional to its distance. Note that both the Big Bang side and the Steady State side considered the apparent speed to be a REAL recessional motion. (But further note: Hubble himself preferred “the alternative possible interpretation, that red shifts are not velocity shifts, avoid[ing two major expanding-universe] difficulties ... ." [1] )

We all know which Worldview came out on top.

Edwin Hubble Powell in 1952.
Credit: Hale Observatories, courtesy AIP Emilio Segre Visual Archives

"[T]he conclusion of the greatest cosmological debate in history,” according to historian-of-the-Big-Bang, Simon Singh, came with the discovery, by Pezias and Wilson, of the CMB radiation and became widely publicized on 21 May 1965 when the New York Times carried the front page story under the banner headline, SIGNALS IMPLY ‘BIG BANG’ UNIVERSE.[2]

Actually, the debate continued into the 1990s. It was in 1992 that the COBE satellite discovered variations in the CMB radiation —variations of 1 part in 100,000— coming from different parts of the sky. When appropriately interpreted (as indicating tiny variations in density of the baby big-bang universe), the data "proved" the superiority of the Big Bang model.  Quoting, again, from Simon Singh's book Big Bang: "At last, the challenge to prove the Big Bang model was over." [3]

When a debate drags on for that long ... and the outcome hangs by a thread (a thread of evidence, in the variation of some variable, that is as tiny as 1 part in 100,000!) then credibility suffers. My initial reaction was to suspect that both sides were wrong.

Now it does not take an astrophysicist to realize that the debate-of-the-century was fundamentally between two types of EXPANDING universe —two types of expanding single-cell universe. The Big Bang (BB) and the historic Steady State (SS) were not of the same species, so to speak. But they certainly were of the same genus. Undeniably, both universes were single cell and both were expanding. That is, each expanded as a single cosmic unit —even if infinite in size (as some BB and SS versions claim to be)!

But hold on a minute. The debate went on for roughly 75 years. A long time. Certainly it was long enough to examine fundamentally different ideas. Surely, the non-expanding option would have been proposed and explored.

Surely, there must have been a "great debate" between the expanding universe and  the non-expanding universe. And what about a "great debate"  between the single-cell cosmos and the multi-cell cosmos? After all, these are concepts of fundamental and obvious relevance to the historic debate.

Guess what! ... Search your libraries; search the history of cosmology; search the astrophysics literature. You will come up empty handed. No such debate has ever taken place!

Ladies and gentlemen, let me make this crystal clear: what historians call "the greatest cosmological debate in history” was between TWO  expanding universes —two hypothetical models that share the same, I repeat, the same foundational property! If one is to claim some great contest of ideas (let alone the "greatest") then surely there must exist some deep dividing difference! What —we must ask— is so great about a debate when both sides agree that the universe is  expanding, is single-celled, and is evolving? [4]

The cosmology debate that never happened. The pioneering "expert", in their haste to construct a mathematical universe based on Einstein's theory of general relativity, neglected to make a proper evaluation of the two distinct classes of universe —the expanding and the non-expanding universe. With the non-contestation of the expansion-of-the-whole-universe idea, Academic Cosmology became entangled in a phantasmagoric debate and devolved into an unnatural esoteric Worldview known as the Big Bang.

Sad to say, the experts in this field have dropped the ball —collectively and individually.

The astrophysicists, the cosmologists, and the theorists of the 20th century were embarrassingly negligent. Admittedly, these are strong words, but fully justified. Since the late 1960s and early 1970s, astronomers, including Charlier-de Vaucouleurs, and most notably Jaan Einasto of Estonia, have stated over and over that our universe appears to be cellularly structured! However, in time, astronomers convinced themselves that without a proper supporting theory the apparent cellularity was merely an observational phenomenon. Without a "proper theory" this critical observation was relegated to the status of a mirage, a mere curiosity. ... All I can do is shake my head in disbelief.

Anyway, the debate that never happened, the cosmology debate that should have taken place long ago, the debate that the history books will call the "Great Debate III",[5] ... at long last, IS NOW ON.

One of the key issues is the multi-cellular universe as opposed to the single-cell universe (both the BB and historic SS are single-cell). When I say "multi-cellular universe" I'm not talking about a multiverse. I am not talking about a collection of many separate and isolated universes each with its own laws of physics —each with its own defining parameters. No. I am talking about the universe (in the singular) being divided into subunits with no interaction among such subunits other than radiation.

A beautiful idea. There is a beautiful idea that Nature has decided to use, and it does so, on all size-scales. The beautiful idea is cellular structure. The scales range from the microscopic scale (think viruses and crystals), through the biological scale (think living cells), and the planetary scale (think plate tectonics), to the stellar scale —and even to the cosmic scale!

Nature's cells are not phenomenological. Rather, they are dynamic and process driven. A beautiful idea.
 

A Failing Cosmology

Although we are repeatedly told that the debate is over and that the Big Bang reigns supreme, problems remain. In his book on the Big Bang, Simon Singh, after explaining that the BB universe "is a strange place indeed" and quite unnatural, wrote the following:

 

"Completely solving the remaining mysteries of the Big Bang will require a three-pronged attack, involving further theoretical developments, laboratory experiments and, most important of all, even clearer observations of the cosmos ... and experiments on the lookout for signs of dark matter." [6] [emphasis added]

 

This does not sound like a winning cosmology. To many impartial observers, It remains a mystery how the BB model actually connects with reality. Evidently, some theory rethinking is called for (prong one). More laboratory tests are needed  (prong two). More observations  and experiments are needed in the perennial effort to find that elusive dark matter (prong three).

Incidentally, those words, calling for laboratory experiments, brought a smile and inspired the following comic strip. It metaphorically illustrates why a penetrating examination of the BB model would lead to its destruction.

Why the Great Debate III was abruptly cancelled!

The above cartoon highlights one of the more serious problems with Standard Cosmology, its insistence on applying the so-called cosmological principle of homogeneity of the universe.[7]  Just like the balloon is a ball of homogenous air, the early BB was a ball of homogenous plasma (hot ionized gas). The problem is that in the real universe homogeneity IS NOT OBSERVED! As already pointed out, it is cosmic cellular structure that is actually observed. This cell structure is popularly reported as nodes of rich galaxy clusters and enormous networks of superclusters.
    The BB model demands a high degree of homogeneity; while the DSSU[8] cellular model requires the inhomogeneity inherent in cosmic tessellation. The BB model hypothesizes the homogeneity of the Hubble expansion; while the DSSU model expounds the inhomogeneity of space expansion by including its harmonious opposite, space contraction. That is to say, while the BB insists on the universal expansion of space, the DSSU insists on regional expansion (and regional contraction). The issue boils down to: a run-away universe-wide dynamic model versus a stable regionally-dynamic model.  A BB expanding universe versus a SS non-expanding universe.
    If you like a black-and-white view of cosmology, it does not get any better.  As a sharp contrast to the conventional wisdom, the DSSU has the right stuff for a meaningful debate!

Returning to Singh's earlier comment. He stresses the importance of finding the mysterious dark matter. Let me make a light-hearted public appeal: In the interest of helping a failing cosmology, if you see anything suspicious, if you come across anything that looks, feels, or smells like dark matter, there are BB believers who need your keen observational skills.
    Consider the dedication. The dedication of the BB veterans is truly astonishing. Imagine searching for the dark-matter stuff for over 30 years and finding nothing meaningful! How utterly discouraging! ... They really do need help.

It is not my purpose in this short essay to catalogue the problems of Standard Academic Cosmology. I will simply note that they are many, they are glaring, and they refuse to go away. David Darling, author of Gravity’s Arc, warns that,

 

"The fall of every great theory is foreshadowed by some niggling problems or inconsistencies that refuse to go away." [9]

 

The  one-time assistant to Edwin Hubble and distinguished astronomer, Dr. Halton Arp, had this to say about the failing cosmology:

 

"I believe the observational evidence has become overwhelming, and the Big Bang has in reality been toppled. There is now a need to communicate the new observations, ... and the new insights into the workings of the universe —all the primary obligations of academic science, which has generally tried to suppress or ignore such dissident information." [10]

 

He calls the situation a "crisis for the reasonable members of the profession" of the space sciences; with so many alternative, even contradictory, versions of the BB model, "many of them fitting the evidence very badly." Furthermore, he was motivated to make his own appeal. A sincere outreach. ...

 

"At this point, I believe we must look for salvation from the non-specialists, amateurs and interdisciplinary thinkers —those who form judgments on the general thrust of the evidence, those who are skeptical about any explanation, particularly official ones ..." [10]

 

Halton Arp ends the preface of his book with these prophetic words:

 

"I believe a painfully honest debate is the only exercise capable of galvanizing meaningful change." [10]

 

 

And that "honest debate" with "meaningful change" has its roots in the cosmology debate that never happened!

* * * *       


Posted 2011 Oct
–C. Ranzan

Notes & References:

[1]  Hubble, E.  The Observational Approach to Cosmology, (Oxford Eng: Clarendon Press, 1937)

[2]  Singh, Simon. BIG BANG, The Origin of the Universe (Fourth Estate, Harper Collins Publishers, New York, 2004) p433-4

[3] Ibid. p463

[4]  The BB is an evolving universe; that is obvious. It is not obvious with the SS universe. The SS universe evolves in the sense that it is perpetually gaining matter as it expands (and there is no compensating loss!).

[5]  Great Debate I was between the idea of a single island universe and that of multiple island universes. It concerned the astronomical objects known as "nebulae". One side maintained that the nebulae lay within the Milky Way galaxy; the opposing side held the view that they were independent galaxies far beyond the Milky Way.
Great Debate II was between two versions of the expanding universe, the BB and the SS.
Great Debate III is between the expanding universe and the non-expanding universe.

[6]  Singh, Simon. BIG BANG, The Origin of the Universe (Fourth Estate, Harper Collins Publishers, New York, 2004) p481

[7]  Jean-Claude Pecker (Collège de France, Paris), Some Critiques of the Big Bang Cosmology J. Astrophys. Astr. (1997) 18, 323–333

[8]  DSSU is the acronym for the Dynamic Steady State Universe —the cosmology theory that holds that aether-space is dynamic and that aether-space expands and contracts regionally and equally resulting in a cosmic-scale cellularly-structured universe.

[9]  Darling, David. Gravity’s Arc, The Story of Gravity from Aristotle to Einstein and Beyond (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. 2006) p121

[10]  Arp, Halton. 1998. Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science

Posted 2011 Oct
–C.R.

 

4.   Has the Higgs Boson Been Discovery?

The Unreported Problem with the Higgs Boson

In July of 2012, physicists announced the first definitive evidence of a new high-mass particle claimed to be the long awaited Higgs boson. … After 50 years of searching, the Higgs just had to be found. The participants in the search had really only two options available to them: find the damn thing or admit (Oh no!) that the theory is wrong. Find something that might serve as the Higgs or admit that they, the elite in this esoteric field, were wrong. Imagine being wrong for the past 50 long years! This could easily span a physicist’s entire career. Better to find the Higgs, no matter what. Find the Higgs, keep face, keep the funds flowing, and somehow the mathematical theory will be made to work.

After 50 long years of searching, Physicists claim to have detected the Higgs boson, the ‘particle’ that ostensibly bestows the property of mass on all other such particles. Is it now time to celebrate? … Definitely not..

The question now is this: If the Higgs ‘particle’ is the giver of mass to all other particles, what then gives the Higgs itself its mass?! (Yes, the newly discovered particle has mass, lots of it!) A difficult and embarrassing question indeed. It is like asking: If God created everything, then who or what created God? While physicists think they have solved the mass problem, the reality is that they have unwittingly exposed an even bigger problem —the riddle of “First Cause”.

Meanwhile our DSSU reality-based physics continues to advance without it. –CR

Yes —Oh yes— the mathematics can always be counted on. It has been said that math describes all possible worlds. Mathematics, like magic, conjures up all possible cosmologies. Just look at what creative mathematics has accomplished with the solid, real-world, evidence of a cosmic redshift of the light from distant galaxies. Here's what creative mathematics did with some good data, a bad interpretation, and an ugly extrapolation. Follow me on this.  Take these three ingredients: (1) the cosmic redshift measurements (2) an wholly unnecessary interpretation (3) an extrapolation that is both unscientific and philosophically unsound. Apply some mathematical magic; then behold the resulting formulations —the mathematical universes known as the Big Bang universes (there are already numerous versions not to mention countless more possible versions). Astrophysicist/cosmologists continually proclaim the BB to be the truth; the uncritical believers simply believe. Meanwhile, problems abound, patches concocted, new speculations appended; yet the current research is to extrapolate even further and formulate multiverses!!!  Multiple simultaneous big bangs, of all things! (But that's another story —for another time.)

The mathematics has sustained a disastrously flawed cosmology ever since the 1920s. The same methodology will, no doubt, work for the Higgs model for mass acquisition.

So, celebrate the new particle, whatever it may be. Celebrate the security of the CERN funding. Celebrate the postponement of day of reckoning of the Higgs model. Give serious thought, however, to a rather obvious inconsistency. …

The BIG question now is this: If the Higgs ‘particle’ is the giver of mass to all other particles, what then gives the Higgs itself its mass?! (Yes, the newly discovered particle has mass, lots of it!) A difficult and embarrassing question indeed. It is like asking: if God created everything, then who or what created God? While physicists think they have solved the mass problem, the reality is that they have unwittingly exposed an even bigger problem —the riddle of “First Cause”.

What has been discovered is that there is a fatal flaw with the Higgs boson.

Why is all this so important to cosmology, the science of the universe? Why should something, the Higgs, supposedly residing in the tiny scale of particle physics, be relevant to the Universe, existing as it does on an unimaginably large scale? …

It is extremely important, for if you do not understand the cause of the property of mass, the Higgs being a mathematical concept unconnected to reality, then you will not understand the cause and mechanism of gravitation; and without the mechanism of gravitation there is no hope of understanding the intrinsic nature of the Cosmos —its inherent cellular structure.

The cause of mass, leads to a cause of gravity, leads to a three-process mechanism of gravity, which in turn leads to the structure of the universe. This sequitur-sequence of understanding leads to the elegantly natural Cosmos. It’s called the DSSU —the Dynamic Steady State Universe.

* * * *

Posted 2012 Sept
–C.Ranzan

 

2012 09


Top of page            Back to DSSU Home Page 

Copyright © 2005-2017
All rights reserved.
  C. Ranzan Email:
DSSUresearch@CellularUniverse.org
  Site updated: 17-04-23