The Big Bang Never Happened
Bill Gaede is a man who wants to draw a clear distinction between math and physics. In his view, the current crops of physicists are really mathematicians who have lost their ways by straying too far from realistic explanations of natural phenomena. The mathematicians championed such abstract concepts as zero form particles, particle-wave duality, and particle-mediate carriers of forces. Mr. Gaede's proposes a "rope hypothesis" which, in the case of gravity, the torsional force linking every bodies in the universe implies instantaneous actions at a distance. Viewed this way, if the Sun would suddenly disappear, the earth's movement would immediately fly off on a near straight line. The current belief is that it would take about 8 minutes for the earth to feel this effect.
The rope hypothesis partitions space into sets of preset gravitational potentials. If a celestial body is not present, there is immediately no potential on the other body. The rope hypothesis is a static concept, thus is free of a force mediator associated with a dynamical force field.
One video to another, we are led to the cases of black holes and the big bang. Mr. Gaede interviewed Stephen Crothers, a science dissident because, according to his web site, he was unjustly denied from earning his Ph.D. Mr. Crothers is a man who would run circles around most GR theorists. Remember here that we are discussing the pure theoretical foundation for the existence of black holes here. This means that Mr. Crothers is not a lightweight hand-waving theorist but a master in mathematical symbolic manipulation.
Mr. Crothers contends that the physics of singularities are wrong because:
1. In the Einstein's field equations,
Einstein Tensor (curvature of ST) = Energy Momentum Tensor (matter that causes g) (I)
In case of black hole,
right side = 0 (set by theorists, no source/matter) (II)
(I) reduces to Ricci = 0
Left side is field outside the body due to black hole.
But theorists already set source to not present. This is a contradiction.
In case of Schwartzschild ST, right side = 0, yet theorists maintain there's a source present. (III)
Then in the De Sitter ST, EMT present but no source. (IV)
(III) and (IV) contradicts.
In case of the Big Bang, Schwartzschild ST contains no matter, only a generalization of Minkowski ST (pure geometry object) => no bearing on Einstein's field equations.
Since EMT != 0 ...total energy of gravitation field == 0
So, it's impossible to localize gravitational energy => no gravitational waves.
Einstein's Tensor = EMT = 0 violates energy/momentum conservation. So...projects such as LIGO is in vain.
Einstein's fields equations are invalid ==> big bang cosmology is invalid.
It doesn't help that Einstein had doubt that physics can be based on the field concept. More recently, the icon of modern physics Roger Penrose also said that QM may be wrong.
I personally don't like the concept of infinite mass and zero dimension. My own theory is that all objects and systems of objects in the universe have some intrinsic angular momentum. The focal point of their orbits are the centers of mass. At any point in time, the bodies would fall toward the center of mass and miss. This is because the information about the center of mass travels at infinite speed -- or like Mr Gaede's rope hypothesis and principle of instantaneous action -- but the motion toward center of mass is not. By the time the bodies come close to the center of mass, a new center of mass has been conveyed and it is different from the previous.
Back to Mr. Gaede, he ended the video thinking the universe is a perpetual motion machine without a beginning and an end. I recall Prof. Michio Kaku's comment that to an ant, the earth may as well be two dimensional. Is it possible that we're just ants in the universe? Is the universe really infinite or it's just a result of our limited perception? the limit of our deductive reasoning? We can't really assume the state of things based on mere anthropocentric definitions alone.
2 comments:
o rly?
yarly
Post a Comment