Understanding the Expansion of the Universe:

Soumendra Nath Thakur

28-07-2024

Abstract

The expansion of the universe is commonly interpreted within the framework of general relativity as the stretching of the fabric of space-time. However, this interpretation is not empirically valid. Observable cosmic expansion is better understood as an increase in the distances between galaxies, driven by the repulsive effects of dark energy, which contrasts with the gravitational effects that typically pull objects together in classical mechanics. This perspective emphasizes changes in the positions and distances of matter rather than alterations in the structure of space-time itself.

Keywords: Galactic recession, Increased galactic distance, Dark energy, Cosmological expansion, Observable Universe, Classical Mechanics,

The expansion of the universe refers to the observation that galaxies are moving away from each other, which implies that the distances between them are increasing over time. This concept is often visualized as the stretching of the fabric of space itself, particularly within the framework of general relativity. However, this interpretation of space-time fabric expanding is not empirically valid for two main reasons:

1. Observable Cosmic Expansion: The measurable expansion of the universe is observed as an increase in the distance between galaxies. This phenomenon can be attributed to the effects of dark energy, which exerts a repulsive force (anti-gravitational effect) causing galaxies to move apart. This is different from gravitational effects that draw objects together, as understood in classical mechanics.

2. Nature of Expansion: The concept of an expanding fabric of space-time suggests a dynamic change in the underlying structure of space and time, which is a theoretical construct in the relativistic framework. However, the observable evidence points to the increasing distances between objects (such as galaxies) rather than an expansion of space-time itself. This distinction emphasizes that the empirical observations are more aligned with changes in positions and distances of matter rather than alterations in the space-time continuum.

Thus, the cosmological expansion is better understood as the increasing separation of galaxies driven by dark energy rather than an expansion in the fabric of space-time.

#GalacticRecession #IncreasedGalacticDistance #DarkEnergy #CosmologicalExpansion #ObservableUniverse #ClassicalMechanics

Measuring Distances of Celestial Bodies Using Infrared Signals

In smaller scales, parallax is used directly to find the distance of celestial bodies (stars) from Earth (geocentric parallax) and from the Sun (heliocentric parallax). Visible light is used in parallax measurements. Parallax is effective over relatively small scales.

However, observing galaxies as old as the universe involves much larger scales, and visible light cannot reach us beyond a certain distance. This is because the shorter wavelengths of visible light are scattered by dust, vapor, and gases. Therefore, infrared signals with longer wavelengths are used to observe distant objects such as ancient galaxies. The longer wavelengths of infrared signals can penetrate dusty or gaseous environments.

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) uses near-infrared and mid-infrared cameras to observe very distant galaxies.

The above image shows the respective distances corresponding to the increased wavelengths of infrared signals, helping to determine the distances of galaxies based on the wavelengths of the signals received. Additionally, the expansion of space increases these wavelengths further, in addition to the normal increment with light-travelled distance.

Furthermore, by analysing these signals using a spectrograph—an instrument that disperses electromagnetic radiation into a spectrum and photographs or maps it—we can understand the composition of the observed object. The spectrograph converts signals according to their frequencies and corresponding wavelengths.

Therefore, by measuring the wavelengths of these signals, the distance to the object can be determined, not by using the parallax of visible light but by using infrared.

#InfraredSignals #JWST #JamesWebbSpaceTelescope #Spectrograph #GalacticDistances

Dr Louis Essen Rejects Einstein’s Relativity Theory:

These points encapsulate Essen’s main criticisms and provide insight into why he rejected Einstein’s theory of relativity.

1. Relativity as Not a Scientific Theory:

• Contradictory Assumptions: Essen argues that relativity is not a coherent scientific theory but a collection of contradictory assumptions and mistakes.

• Clock Paradox: Essen criticizes the thought experiment leading to the clock paradox, claiming it results from a fundamental mistake.

2. Measurement Units and Disciplines:

• Units of Measurement: According to Essen, Einstein lacked understanding of the units and disciplines of measurement, leading to an inconsistent theory of measurement.

• Absolute Standards: A valid theory of measurement requires absolute standards, which relativity theory denies, making it inherently contradictory.

3. Thought Experiment Mistakes:

• Equator vs. Poles Clock: Essen points out an error in Einstein’s 1905 paper where a clock at the equator is said to run slow compared to one at the poles, which is a misinterpretation validated by incorrect experimental models like Hafele-Keating.

4. Experimental Evidence:

• Marginal Effects: Essen criticizes the reliability of experiments supporting relativity, such as Eddington’s 1919 eclipse experiment and the 1972 Hafele-Keating atomic clock experiment, stating that the observed effects are marginal and not definitive evidence.

5. Sociological Issues in Science:

• Harm to Reputation: Essen admits that criticizing relativity could harm one’s professional career due to peer pressure within the scientific community.

• Manipulation of Results: Essen suggests that scientists might manipulate results to confirm accepted theories rather than disprove them.

6. Logical Consistency:

• Internal Consistency: A valid scientific theory must be internally consistent and logically sound, which Essen believes relativity is not.

• Empirical Verification: Essen argues that relativity fails to incorporate a consistent theory of measurement and cannot be empirically verified, making it pseudo-scientific rather than a true physical science.

7. Conclusion:

• Pseudo-Science: Relativity is labelled as pseudo-science by Essen due to its lack of empirical verifiability and logical consistency in measurement theory.

Reference: Dr Louis Essen Inventor Of Atomic Clock Rejects Einstein’s Relativity Theory by Harry Ricker, August 28, 2019

#ContradictoryAssumptions #ClockParadox #MeasurementUnits #ExperimentalEvidence #PseudoScience

Re-evaluating the Interpretation of Atomic Clock Experiments and Time Dilation

Dear Mr. Peter Jackson, 

I appreciate your engagement and your efforts to test and verify the findings of Hafele and Keating. However, I have reasons to accept that there is a fundamental misunderstanding in the interpretation of the results and the nature of time dilation.

Your statement, "Atomic oscillation speed changes under acceleration," is indeed an important observation. However, this change in oscillation speed is due to physical factors affecting the oscillator, not an inherent dilation of time itself. My previous response detailed how experiments with piezoelectric crystal oscillators demonstrate that changes in wavelength correspond to changes in time intervals, leading to time distortions. This suggests that what is often interpreted as time dilation is actually a result of physical deformations and wavelength shifts.

Consider the following points:

1. Piezoelectric Crystal Oscillators: As mentioned, experiments show that a 1° phase shift on a 5 MHz wave corresponds to a time shift of 555 picoseconds. This illustrates how physical changes in the oscillator can affect time measurements, leading to distortions that are misinterpreted as time dilation.

2. GPS Time Delay: The caesium-133 atomic clock in GPS satellites experiences a time delay of about 38 microseconds per day due to its altitude and velocity. This delay can be attributed to wavelength dilation caused by gravitational and relativistic effects, not a direct dilation of time itself.

3. Hafele and Keating Experiment: The changes observed in the atomic clocks on the commercial airliner can be explained by considering the physical conditions and deformations affecting the clocks. These include mechanical stresses, temperature variations, and other environmental factors that influence the oscillation rates of the clocks, not an inherent dilation of time itself. It's important to note that the Hafele and Keating experiment is not included in the original relativity paper. The original relativity paper does not provide experimental evidence for time dilation.

4. Mechanical Deformation and Wavelength Shifts: Changes under acceleration lead to mechanical deformation, which in turn causes wavelength shifts. These shifts result in time distortions, which are mistakenly interpreted as time dilation.

Your conclusion that "Atomic oscillation speed changes under acceleration" aligns with these observations, but it does not necessarily support the concept of time dilation. Instead, it highlights the importance of considering physical deformations and wavelength shifts in understanding time distortions.

In conclusion, while the observations from the Hafele and Keating experiment and your own tests are valid, they do not inherently prove time dilation. Instead, they demonstrate the need to account for physical factors affecting oscillators and the resulting time distortions. I encourage a re-evaluation of these results with this perspective in mind.

FYI Pardeep Rana Gary Stephens Abdul Malek

Best regards,

Soumendra Nath Thakur

The names 'quanta' and 'photon' :

Quanta

Before 1900, the term "quanta" (singular "quantum") was used to describe particles or amounts of various quantities, including electricity. The significant shift in its usage came in 1900 when the German physicist Max Planck was studying black-body radiation. Planck suggested that experimental observations, especially at shorter wavelengths, could be explained if the energy within a molecule was a "discrete quantity composed of an integral number of finite equal parts," which he termed "energy elements."

In 1905, Albert Einstein built upon Planck's idea while studying light-related phenomena such as black-body radiation and the photoelectric effect. Einstein proposed that these phenomena could be better explained by modelling electromagnetic waves as consisting of spatially localized, discrete wave-packets. He called these wave-packets "light quanta."

Photon

The term "photon" derives from the Greek word for light. It was initially suggested as a unit related to the illumination of the eye and the resulting sensation of light. This term was used in a physiological context by several scientists:

1916: American physicist and psychologist Leonard T. Troland.

1921: Irish physicist John Joly.

1924: French physiologist René Wurmser.

1926: French physicist Frithiof Wolfers.

Although Wolfers's and Lewis's theories were contradicted by many experiments and not widely accepted, the term "photon" gained popularity. Arthur Compton used "photon" in 1928, referring to Gilbert N. Lewis, who coined the term in a letter to Nature on 18 December 1926. Despite earlier uses of the term, it was Lewis's coinage that became widely adopted among physicists.

#Quanta #Photon