| viXra.org > Relativity and Cosmology > 2609 |
 |
 |
| viXra.org > Relativity and Cosmology > 2609 |
|
|
[3] viXra:2609.0032 [pdf] submitted on 2026-09-12 06:56:25
Authors: Carl Littmann
Comments: 9 Pages.
In his book, ‘Opticks’, 1700, Newton made a respectable estimate for both ether’s pressure and density — the best up to about 1905, after which interest in ether sadly waned. Ether pressure is, in fact, the energy per volume in space, and thus is very fundamentally important. But this paper explains, sadly, how the scientists of the 1800’s largely failed to address ether’s pressure. I.e., not even appreciating ether’s causing the high-pressures near the center of the earth and inside more massive bodies. So, Einstein’s great (mc^2) was welcomed even more than otherwise. ((I also give my reasons for my own rough estimate of ether pressure of (10^+34) N/sq.m., (coincidentally, same as scientists use for inside neutron stars.) [1] And for my ether density estimate of (10^-20) Kg/cu.m., (consistent with the highest-to-lowest densities in Nature — roughly equaling the highest-to-lowest forces found in Nature).)) Some 1800’s scientists made good estimate of ether’s density. ((It is said of Einstein’s gravitational theory that "two adjacent bodies bend space more than otherwise". But my view is that the available space for ether flow is naturally more constricted between two close bodies, so ether’s flows must speed-up there to maintain flow continuity. And that causes the well-known ‘Venturi flow effect’ -- reduced pressure, a suction effect, ‘attraction’, i.e., known as ‘gravity’.))
Category: Relativity and Cosmology
[2] viXra:2609.0026 [pdf] submitted on 2026-09-11 20:43:44
Authors: Moshe Segal
Comments: 11 Pages.
Modern physics is caught in a profound conceptual schism between deterministic, continuous classical frameworks and probabilistic, discrete quantum mechanics. While recent advancements—such as Nicolas Gisin’s application of intuitionistic mathematics to classical mechanics [1] — might have provided some bridging of this gap by exposing classical physics as fundamentally probabilistic, they continue to rely on the static assumption of a fundamental, singular space-time background. This paper argues that space-time might not be a primary entity. Instead, this paper argues that what Humans perceive as space-time might only be an emergent cognitive interface used to interpret and explain energy interactions. To break the logical paradox of using a brain embedded in space-time to disprove space-time, this paper proposes that science must look for an internal algorithmic "bug" in the existing frameworks. This paper proposes a Charged Lense-Thirring Effect Experiment, which is designed to observe a possible anomaly in the spin-precession of a charged particle beam orbiting a rapidly rotating charge distribution, which, if this anomaly is detected, might also support the assumption that space-time might be a secondary property of localized energy interactions and a cognitive construct stemming from energetic interactions. This paper does not present that a successful implementation of the proposed experiment, will, by itself, assert that the space-time is not a primary entity. But this paper argues that a successful implementation of the proposed experiment, with possible successful implementations of additional properly proposed experiments, might support the already ongoing research endeavors to present the space-time as an emerging entity, which might conclude in a more reasonable view of the universe, and also resolve issues related to the existing view of the space-time as a primary entity.
Category: Relativity and Cosmology
[1] viXra:2609.0005 [pdf] submitted on 2026-09-03 04:06:45
Authors: Dave E. Dunstan
Comments: 4 pages. 3 Figures.
The Pantheon + SHOES data is interpreted using transformed coordinates with distances that have origin at the beginning of the Universe. Distances (R) taken from the beginning of the Universe (R~0 and t~0) increase toward Earth and reveal a Newtonian Gravitational redshift (z<0.1). Distances determined in this way are the inverse of the luminosity distances measured from Earth. The revised coordinate frame yields a 1/R dependence of the redshift consistent with a Newtonian gravitational redshift. An alternative to the Hubble-Lemaitre expanding Universe is presented. The alternative Universe suggested is determined by Gravity, is static in size and contains Galaxies that show a Gaussian distribution of velocities. This is the model of the Universe first considered by Einstein.
Category: Relativity and Cosmology
| Third-Party Links: |
|