I was thrilled when I heard that our spacecraft are slowing down as they travel further away from us, because this was one of the predictions from a model for the universe which I have thought to be true for years. The model predicted a slow-down, but the slow-down would be very small where the spacecraft are now. I did not expect that it would be observable in this way.

The model explains red shifts, the shape of galaxies, and might even account for observations that are currently attributed to dark matter.

For a model to be seriously considered, it must be compatible with what is observed in astronomy. Predictions based on the model should be consistent with observations which we can now make. If a model makes predictions which future observations show to be true, then the model gains credibility.

Please be patient with me as I explain the model. As I first start to explain the model, there will be some very obvious concerns, but these issues are addressed and the model does become consistent with itself and with observations. Please review the entire model before judging it.

I am familiar with special relativity and some of the basics of general relativity, and I have worked with tensor analysis many years ago.

Classical physics works very well to explain the orbits of planets and moons and our spacecraft, and to get us to the moon and back. Relativity refines our models, making them more accurate. As the distance between two objects is doubled, the gravitational attraction between them is one-forth. As two objects are moved further apart from each other, the gravitational attraction is greater than what existing models would expect.

Within our own solar system, existing models for gravity work very well, however, they become inaccurate as the distance increases between two objects. The greater the distance between two objects, the less accurate existing models for gravity become, and the greater the distance between them, the greater the disparity between the actual gravitational attraction between the objects and the attraction that is predicted by existing models.

By now, some serious concerns and objections are already forming in the minds of those who are knowledgeable in astronomy and physics. Wouldn’t that diminish or obliterate the possibilities of having a red shift if the gravity is too strong at a distance? Be patient with me. Wait until I have finished describing the model before judging it. These concerns will be addressed.

As distance increases, the gravitational attraction increases more and more over what is predicted by existing models, and over great distances, gravity may even become fiercely attractive.

The red shift, instead of being caused by galaxies receding from us, would be caused by the transverse Doppler Effect. The earth would be located near the center of gravity for the entire universe. The further the galaxies are from earth, the faster they would move in orbit around the center of gravity for the universe.

As the galaxies move, perpendicular to us, moving at great speeds causes time to slow down for the stars, resulting in a red shift which is observed on earth.

The speed of the galaxies at great distances, orbiting around the center of gravity for the universe, would be phenomenal, absolutely incredible. It would be far greater than what would be required for the galaxies to be simply receding.

In order for the galaxies to be in a stable orbit, it requires an incredible amount of attraction between the galaxies and the center of gravity for the universe.

For such an incredible amount of attraction to exist at such great distances, a small change in the percentage of the distance results in a considerable change in the attraction. Thus, circular orbits would be stable, but elliptical orbits would not. In fact, circular orbits become rather strictly enforced by gravity. One possibility is that gravity eventually increases with distance instead of decreasing. Maybe that happens, but maybe not. If so, as a galaxy would deviate from a circular orbit and come closer to the center, gravity would be reduced causing it to travel further out. If it deviates away from the center, gravitational attraction would increase causing it to travel closer to the center. Thus, circular orbits become the most stable, perhaps strictly enforced by gravity.

I do not know if gravity would change so much with distance that, over great distances, further distances would actually increase the amount of gravity or if the change in gravity would be less drastic than that.

Elliptical orbits, such as those of comets, can actually have two focus points, not at the center, but more towards the edges of the orbits. If changes in gravity were to start to show on a scale of a galaxy, then when looking at a galaxy with the plane facing us (not with the plane at an angle) a stable galaxy would be circular. An elliptical galaxy with an observable focus point not at the center of the galaxy probably would not be observed.

It actually is quite easy to build a chart giving some information about the strength of the gravity at different distances, based on observations. Assuming the earth is near the gravitational center of the universe, and assuming the red shift is due to transverse Doppler, use special relativity to calculate the speed of the galaxies at different distances. Take a look at the curve, showing the change in gravity with distance, and also take into account the slowing down of our spacecraft. Now there still is a huge gap of data in the middle, at the galactic level, but the chart can give us some ideas of the change in gravity at the galactic level. From there, it is possible to see if the changes in gravity could account for what previously has been attributed to dark matter.

Such a universe would actually have a boundary. At great distances, the speed of the galaxies orbiting the center would need to be so great that it would reach the speed of light. Since matter usually can not travel that fast, matter would not be expected beyond that boundary. But if matter would exist beyond that boundary, it would be strongly attracted towards us.

Obviously, this model conflicts with the big bang model. The question should not be whether the model conflicts with the big bang model, but rather whether it conflicts with observations we can make of the universe.

When two models conflict with each other, which model more closely matches what is observed? Sometimes, some models work in one situation and a conflicting model works in another. Sometimes one model would far outshine others, causing others to be disregarded. The model I have suggested is completely incompatible with the big bang model. The two can not be true at the same time.

I do believe that the only factor affecting the red shift is the motion of the galaxies. It is important, however, to consider another possibility. Time might slow down more the further a galaxy is positioned away from the center of the universe, even without the galaxy moving. I do not believe such is happening, but I do need to bring it out as a possibility.