Hi Tim Thompson

When I stated ... Why assume that self-gravity prevents stars and galaxies from expanding?

You said “It's not an assumption, it's a derived result.”

I checked out your reference and while interesting it has a number of flaws. Besides the lack of an extra dimension of time, there are a number of conceptual flaws. One is that the dark energy which is driving the “acceleration” is from somewhere else. The energy is extracted from our own universe. All systems loose energy with the expansion of space.

Quintessence has not garnered much support, just look at how complex the relationships are. Compare them to my proposed relationships

Ratios of Time
D2/D1 = (T2 /T1) ^ (2/3)
V2/ V1 = (T1/T2) ^(1/3)
E2/ E1 = (T1/T2) ^(2/3)
"G2/G1" = (T1/T2) ^(4/3)


It is possible to describe the basic idea of my proposed theoretical model in just one or two sentences. The uniform expansion of space conforms to a specific geometric structure of space and time; matter itself is part of the expansion.

Try to do that with Quintessence in terms an ordinary person is going to understand.

If one is going to try and describe reality, the most accurate and the simplest is usually correct.

Please also bear in mind that the proposed theory also corresponds to observation. When I say that the uniform expansion of space includes matter, the relationships are theoretically verified and experimentally confirmed, as I will be systematically proving in the course of the next few months.

I will be posting a series of papers validating the relationships and resolving some unsolved problems. I will be posting one soon on Iron plasma in the sun. The iron in the sun issue will probably not garner too much support right now since it conflicts with the mainstream view. Fortunately I am presenting this theory and making predictions at a time where increasing resolution of the interior of the sun will eventually affirm the assertion. Another issue I will be resolving is the image size problems of quasars. (They tend to appear to vary in image size only by a factor of two despite a wide range of red shift determined distances.)

Eventually someone is going to start to agree with me. I already have one graduate student with a PhD in physics agreeing that the model is mathematically consistent. (But he still will not accept the model, no reason given. I think it will take a particularly courageous physicist to be the first to support the ideas)

snowflake