Our Sun Exploded
As noted earlier, the energy production in the young universe was dramatically greater. If the energy output from quasars is just accelerated stellar physics, then that means our Sun experienced this accelerated rate of evolution. If the variation in the energy output from quasars is from miniature stars exploding in vast chain reactions, it is highly probable that our sun was once part of this process. If this did happen there should be evidence of this.

1. Professor O.K Manuel, a nuclear chemist, has had the opportunity to test some of the samples of material from the moon. He discovered an isotope of “strange xenon” . From the samples he determined that the only way this element could exist is if the sun blew up about 5 billion years ago. http://www.aas.org/publications/baas...s/S025003.html When he presented his findings at an American Astronomical Society meeting, his work was largely ignored. The major problem is that if a star explodes there is nothing left. There would be no planets, only a vast expanding gas spewed out across space. However, in this model, if the sun did explode about 5 billion years ago, then the size of the sun would have been about 10 percent of what it is now, based on my calculations using the Uniform Expansion Model. The explosion would be much smaller and a vast cloud of material representing the remaining 90 percent of the matter in the solar system would have helped muffle the blast.
2. Bode’s law shows that the orbit of each planet roughly doubles sequentially from the Sun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodes_law While there is a gap in the sequence between Mars and Jupiter, there is the asteroid belt. Critics of the implication that Bodes law is actually significant point to the fact that the material in the asteroid belt is way too small to make up a planet. However, 5 billion years ago, when the Sun blew up, the size of the planets would have been much smaller and most of the material would still be flying around in fragments and gas. Destroying what would have been the core of a planet stopped the formation of the planet. The lack of planetary amounts of matter would be expected in the Uniform Expansion Model.
3. The evidence of intense crater formation well after the formation of the planets needs some kind of source for meteorites. An exploding sun would do the trick.
4. The discovery of planets around other stars has revealed that most of them have gaseous planets close to the mother star. Why not our solar system? If the Sun blew up 5 billion years ago, it would have stripped the atmosphere off all the interior planets and blown the gasses to the outer planets.
5. The distribution of heavy elements on the surface of the Earth is primarily the result of meteor impact. Presently the Earth has a thin solid crust, but once it was all a hot molten mass. Heavy elements sink. Heavy elements requires a star to explode, the best source of such elements is to have the sun explode and then have the enriched matter rain back down on to the surface of a cooling planet or moon.
6. The distribution of the angular momentum of the solar system only makes sense if the sun blew up. According to the nebular cloud theory, all the planets and sun formed out of a nebular cloud. One characteristic of such a cloud is that eventually all the material in the cloud moves as on large distributed mass with no one particular piece moving faster or slower than its neighbor. If they did not move together, collisions would occur and each collision would distribute and even out the motion of the cloud. As the planets and sun form, the angular momentum of the system would be preserved for each region in which the planets formed. An analysis of the distribution of the angular momentum of our solar system shows that somehow most of the angular momentum has been displaced to Jupiter. This can be explained by having a rapidly rotating Sun explode and disperse its angular momentum out to the outer planets.
Water on Mars
The evidence of water on Mars is extensive. There is evidence of seas, lakes, rivers, and streams. It rained on Mars.

The surface gravity on Mars is about 38 percent of Earth’s. Its surface gravity is so weak that all the atmosphere on Mars has been lost in space. If it were possible to pull a switch and change the effect of gravity on Earth to that found on Mars, the density of the atmosphere would be close to that found on the top of Mount Everest. At this density it becomes impossible to form rain clouds, the only reason there is snow on Mt Everest is that it is blown up from lower elevations.

This raises the question as to how could rain clouds ever form on Mars?

What combination of gasses can possibly cause it to rain water? There is currently no model that I have been able to find that explains how this is possible.

However the Uniform Expansion theory does explain this since the effect of gravity is a function of time. In a 10 billion year old universe when the universe was 3 billion years old, the effect of gravity would be increased by 5 times (A2/A1 == (T1/T2)^(4/3) = (3/10)^(4/3) = .2.) . 5 times .38 = 1.9 times the surface gravity of the Earth.

This raises a problem. As time passes, the effect of gravity on Earth will not be strong enough to hold on to its atmosphere, and it will become like Mars. A thinner atmosphere cannot carry as much water. It is interesting to note that the Earth was once quite and wet. It was not that long ago that the Sahara Desert was forested. (Go back far enough and the Sahara Desert was located closer to the South Pole and was glaciated). Could the drying of the Earth be a process that is being felt today?

Stars older than Universe
It takes time for a star to burn all its initial fuel of hydrogen. Once this is done, the star begins a new phase in which it expands dramatically. The time it takes for this process to occur takes billions of years. There are a group of stellar physicists that have determined that it appears that some stars in globular clusters are older than the universe. Stars Older than Universe This thread shows that a rather significant minority believe this is a real problem. All the papers reviewed precludes a flat universe with an age of 2/3 1/Ho. How can this be resolved? If the effect of gravity were more powerful in the past than this is no problem. Stars would evolve much more quickly than assumed.

Galaxies born before the Universe began
There is evidence of high red shift galaxies with high concentrations of metals. A High red shift implies a young age, the galaxy is observed very far in the past. Evidence of metals implies an old age since it takes a star a lifetime of billions of years to form these heaver elements. For this to happen these galaxies would have to exist before the universe began. Critics of the Big Bang often use this example to argue for a steady state model. The increased rate of stellar evolution due to the early effect of gravity is not enough to resolve this issue. However, if such a high red shift galaxy was also in motion away from us early in the evolution of the universe, this would induce a Doppler shift, and it would increase the amount of expansion. Allowing a galaxy to be moving fast enough to generate this kind of red shift is not possible in the limited expansion model since there is no evidence of galaxies moving anywhere near this fast now. The Uniform Expansion model does allow early galaxies to be in motion, since the expansion of spacetime draws of the kinetic energy of all objects, so any object observed recently show little evidence of the early high speed motion.

No time dilation observed in the energy variation in quasars
The expansion of spacetime expands the duration of events. Quasars show a variation in the energy output lasting days, weeks and even years. There is a pattern to this energy variation. The pattern should show signs of time dilation in relation to the observed cosmological red shift; they do not. Most quasars have a red shift factor of about 2, so quasars with a red shift greater than that should have the energy variation periods stretched out. Those with a red shift less than two should have a shorter period. This is not observed; the energy variation periods are almost linear.

The answer to this is issue is to consider the clock rates predicted by the uniform expansion theory and allow the same Doppler effect due to real or “peculiar” motion that was used to explain how a very high red shift galaxy can have metals.

Clock rates

A quasar in motion towards us is older than the quasar moving away by the difference in the relative time that separates the two quasars. The older quasar has a slower clock rate. The younger star has a faster clock rate. Also, the Doppler effect means the quasar moving away is not as far away as thought, and a quasar moving towards us is not as close as thought. This shrinks the expected time dilation.

The net effect is no observed time dilation for the energy variation in quasars.

Quasars interacting with Galaxies
Also, allowing quasars to have real or peculiar motion of various rates allows some of the higher relativistic speed quasars to catch up to their more quickly evolving stationary galaxies. Combined with the increased effect of gravity results in a few quasars interacting with galaxies.

Quasar Distribution curve
The distribution curve of quasars is a bell shape curve that peaks at a z of 2 and is stretched out at higher red shifts and is compressed at lower red shifts. This apparently corresponds to the above time dilation effects. (I have only looked at a few quasars to see if this is true)

Continued
Neat things about the theory.