This letter is being sent to professors of Astronomy around the world

To Professors/mentors of: Physics, other Sciences, and Astronomy:

Astronomy could be included with Physics and other Sciences, only when postulations that are provable and consistent with the laws of physics are used to explain discoveries. Such progress is essential for dispelling all types of myths, which are the underlying obstructions to world peace. Astronomy and Science in general, will become more credible to the world population, and then we can go forward towards disseminating the principles of science. (Logical deductions only with proven facts, and repeatable, verifiable phenomena)

With this objective in mind, I sincerely believe you will find this website intriguing, challenging and informative. Type into your browser window:

http://newuniversetheory.com/

Subsequent to viewing this site, your and your students’ thoughts will be appreciated. Comments will not be quoted without permission. Please send to the email address on page 03 of the site.

With due respect and regards,

Bobby McGehee

Welcome to BAUT, Bobby McGehee!

It seems that you have come to the right place, in terms of having your ideas on astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology discussed - BAUT is avowedly scientific in its approach.

However, we are somewhat different from other internet discussion fora that you have have familiarity with, so to make your time here rewarding and enjoyable, may I suggest that these rules be on your reading list? In particular, we are a special rule that addresses ideas such as those you have posted in your initial BAUT post (see section 13).

As your ideas are, per your own website, non-mainstream, I am moving this thread to the ATM section.

No, Bobby, I find your website boring and misinforming. I think it's pretty obvious why you have decided to bypass normal scientific publication processes - no one would publish such a flawed proposal. So you're just looking to sell your book. I don't think you're going to get very far with that. You probably should have stuck with engineering - a field you might know something about.

__________________
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

but are the flaws specificly?

Bobby, you're a NUT! I can't believe I missed that, but you put it right up on the banner of your webpage.

Good luck with that!

Hard to tell; he doesn't really explain his "theory", you'll just have to buy his book to find out. And that I refuse to do, as does Cougar, I'm sure.

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.

ok I never even heard of this tern before "positroniums" it just seems to be a made up word. I wish i knew how to have smilie face hitting his head against a wall.

Davidlpf. Positronium is an electron and a positron in mutual electrostatic orbit. The positron replaces the proton in hydrogen (protium). Unstable. Annihilates to two gammas at 180 degrees, or three at 120 degrees.Pete

__________________
A third rate theory forbids
A second rate theory explains after the fact
A first rate theory predicts...A. Lomonosov

Well, I don't know what it is supposed to be in this context but here is positronium:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium

A positronium atom (made of an electron and a positron) is just a tad unstable. The is on the full smilies list in the editor.

(Edited to add: And I see trinitree answered between the time I wrote this and was able to get back to the computer to post it. Ah, well.)

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

sounds like a virtual pair, just did not hear the name before thanks for both.

From the website at the end of the link in the OP, I read: "an outward progressing spherical 'shell' chain reaction process that converts primordial matter made of the most elementary of particles (positroniums) into high energy gamma rays."

What is the rate of progress of this "spherical 'shell' chain reaction process" today? Or, if this question is nonsensical, in which epoch of the universe's history would such a question have made sense?

What is the relationship between "positroniums" and quarks, leptons, neutrinos, and the force carrying bosons?

What is the energy range of the "high energy gamma rays" that "positroniums" are converted into?

actually Bobby its up to you too at "least" present your fundamentals of your theory so that it is open to discussion here otherwise, I quite frankly think you fear discussion.

if as Celestial Mechanic suggests I have to by the book in order to understand your theory, I'm not buying it either.

so at least present something!!

From the page:

Anyone care to explain this? Well I guess hit-and-run poster Bobby will have to explain this. Red-shift is valid for receeding galaxies, but then it is not valid in the BB theory.

But this is just a book plug, and I doubt we will here again from Bobby McGee (or you and me)

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )

Not quite. AFAIK, the positron and electron in positronium are not necessary created together, i.e. from quantum foam. Virtual pairs are a different phenomenon, and are virtual, whereas the particles in positronium are real.

You are correct, my subject (New Universe Theory with Laws of Physics) is not mainstream, but it should be and will be in due time.

Hello to Nereid, You are correct, my subject (New Universe Theory with Laws of Physics) is not mainstream, but it should be, and will be in due time. All of my theory is consistent with the Laws of PHysics, and the Big Bang is not.

We have seen the theory of the big bang (for free) and seen that it works.
It does not create something out of nothing, the BB is only about the expansion of the universe, it does not say what created it, so it does not conflict with thermodynamics like your website says.

We have seen noting from your theory (for which we have to pay), apart from some dubious questions and quotes on your website. You will have to do better than that, to plug your book here and get us to buy it.

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )

Reply to Cougar. Thanks for your thoughts. The reason I published as I did was that 1, I refused to surrender all copyrights. 2, I want to keep the accessability/availability cost affordable for all readers. (Paperback available for under $20, and hardback for under $30 compared to comperable publishings priced at over $60. I do not expect to recover my publishing costs) My website may be boring to some, but it is not misinforming. If you think so please be specific and I will discuss it with you.

Tusenfem: The first law of thermodynamics states that 'matter cannot be created or destroyed'. Your nsecond statement says the universe was created !

Celestial Mechanic: The theory is about conversion of pre-universe primordial matter into the matter of the universe, occurring at the speed of light in a direction away from its start point (now the center of the universe), and decelerating thereafter. There is no "dark energy" and deceleration is by transfering of linear momentum to angular momentum. The observable universe is rampid with angular momentum. If you cannot afford to purchase the book or download a <$5 electronic copy, send me a personal email and I will send you a complementary copy.