Chuckg Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 From Howard Tayler's blog, for those of you who have more mathematics than I, presented without comment. He's linking to another post he saw on Slashdot. The original website that started all this discussion is here. An excerpt of his commentary: A Schlocker emailed me a link to this PDF which describes a “solution†to some of the underlying cosmological puzzles of our day — puzzles which we’ve fudged solutions for using Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and singularities. I think I can follow about 20% of it. Some of you can follow more. A few of you might be able to wrap your heads around the whole thing. (Yes, this got slashdotted — I suppose you could wade through the comments over there to try and make more sense of it, but that’s as hard on my brain as any mathematics ever were.) The conclusions suggested by the geometric spacetime model are pretty stunning: 1) the Universe is not between 12 and 14 billion years old. It’s pretty much eternal. 2) There was no “Big Bang.†3) There is no “Dark Matter†or “Dark Energy.†4) Red shift of distant galaxies is not caused by movement, but by a difference between their time vector and ours. 5) From our point of view, there is a “cosmological horizon†(see page 28 of the PDF), beyond which we cannot see. Any objects on time vectors offset from ours by 90 degrees or more are invisible from here 6) Black holes are not singularities, and do not locally conserve energy. They feed white holes (the cores of active galaxies) that are 180 degrees removed from the black hole’s local time vector. 7) We need more data (MUCH more data) in order to confirm the validity of the new model. If all of this sounds like science fiction, well, that’s because I’m a science-fiction writer. Good. It’s working. Go check out the PDF — it reads more like real science, and the math will give you a good scare. But there are pictures, so we all ought to be okay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edsel Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 Re: Geometric Spacetime Can't twist head around warped theories... Neurons rebelling... Snap! Evil man make Edsel's brain hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckg Posted February 6, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 Re: Geometric Spacetime Hey, even if it's actually as fallacious as phlogiston, you could still do some wicked fun science *fiction* campaigns with this thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 Re: Geometric Spacetime Or even space-traveling Champions game arcs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest daeudi_454 Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Re: Geometric Spacetime Wow...so much possibility, so much deviation, so much bad math.... While any single formula in this thing is correct, none of them relate to each other in any coherent fashion. It's like saying that since 2+2=4 and 42/12=3, then he has solved i (square root of -1). Time vectors is an interesting concept, but flawed. There is sufficient math to show that time is scalar and radial. However, string theory does allow for time to also be in different wavelengths or bands. But that has no bearing on the size of the universe, but it could account for the missing mass. a simplified version of wavelength time is in the "Good News for Time Travelers" thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hisho Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Re: Geometric Spacetime Mhm... can't get the pdf or the original site (forbidden at the moment) but all this sounds familiar, somehow I remember a theory that sounds similar from the short list he gave on this blog. http://www.quantum-vortex.com/quantum_vortex/quantum_vortex.htm It's the quantum vortex theory, understand all the fundamentals of the universe without the math. At least the 180 degree part and the "there is no dark matter" part sound familiar. I think that this site is at least a good read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.