|
Above is a diagram of how the universe might work, if we follow the natural pattern of how things operate in the real world. I will make it clear that this is not how I am saying the universe does operate, I am just postulating that this model fits all the parameters for how it could.
It starts with the premise that our universe, indeed all stable universes, of which there may be an infinite number, exist as zones of energy sandwiched between two other universes that possess different energy states. These energy states are a function of their position relative to each other. The lower (energy) state universe resides closer to the centre, and has lower rotational energy because it is turning more slowly. It is probably best to visualise this, as above, in the form of a rotating disk, although the actual 3-D form is of bubbles within bubbles, or even toroids within toroids, where the outer edge, since it is travelling further in the same period of time, is moving faster (has more energy) than the inner part which is moving slower.
Picture also that we are dealing with a fluid construct, like a plasma, that has, over time, split itself into zones
partitioned by fluid boundaries where the energy density is high enough to separate the structure into rings. For this picture the rings of Saturn. The spaces between these rings are universes. Picture next, that the rotating bubbles have drifted slightly off-centre, relative to each other, creating zones where universes have drifted closer together and zones where they are further apart.
Now we can set about providing a potential explanation for one of the mysteries that is currently confronting astrophysicists and explain it in the much more simple terms of the universal pattern.
The universe is expanding as result of the 'big bang'. Therefore, a number of things should be happening, but aren't. One key and confirmed observational fact (reached through red-shift measurement) is that if the 'big bang' theory is correct the older galaxies at the edge of the universe should be losing energy and their velocities should be reducing as their initial energy is dissipated over time. However, quite the opposite, they are speeding up. This fact has baffled scientists and in response they have invented 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' as a means to balance their mathematical equations. This has created another problem, having since invented the concepts of dark energy and dark matter, scientists have, despite spending millions of hours and billions of dollars, been unable to prove the existence of either.
Our universe did not come from a big bang but from the formation of a new bubble, resultant of the rotational spin of all the universes. Our universe is the space between a higher energy zone and a lower energy zone. The only universal constant for all the universes is 'time', and that constant is only true in terms of your position in both the energy structure of all the universes as well as the universe where you are physically located. When we talk of time, we talk of our position in our rotational cycle relative to where we were in the past. The universe is not expanding or contracting, we are rotating within bubble.
The older galaxies, which we observe
to be speeding up, when they should be slowing down, according to big bang, are in fact speeding up, relative to our observational viewpoint, possibly because they have entered an energy zone where the space between our universe and the next upper energy level universe has narrowed. Because time is the only constant, the narrowing of this energy space concentrates the energy levels, and increases their velocity, in the same way that we can speed up the flow of a liquid using a venturi tube, or increase the flow rate of water by sending it through a narrower pipe. However, in the case of the universe, because time is a constant, the physical mass is accelerated without a resultant build-up in back pressure.
The long and short of it is, that if we speculate on the rotational nature of the universe, relative to our position in the cycle of rotation, this would explain why the older galaxies are speeding up and not slowing.
It would, however, also completely refute the big bang version.
What about Albert Einstein, and his Theory of General Relativity?
This rotational concept actually fits Einstein's theory of general relativity extremely well, in that it confirms that the faster you are moving, the slower time passes, relative to a stationary observer. The higher the velocity (time/energy state) the further in a higher spin direction you are located in the energy bubble. Again, if you visualise this as a flat disc, the centre of the disc is moving relatively slower than the outside edge, meaning that the further out you move the slower time appears to move, relative to your original stationary position. Time being a constant, though, means that no matter where you are on the energy disc, for you, one second in time remains exactly the same but, in relation, is shorter for someone observing from a lower energy zone.
Where this concept might vary from Einstein's is that it incorporates a variance in spin speeds of atomic matter as you move from lower energy zones into higher energy zones. This would mean that at a fixed stationary point the speed of light would vary little, however the speed of light would increase radically, in relative terms, as you entered areas of higher spin, although for an observer within the higher energy zone, it would appear that light speed has remained a constant. From an observer at the stationary starting point, relative light speed would appear to have increased radically.
Therefore, it follows on, that from a fixed point in space, if atomic spin-speed determines the local speed of light, as you approach the higher energy edge of our local universe, there might be no limit to the number of multiples of light speed attainable, subject to not exceeding the uppermost limit of the local universe as measured relative to the fixed starting point. Additionally, since the atoms comprising craft you may be travelling in would increase their spin speed, relative to its space-time velocity, matching its local energy level space-time, there would, theoretically, be no danger of it breaking up, unless it collided with something travelling in the opposite direction. To avoid this it would probably be a good idea to always travel in the direction of the universe's natural spin.
That obviously is a completely theoretical scenario. The fact is that if you had figured out the way to be able to move freely through the energy zones of our universe, the probability is you would not need spacecraft to do it. More on that topic later.
 ...back
|
monoatomics |
