I was looking at the newest issue of Scientific American, and their cover story for the April 2009 issue is about Dark Energy ("Does Dark Energy Really Exist?").  Of course, their viewpoint is that the search is real, but they have some scientists who proposed a rather preposterous solution, that if earth and vicinity is smack-dab in the middle of a huge void, the non-expansion in our area would mitigate our intense search for evidence of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

    From a C-R theory point-of-view, the search for Dark Matter and Dark Energy is especially fruitless, since the C-R theory maintains that our universe is not now expanding, never has, and never will!!!  Our universe does nicely show an increasing red-shift in all directions, with the anomaly (in the conventional view) of the Great Attractor.

    The C-R theory claims that the Great Attractor not only is NOT attracting anything, but that, on the contrary, it is the “most-uphill (like)” point in our entire universe.  It runs faster (is blueshifted the most), as compared to us, and everywhere further-out, even slower than us.

    The C-R theory claims that this is directly derived from observations of the properties of various phenomenon seen in our universe.  We live in a CLOSED universe.  The inside of this closed universe is exactly filled with enough matter to completely close-off the universe.  This is NOT a co-incidence, but merely a statement of fact.  After our universe acquired enough mass, at a sufficient density, to close it off, it has remained that way ever since.  (It is no more coincidental than when you go to a store, and buy a gallon of milk, or a quart of oil, or a liter of water, and after checking, you find those same quantities inside the full package.)

    Einstein was initially right that our universe is relatively static, and closed.  Where he made his biggest blunder (by C-R theory reasoning) is when he reasoned that there was no preferred reference-frame.  If our universe is a closed universe (and it IS), that superimposes a “preferred reference frame” over the entire contents.  The reference frame {gravitational curvature}is minimum, 0 {plus external contributions, if any}, at the center, and is complete, or 100% curved, closed-off, everywhere, in all directions, at the outer edges.

    The most surprising thing about this arrangement, based upon gravitational curvature, is this: rather than having a tendency to collapse inwards upon itself, since matter is more curved [hence, less energetic] at the outer edges, and more energetic the closer-in to the center one goes, matter at the outer-most edges must GAIN ENERGY to be permitted to collapse “inward”.  Since that matter there lacks enough energy, it is “stuck” in greater curvature until or unless it can acquire more energy. (Which is NOT available there.)

    This newly-realized, inherent stability of matter in this closed universe is somewhat a “recycled” answer, learned from nature’s solution when in the early 1900’s Maxwell’s equations predicted that every electron orbiting every proton should radiate-away energy continuously and collapse into any nucleus everywhere.  (This was termed, the Ultraviolet Catastrophe.) {Scientific understanding BASED UPON expectations derived from mathematical equations, which were ALMOST right, but missed a key point.}

    As the old saying goes, those who don’t learn from earlier mistakes in history are condemned to repeat them.  The C-R theory author realized that we had again, the same problem, the same matter, the same natural system, [the same Designer, too], and we could “recycle” the same-type-of solution.

    Thus, by invoking curvature (a geometric-like, or space-time metric) as a solution, one could neatly avoid the problem of the collapse into a singularity.  Note: this works especially well for Black-Hole’s ^C-R too, once matter has collapsed, or passed-through into the Schwarzschild radius.  Once matter’s energy has been lowered completely and “absolutely”, no further collapse can be accomplished.

    An analogy here would be: could a “perfect vacuum” empty-out another perfect vacuum?  Could an ice cube at absolute zero cool down another ice cube also at absolute zero?  Of course not.  In both cases, both are already AS low AS they can go.

    The C-R theory claims that our universe IS the giant inside (an Active Zone ^C-R) of a very large Black-Hole ^C-R.  It is no coincidence that our universe appears almost exactly filled with sufficient matter [within 2 orders of magnitude] to close-off the universe, because our universe always is exactly filled with just that amount. (always has been, always will be)

    NOTE:  From earth’s location, everything further out towards the outer edges of the universe is red-shifted, or slowed-down time-wise.  This is NOT caused by outward expansion, but is a simple gravitational time-slowdown.

    NOTE: Closer-in to the center of this universe, we see “The Great Attractor”, which is, in reality, a volume of space running faster than here on earth, and thus it appears blue-shifted to us. 

    NOTE: If we did not see this one particular area, we could not say for sure that the red-shifts are caused gravitationally.

    NOTE: If we could move our viewpoint to somewhere else, sufficiently distant from earth, we would see different amounts of redshift and blueshift.  For instance, if we could travel to Andromeda, and view earth from there, earth would be just as red-shifted to us there as Andromeda is blue-shifted to us here on earth. 

    If we could move out to a quasar that appears 10 times slower to us here on earth, residents there would see earth 10 times as blueshifted.  From there, everything closer-in to the center would appear blueshifted, and everything further out would appear red-shifted (but not nearly as extreme as the amount of red-shift we see from here on earth).

    The 2.7 K background radiation we see from here on earth has nothing to do with the big bang leftovers.  It is the “averaged-out” smoothed-out radiation from novae, supernovae, Seyfert galaxies, quasars, and GRB’s. This 2.7 K will always appear this way from earth, and will never redshift with increasing time.  It is constantly being replenished.  Seen from elsewhere the value could also be cooler or warmer, depending upon one’s viewing location in the universe.

    If this universe was expanding uniformly, the value of the 2.7 K would appear the same from everywhere (as far as we know), and it would cool-down over time.

    NOTE: The C-R theory says that this 2.7k radiation IS already viewed at it’s real-time rate, and is NOT Doppler shifted (or red shifted) from some higher initial value.  NOTE again: The 2.7 K radiation will be much “warmer” to itself, if it could be viewed in it’s own home time-frame, or if we [earth scientists] could travel to “there”, and measure it there, where it originates. 

    By these simple changes, in changing our ASSUMPTIONS about what we do see in this universe, it is possible to do away with ALL the 5 anomalies usually associated with the Big Bang.  I will leave this topic for another blog segment how Black-Holes ^C-R recycle matter and energy with 100% efficiency, and restore it successfully. (It is no mistake that this occurs, but it “perfectly” exploits part of the conditions the Black-Holes ^C-R create.)

    In short, the hunt for Dark Matter and Dark Energy is really based upon wrong assumptions which “science” made long ago. (Starting in 1929)  The C-R theory seeks to explain the differences, return science to a “common-sense” mentality, in human-friendly terms, which could be easily understood ONLY if one accepts the C-R theory ideas.

    I do not expect 99% of the first-time readers or viewers to change their views, or convert over immediately.  I am attempting to “plant the seeds” of understanding, and show some readers out there: how I believe the universe works, and where to look, what to look for, and things to note, to demonstrate that this is the path nature has already chosen.

    If I can simply “warm-up” readers to these possibilities, and explain the whole-system concept, as a package, I hope a few will see the underlying principles, grasp the overall superiority, and start to comprehend the universe from a C-R theory viewpoint.  I expect those who do to be rewarded with insights, and to potentially discover things I have not yet anticipated, or supersede some of my simple ideas with more “refined” ideas.

    Although I expect these ideas to be accepted sometime within the next 50 years, they are too new, too radical, too far from mainstream thinking to be embraced now.  If you cannot accept these ideas, regard them as a pleasant “fairy-tale” and consider them as “fictional accounts of wishful thinking”, then please ask yourself, why could these ideas NOT work in the manner described?

I would like to reference an upcoming program on Nova on PBS, Feb 17th. After the main program on 4 winged dinosaurs, the host, Neil Degrasse Tyson does a segment where he imagines jumping down a tunnel from the surface of the earth, passing through the center of the earth, then re-emerging on the other side. While his cautions about the hazards from this tunnel in the real world are valid, such as the very high temperature with depth and air pressure (building-up with depth as one descended), the central point of the thought experiment is false {although it is the “Standard Book Answer”, as far as almost all textbooks are concerned.}

I would like to propose a simple experiment that your PBS home viewers can safely do in the privacy of their own living rooms (for under $1.00) which will likely suggest that the answer given in that end segment is false, or should at least generate a reasonable and healthy scientific controversy.

The Experiment:

Take any reasonable sized ball, and toss it safely into the air, not so hard as to injure anyone, touch the ceiling, or create unsafe conditions for nearby bystanders. Toss the ball high enough that it leaves your hands, and see what happens. Always throw the ball so that you can catch it again. (This is not a necessity for the experiment, but a great convenience for repetition of the experiment, quickly, without chasing the ball over and over again.)

Notice that whenever you (or home viewers) toss the ball up into the air, you are always sending the ball into LESSER gravitational curvature. Notice that, after a brief rise, the ball slows down, and returns back down to (near) the original position, if you were careful with your original toss. Notice that the ball ALWAYS returns back into slightly greater curvature, nearer the surface of the earth. Conclusion: On the surface of the earth, the ball always returns back to greater curvature from lesser curvature. {Please note any exceptions in your home experiments, if any ever occur.}

Viewers at home may remark, that is hardly a new, or remarkable or radical experiment. People have been getting exactly that same result for as far back as we know.

Now, let us consider a different situation, which cannot practically be performed, due to extreme difficulty in re-creating the exact conditions. If one considers the Newtonian equation for gravity = G (m₁ M₂) / r² , it should be apparent that the value should decrease as the radius decreases, all the way to the center of the earth. This is the standard “book answer”.

In our real world, the true answer is not quite so simple for one simple reason. The density of matter MORE THAN QUADRUPLES with depth, at least until one reaches the core-mantle boundary. After that, the density still increases, but does not quadruple.

If you consult the CRC Manual as a reference book, you can see that gravitational curvature (the strength of gravity) actually INCREASES with depth, ever so slightly, until one gets to about 2,886 Km straight down. Depending upon location at the surface, gravity starts at around 9.81 m/sec² at the (blue) surface, and increases to 10.69 m/sec² at 2,886 km below the (light brown) surface (the core-mantle boundary) [CMB].

From that maximum area, gravity then decreases to ZERO* at the center of the earth (or more correctly, to it’s minimum value on earth. *The gravitational influence from the moon, other planets, the sun, and other stars and galaxies is still present, so the end value may actually exceed zero.)

Now, if one were to dig a tunnel from this CMB region, through to the center of the earth, gravitational curvature would start-off at MAXIMUM, at the top of that tunnel at the CMB, and decrease steadily until one reached the center of the earth.

If we were to apply our RESULTS of the experiment we just performed above, our conclusion MUST BE exactly the opposite to that of the “world’s greatest experts”, including those results imagined in your program on February 17th, 2009. (I know that broadcast segment has aired before, in previous years. I do know that I sent a brief response before, but I did not include the home experiment with differing results at that time.)

I would challenge you at the Nova staff, if you do not accept the results of the above experiment, that is one thing, but, I would request that you at least offer your home viewers the opportunity to perform the above experiment themselves, and then, decide for themselves whether to accept their own experimental results, or whether to accept the “prevailing opinion of the world’s greatest experts” view(s) as presented and hosted by Mr. Tyson. {A strictly “Newtonian” view, based on the 17th century notion of gravity behaving as-if it emanated from a single-point source at the center.}

You can read more about this at www.cr-theory.org , or The Comedy-Recycling Theory of the Entire Known Universe. I have an edited video of me performing my own experiment above, with my running commentary, on-line. I do have the original high-definition camcorder footage of that same experiment that I could release to support MY conclusions. (Your results WILL be the same, too.)