Blog for the year-end of December, 2011

Part 2 of the blog, about Bob Berman’s 50 weirdest objects in the cosmos, plus more

 

      We just recorded our 38,000^th visitor the other week, and I would like to thank all of those who have come by to visit.  We also had a record week for visitors and bandwidth served, which means that at least some people are visiting and showing an interest in this site.

      I’ve been having meetings with my webmaster to discuss positive changes to this site, to try to improve your options at how information is presented, and to give a wider variety of options and looks to first time visitors.  We will try to start to incorporate some of those enhancements in the very near future, probably in 2012.

      Thanks to all who return regularly to these blogs, and welcome to all first timers.  I try to help readers appreciate the C-R theory’s insights which mainstream science does not understand, look-for, or want.

      I left off in the last blog without listing more of the 50 weirdest objects, as I was running out of time, but wanted to get that blog out.  I believe that the C-R theory uniquely can help readers understand some aspects of what we really see, and what is reported.  Astronomers and physicists are reluctant to consider “amateur” points-of-view, and they stick quite firmly to what they were taught.  Usually, that serves them well, unless what they were taught was wrong from the start.

      For the home-reader, this gives you the opportunity to consider these new ideas before the “insiders”, the full time professional astronomers and cosmologists, will even consent to look at these ideas.  There is such a “bias” in the academic community against revolutionary new ideas [especially when one needs as many of them simultaneously as the C-R theory needs], many will not even look at new ideas until they have been vetted by their peers, who all hold the same prejudices, and have been trained the same way.

      I wish that this situation were not so, and I have tried to offer the C-R theory in good faith, but the gap between world-wide-acceptance, and the innovations required is too large for the time this theory has been around (over 30 years, and on-line for at least 15 years). [My suspicion is that the C-R theory needs 2-3 generations to pass-by until a sufficient amount of new understanding can be presented in a way that can be accepted.]

      Part of that is my lack of persuasiveness, but most lies in the amount of old stuff that must be overthrown before the “new understanding” can take place.  Very soon, I will attempt to make simpler, and more direct claims, and break-down some of the C-R theory ideas into smaller packages, with more distinct new sub-sections.

      As always, please feel free to write in with any questions you might have.  I expect there are many of you who would like to do so, but very few actually do write in.  I also apologize that this web-site here is the only place on the entire web promoting these new ideas, except for a few sites re-posting some of my earlier work from the older GeoCities web site. (Those sites miss my later revisions, and newer phenomenon which was unknown to me at that time.)

      I try to show that the C-R theory ideas offer new lines of “causation” which are not known, and have NEVER been considered.  This is mostly because the textbooks ALL say that “it does not happen like the C-R theory says.”

      I will also ask myself, is this new theory reasonable? I constantly “think” I am finding new items in the news which help to support the C-R theory, and illustrate the ideas in the real world results.  I would like to let the readers look at these items, and test for themselves to see whether it sounds as reasonable to them.

      I will resume this blog with item #25 on Bob Berman’s list, M87, a massive agglomeration of galaxies or globular clusters, including the largest Black-Hole ^C-R, some 6 billion solar masses, known to science**. [As I wrote this part, just this week, scientists have found new, even bigger Black-Holes ^C-R, of at least 10 billion solar masses.] {**NOTE also: The C-R theory maintains that our entire universe is the inside portion of a vastly larger Black-Hole ^C-R, having the mass (inside) of our entire universe, but science has not accepted, much less, embraced that idea, yet.}

      Of course, the C-R theory also believes that the Black-Hole ^C-R there is a “standard” Black-Hole ^C-R.  This means that the massive jets shooting out from the central mass have unseen filaments that extend for 100,000 light years.  The article mentions that the deep blue color of the beam indicates synchrotron radiation, produced by electrons, twisted-about in intense magnetic fields.  One should note that ONLY an abundance of loose, highly energetic electrons, could combine their individual magnetic fields to provide almost exactly what is described in this article.

      I think it is safe to say {from this article}, mainstream science has not got a clue as to why these jets occur.  These jets certainly could seem to me to suggest enormous quantities of high-energy electrons.  Should I hazard a “guess” that those jets are not “uncaused”? That I know-of, only the C-R theory claims that enormous quantities of electrons are freed-up, stripped-off or peeled-away from every consumed nucleus, for every atom eaten.

      While I do accept that “by-the-book” this process does not go on {in their books opinion}, is it really that unreasonable? For example: whenever I eat an orange [or a banana, or peanuts in the shell], I peel it first before I eat it.  If one found however many orange peels in my vicinity, would it not be more probable evidence supporting my diet, rather than the claim that the peels appeared from some other {antimatter?} universe?

      I know that “science-experts” strongly disagree with this electron-stripping idea, as they are taught that any knowledge of the internal electrical charge cannot be hidden, and they simply do not question that idea.  I would politely remind home-readers that not one of them has ever successfully entered either a (generic) black hole or a Black-Hole ^C-R and tested that assumption from the inside.  I would simply ask the home-reader to “try out this idea” as a test, without first rejecting it.

      What I am attempting to do is provide a reasonable, new hypothesis to suggest why this “known” situation occurs.  If I can get you to understand this simple mechanism, you might understand how our universe “exploits” this situation, in a way never before considered.  HINT: The universe either does this, or it does not.  But, if IT DOES do this, then we have an “unreasonable” situation, reasonably explained.

      Even if you DO NOT believe the C-R theory, please check out the existing scientific literature and LOOK FOR known situations that resemble what I have described.

      {GUIDE: Look for: Large numbers of high-energy electrons, enormous magnetic fields, causes of continuing “local” expansion that do not “cool-off”, or cease, as the expansion continues, and high-speed jets “of something” leaving the Black-Hole’s ^C-R vicinity at speeds of at least 99.99% of lightspeed.}

      NOTE: The way that the Black-Hole ^C-R accumulated positive charge stores-up, or packs-in immediately inside of the Schwarzschild radius.  This volume (or region) IS THE ONLY PLACE IN THIS UNIVERSE where “the ESCAPE VELOCITY is GREATER-THAN the SPEED-of-LIGHT”.  This “internal condition” IS what prevents the knowledge-of the positive charges from being communicated-out.  Because any electromagnetic energy [as particles or waves, or combinations] cannot travel above light-speed, [as speeds above lightspeed WOULD be required to escape], this charge-quantity-information is insulated and isolated inside, but NEVER lost.

SUPPOSITION: If YOU {and most of science} believe something, without PROOF, and ALMOST EVERYONE accepts it, THAT does not MAKE IT true!!! [Just - believed]

DEMONSTRATION:

      Let me make a key point here.  Mainstream science believes that, after starting-off, out-of a singularity, when temperatures were around 10⁹⁶ degrees, all of the 4 forces [gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force], started-off as equal strength, and they were all derived from the same-type of starting source, but as the temperature from the initial big bang lowered, the individual forces broke-off and “froze-out”, and became clearly distinct and different.

      Where the C-R theory has a clear difference is that the C-R theory now expects gravity and electromagnetism each use totally different propagation-styles (even though they are similar, and both act as inverse-square forces), and they behave differently across the Schwarzschild radius (or the event horizon) because their active causal mechanism is quite different.

      STRONG HINT: This condition at the outside of the Black-Hole ^C-R is not random or accidental, and the uses will be revealed elsewhere within the C-R theory.

      NOTE 2: Since this portion of the Black-Hole ^C-R can only accumulate more matter and energy, [BECAUSE nothing from the inside can escape or radiate-out], it stores-up THE ONLY KNOWN FORCE, in this universe, that can overcome gravity, when it is allowed to do so. [Positive charges, or an accumulation of protons and proton-neutrons]

      NOTE 3: This Neutral Zone ^C-R, something like a physics-lawless region of piggy-bank crossed with a storage closet, holds the real secret of the Black-Hole ^C-R in operation, and it’s intended role.  HINT: Something akin to an overfilled, steaming teacup’s saucer plate, a sufficient BUMP might sometimes release some (maybe even ALL) of the trapped contents.

      NOTE 4: If this region’s accumulation is sufficiently twisted or bent, once the neutralized protons and neutrons are re-freed-up, creating an explosive, energy liberation on a scale only exceeded by direct, matter-antimatter annihilation, releases positive charges which repel-away everything they encounter on a scale 40 magnitudes [powers of ten] larger than the gravitational attraction, until the charges are re-neutralized.

      NOTE 5: These released positive charges then explode violently, to create the enormous, expanding balls of glowing energy, which are so evident in many of the Hubble’s most spectacular photographs.  These released charges also continue to forcefully expand and glow (radiate energy) long after a fusion-generated temperature should have cooled-off.

      Since the entire energy-release, process-cycle described above is not expected (or even ALLOWED) from the standard view, every occurrence is either misattributed to runaway fusion, or dismissed, or else credited to dark matter’s mysterious effects.

      Item 23, Eta Carinae (and the Homunculus Nebula around it) is one of the most interesting stars known.  In 1677, Edmund Halley listed it as 4^th magnitude.  In the early 1700s, it was one of the brightest stars in the lesser-known constellation of Carina (the keel). It then dimmed again, until about 1820.  It then brightened until, at one point, in April 1843, it was the second brightest star in the sky.  Afterwards, it again dimmed considerably.

      I believe one of the Electric Universe web-sites claimed this star, Eta Carinae, was a “poster child”, [or the best-known stellar example] against the Herzsprung-Russell diagram, the standard-guide-chart that is believed to represent the normal development-path that stars are “supposed to follow”, over their lifetimes of millions to billions of years.  

      The interested reader may note that this star has gone through several of those phases, brightening and dimming over decades, during a relatively short observation period, compared to multi-million-year star-lifetimes, may demonstrate that “this bad star has not read our physics books” to “know-how” to behave normally, as astronomers expect.

      {Science now considers this star as a Wolf-Rayette type-of star, or as a false-supernova.  It is supposed to go into a supernova sometime within the next 100,000 years.  The long-period variability of this star, where it repeatedly dims and brightens over magnitudes, does not play-well with a “standard-textbook understanding” of how the fusion-based process in a star should unfold.  It may well fit-in better to a small-Black-Hole ^C-R powered model, where the star’s power output could vary wildly, based upon it’s gravitational diet, yet also periodically, over a shorter scale of a few years or decades, instead of millions or billions of years.}

      The central star is now believed to be part of a binary pair, placed inside an obscuring, but expanding nebula called the homunculus nebula, but which resembles a short barbell, or a peanut-shell-like shape of two glowing-globes of roiling-expansion at opposite ends of a central volume shaped something like the handle of a barbell {a handheld, one-hand, cast-iron training weight}.  

      The very peculiar shape of the released energy seems quite incompatible with any fusion-based process, (which is very unlikely to easily split-in-two), inside a star.  The confined charge-region, on the outside of the sphere could possibly work if two near-simultaneous charged-particle releases occurred at opposite ends of a Neutral Zone ^C-R.

      NOTE: I have blogged about this particular star, and the 3 other “rebel ones” before, but this magazine article gave me an excuse to re-visit this particular one.

      The next item to discuss is number 22 on Bob’s list, The Cat’s Eye Nebula, or NCG 6543, and it also provides the spectacular cover illustration for this special issue.  The glowing shells and colorful bubbles in this nebula are vaguely similar to the previous nebula, but this one looks like it has been around longer.  There seem to be older, regular-release-interval shells of matter, released maybe a few thousand years ago, with younger, energy-bubbles inside, twisted and skewed around even more energy-bubbles, all stuffed inside these large, hollowed-out [expanding] shells.

      According to the article, the central star inside is around 150,000° F or 80,000° C. It is also giving off a stellar wind at 20 tons of it’s mass, lost per second.  High energy X-rays are emitted, even though the star’s surface-temperature is way too cool to generate them.  

      I would propose that the release of the X-rays comes from the left-over electrons shed by a central Black-Hole ^C-R in that vicinity, while the high-energy “proton-shells”, find a way to escape from a central Neutral Zone ^C-R, [where they were stored], on a semi-regular (100-1000 year) recurring basis.  [NOTE: the Neutral Zone ^C-R itself may not be disturbed violently-enough to totally free all of the trapped contents] This scenario might be a more perfect-fit to release, energize, and drive-out the expanding, glowing-shells, then produce yet more energy-release phenomenon inside at some later time.  

      NOTE: The released “proton-shells” do not cool-off as they expand, because the expansion is not (initial) temperature-driven, but is “positive-mutual-repulsion driven”. The sum of the combined actions there could then account-for what is actually seen, if a C-R theory-like scenario is occurring.

 

      The next two numerical items are also featured on the same page, item number 21 being the V381 Nor, the last of the microquasars.  The C-R theory maintains that quasars are only another part-of the (total lifetime) phase in the complete ecological-cycle of matter-energy-recycling, using Black-Holes ^C-R.  The phenomenon is similar to, but much smaller, as the scale changes from the far-distant to the more local, from the increasing size, older quasars we are more familiar-with, as the distance to the Black-Hole ^C-R gets larger.

      NOTE: As the quasars get older [more distant and more redshifted], science compounds the problem of understanding by falsely “correcting” the quasar’s “observed” [real-time] redshift (or it’s ongoing real-time-rate) and “restoring” it to an earth-vicinity rate, rather than leaving the rate intact, as it was actually observed.  They buy-into Einstein’s {false} idea from relativity that everywhere-else in this universe the time-rate elsewhere IS IDENTICAL to our time-rate here on earth.

      This complicates science’s understanding of the process, and gives science the idea that the distant quasar’s energy output [way-out “there”] is even greater than it truthfully is, if the true-energy release-rate occurs at the redshift seen by us, that indicates a reduced, real-time-rate.  The C-R theory would maintain that this same process is still ongoing, including right now, {everywhere in this universe}, at approximately the rate observed, if only we could go “out-there” and check on the events “there”, in real time, rather than time-delayed, as we must when we are observing while residing here, on earth.

      The next two items on the list are featured starting on the same page.  Number 21, V381 Nor, also called XTE-J1550-564, the object sits “just” 17,000 light-years from earth, within the Milky Way.  It is a “scaled-down” quasar-lite-like version of much larger, much further away quasar-systems.  The central Black-Hole ^C-R is “only” about 10.6 solar masses, orbited by a binary star approximately 2.5 solar masses.  The article states that, in 1998, this object brightened 1.5 times the brightest current X-ray source (which is the Crab Nebula), also producing “many quadrillion volts of cheap electricity”.

      Here we have a known object producing enormous quantities of electrical charges, at gargantuan voltage ranges.  This is very close-to, (if not exactly-like), what the C-R theory expects from dining Black-Holes ^C-R.  Since the radiation observed was in the X-ray range, this means that extreme magnetic conditions for charged-matter are being encountered.  There is also a dynamic here where a variation in the matter-consumption-rate, while nearing the Black-Hole’s ^C-R vicinity, actually seems-to vary the observed energy (radiated) output.  

      This gives the object’s X-ray brightness a quick variability, and a diet-based flexibility, that thermonuclear fusion-produced radiation cannot match. {Fusion is not allowed to vary that quickly, as the central mass is larger, and less subject to change.} The expected energy-output from a star undergoing nuclear meltdown (at it’s end-of-lifetime stellar collapse) is much more constrained on it’s ability to brighten and dim repeatedly, and periodically, over hours, days, or weeks.  According to the H-R diagram (Herzsprung-Russell), which describes how a star is supposed to age and expire, millions of years are needed for most star’s full cycles.  

      The fusion reaction-rate should not simply be switchable, or scalable, up and down, over a short-period rate.  Fusion only occurs long after gravity accumulates a substantial, central-blob consisting of a massive amount of gas-matter, which is not free to just switch-on and off as fresh, external matter arrives on-scene, trickling-in.

      If the energy-output of the weird object is more external, or “diet-based”, then what goes in to that object should much more strongly modulate, or affect the radiation-energy output that comes-out of that object.  The question is, is there a discernable, predictable output, or is the regional conflict there [right outside the Black-Hole ^C-R] an indication of a Black-Hole ^C-R dining on only what matter is available? The newest observations seem to favor high quantity, variable-rate, externally-sourced, dining on matter, with leftover electrons possessing abundant energy.

      Even though the magazine articles were not written to support the C-R theory ideas, I would ask the home-readers to evaluate objectively what unknowns the text reveals, and ask if this is compatible with conventional ideas on the ongoing processes inside galaxies. {Answer: No} Then, after those ideas are ruled-out, can the same phenomenon seen there be used to indicate a C-R like process?

      (HINT: Would I have written this, and inserted it inside this blog, if it did not?).

      NOTE: The reports of enormous quantities of enormous energies-worth of electrons and high-energy X-rays, gamma rays, ultraviolet, radio waves, infrared, light, microwaves, and the like, are not good indicators of a proper understanding for almost anything conventional, EXCEPT for the C-R theory-like ideas.

      The second weird object, listed on the same page as the above, concerns high energy cosmic rays, as item #20.  If there is one huge advantage for the C-R theory here, it is that only the C-R theory has a built-in “natural” mechanism to produce abundant, high energy positive charges, in bulk.  One interesting fact covered in the article is that 89% of all cosmic rays are single protons, with 10% alpha particles, while only 1% are electrons.

      Almost every conventionally known energy-exciter process should accelerate ALL charged particles in the same manner.  Since the electrons are individually much more excitable, as well as lighter in weight, it is very surprising to the experts that there are not as many high-energy electrons included as cosmic rays.  There is no other competition, theory-wise, so far, that can adequately explain what process imparts the high energy to protons, while virtually ignoring most of the electrons.

      Only the C-R theory naturally transforms protons into positive cosmic rays as a by-product of “normal operations”.  Conventional theory is “stuck in the mud” to try to create a logical reason for the cosmic rays that occur naturally.  This article expresses this exclusion of electrons from cosmic rays as a true mystery.

      There are some natural cosmic rays with truly astounding energies.  I have read elsewhere that last year (in 2010) scientists measured a single cosmic ray with over 300 quintillion eV.  The article states that a single proton can have the impact-energy of a Wimbledon tennis ball at over 100 mph (or 160 km/hr).

      Even at these high energies, I believe the C-R theory is capable of helping to explain why the highest-energy cosmic rays get their energy.

      The next item, #18 on the list, is a galaxy with a large redshift, which is far older than it is supposed to be.  Only found in 2010, galaxy CLG J02182-05102, is composed of at least 60 members, all intensely red.  Some at the center have 10 times the stars that our Milky Way galaxy has.  The big problem for conventional theory [the Big Bang] is that galaxies that massive and developed are not supposed to occur “that early” in this universe.  That awkward situation is no problem for the C-R theory, as the C-R theory says that this universe is infinitely old, but it makes a dilemma for the Big Bang. The red shift indicates that (by conventional reasoning) it’s light should have left around 9.6 billion years ago.

      While that is bad news for conventional understanding, it is great news for the C-R theory, which expects many more “old-looking” galaxies will be found as our equipment improves.

 

      The next item, #17, is SGR 1806-20.  On March 5^th, 1979, a large gamma ray burst pegged the radiation meters on spacecraft near Venus and Earth, for 1/5 of a second. The burst was tracked to a small neutron star with an outrageous (by conventional thinking) magnetic field over 1 quadrillion gauss.  From later on, in 2004, another burst came from this same magnetar, emitting more energy in 1/10 of a second than our sun emitted in 100,000 years.  This 12 mile wide neutron star is located 50,000 light years away, across the galaxy, on the opposite side of the center of our galaxy.

      According to this article, SGR 1806-20 is the most magnetic object ever detected. These magnetars embody the known extremes of gravity, magnetism, and density, all in one compact object.  Supposedly, after about 10,000 years, the magnetic field falls-off (or weakens) to a couple trillion gauss, which decreases their ability to produce the most extreme gamma rays.

      The C-R theory proposes that those extreme magnetic fields are created by instant and simultaneous release of all of the positive charges (mostly protons) which a large Black-Hole ^C-R can free-up, after confining them, by eating them, over millions or billions of years.  Even though most of the protons flee the vicinity in a huge energetic blast, the remaining neutron star retains the intense magnetic field strength.

      Unfortunately, the magnetic field there is far too intense to be re-created here on earth.  Even though we can only get to about a million gauss in earth-laboratories before the conditions become too extreme for the strongest earth-lab materials to endure, and the test apparatus simply explodes, conditions at the magnetar are so intense that even the quadrillion gauss magnetic fields there cannot damage the neutron star’s incredibly-high density.  This may be one place where the original Black-Hole’s ^C-R Neutral Zone ^C-R is destroyed, but most-of the original (inside mass) is left behind as a neutron star. [That means that I may have to revise some of my original ideas.]

      We will now skip some interesting items until we arrive at item #9, M1, the Crab Nebula, with a rapidly spinning pulsar (now revolving at 33 times each second) inside, at the center.  According to this article, the central neutron star has the same density as any atomic nucleus, except that it is 16 miles (or 26 Km) wide.  In this case, this supernova remnant seems to have obliterated the Black-Hole ^C-R that I suspect was there, and merely left a neutron star in it’s original place.

      What is different in this case is that we know the day and the approximate hour of the appearance of the explosion; July 4, 1054, before dawn, as seen and recorded by Chinese astronomers.   (The actual explosion was about 6,500 years earlier, as that is M1's distance from earth.)

      If a Black-Hole ^C-R did exist here beforehand, it may require me to revise my original ideas that most interiors of the original Black-Hole ^C-R (i.e., the inside Active Zone ^C-R), always survive intact, that in this particular case, would appear to be incorrect.

      NOTE: If the original starting mass, originally the Active Zone ^C-R, did not survive intact, it would be more of a revision to my original ideas, than a show-stopper.  I am willing to revise my ideas, if needs be, to incorporate new evidence.  In this case, nature seems to be more flexible, and less “rigid-minded”, than my first concepts expected.

      NOTE #2: By my original concept, the neutron star left behind here did cause me to rule out a possible Black-Hole’s ^C-R involvement.  It was only after I read enough articles about the evidence of a high number of highly energized electrons, and the enormous magnetic fields found there at the Crab Nebula, that persuaded me to change my mind that maybe a Black-Hole ^C-R was involved in just one phase of this object. [Late in the year 2011 is when I changed my mind.]

      In essence, this year’s evidence from articles about the Crab Nebula persuaded me to revise my original rejection of a Black-Hole ^C-R there, because the hallmarks of a C-R theory Black-Hole’s ^C-R activity was stronger than my original ideas suspected.  I allowed nature to show me that some unexpected flexibility was allowed in this extreme example, and that I needed to listen to what I was telling the whole-world about how to recognize where and when a Black-Hole ^C-R exists.  The excess, high-energy electrons there were a dead-giveaway.

      Item #8, the Milky Way antimatter fountain, is one of the most interesting items, from the C-R theory author’s standpoint.  The standard idea is that there is a huge fountain of antimatter (positrons) appearing “magically” around the center of our galaxy, and shooting off 3,500 light-years.  These positrons encounter electrons, and annihilate them, in bulk, producing a characteristic 511,000 eV signature.  By this article, either 10 million, trillion, trillion, trillion positrons each second, or some 500 trillion tons of matter are annihilated each day.

A SHELL of a GOOD IDEA (pun), or this should appeal to you

      From the C-R theory’s view, science considers the above antimatter-fountain scenario more reasonable than: Black-Holes ^C-R there, at the galaxy’s center peel-and-eat their hydrogen’s heavier nucleii, leaving behind the rejected electron “shells” as evidence, as the aftermath of the dinner.* [Besides the central Black-Hole ^C-R, at 4 million solar masses, there are believed to be at least 20,000 additional Black-Holes ^C-R within the central 3 light-years.]

      *IDEA: The Black-Holes ^C-R are actually very peculiar and deliberate eaters.  They strip-off the electrons from their dinner, (or allow ALL-of-the electrons to escape), while completely devouring the protons and proton-neutrons (the nucleii).

      Sadly, mainstream science finds the “fairy-tale” that an antimatter fountain of positrons, (possibly created in interactions with dark matter), is “more reasonable” to accept than that the gourmet Black-Holes ^C-R “hand-fillet” each atom of all of it’s electrons.  HINT: It takes a pretty powerful “fairy” to produce 15 billion tons of positrons each second and hurl them up 3,500 light-years from our galaxy’s center.

      COMMENT:

      I was also reviewing more items from Bob Berman’s 50 weirdest objects in the cosmos when the following thought occurred to me.  Item #8, a supposed fountain of antimatter positrons occurring right in the middle of our galaxy, is based on the detection of an energy-signature release of 511,000 eV worth-of energy that occurs when an electron encounters a positron, annihilating both of them mutually, and producing a gamma ray.

      While I have no quarrel with that process on a limited basis, what does bother me is that mainstream science finds it more reasonable that every second, some 10 million, trillion, trillion, trillion positrons encounter matter and are converted into pure energy, despite the fact that there is no known source for them.  In 1997, the Compton Gamma ray observatory found the energy-release signature of 511,000 eV from this region. Now, science accepts that every second, some 200 billion tons of positrons meet their demise, rather than accepting the “more reasonable” hypothesis from the C-R theory that the Black-Hole(s) ^C-R there are peeling-and-eating the nucleus-matter (the protons and proton-neutron combinations) from all of the atoms, before they dine.

      While I do accept that “by-the-textbooks” this C-R type process does not go on {“in their textbooks opinion”}, is it really that unreasonable? For example: whenever I eat an orange [or a banana, or peanuts in the shell], I peel it first before I eat it, and discard the peel.  If one found however many orange peel pieces in my near vicinity, would it not be more probable evidence supporting my diet of peeled oranges, than to claim that the peels appeared mysteriously from some other {antimatter?} universe?

      Near the end of this article, the real truth comes out: No one has a clue. (Other than you, the home-readers of this C-R theory blog, who have the best clues I can make.)

      I guess what annoys me the most is: after 15-20 years of telling anyone who will read my articles on-line, that ALL Black-Holes ^C-R ALWAYS strip-off all of the electrons from their “atoms for dinner”, before eating them, science finds a non-stop antimatter fountain, spouting 200 billion tons of positrons per second “a more reasonable hypothesis”.  To some extent, maybe I have not been clear enough or convincing enough, or persuasive enough.  The full truth is, the C-R theory ideas are too new, and too radically different, and need too many new ways of thinking to be easily accepted.

 

EXPAND UPON IT (pun)

      I will briefly comment on item #2, our accelerating universe.  The C-R theory has claimed for years, from the very start, that our universe is fixed in size, is not expanding at all, and that the bulk-of the redshifts observed are not Doppler-shifts, from receding or speeding-away, but are almost 100% gravitational redshifts.

      As a consequence of our living on the inside of our closed universe, this mandates that curvature in each direction we can see gradually increases to the full 100%, which also causes the far-off redshifts to increase, too.  This is not really as strange as it first seems, it just requires a new way to understand gravity, based upon what we see in this universe.  I will cover briefly that just as gravity changes by elevation, right here on earth, it also does so, [i.e., change from point-to-point], everywhere else within this universe.

      Where science made it’s biggest mistake was to accept Einstein’s claim, implied from his assumptions in relativity, that everywhere in space was exactly the equivalent to everywhere else, as there was no possible “preferred reference frame”.

      What Einstein failed to realize was: If our universe IS closed-off [from the inside], this forces a “preferred reference frame” to be superimposed over everything INSIDE. Thus, the redshift-ranges we see in far-away objects are positionally related, by curvature, or gravity.  Where you are inside this universe assigns you a curvature level, which changes the redshift amount we notice when we observe objects elsewhere.

      At our universe’s center, would be the minimum overall curvature, and the curvature increases until, in every direction, you reach the outer edges, which end as 100% curvature.  (Once you exceed 100% curvature, this freezes all electromagnetic radiation, and freezes “measurable time”.)

      Of course, as any student knows, it is unacceptable to correct your observed data for what you EXPECT to be wrong, before you draw your conclusions from it.  Since earth’s scientists first CORRECT the observed redshifts {which they ASSUMED were Doppler shifts}, to make the data just like here on earth [time-rate-wise], they actually make their data “WRONG”ER (or more incorrect).

      Compounding the mistaken ideas about our universe’s nature, and then “correcting” the data in the wrong direction, scientists were then able to imagine that our universe’s expansion was accelerating; instead of noting that our mostly static universe, where objects were naturally existing in different real-time-rates elsewhere, and we actually see all events in our universe happening at their TRUE, real-time rates.

      By conventional Newtonian theory, a static universe is not possible.  It must expand, or else collapse.  Without justifying it here, let me state that a closed universe has a true inner stability, and it cannot possibly collapse.  It simply is stable, size-wise, by design.  Because curvature is zero (or minimum) at the center, there is no possibility of collapse inward.  Matter has a “stratification-level” where what energy it possesses is guided-by it’s overall position, as it is measured from the center.

      Since matter at the center is worth the most energy, and the same objects at the outer edges would be worth the least energy, position (location) is everything.  Just as energy must be added, on earth, to lift-up a heavy weight, to move it, so also do objects need to gain energy to move their position inward, or else they surrender energy, if they move from a higher-energy, inner area to lower-energy, outer region.

      NOTE: Please read the C-R theory for a better treatment of the closed universe idea.  The blog merely mentions it, and is not intended to justify my ideas here.

      Finally, we reach the #1 item on the list.  The discovery in 2010 of two enormous, 25,000 light-year-tall bubbles filled with high-energy gamma-rays (or filled with electrons with gamma ray level energies), now tentatively called Fermi bubbles, expanding at 2.2 million mph (3.5 million kph), totally surprised the astronomical community.  While the bubble shape itself was not expected by the C-R theory, the presence of 100,000 supernova’s worth of energy-rich electrons, ejected both above and below our galaxy’s central mass is only “reasonable” from a C-R theory view.  

      Only the C-R theory claims that every Black-Hole ^C-R rejects virtually every electron from the mass it eats, and that these electrons should all have substantial energy leftover.  With a 4 million solar-massed Black-Hole ^C-R, and at least 20,000 other smaller Black-Holes ^C-R stuffed-in around the central 3 light-years, only the C-R theory expects an adequate number of energetic-electron source-generators.

      I would regard the presence of the outrageously high number of gamma-ray-energy-level electrons as a “calling card” for the C-R theory, and the next most reasonable explanation, if it can ever be accepted.  The two lobes may be nature’s way of introducing science to the leftovers from a Black-Hole’s ^C-R meals.  Even if the central, 4 million solar-massed Black-Hole ^C-R did not get a large feast, the 20,000 “scavenger” Black-Holes ^C-R might get some of the credit, too. Whatever gets the credit, there is certainly an adequate cause suggested by the C-R theory to account for the phenomenon we see.

      The lobes might actually be “big enough” to gain science’s attention, or to suggest that there is something going-on.  The bubbles have a temperature of 7 million° F or 3.9 million° C, so we know some extreme energy is involved.

      Some scientists believe [or hope] that these Fermi lobes are finally evidence of dark matter’s interactions with regular matter.  I am trying to share that the C-R theory may have another, more reasonable alternative to consider.  I will leave you, the home reader to chose the best-fit, between the most reasonable alternatives offered to you.

      Again, I would encourage the blog readers to consider purchasing a copy of this special issue of Astronomy magazine. {Bob Berman’s 50 Weirdest Objects in the Cosmos} There are quite a few items I did not cover, that probably do not have anything to do with the C-R theory ideas, but are still fascinating to read about.  I would welcome reader comments or questions about this blog.  I apologize that this took so long to finish, but I have been doing many things for the holidays.

      The C-R theory is either correct, or it is not.  If it is, I believe it helps explain some of the most mysterious items in this special issue magazine.  I can state that mainstream science is not prepared to understand why these things occur.  If I can help you at home understand the processes in this universe better, then this blog is worth the effort.

      There are many new items in other magazines that I would like to comment upon, next year (in 2012).  I am continually amazed that nature has been extraordinarily kind to the C-R theory, and giving many unexpected phenomena that only the C-R theory seems to appreciate, want, and need.

      I will end this blog here, and save more for next time.  Thank you for visiting, and I hope you will visit this web-site again.  Have a Happy New Year, too, as 2011 is rapidly running out of time.  I wish all my visitors a better-informed New Year, for 2012.

Jerry Reynard

October-November blog: There is a special issue of Astronomy magazine for Fall, 2011, that just came out, called : Bob Berman’s 50 Weirdest Objects in the Cosmos, and I let this topical issue bump-back my original lead for this blog which was about the Crab Nebula’s surprises. [I had hinted in the last blog that I wanted to cover the multiverse, but decided the more-immediate opportunities were too fresh and too exciting to cover these other articles that were discussed.  I will save my comments about the multiverse for the next, or a later blog.]

      I try to regularly visit a certain bookstore, a block away from the theater where I like to catch independent and international films downtown, in Washington DC.  That means I have an excuse to walk one block, and check for the newest issues of many magazines.  I had read the previews for this “new special issue” lead item in this blog, and figured it would be a good possibility to feature some items of interest to the C-R theory’s readers.  The nicest things about some of the 50 weirdest objects in the cosmos is that many of Bob Berman’s selections are probably “weird” specifically for their electromagnetic activities, or unexpected (by mainstream science), high-levels of energy released.

      I will attempt to cover some of the most interesting items, from the C-R theory view, that were featured in this special issue, in the first part of this blog.  The issue should be available on newsstands now, for a few months.  I would encourage those regular readers of the C-R theory to pick-up or at least, look-at this magazine, if they can find it. [I don’t know about it’s availability internationally, though.]

      The first weird item of “C-R theory interest” is Sagittarius A*, the 49^th of 50 objects, counting backwards.  It is the Black-Hole ^C-R at the center of our galaxy.  From the C-R theory, the main reason this large Black-Hole ^C-R is so “quiet” is that it is also surrounded by as many as 20,000 lesser Black-Holes ^C-R, which collectively do intercept most of the loose-and-available “edible” matter [hydrogen gas], near our galaxy’s central 3 lightyears of volume.

      The real significance of these 20,000 lesser Black-Holes ^C-R is totally missed by mainstream science, which does not expect a C-R theory type-of process to be going on.  I suspect that these lesser Black-Holes ^C-R may also have something to do with our central Black-Hole ^C-R being a “measly 4 million solar-masses”, as compared to the billion(s) of solar-massed supermassive Black-Holes ^C-R, seen in other galaxies.

      HINT: The 20,000 lesser Black-Holes ^C-R may be the real reason(s) behind the excellent “livability” in our galaxy, vs. the enormous radiation outputs experienced in galaxies with far-larger central Black-Holes ^C-R, that make those galaxies much less hospitable to lifeforms like us.

      Without giving too much away, it might be the actions of these 20,000 lesser Black-Holes ^C-R which help-to release all of the high-energy excess electrons which becomes the source for the filling-up the two huge lobes, containing 100,000 supernova’s worth of energy, filling the 25,000 light-years above and below our galaxy’s center. {As compared to only the central Black-Hole ^C-R being the generator of the energy filling these lobes.} Those lobes were just discovered last year. (HINT: Those mysterious lobes MAY also feature prominently later on in this special issue.)

      NOTE: Mainstream science maintains that these lobes are filled with pairs of electrons and anti-electrons {positrons}, mysteriously created by interactions with dark matter, [which the C-R theory says does not exist].  The C-R theory claims that these lobes are filled with almost pure electrons, freshly stripped-off from the Black-Hole’s ^C-R lunch.  Whether these electrons came from matter eaten by the central Black-Hole ^C-R, or from the lesser 20,000 Black-Holes ^C-R, or some combination of both, cannot be determined right now.  What is CERTAIN, is that there are enough potential suspect Black-Holes ^C-R lurking there, in and around the center of our galaxy and in that immediate vicinity, and there are huge lobes filled with something highly energetic.

      The C-R theory’s argument is that, by conventional theory, standard black holes should not be spontaneously creating excess-energy electron-pairs by simply “existing”. One can argue that the central Black-Hole ^C-R, Sagittarius A*, shows very little current activity, as compared with many other central supermassive Black-Holes ^C-R in other galaxies.

      Another 2 items featured in the 50 weirdest objects issue are the Crab Nebula and it’s remnant pulsar, which will be covered later in the second part of this blog.

      The starburst galaxy (item # 47), M82, becomes an interesting possibility, for showcasing the release of a huge amount of energy from one of the supermassive Black-Holes ^C-R at the center of a galaxy, colliding with another galaxy, M81.  The huge amounts of radio energy, exploded gas, and infrared energy should be indications of some earlier activity which should be consistent with the release of the contents from a supermassive Black-Hole ^C-R, accumulated over eons or billions of years.  This is how I believe nature recycles matter and energy, and restores the “freshness” of this universe, internally.

      Unfortunately, it may take millions or billions of years to determine (from earth’s vicinity), whether such processes are indeed, going on.  I do hope that the C-R theory provides an adequate alternative to the Big Bang, and gives our home-readers some believable new way to understand what is actually going-on in this universe.

      The Antenna Galaxies (item # 45) seem to indicate yet another type of energy release event, where two galaxies seem to be colliding, and the processes of star-creation is going wild.  Where the “weirdness” comes in is from the (unsuspected) electromagnetic qualities that are just not supposed to be going-on, aided and abetted by the huge releases of energy and electrical (positive or protons) charges freed-up when a supermassive Black-Hole ^C-R becomes contorted-enough to release some, or all of it’s contents.

      Where conventional science wants to attribute ALL of this energy released in galaxy collisions solely to gravity [including the huge “fictional” contributions from unseen masses of dark matter], the C-R theory contends that the central Black-Hole’s ^C-R role in this process is totally unsuspected, and unaccounted-for.  I would advise readers to look at the claims from the C-R theory, and LOOK for similar occurrences everywhere there are enormous quantities of energy released, confined positive charges explosively freed-up, and rings of released charges expanding at velocities not explainable by initial temperatures created in conventional processes.

      My hope is that others will realize that one CAN understand more of the type-of events we actually find occurring in these spectacular displays everywhere we look, and can add a few layers of insight. [without needing ANY dark matter]

       Even though we do live in an era with improved technical resources, and can search the heavens with fantastic new “appliances”, both astronomers and cosmologists do not understand the many clues nature is TRYING to give us, as to the operations inside our universe.  They ARE baffled by a search for a real underlying CAUSE, or a believable energy source to “pay-for-it-all”.  It SHOULD-BE an embarrassment to science that the “dark energy” ultimately comes from seemingly nothing, right out of thin air.  THAT IS NOT SCIENCE. (It may be wishful thinking or fairy-tales.)

      As an alternative, the C-R theory only uses known objects and known forces, in new ways, to accomplish processes which should sound remarkably-like what we actually find in the real world.  We NEVER get something from nothing, and everything is paid-for-in-full, energy-wise.  The processes are new (and maybe speculative).

      Next on the list is the galaxy at Centarus A, NGC 5128, (item # 42).  It features massive lobes of high energy particles leaving the central Black-Hole ^C-R at speeds at least half the speed-of-light.  Do these solid particles gain some of their energy from jets of pure electrons, which only the C-R theory expects to emanate from a feeding Black-Hole ^C-R? It emits intense radio waves.  There was also a jet of X-rays, which could also indicate the presence of high energy electrons.

      Arp 220, (item # 38) is the most intense infrared source from a galaxy in our sky.  It was catalogued by Halton Arp.  It seems to have regions of, both stars born a half-billion years ago, and regions of stars very recently fired-up (within the last few million years).  I suspect some C-R theory-type processes will be featured here, too.

      One of the next items on the list is Io, (item # 34), Jupiter’s innermost large moon. From the C-R theory, this moon receives a [time and orbit varying] cyclic flux-tube-current of up to 5,000,000 amps, and NASA has measured a voltage of 400,000 volts across Io’s face.  The C-R theory claims that at least some of this electrical current could be contributing to the active, sulfur spewing volcanoes observed . {The items of interest to the C-R theory were not featured in this article, but this moon, Io, was noticed for it’s weirdness.}

      I may save more items on this top 50 list for the next blog, in the interest of finishing this blog up and getting it on-line sooner, rather than waiting until even later.  I was already planning to feature some new comments on two more of the items on the list, both from the Crab Nebula and it’s remnant pulsar, before I obtained the issue, so I will comment on them, below.  

      I was reviewing some articles, at work, over my lunchtime, about the most recent surprises from the Crab Nebula.  It emitted outbursts of gamma ray energy over a very short scale, many times more powerful than it’s normal output.  An article from earlier this year was stating that the Crab Nebula’s electrons emitted were already some 100 times more energetic than the best of earth’s “high-energy accelerators” can muster. [up to 100 GeV] That also includes the regular pulses emitted by the Crab Nebula’s pulsar.

      Scientists had grown so accustomed to the “normal” Crab Nebula energy-output, that it had been used to calibrate some earlier equipment in space.  Later-on, it was found that even this normal output has surprising, short-term variations coming from it.

      While earth’s scientists attribute the outgoing beams, travelling at 99.99% of the speed-of-light, to an equal mix of electrons and anti-electrons (positrons), the C-R theory would claim that the beam is the leftover residue from a Black-Hole’s ^C-R lunch (or dinner), and is almost purely electrons.  

      While the electrons should normally repel each other, their collective magnetic fields might just bunch them together, to make it easier for them to leave the scene, en-masse, somewhat reminiscent of a mass-jailbreak, where the escapees band together to escape, then flee separately later-on, after they’ve fled the scene.  

      I remember seeing stock footage from early amusement parks showing groups of people sitting on some wooden circles, who would go shooting-off sideways, when the circles were spun around.  If we could imagine that flat circle as a half a globe, and reverse that footage, it might resemble what the proposed electrons do when leaving a Black-Hole ^C-R.

      Whether or not that is how electrons really behave, it would be one of the simplest explanations as to what could cause two, intensely-energetic beams to shoot-away from Black-Holes ^C-R at 99.99% of the speed-of-light.  The analogy above kind-of simplifies why those electrons would bunch-up into two beams, emerging from the top and bottom of the spinning Black-Hole ^C-R, vs. leaking away from all directions, as an expanding shell.

      If any of the C-R theory’s readers out there has a spare supercomputer, and a few million dollars to spare, it would be interesting to see if a simulation of the C-R theory-based processes would produce the required jets of matter.  A simulation based on the existing theories, where the electrical charge does not become infinitely isolated inside, and the electrons are not stripped-off, will not show anything like what is seen.

      Note: this electron-rejection idea, based upon the construction, operation, and feeding of the Black-Hole ^C-R, is unique to the C-R theory.  For a fuller description of how the Black-Hole ^C-R works, see my earlier blogs, or the C-R theory sections on Black-Hole ^C-R operation.

      Another hallmark of the C-R theory’s differences is that the generic supernova’s enormous instantaneous release of intense energy is primarily due to the escape of a built-up from accumulations of positive charges, rather than a runaway, one-time thermonuclear fusion reaction at the end stages of a star’s lifetime.

      Note: If there is a sudden, explosive release of an enormous quantity of newly-liberated positive charges, the SUDDEN re-appearance of those charges could also contribute substantially to the enormous magnetic fields attributed to both pulsars and magnetars.

      Some magnetar’s magnetic fields have been estimated at one trillion Teslas. [Our earth’s magnetic field is about 0.6 Teslas.] This level of magnetic fields simply CANNOT be created on earth (yet), as the best laboratory equipment disintegrates or shears-apart from stresses after reaching about 1 million Teslas.

      This simple causative mechanism also easily explains the origins (and continual replenishment) behind the source of cosmic rays.  The cosmic rays are predominantly single, high-energy protons.  I read last year that one extreme cosmic ray had been measured to have at least 300 quintillion eV, even though the “average” cosmic rays encountered were much less energetic (at a half-million to a million eV).

      NOTE: I have also read that such an energetic cosmic ray would allow that single proton to pack an energy-punch equivalent to a major league baseball [fastball] thrown into a catcher’s mitt.  Fortunately, most of those cosmic rays are intercepted by our protective atmosphere, and become converted into a massive shower or swarm of lesser-energy particles, well before they can impact us.

      Every second of every day, several cosmic rays are crashing through your bodies, leaving a trail of damage, which does build-up over a lifetime.  The cellular repair mechanisms of your body attempt to repair the most significant damages, but subtle changes do persist.

      I do not know of any other theory, besides the C-R theory, that is willing and able to make very specific predictions as to what to look-for, and where to look.  I invite all of our home readers to look for reports of new phenomenon featuring C-R theory-like levels of energy output.

      In spite of the tendency for science writers to “not-write” articles from a C-R specific vantage point, there is abundant evidence left in the everyday reports suggesting vastly more electromagnetic activity, magnetic fields, interstellar gas flows, ionization, warm gasses (from 4,000 to 10,000 K) in the Reynold’s layer, huge lobes filled with electrons (or else, a 50-50 mix of electrons and anti-electrons, if standard theory is correct).

      Strong Hint: If we also observe all of the electromagnetic radiation emanating from galaxies, in almost every energy band, and the level of polarization, from the presence of strong magnetic fields, we can check that SOMETHING electrical is going-on there.

      The REAL IRONY: In spite of ALL the evidence for electromagnetic activity inside galaxies, astronomers want to attribute the action holding galaxies arms together exclusively to gravity, generated by dark matter, for which there is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence, instead of a KNOWN FORCE, electromagnetism, which is 10⁴⁰ times stronger, per atom, than the attraction from gravity.  Every galaxy we detect seems to be rife with polarized light, magnetic fields, radiation in every band from radio, microwave, infrared, light, X-rays, and gamma rays.

      If we were to set-up a police-style line-up, looking for the “guilty parties” to “blame” for holding-together galaxy arms, let us imagine this example.  To cause the Reynold’s layer, found in the Milky Way and other nearby galaxies, dark matter would be needed to generate the excess gravity to hold-together the galaxy arms from shearing-off or smearing out, and twisting (spiraling-around) until the arms were stir-blended (mixed-in until they were homogenous) together.

      Or, to generate the magnetic fields capable of confining or constraining the galaxy’s arms from shearing-off, we would need candidates to blame for the 4,000-10,000 K hydrogen gas layer. [the Reynold’s layer] If we lined-up ALL of the galaxy’s 200 billion stars, side by side, and had them each read “I’m guilty” (of causing this galaxy’s arms to hold together intact, magnetically), we could eliminate those below 4,000 K and above 10,000 K.  That would still leave tens of billions of viable suspects to consider.

      The world’s scientists just have had such “blinders” on, that they have only considered dark matter as the possible source of the missing gravity, and “forgotten-about” the other 50% of the known inverse-square forces, electromagnetism, for which I (as the C-R theory’s author) consider the evidence to be abundant and overwhelming.

      I would appreciate any of my incoming home-readers to help get out the idea that there is a practical, reasonable alternative to dark matter to explain why galaxies hold together available in the C-R theory.

      The recent surprises from the Crab Nebula were said to be unexpected by scientists, but I think they are more “good news” for the C-R theory.  There were unexpectedly high levels of x-rays varying over very short time intervals found coming from the remnant location of the explosion in the Crab Nebula.  I probably have avoided this topic, from a C-R theory standpoint, since I felt that the pulsar left behind more clearly seemed to demonstrate a neutron star-like behavior, as opposed to a Black-Hole ^C-R like appearance.  Just recently, in searching articles about the Crab Nebula, I came across an article from April, 2011, with descriptions of the emissions from the Cygnus X-1 pulsar as “electrons with over 100 times the amount of energy of anything we can produce in our most advanced LHC.  That article emboldened-me, and reminded me that only the C-R theory claims that Black-Holes ^C-R emit copious amounts of these high-energy electrons.

      This helped me to decide that maybe the C-R theory ideas can help here, in this case, too, and that the pulsar at this spot is either a type of a Black-Hole ^C-R, or somehow, is mimicking the same [or a very similar process] as I have attributed to Black-Holes ^C-R.  If it also is stripping off the electrons from matter, and confining the neutrons and protons as effectively as a Black-Hole ^C-R, then it is time to let science have a look to see if it is so.  Give that idea a fair “test-drive”.

      I’ve been saying for over 30 years that the Black-Hole ^C-R eats only the proton and proton-neutron combination, and separates [and spits-out or rejects] the electrons, without consuming very many (if any).

      Either these high energy electrons ARE from Black-Holes ^C-R, or something similar that the pulsar there is mimicking.  This means that, maybe the C-R theory ideas can be of use here, to help scientists to understand what is going on.  Mainstream science certainly is not looking for any “C-R theory-like” mechanisms.  At least until some other, more plausible process can be proposed, get the C-R theory’s “foot-in-the-door”, where it might be helpful.

      The October 2011 Scientific American also had an interesting cover article about “Warped by dark matter”, which is worthy of a mention.  The article, starting on page 38, by Leo Blitz, covers a twist to the shape of the Milky Way.  I would offer that, as well as holding our galaxy’s arms together, simple electromagnetism can also produce the warped shape of our galaxy, and not need to call upon dark matter to do the job.

      According to this article, it is possible that this warp-shaping varies over time [oscillates], and is cyclical.  The C-R theory could agree with that possibility, just not that it was the influence of dark matter acting upon the galaxies, via gravity.

      Not one experiment has ever shown any indication that anything like dark matter exists.  Mainstream science is using dark matter as a simple fix for the expectations of their theories, to correct the errors which should have been obvious [that those theories don’t fit reality].

      I hope to expand upon that idea in the next blog, and still get to the C-R theory’s take on why the multiverse is not needed, either.

      This blog was to have been October’s blog, but I goofed-off enough so that this had to wait until the beginning of November.

      I was going to celebrate the 36,000^th visitor’s arrival to this web-site, but I also delayed long enough that we are now just over the 37,000^th visitor’s arrival, too.

      Thanks to all who have visited, I hope you can find new ways to appreciate our universe.  If you do not believe the C-R theory yet, that is expected, too.  I trust that I can provide some fodder for arguments that many have never considered.  If you cannot change your lifetime’s viewpoint in one reading, that is normal, too.

      I would simply try to ask for a fair evaluation, with an open mind.  If I can start the process of changing your thinking, that is progress.  If I can help you to learn more about our fascinating home (this universe), then that is a good thing, too.  Nature has left abundant clues, hidden everywhere, in plain sight, for ALL to see.  If I can help you to understand HOW the pieces all fit-together, that is my goal.

      My biggest claim is, our universe MAKES SENSE, once you understand HOW to look at it, and WHAT you are seeing.  If YOU can use some of this information and speculation from the C-R theory to understand it better, then we all benefit.  There IS much more left to learn, and to understand.

      There are many reports with items that may make more sense when combined with many other observations.  If you can contribute to the overall understanding, that would be great.

      Please feel free to disagree with the C-R theory, or to build upon it and try to improve it further.  If you do enjoy it, please let others know, and recommend it to them.

      Expect to need to return more than once to fully grasp these ideas.

Until the next blog,

Jerry Reynard.

By the time this blog is posted, we may have had our 35,000^th recorded visitor to this web site.  Thank you to all who visit, and expecially to those who regularly return, to understand this theory better.

FOUND: The Reynold’s Layer, in our Milky-Way galaxy, and some nearby galaxies, too.

      I was reading an interesting article about what is currently known-about our Milky-Way galaxy, in the September, 2011 issue of Astronomy magazine.  In this article, by 3 authors, I found a mention, starting on page 30, that an astronomer, Ronald Reynolds, already knew about a 6,000 lightyear thick layer of ionized hydrogen gas that exists in our galaxy’s arms.  Ronald Reynolds detected this layer back in 1993, and since then, other nearby galaxies have also been measured as having very similar, ionized-gas-rich areas.

      The optical, ultraviolet emissions from the gas, in the Reynolds layer, places it around the 8,000 K temperature range, [other articles state from 4,000 to 10,000K] which is quite a bit warmer than the cold-dark vacuum that had been expected in a galaxy’s arms, in our earlier cosmology.  Further above this layer, much hotter ionized gasses, although more tenuous in their density and pressure, but in the million degree plus temperature range, are measured out from the galactic plane.

      What is even better, [for the C-R theory], when searching-out more information about that phenomenon, I ran into yet another article with an even nicer “gift” for the C-R theory.  It seems that, when measuring the arrival time of pulses from distant pulsars, the high energy photons arrived here, on earth, before the lower energy photons from the same pulses.  According to that article, the cause of that “pulse dispersion” was mentioned to be, that to cause that effect, those pulses must have travelled through AN ELECTRON RICH media.  (The emphasis added was mine, but the quote came from)

 see [ www.wtnnews.com/articles/577/ Check the end of the 7^th paragraph]

      That I know-of, no standard theory celebrates things like that, and only one theory that I am aware of, [the C-R theory], wants and needs claims of excess “free” electrons filling the space between the galaxies.  I included the link to that article above, and have interested home-readers note the last part of the paragraph beginning ..  “The photons or light particles that Reynolds was looking for...”

A GOOD WEEK of GENEROUS GIFT GIVING [all for the C-R theory’s enjoyment]

      Considering the article about the Reynold’s layer, and the article about pulsar pulse-dispersion indicating that those pulses had travelled through “an electron-rich media”, that was a pretty-good week of finding nature’s “gifts” to support the C-R theory ideas.  Note that both of these phenomena are not wanted by any standard theories, but both of these phenomena can-be embraced, cherished, and treasured by the C-R theory, as supporting evidence.

      Both phenomena were known-about long ago, but are “new and fresh” to the C-R theory’s author.  I consider two such “serendipitous” findings, in the same week, worthy

of mentioning as the lead section in this blog.  

      If they are thrown-in with aurorae and thunderstorms (with lightning) on every planet, and the new item, below, about Saturn and Enceladus, these are the types of electrically-related items which I cannot personally manufacture or conjure-up, but which keep “crawling-out-of-the-woodwork” {an expression of items found by accident, that were not looked-for deliberately}.  I suspect that these will not be the last related-items found, but represent “the tip of the iceberg” {the small but visible part of much-larger trove of hidden items, “submerged below the visible horizon”} when scientists consider the known evidence, as they determine: how this universe works.

[Electrical?] Current Events

or, Cooking your Moons with Electricity?

Pun: Ohm, Ohm on the (electric) range

      In going over some of my older magazines for this year, I came across a very interesting short article in the August 2011 issue of Astronomy magazine, on page # 17, that scientists have found yet another case of an electrical current between a large planet and it’s {ice}-volcano-spewing moon.  NASA’s Cassini spacecraft detected an electrical current between Saturn and Enceladus, by measuring an extra ultraviolet (light) peak in Saturn’s aurora, found near Saturn’s north pole, spreading-around, and covering an area as large as 1200 km. x 400 km. (or 750 miles x 250 miles).  The spot [added over the top of the normal aurora] with the extra glow always faces towards Enceladus, as it orbits around Saturn.  The short article (in Astronomy) mentioned this information came from Nature magazine’s article in their April 21 issue by lead author Wayne Pryor of Central Arizona College in Coolidge.

      The scientists had known about the huge current, varying cyclicly, flowing between Jupiter and Io, which can measure as high as 5,000,000 amps, as Io orbits nearer to Jupiter.  (and up to 400,000 volts have been measured across the face of Io) They looked for something similar, elsewhere, but did not notice anything until they detected this additional ultraviolet light-highlight phenomenon in Saturn’s auroral ring in it’s north pole.  I consider this very good news for the C-R theory, adding yet another very large, “known-about” electrical current, discovered within our solar system. (I did not see any mention estimating how large this current was, amperage-wise.)

      I have read elsewhere that in our earth’s aurora, it can have folded Birkeland currents, measured at up to 1,000,000 amps, but that article never specified if that was for each aurora (north pole and south pole) or both, simultaneously.  The important thing is that those millions of amps detected, in all of these diverse places, start to add up, and should make it increasingly difficult to deny that something electrical is going on, quite close-to-home, in our solar system.

      That I know-of, all planets (except for Pluto, which has been demoted recently) in our solar system have been detected with an active aurora, at times.  Even a few of the larger moons have been found to display an occasional aurora, too.  (As a guess, I will predict that Pluto will be found to have an aurora, too, once our planetary probe reaches it, later in this decade.  I think it was far-away enough that we did not have sufficient resolution to see it if it occurred.)

      The current issue of Astronomy magazine for September, 2011, has a very interesting article on what is known about our Milky Way galaxy, starting on page 26. On page 30, the article mentions the “Reynold’s Layer”, a thick layer of ionized gas, discovered in 1993 by Ronald Reynolds, measuring about 8,000 K.  Further outside this layer is a thin, hot layer of gas measuring over one million degrees Celsius, with energy probably coming from a wind emerging out-of our galaxy’s hot center.

      There is also a mention of our galaxy’s halo containing some electrically-neutral gas that might be involved in high velocity gas clouds, known-about, but not yet properly explained.  All these mentions are the type of phenomena that the C-R theory is looking-for, and trying to connect-the-dots-with.  

      Articles I found elsewhere also seem to indicate a dynamic (gas) wind away from the galaxy’s center, as well as vertical “chimneys” (or holes, cleared-out, hollow-bubbles, in the galaxy’s arm’s hydrogen gas), pockets spewing fountains of gas up (from the galactic plane) away from the center, and into the thinner upper layers. {There might also be a rain of cooler, condensed gasses, returning back, down into the galaxy, in yet another flow-pattern.}

      Maybe after I can try to point-out a few hundred items similar-to this type-of information, other’s will realize that there is something electrical going-on in our galaxy, and known-about, that mainstream science is not looking-for, or expecting to be there.

HINT, when “science” tries looking for something: Find What Already Is There, and do NOT go Looking-for Dark Matter [that Isn’t There]

      Then, instead-of “not finding dark energy and dark matter”, astronomers can start acknowledging the already known-about electrical currents and magnetic fields.  The galaxy-wide electromagnetic interactions, coupled-through these items might-well explain why our galaxy’s arms seem to hold-together just fine, and be driven-around, magnetically, (similar to a fan motor), without sufficient force-contributions from normal gravity, alone.  Just estimate-in the contributions possible from the KNOWN amounts of ionized gasses, magnetic fields, or extrapolate in what amounts the fields would need to be to hold our galaxy’s arms together, rotate them around the center, without shearing the arms, or tearing them apart, and also keep the stars inside the arms confined, grouped and constrained magnetically.

      Please remember that electricity is some 10⁴⁰ times stronger than gravity, on a local scale, so we don’t need nearly as much influence from it to replace the missing gravity.

Just a coincidence, or something more?

      Earlier, on August 23, we experienced a “small” earthquake here in Washington DC.  For safety reasons, we were told to evacuate from our building, even though no damage was done to our building.  The streets were jammed with people evacuated from other nearby buildings, and most of the people were sent home early.  While that, in itself is not “remarkable”, what makes that more interesting is that I had a very vivid and memorable dream, just the day before, in the morning, before I got out of bed, prominently featuring an earthquake.  It is extremely rare for me to have any-type of vivid and extraordinary dream, much less one of any kind occurring right before I awake.  I distinctly “remember” feeling the low-frequency shaking, and recognizing it as being from an earthquake, as a part of that dream.  I thought no more about it, after I woke up, other than, I normally almost-never remember specific items or details from my dreams, and by the time I arise, the details from any-of my dreams are long-faded away and forgotten-about, or hazy at best.

      In mentioning that dream to my webmaster, he did say that, if I dreamed vividly about “any specific lottery-winning numbers”, to please let him know, right away. [only half-jokingly, though] If there is a next-time for a vivid-dream, I may be more alert to possible implications.  I cannot dismiss it as sheer coincidence, but it is certainly not a regular occurrence, that was “lucky enough” to be “statistically” prescient.  After all, a stopped clock is still perfectly correct twice every day.

      That item above was not about the theory of the universe, but was fresh from the morning [as I was writing this paragraph].  I do not know if I somehow “got tapped-in to a celestial data stream”, but the nearness of both, within 30 hours of each other, seems unlikely to be a random coincidence.  Now on to more relevant topics.

      (This next part was originally the lead section of this blog, but I relegated it to second place, and now third place, in lieu of the new items I found which can probably explain how our galaxy works, without invoking any “help” from dark matter and dark energy.)

Living Inside a Comedy-Recycling theory “brand name” Closed Universe ^C-R

(and NOT a generic Closed Universe, as expected, conceived, and defined by our competition)

The basic properties of a Closed Universe ^C-R:

      A Closed Universe ^C-R contains EXACTLY enough matter to close-off spacetime at the outer edges (the outer Schwarzschild radius).

      NOTE: If the inner volume possessed any additional mass, it would have closed-off a little-bit sooner.  As it did not close off any earlier, it waited until it’s mass was totally sufficient, then closed-off.  Once it is closed-off, it becomes a complete package, and a self-sufficient system.

      NOTE: It is not a coincidence that a Closed Universe ^C-R contains exactly enough matter at exactly the right density to close it off.  IT IS a requirement!!! Once this universe closes off, it remains sealed forever (unless it is tampered-with, from the inside, by beings who do not-yet know any better).

      NOTE: Once this universe is “sealed”, or complete, this creates a condition immediately outside, [where the escape velocity is equal to or greater than the speed of light], which prevents entry from the outside.  This same total-bending also prevents any emissions from exiting from within, but continually re-directs and deflects potential emissions back inward.  HINT: Think of the ultimate goo, or sticky-trap. {See the Neutral Zone ^C-R, for further information on this region, and the third from next paragraph}

      Just like here on earth, as gravitational curvature increases (bending or warping spacetime, and ever-so-slightly increasing the pathlength light must travel), the real-time clocking rate slows down appropriately. [That IS WHY time slows-down, when the strength of gravity increases.  Light must travel that EXTRA amount that was added-into the total path.]

      There is a MINIMUM slowdown [or the MAXIMUM time-running-rate] which only occurs at the very center.  Then, with time decreasing progressively, until the outer edges are reached, that is where full curvature is attained.  At full curvature, the escape velocity equals the speed of light.  (Everywhere, at the outer edges, in all directions, the real time rate is ZERO, as “measured” by light)

Nature’s “Storage Closet?” or: Light Gone Loopy

 or: Light (says) : Now, I’m Ticked-OFF

      Any additional mass eaten, will be stored just outside this inner region, where the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light.  Since photons of light cannot “travel” in this condition, (as they cannot travel at a speed above “c”), they are {unhappily} forced to “resonate in place” until the region’s escape velocity is decreased.  This effectively time-traps both light and matter, isolating and insulating them both, from ANY speed-of-light communication, interaction, knowledge, radiation, absorbtion, or emission, whatsoever.

HINT: Imagine a metronome in a parked position, where it cannot tick.

NOTE: The Second LAW of Thermodynamics CANNOT apply to this VOLUME of spacetime, as NO energy can escape or leak-away. {BANK on it!!}

CAN YOU REMAIN NEUTRAL, or WILL THIS NEW IDEA “TURN-YOU OFF”?

      Matter and energy so trapped act as if they were electrically neutral (even if they are electrically charged), and behave like they are oblivious to any other outside influences.  

      NOTE: This does make for an ideal storage-closet type of packing method.  Set it up, pack it in, and forget about it, for the time-being.  This is why the C-R theory has called this region The Neutral Zone ^C-R.  This brand-new feature is an exclusive innovation, unique to the C-R theory brand-name Black-Holes ^C-R.  Note that this condition can only be created after curvature causes the escape velocity to exceed the speed of light.

      Hence, nature must “pay-for” the entrance-ticket, “energy-mass-price”, by gathering a dense-enough mass to create a Black-Hole ^C-R.  There can be no singularity at the inside center, but the reward is to achieve an extremely useful new tool.  This NEW concept ONLY makes sense from a curvature-based gravity, and does not work, at all, if you are using a Newtonian (graviton-emission based force) type-of gravity.

      NOTE: Speed-of-light limited gravitons CANNOT pass through, or be emitted from a Neutral Zone ^C-R.  Neither can any “knowledge-of”: the inside electrical charge, the spin of the mass, or any electromagnetic energy pass through, as no “particles”, necessary for communication, can traverse-across this barrier, either.

      Second note: Curvature does pre-exist, and is maintained through the Neutral Zone ^C-R, but emits no speed-of-light based energy to do so.  Curvature is a metric-like property of spacetime itself, something more-akin to the slope of a mountain, which is caused by the varying-arrangement of the mass of the mountain, but does not change {rapidly or detectably} over real-time.  A mountain needs to emit no energy to maintain it’s slope, until the arrangement of the mass of the mountain changes.

      AUTHOR’S NOTE: For the record, I have NO IDEA WHY curvature does so, or what it’s “absolute” causative mechanism is, on a quantum-level.  I am understanding that this IS how it works, though, and that seems to produce a consistent result, and a real, useful difference in performance (of gravity).

ONLY by changing “How you think about a problem”, can YOU change “How YOU understand that problem, in a NEW way”.

      ONCE YOU can understand this difference, it easily becomes possible to sense the profound usefulness of a brand-name Black-Hole ^C-R, vs. a “generic-imposter” black hole.

SITUATIONAL AWARENESS: or,: Recycling a good answer, again.

      NOTE: I did not receive this new insight by studying the available “Newtonian” gravitational equations.  Instead, I kind-of assumed that nature would prevent any possibility of a singularity*, and then, the “curvature-based gravity” concept showed ME how it was done.  NOW I KNOW how gravity exists outside of a Black-Hole ^C-R, because gravity actually is ONLY caused LOCALLY, and is NOT POWERED from a distant source [coupling-through or across the Schwarzschild radius, as in, coming from inside a conventional black hole].

      *I recycled my understanding of “The Ultraviolet Catastrophe”, where nature originally avoided a singularity expected by scientists in the early 1900's, and figured nature also had a good way to prevent a singularity INSIDE a (generic) black hole, if I could recycle that lesson.  The “reward”, for pursuing that path was ultimately, the Comedy-Recycling Theory. {Plus, the Black-Hole ^C-R also recycles matter and energy, so recycling played at least a double role in my understanding.}

SEE OUR brand-name, or, C-R brand name:

 --{or: TAILS of WOE or: tales of Whoa}

      AUTHOR’S ADMISSION: I do not ENJOY typing and invoking the superscript fonts for the ^C-R tailed superscripts at the end of Black-Holes and Neutral Zones, but elected to do so, to show YOU, the home-readers, the uniqueness of the concept, and to differentiate the “brand-named” objects from their “inferior” counterparts.  That may make it more difficult to have the new C-R concept catch-on elsewhere, especially IN PRINT, as other writers are much less likely to carefully and deliberately type-in the appropriate “brand-name” {trademark-like} extra superscript tails.

      I probably could have re-named those “tailed” items to something more original, but the “generic-named” concepts were already known and loved-enough to make the “C-R” re-branding concept the lesser of two evils.

      Note: This “electrically-neutralized” packing method is an extra bonus, thrown in for free, from the Comedy-Recycling theory method of understanding this universe.  What is very interesting is how these very properties come together, and are used by nature to do something both surprising and very effective, and totally unforeseen by mainstream science.

The Sky’s the Limit, or “Disguise the Limit”; we cannot tell the difference.

      SAD NOTE: The “electrical-nature” of the Black-Hole ^C-R has been so well disguised by nature, that mainstream science has totally-missed noticing this concept, and still maintains that our universe, and almost all operations inside it, are electrically neutral. Despite numerous clues to the contrary*, the charge-disguise has actually been “too-effective”.

*[See the items I moved into the beginning of this blog, now at the top, and some earlier blogs, too]

      Another property of a closed universe is that matter anywhere inside IS NOT equivalent to matter elsewhere inside this type of universe, unless both masses are situated at identical radii away from the center.  Otherwise, the matter is worth less energy (or is more slowed-down) if it is further-out to the outer edges, or is worth more energy (less curved, or path-elongated), if it resides closer-in to the center, where it can “clock-faster” or appear blueshifted to other matter.

      NOTE: Such a “positional-energy-worth” vector-modulation effectively contains outlying matter, and keeps the outermost matter from collapsing inward, because it MUST acquire more energy to be allowed to move inward.  Unless matter can acquire that energy (which is expensive, time-wise), it may not proceed inward.

      [I apologize for understanding the process this way, but that IS how I think it works.]

      However, due to electrical charge imbalances, there is some flow-mixing of the matter, but this current-streaming is limited in it’s scope.  The limited circulation provides some “refreshing” of matter and energy, and does cause some noticeable overall flow currents.

      Some of these flow currents magnetically pinch and shove the magnetic-matter around in galaxy arms, causing the characteristic spiral shape, and holding the galaxy’s arms together.  Science has mistaken this effect for the influence of the “phantom” dark matter for which there is no real evidence.

      Science is looking for a non-existent force to replace a perfectly known-about electromagnetic-field-force, which is more than adequate to cause ALL of the galaxy-holding-together needed to explain what is actually seen.  The real causative mechanism is much more mundane, and far less exotic than is dreamed-of by most cosmologists.

      What a lucky break for the C-R theory that in addition to all of the other items it straightens-out, the theory also provides a very simple causative mechanism for sufficient electrical currents to be generated across all-of-the galaxies, universe-wide. The result is a far simpler-to-understand model of how this universe works, an easy agreement with more of the known observations, without needing major (and improbable) anomalies to explain them away.

      Because our universe has always existed, and always will continue to do so, it easily explains the lack of a mass-modulation effect on the background 2.7 K. This means that the clumped masses seen do not subtract from the background temperature, and superimpose an image-imprint on it. This also explains why every direction inside our universe appears to be so similar, temperature wise, because ALL-of it, in all directions, actually is at thermal equilibrium with everywhere else, and always has been.

      Additionally, the 2.7 K background radiation is not connected in any way to a big bang’s aftermath, but is more-like the roar of a waterfall, but coming uniformly from all directions.  It is more-like the averaged-out reflected [or redirected-around] “noise” of day to day operations in this universe.  As such, the 2.7 K will never redshift (or cool-down) over time, but will remain the same.

      If one could freely wander-about inside this universe, your “local” background temperature would warm-up, as you moved out, towards the outer edges, or cool off, if you could gain enough energy to be allowed in, towards the Great Attractor, as the traveller varied his/her position as they wandered.  This will become readily apparent within the next few billion years, as humanity develops the technology to travel-about and report back their findings, but it might not be as apparent, now, in a realtime, earthbound, single observation-location.

      NOTE: A billion lightyear change in your observation-location-position should easily confirm this, but that is not likely within the foreseeable future.

EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE, but not the SIZE-of YOUR UNIVERSE

      Since our universe is not expanding at an expanding rate, no driving (dark) energy source is needed, and conservation of energy will once-again be respected instead of continually violated.

      Since the Big Bang is no longer needed, neither is the ridiculous hyperinflation also needed to explain the overall smoothness of the contents of this universe.

      It should be considered “ironic” that as far back as scientists think they have discovered objects from the early stages of this universe, the “baby pictures” all seem to reveal full-grown adults, far more mature than the short time alotted-by the Big Bang theory can accommodate.

{A Scientific Hint:}   IF YOU WANT TO GET A “CORRECT” IDEA, DO NOT FIRST CORRECT {or re-write} YOUR OBSERVED DATA (by actually corrupting it), TO WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT!!!

            or: (re)-WRITING a WRONG:

      While the increasing redshift of objects seen does indicate an increasing distance-away, almost ALL of the distant objects seen are actually “observed” at their true “real-time-rate”.  When scientists “fix” their data to correct the time-frame for the “assumed” Doppler-shift, they are actually corrupting, [spoiling], their true data, [which is gravitationally redshifted], and introducing-in {writing} the very-wrong items that make them think this universe is expanding at an expanding rate.

      Any decent professor should tell their youngest students NEVER to correct their data BEFORE they draw their conclusions from it. {Shame, Shame, Shame} To fool the whole world by doing just that has bolluxed-up the entire world’s thinking, and ruined their understanding about the true nature of this universe since 1929-1930.

      Maybe the simplest way to understand this universe is TO CHANGE the theory they use to understand it with.  Fortunately, you have come to the only site where such an easy fix is possible. {I do wish there were far more of them.}

      The universe described by the C-R theory is far easier to understand, from a human-based viewpoint, than any of the competition can match.  First of all, almost all observations are straightforward, simple, and need no correction or interpretation to evaluate.

      Our universe is a fixed size, not expanding, and definitely, not expanding at an expanding rate.  It is perfectly stable, yet dynamically interactive-enough to allow some mixing of the internal contents to keep things fresh and interesting.

      Inside a closed universe, there is a 100% probability of finding EXACTLY enough matter at exactly the right density to close-off that universe, otherwise it would not be closed-off.  NOTE: If our closed universe was larger, it would have had more matter at a lesser density.  If our closed universe had been smaller, it would have had less matter at a higher density.

      Since we see an increasing amount of redshift in all directions, something must be causing that.  In our universe’s case, it is the gravitational curvature (or increasing bending of the time-frame of spacetime) which “stretches-out” spacetime, and requires light “there” to travel a longer (or stretched-out) distance to cover the same real distance, which, in effect, slows down time. [HINT: Think of blowing-up a balloon, and taking longer to travel the same balloon’s surface area as it’s surface expands.  It is the SAME balloon, but the trip across it’s surface takes longer when it is inflated.) As light travels in more-curved space, it appears to slow-down.

      We get exactly the same effect here, on earth, when an atomic clock is lowered into a more intense gravitational field, but on a far-wimpier, minuscule scale.  Whereas we lose time by about 1 part in 10^-16th, here on earth, for every meter’s difference in elevation (down), nearer the outermost edges of this universe, the time-loss effect is measured in a percentage of real time-slowdown nearer to 80-90% in distant galaxies and quasars.  HINT: By this mode of thinking, the 2.7 K background radiation is the reflected, averaged-out, slowed-down remnant of light (bent back around, sent to us again, rather than emitted-out from this universe).  

      The 2.7 K is NOT in any-way related-to the cooled-down Big Bang leftovers, because the Big Bang never occurred.  Therefore, no remnant of the explosion is needed.  The 2.7K thus does not prove the Big Bang at all.

      The easiest way to check to see that this is so is to also look, simultaneously, for one, and only one inner region, where matter appears to be blueshifted to us, because matter (and energy) there is running faster than here, on earth.

      By some (non-amazing) “coincidence”, we do see just that, too.  In every study I am aware-of, enough mass has never been found at The Great Attractor to suck our mass, from here on earth, to rush-in towards that region, from that great of a distance-away. A far simpler answer is that both the redshifts, and the blue shift are BOTH caused by non-linear time-rates, and simple positional differences.

      (Incidentally, matter on the other side of the Great Attractor is also not seen to be rushing inward at a similar rate as from earth, as might be expected if The Great Attractor was actually ATTRACTING anything.)

      My argument is: If increasing nearness to the earth’s mass slows-down time, here on earth, is it not reasonable that, for a [gravitationally] totally closed universe, time rates should also vary, internally, BY LOCATION? Is it not unreasonable to claim that mass here, on earth, does so, but the entire collective mass of our universe DOES NOT?

      I would humbly maintain that it is far easier to FIX our understanding of this universe, than to accept ALL of the ridiculous anomalies associated with the Big Bang, collectively.  I cannot help but gloat smilingly when I think of how easy it is to do away with all of the unreasonableness of the Big Bang’s necessary corrections to make it work-out.

      The principle of Occams’ razor states that, the theory with the most reasonable, and fewest assumptions, is most likely to be correct.  I welcome any home-reader to stack up the simple points, and the unreasonable points, between the C-R theory, and the Big Bang, and judge for yourself where the most unreasonable points lie.  Let us place a possible guide below, and ask you to use your intuition about which alternatives sound most sensible, and implausible, by YOUR standards of reasoning.

{Place chart here, after I’ve created it}

      Many thanks for visiting.  I hope you can understand my concerns, and start to understand the C-R theory and see why it really makes the most sense out of the observations, without any necessary corrections.  These ideas are too new, and too far from what conventional theory understands.  I do not expect anyone to warm-up to these ideas upon your first encounter.  Expect to need multiple re-visits, and extended re-thinking time, before you can accept these simple new changes.

      I encourage any first time visitors to slowly re-consider what you now believe, and welcome your skepticism.  Feel free to personally research any of the points I bring-up, and use the many illustrations and drawings on the side column to fill-in your understanding.

      Please use your innate, common sense, and ask yourself if the C-R theory point-of-view is not simpler to understand, if you can accept the arguments.  Please test these ideas whenever possible, against every new discovery, and/or, re-read modern articles, and note every mention of electrical current, magnetic fields, roving gas-clouds, polarized light, high-energy cosmic rays, and weigh their presence as compared to the non-discovery of dark energy and dark matter.

      If it is nonsense that a small, bowling ball-like object, would be constantly expanding, accelerating it’s acceleration outward, and increasing it’s mass daily, without the slightest trace of an energy source, should it not be “increasingly improbable” nonsense when those very same properties are applied to our everyday universe, and accepted with a straight faced sincerity?

      If science is not consistent in it’s applications, is it worthwhile? HINT: If you accept the C-R theory, it still is.  Perhaps if science did not so obviously mis-judge the age, origin, and time-varying-nature of our universe, it could be restored to a more “fully-respected” mode by the general public.

      PREVIEW: I hope to tackle some of the nonsense of the Multi-verse in the next blog, unless something more-interesting comes up before then.

      Jerry Reynard, September 5th, 2011