the expanding matter hypothesis
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:45 am
"if you put a balloon in a vacuum environment, it will get bigger and bigger until *bam* it pops. I suspect matter expands in a similar fashion and for the same reason."
-Mark McCutcheon, The Final Theory
so I really enjoyed this book and thought I would post some of the highlights.
re-examining gravity:
geometric orbits
prior to Isaac Newton's theoretical discovery of gravity, there was already a framework of equations that perfectly describe the motion of orbiting bodies without any appeal to force, written by Johannes Kepler.
1. the orbiting body moves about in an elliptical fashion, with the orbited body at a focal point.
2. the area swept out by the distance between the orbited body and the orbited body over an equal amount of time is equal.
3. the average distance between the two bodies, cubed, divided by the time taken to orbit, squared, is constant.
note there's no mention of mass or force, yet any orbit can be described by these principles.
even for falling objects force is an unnecessary construct. the simple equation, distance = 1/2 acceleration*time^2 is well more than enough to describe this. nevertheless, something must be behind all this motion...
introducing a new concept:
the expanding matter hypothesis
imagine a two dimensional world. imagine a flatland person in it. now imagine we introduce a single expanding particle to it. to the person it would look like he is falling into the particle as it got bigger. then when he hit it he would feel forcefully pushed against as it got bigger and bigger yet. but in such a universe, things aren't staying the same relative size. so now imagine that we introduce a limitless amount of particles, each expanding at the same universal rate...
new possibilities:
the artificial gravity generator
under Isaac Newton, in order to have artificial gravity equivalent to that of the earth, you would need something as massive as the earth in order to do it.
but under the expanding matter hypothesis you only need something as long as the earth's radius, with a counter weight at the base.
a strong pipe, expanding both directions from the center.
a strong pipe, expanding mostly in one direction.
....
the first principle equation:
if everything is expanding, then there are two things we need to consider, absolute distance decrease and relative distance decrease. imagine two equal sized objects that start off 6 radii apart, and then double in size over a period of time. in and absolute sense, they are now 4 radii part. in a relative sense, they are 2 radii apart.
both needs to be considered in the principle equation [...]
D' = (D -n^2 *A *(R1 +R2))/(1 +n^2 *A) where A is 0.00000077/s^2
[...]
plugging the values we can calculate that everything must double in size roughly every 19 minutes.
[...]
the book is pretty weird, he goes on to describe magnetism, electricity, and light under the expanding matter hypothesis. part of me wants to believe it but it's just such a radical idea I don't see how I can.
-Mark McCutcheon, The Final Theory
so I really enjoyed this book and thought I would post some of the highlights.
re-examining gravity:
geometric orbits
prior to Isaac Newton's theoretical discovery of gravity, there was already a framework of equations that perfectly describe the motion of orbiting bodies without any appeal to force, written by Johannes Kepler.
1. the orbiting body moves about in an elliptical fashion, with the orbited body at a focal point.
2. the area swept out by the distance between the orbited body and the orbited body over an equal amount of time is equal.
3. the average distance between the two bodies, cubed, divided by the time taken to orbit, squared, is constant.
note there's no mention of mass or force, yet any orbit can be described by these principles.
even for falling objects force is an unnecessary construct. the simple equation, distance = 1/2 acceleration*time^2 is well more than enough to describe this. nevertheless, something must be behind all this motion...
introducing a new concept:
the expanding matter hypothesis
imagine a two dimensional world. imagine a flatland person in it. now imagine we introduce a single expanding particle to it. to the person it would look like he is falling into the particle as it got bigger. then when he hit it he would feel forcefully pushed against as it got bigger and bigger yet. but in such a universe, things aren't staying the same relative size. so now imagine that we introduce a limitless amount of particles, each expanding at the same universal rate...
new possibilities:
the artificial gravity generator
under Isaac Newton, in order to have artificial gravity equivalent to that of the earth, you would need something as massive as the earth in order to do it.
but under the expanding matter hypothesis you only need something as long as the earth's radius, with a counter weight at the base.
Code: Select all
3000m 3000m
<------------.--------------->
______________________________
a strong pipe, expanding both directions from the center.
Code: Select all
6000m
------------------------>
|||________________________
|||
a strong pipe, expanding mostly in one direction.
....
the first principle equation:
if everything is expanding, then there are two things we need to consider, absolute distance decrease and relative distance decrease. imagine two equal sized objects that start off 6 radii apart, and then double in size over a period of time. in and absolute sense, they are now 4 radii part. in a relative sense, they are 2 radii apart.
Code: Select all
/
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
/
/
/
| |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---
| |
/
/
/
/
| |
|------|-------|-------|------|
| |
/
/
both needs to be considered in the principle equation [...]
D' = (D -n^2 *A *(R1 +R2))/(1 +n^2 *A) where A is 0.00000077/s^2
[...]
plugging the values we can calculate that everything must double in size roughly every 19 minutes.
[...]
the book is pretty weird, he goes on to describe magnetism, electricity, and light under the expanding matter hypothesis. part of me wants to believe it but it's just such a radical idea I don't see how I can.
.
