User:Lesdavid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Universe non-expanding, everchanging, everlasting; UFO's can exceed observed light speed; Shape of the universe, no center, bounded by cosmic horizon; Zero time frame of light; Space-time curvature governs observed light velocity; Red shift; Cosmic microwave background; Comprehensive explanation of the universe.

Beyond Einstein

The True Shape of the Universe by Les Burgess A New Cosmology A more complete view of the space-time continuum

Foreword

The writer’s extrapolation of Einstein’s theory of relativity has revealed a whole new set of answers to cosmological questions. Much confirmation of the extrapolations already exists in recent astronomical discoveries. It is not difficult to understand the conclusions, but they are difficult to believe for a very good reason: the geometry of four dimensions integrated into one 4-dimensional continuum is incompatible with the geometry of three spatial dimensions. The red shift is a natural relativistic effect in the 4-dimensional space-time continuum of the universe.

Trying to visualize the shape of the universe in one time frame (one picture) is attempting the impossible. We think in three dimensions, which means we have to see through the eyes of each observer (in imagination) fairly close to the scene in that time frame (not from across the universe in our time frame) to see the true facts. Einstein’s theory of relativity means relatively to each observer, whose observations of phenomena may vary considerably according to their state of motion and position. In fact, there is no absolute motion in nature, only relative motion, and likewise there is no absolute position because there is no boundary or center as a reference point.

The universe is very complicated, which it has to be to produce the amazing performance that we can see, plus what we cannot see. The reader should not feel too intimidated by such an alien view of the physics of the universe. Just keep reading about the rules for interpreting reality. They are very simple.

With the aid of very sophisticated analytic (algebraic) geometry, necessary for higher dimensions (mathematics increases the power of the human mind to solve problems), Einstein was able to describe a seemingly magical side to our universe which no one had ever suspected. Logic, extrapolated to infinity, is the foundation of intelligence and everything in the universe.

The perfect mind is logical and there is no end to its potential complexity. Everything can be explained and there is no problem that cannot be solved. The details of the universe are so complicated, especially at the nuclear level, it indicates that logic, which explains the universe, can be extrapolated to the ultimate level.

The Non-Expanding Universe

We have been told for a long time by nearly all astronomers that the universe is expanding, and that it must have started from a point some 14 billion years ago with a big bang, hurling matter outwards at near light speed. The theory was based on astronomer Hubble’s discovery in 1929 that light from stars analyzed in a spectrum shows a red shift, which increases in proportion to distance from earth.

Scientists almost universally assumed this to be caused by stars and galaxies receding from us producing the Doppler effect: the elongation of light waves towards the red end of the spectrum. It is a known characteristic of light that motion of the source of light alters the wavelength. If there had been a shift to the blue end of the spectrum it would have implied that the stars were moving towards us. The Doppler effect also operates in sound waves. An air plane that approaches us has a higher pitch sound due to the waves being compressed, than when it is moving away from us due to the waves becoming elongated.

Naturally, scientists quickly saw that if stars and galaxies were receding from us at an ever-increasing speed, in more or less proportion with distance, this implied that the universe began billions of years ago with a vast explosion from a single point. With trust in the obvious, and never a thought of a much more sophisticated explanation, just about everybody embraced the ‘Big Bang’ theory. It seems that most scientists still do after nearly eighty years, even though Einstein had published the first part of his theory of relativity in 1905 and the second part a few years later. Obviously, nobody really understood its implications.

Modern technology keeps uncovering facts that do not fit the expanding universe theory. For instance, the ages of some galaxies exceed the time available since the supposed 'Big Bang’ commencement, and the rate of expansion appears to be increasing with distance rather than decreasing with the constant pull of gravity towards an assumed center. There are alternative explanations for the red shift, which are being assiduously researched.

It has become more popular now to suggest (and teach) that space itself is expanding, but this means that the universe is becoming larger and less dense, and the end would be literally out-of-sight. This is not supported by the most recent observations; neither is it compatible with Einstein’s description of a 4-dimensional universe.

The suggestion is another attempt to find an alternative explanation for the red shift because the Big Bang theory is now being seen to be increasingly untenable. Fortunately, there is now good evidence from Nasa (quoted below) that the universe is constantly regenerating with new galaxies being formed. This is in agreement with the writer’s theory of an everlasting universe.

If the universe were to be finite and spherical the gravitational pull towards the center would be greatest at the surface of the sphere, and nil at the center, where gravity on one side equals and cancels the gravity on the other side. In the early days the gravity of a compressed universe would have been enormous, exceeding by a factor of billions any possible black hole we are detecting (not seeing) today with our powerful telescopes. Even light cannot escape from a black hole; it is trapped in a circle.

All the stars, especially the outer ones, would have lost much of their original velocity over billions of years being subjected to strong gravitational attraction to the center. The general opinion is that observations based on the red shift unexpectedly indicate an increase in the rate of expansion.

Professor Stephen Hawking from his book, ‘A Brief History of Time’, p.68: "…nowadays nearly everyone assumes that the universe started with a big bang singularity. It is perhaps ironic that, having changed my mind, I am now trying to convince other physicists that there was in fact no singularity at the beginning of the universe." Also, "If the rate of expansion one-second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million, the universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size."

At least one astronomer has reported that the red shift increases exponentially with distance (and increasing curvature of the space-time continuum), which is in agreement with the writer’s extrapolation of Einstein’s theory of relativity. The red shift increases to infinity at a finite distance (about 10 billion light years, not 14) more and more rapidly forming every observer’s cosmic boundary, or horizon, beyond which we cannot see.

The wavelength of light attenuates beyond the limit of visibility becoming heat waves. The cosmic horizon, the limit of visibility, works like our horizon on earth; it moves as the observer moves. But there is much more to the theory than this one conclusion.

Size of the universe

The universe is spatially a little smaller than the red-shift effect indicates. We should soon have a more accurate figure based on other known methods of measurement. The red shift of Supernova 1997ff indicates that it is 10 billion light years distant but its known brightness (from similar supernovas) indicates 7 billion, which is another confirmation of the 4-d universe theory.

There is now evidence (quoted below) that the Hubble telescope can see almost the entire universe and we appear to be at the center, which would be extremely unlikely in 3-dimensional space, but not in a 4-dimensional continuum, which has no common center as Einstein’s theory shows. There are several other objections which prominent cosmologists raise from time to time.

The writer’s own theory answers a lot of questions, especially about every observer seeing himself at the center of the universe. Even with the 2.5m Hubble telescope (and certainly with the much larger 6.5m James Webb space telescope now in preparation for launch in 2013) we can see the cosmic horizon. We just haven’t recognised it.

Single view of the universe not possible.

The problem with relativity theory is that it is impossible to visualize the 4-dimensional universe in one 3-dimensional picture because of the time factor. Einstein’s mathematics described it, but to convert the peculiar geometry of 4 dimensions into 3-dimensional sense requires, for most of us without a comprehension of multidimensional geometry, a leap of faith.

This became evident to the writer as soon as he ‘saw’ the major missing piece of the comprehensive theory of the universe – the shape of the universe. All the other parts of the jigsaw puzzle fell into place very quickly confirming the general theory. The writer had known for many years that every observer sees himself at the center of the universe, but the two views, from here and from the cosmic horizon seemed incompatible.

It was only when he abandoned normal 3-dimensional logic, and accepted that reality requires us to accept the relative-to-the-observer point of view central to Einstein’s theory of relativity, that he knew he had found the truth. Einstein’s theory of relativity reads like magic, but it is proven by higher mathematics, and it has been confirmed by careful observation. It all fits together, each part supporting every other part.

Cosmic horizon

The cosmic horizon, the limit of visibility for every observer, beyond which we cannot see because of the attenuation of all electromagnetic waves, including light, moves as the observer moves. This means that the universe only appears to be spherical. Einstein said it was spherical, boundless and centerless but is really a continuum. It is without beginning or end. It is finite in the spatial dimensions but infinite in the (fourth) time dimension.The future goes on forever.

A universe that can be visualized in one picture has to be 3-dimensional; the fourth dimension, time, changes the spatial dimensions, but we have to be closer to our (present) cosmic horizon in imagination to see (or visualize) the curvature of the space-time continuum.

Velocity of light and space-time curvature

Just to show the apparently illogical nature of our 4 dimensions, the observed speed of light is the same however and wherever we measure it. Motion in any direction of the light source or measuring equipment makes no difference to its observed velocity. Light, in its own time frame, travels instantaneously (at infinite speed). Light exists in a constant state of instantaneous motion in our three spatial dimensions. Its observed finite speed (always a constant ‘c’: 300,000 km per sec.) is governed, or caused, by the space-time curvature of the universe, but the writer doubts that anyone else knows this so the reader shouldn’t expect confirmation.

If the velocity of light really were as we observe it, and space really had only three dimensions, it would change as our speed changed. If we could travel fast enough we could catch up with it and probably overtake it. But, of course, we can’t, and never will. Light always moves at the same speed to any observer. This is true of light in a vacuum. When light moves through glass or water it appears to slow down but this is due to molecular action in the material transmitting the light. In the space between atoms and molecules light still travels at ‘c’. In its own time frame it travels at infinite speed because it exists in a timeless spatial dimension (zero time frame) as we would if we could transform into electromagnetic energy.

Einstein proved mathematically that when an object accelerates towards (observed) light-speed it increases in mass exponentially to infinity, shortens in the direction of motion, and its clocks (physical processes) or time rate slow down towards zero. Of course, matter can never attain light speed, (a) because it would require infinite energy to accelerate an ever-increasing mass, and (b) because it would have to accelerate to infinity, which is impossible and illogical.

It follows that light exists in a timeless dimension because its time rate has contracted to zero, and it moves instantaneously, but only in its own time frame. Also, it doesn’t accelerate, it transforms instantly. Space is integrated with the time dimension forming a space-time continuum with some weird geometrical properties that only become noticeable at extreme speeds and distances.

Distance means a change in time as well as space. Clocks in different places show different times Light from the sun takes 8 minutes to arrive here which makes us think that light has a finite speed, but the delay is due to the construction of space-time. The sun really is 8 minutes behind our present time, just as we are 8 minutes behind the sun’s present time. Light connects us instantaneously in its own time frame or system, but it is only showing the truth.

This is irrational in 3-dimensions but not in 4. In 4-dimensions the sun is 8 minutes in our history because it is separated from us by 8 light minutes of space, with a curvature of 8 minutes of time. Relatively to us, the curvature of space-time makes light appear to have a finite speed, which works satisfactorily for practical purposes.

This could mean that light does not follow the curvature of space-time. It makes a ‘quantum jump’ in a spatially straight line instantaneously in its own (3-d space) zero time frame. The 8 minutes of difference is due to space-time curvature. The effect on the light is to increase its wavelength very slightly. If the light source were 10 billion light years distant the increase in wavelength would make it unseeable. This can be visualized if the light maintains a constant angle wavefront in its own uncurved space but lands on an increasingly sloping surface the greater distance it travels – one explanation of the red shift.

The universe is spatially spherical to any observer surrounded by the observer’s cosmic horizon. If the above theory is correct it should be easy to check against available figures for the red shift in the spectrum in light from stars and galaxies at known distances, measured by other methods (eg known brightness).

The importance of relativity

The reader can see the difficulty in believing the theory, but everything depends on seeing things relative to each observer and his point of view. Einstein’s mathematics proved it. It is essential to understand, or accept, the concept of relativity because it is the major factor in everything from higher physics to spiritual experience.

We live in what appears mostly to be a 3-dimensional world in which 3-dimensional logic is self-evident with time as an independent but necessary factor involving variable rates of motion or change. But the world doesn’t normally experience the very high speeds at which anomalies become apparent. The exponential nature of relativistic change or transformation means that we would have to move extremely fast before any change would be noticeable.

Acceleration and the contraction of time

A near-light-speed journey in a subjective straight line across the universe would quickly bring us back to the space we left, but 20 billion years later in universal time. Our continuum of 4 dimensions curves in both time and space at one second for every 300,000 km. There are two rates of time for a traveller: his own subjective rate and the universal or (relatively stationary) planetary observer’s rate.

Why we can exceed light-speed

It is widely believed that nothing can exceed the speed of light. However, a space ship can exceed the observed speed of light without limit but only in its own time frame. Observers would never see it attaining light speed, or more correctly, 300,000 km per second. If the ship accelerated enough, and one hour in an earth observer’s time equalled one minute in the ship’s time, then the earth observer would only see the ship travelling at one sixtieth of its (subjective to itself) true speed. The ship would see earth spinning, and the moon revolving, sixty times faster.

This is in accordance with Einstein’s theory (time contracts with acceleration). If we could see the passengers inside the ship they would appear to be moving sixty times slower. The theory could be tested with an accelerated camera or specialized equipment, observing a binary star for instance, but nobody seems to have even tried it. By these criteria, the ship must exceed the speed of light in the view of its passengers, but in our view it doesn’t. The ship, at any sub-light speed, would see light moving at its normal constant relative to themselves. At light-speed they would see nothing because the journey would be accomplished instantly.

It is acceleration, not motion that produces the relativistic changes in mass and time that Einstein calculated. The accelerating travellers do not experience any relativistic changes in their own environment, ie the spaceship, only in their observation of others. I only mention this because of a widespread misunderstanding that all motion is identical or reversible between two observers. It is the one who accelerates who undergoes transformation, who increases mass and whose clocks slow down.

If a father went on a spaceship and travelled at very near observed light speed and arrived back after 20 universal years, his son would have aged 20 years while the father had hardly aged at all. The father would have only experienced a few months of time, depending on his speed. The physical effects of high acceleration are being ignored for the sake of simplicity.

Foreshortening of space

The writer should mention the contraction in the direction of motion of the accelerated body or ship. As a ship accelerates the passengers do not experience any relativistic transformation within the ship, but their observation of the outside universe does change. The universe appears to be foreshortened. From the point of view of the ship (and of nature), it is still at the center of its observable universe and light would appear to have the same constant ‘c’ speed.

The foreshortening effect applies to both observers on ship and earth, because motion (the result of acceleration) is only relative to other objects and can be regarded as reversible (either one could be the one moving, as taught in ‘University Physics’ 9th edition, Young-Freedman, p 1205). Both observers see each other as foreshortened. The ship should see the distance to their destination decreasing (shortening) as they accelerate. The ship itself would shorten but the passengers would not perceive that, because everything in the ship is in the same time frame.

It appears that the ship does not have to exceed observed light speed in its new space-time frame because the distance has contracted instead, as has the rest of the universe, in which everything spherical would appear oval (foreshortened in the direction of motion).

Kinetic energy stored in increased mass, not motion.

The kinetic energy of acceleration is being stored by increased mass (E = mass x c, the velocity of light, squared – Einstein’s famous equation) which also makes the rest of the universe seem lighter in ‘weight’ (correctly, inertial mass) to the observers in the ship. The reason that mass increases with acceleration is that there is no absolute state of rest or motion. All is relative to everything else. There is no boundary or center to measure to or from. There is no absolute motion to nature because every molecule is always at the center of its observable universe. Thus, nature does not recognise kinetic energy as we do as observers.

The energy of acceleration must be stored to maintain the mass/energy constant in the universe (mass/energy can neither be created nor destroyed). We think of increased kinetic energy as energy of motion or momentum, but in 4-dimensional space-time this is not entirely correct. It is practical at terrestrial speeds because the relativistic changes are extremely minute, but increasingly impractical at close to light speeds when the mass-increase factor becomes significant. The scientific community accepts the mass increase (from observation of high-energy cosmic rays) as a proven fact, though it is unlikely that anyone knows the reason for it. It is another confirmation of the space-time continuum nature of the universe.

Space travel

How is the space ship’s time passing in relation to earth observers? This is the important question because it determines the human limits of space travel in our enormous universe. Let us say that the ship takes 4.1 years in our time to travel 4 light years (the distance to our nearest star). Time contracts on the ship to one fortieth for the passengers, making the subjective time for the journey on the ship 0.1 year. We know by theory and experiment that clocks slow down in accelerated objects. The writer has used this conclusion to explain how intergalactic travel is possible in reasonable periods of time, but only for passengers. It takes a hundred thousand years for light to cross our own Milky Way, which is only one of billions of galaxies.

To illustrate the nature of the shape of the universe, imagine a cable-laying spaceship travelling at light speed. It travels in a subjectively straight line, which is really curved in both space and time, around the universe. Arriving at the same space it left, the end of the cable would meet the beginning forming a great circle 20 billion light years long, but the end of the cable would be new whereas the beginning of the cable would be 20 billion years old.

The journey in the travellers’ time would be instantaneous (due to time contraction and space contraction) and the space would also be 20 billion years older with new stars and galaxies. Observers would only see the ship travelling at light-speed. A straight line in space-time is impossible. Any two ends of an imaginary great circle could not meet although they could be in the same (imagined) space but separated in time by 20 billion years.

Time is infinite, the future is constantly being created and the past is creating the future. We could travel to the future but we cannot travel to the past. Each observer is at the spearhead (present) of the creation of the future; everywhere else is in his past.

The following is a short table of speeds as percentages of light speed (of a space-ship), and the equivalent relativistic transformation factors, affecting mass (+), length (-) and time (-): 40% = +10%; 80% = +67%; 99% = +700%; 99.99% = +7000% (70 times rest mass, 1/70 length, 1/70 time). Just 1% of light speed would be 3,000 km/sec

Light, the alter-ego of matter

Light is the alter ego of matter as they are interchangeable. Light is electromagnetic energy and energy has mass (Feynman). Radiant energy has no rest mass because it is never at rest. If it did stop it would convert to matter or kinetic energy. Light transforms instantly into its natural state of constant motion. If we could transform ourselves into a timeless state or dimension, like light, we could travel anywhere in the universe instantly in our own time frame, but universal time would take its toll everywhere else. There are lots of experiments at the quantum level where light appears to move instantaneously to everyone’s surprise and mystification.

One is described in the magazine Science (AAAS) March 17, 2000 pp 1909-1920 called ‘Spooky Action’. It is possible that this anomaly is caused by the system of timing, because time does not exist to electromagnetic radiation, and time changes with position. The mysteries of quantum mechanics which scientists gave up trying to solve a long time ago in favour of probabilities (random individual results) might yet be understood. In the well-publicised argument about the unpredictable motion of individual electrons, The writer supports Einstein’s sentiment that "God does not play dice with the universe". Electrons must follow the line of least resistance; nothing happens without a cause. The universe is perfect. Few people, if any, fully appreciate that fact and what it implies.

The Lorentz Transformation Formula

The mathematical (Lorentz) formula for calculating the factor or rate of relativistic changes (commonly referred to as ‘Beta’) is very simple: Beta = the square root of 1 – v (the observed velocity of the observed object) squared over (divided by) c (light velocity) squared. It is always between 0 and 1 because we can never observe anything moving faster than light. When the observed object is not moving relative to the observer, v is 0 and the answer is 1, which means there is no change.

On the other hand, if v equalled the velocity of light, which is impossible within our present knowledge of physics, the answer would be 0. Any finite number divided by 0 equals infinity so the degree of change would be infinite. This means that the observed mass would be increased to infinity. The same with time: its clocks, and biological processes, would appear to the observer to have stopped. No motion would be visible within the ship, even though we might observe it for a long time travelling at light speed. Passengers within the ship would arrive at their destination instantly, but a million years would have passed in universal time while the ship completed a million light year journey.

Interstellar flight

Now this opens up the possibility of interstellar flight. We are presently limited by time because of the slowness of space flight with our primitive technology and the human condition. But there are probably planets populated by ‘beings’ with very advanced knowledge. Since there is no theoretical limit to the subjective speed of space flight we could be visited by ‘UFO’s’ from our nearest star systems, four light years away that, to them, might only take a month. To us, the journey would appear to take a little over four years. If they were capable of transformation into a timeless dimension for the journey they would arrive instantly in their own time frame, but four years in ours.

If the writer may introduce a philosophical offshoot of this concept, ie if we could be copied, molecule for molecule, into an electronic form, sent on our long journey, then recreated into our original form, we would not know any difference. With the same memories, body and brain, how could anyone tell?

Gravity and time.

According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, clocks also slow down in stronger gravitation, so that a clock on a high-flying plane would run very slightly faster than clocks on the ground where gravity is very slightly stronger though the plane’s acceleration would counteract this. The Harvard tower experiment to test the effect of gravity on time also confirmed the theory. It is interesting to note that the forces of gravity and acceleration are equivalent in relativity theory. We experience the feeling of weight equivalent to accelerating at g force (gravity at the surface of the earth) continually, because we are not free falling to the center of the earth.

The true shape of the universe

Now we come to the very difficult part of Einstein’s theory: trying to visualize the shape of the universe. Einstein found, according to his faultless mathematics, that the universe is spherical, spatially finite, boundless and centerless, and that it is a continuum. This is where Einstein seemed to reach his own boundary, because he knew the universe was spherical and thought that the stars would collapse to the common center under their own gravity. This is the least understood part of Einstein’s relativity theory. He, like everybody else, didn’t seem to realize that it is only spherical to any individual observer and that this is only a relativistic effect, which changes as the observer moves.

He inserted a mysterious ‘constant’ – a force that prevented collapse - into his perfect equation. It must have seemed self-evident to him that something must exist. At that time it was thought that the universe was static (not expanding) and very much smaller than we now know it to be. Hubble’s discovery in 1929 of the red shift (the attenuation of light waves from distant stars increasing with distance) indicating an expanding universe, appeared to be the answer to the problem of gravitational collapse. Einstein then said that his insertion of the constant was his biggest blunder.

Physicists are still looking at a convenient constant to solve some of the anomalies in the expanding universe theory. They do not seem able to accept the 4- dimensional explanation that the universe is more or less static as Einstein’s mathematics proved. The idea of a centerless, edgeless continuum in the objective sense coexisting with a sphere in the subjective (observer’s) sense seems too alien to their 3-dimensional minds.

I doubt that Einstein, or anyone else to the writer’s knowledge, has understood the nature of the 4-dimensional continuum, other than the vague idea that space and time are integrated into one system and space-time curves. The universe is only spherical from any observer’s point of view. But if the observer moves in a straight line in any direction the cosmic horizon (the limit of visibility) advances in the same way that the horizon advances on earth as we move on its curved, unbounded surface.

The Red Shift and cosmic background radiation

The universe is not expanding or, at least, there is no need for expansion. As the observed velocity of light is governed by the curvature of space-time, so the red shift is probably caused by the angular change in light traversing a 180 degree curve - half a full circle, the necessary angle of curvature from the horizon. All lines of sight would appear to be straight.

We are all agreed that light waves attenuate with distance, but we really need to find the exact rate of attenuation, which, though difficult, is not impossible. I expect it will be found to be a geometrical progression, which would indicate a particular curved path while the angle of the wave front would be a constant. To use an analogy, if we shine a light from a point source onto a globe the distribution of light will be maximum at the ‘equator’ and nil at the ‘poles’. The light only shines on half the globe in 3 dimensions, but in four dimensions there is only one (imaginary) pole – for each observer, which moves as the observer moves. Its opposite ‘pole’ is where the observer stands.

The red shift in light from stars would be exponential to infinity at the halfway point looking across the universe, forming the cosmic horizon. To see beyond that part of space the telescope would have to point in the opposite direction. The most powerful telescope in space would see nothing immediately beyond the cosmic horizon because the extreme elongation of light waves (and all electromagnetic waves) would cause them to become undetectable or, at least, unseeable.

Nevertheless, this phenomenon may solve one more cosmological puzzle: the constant very low energy cosmic background radiation from all points in space detected by heat sensitive telescopes. All electromagnetic radiation from beyond the cosmic horizon must attenuate exponentially (decreasing in energy) with increasing distance to infinity (or some quantum value of energy) as it reaches the exact opposite point to the point of origin.

Just to clear up any misunderstanding, if we look to the east, with a sufficiently powerful telescope, we should see the cosmic horizon, beyond which we would see nothing. If we then look in the opposite direction, west, we would see the same horizon but from the other side. The writer has roughly estimated it is 10 billion light years to the cosmic horizon, so the diameter would be 20 billion. The geometry of four dimensions is very different from three. We can see around curves but only halfway around a circle in any one direction, because of the attenuation effect, reducing light (electromagnetic) waves to long, very low energy, heat waves.

The invisible ‘cosmic pole’

Let us imagine that a conveniently visible ‘cosmic’ pole exists at the extreme boundary of our cosmic horizon. If we looked in any and every direction we should be able to see it, and its image would fill the whole sky. All straight lines from any single observer would intersect at his opposite pole, like the geodesic lines of longitude on a globe map of the world. It follows that all stars near the limit of observation (the cosmic horizon) in all directions must be close together.

What should be the effect on light from that group of stars, bearing in mind that the light travels a curved path around a spatial sphere and that they appear to the observer (us) to be very widely separated. Offhand, I would think that they should appear brighter, at least, due to convergence (of longitudinal lines on a globe) from the ‘equator’.

We could never see the same star twice at the same time, but we could see two stars that are relatively close together, one each side of the cosmic horizon that could appear to us as widely separated because we would be looking in opposite directions at each of them.

Background radiation

Physicists have theorized that cosmic background radiation probably comes from the residual radiation from the original ‘Big Bang’ at the center of the universe. But in 4-dimensional physics there is no common center, there is no expansion and there is no need of a universal ‘big bang’, though there may be relatively minor explosions as astronomers frequently observe.

If the heat and light from the big bang at 7,000K (Kelvin = absolute temperature scale in which zero = -273.16C) deteriorates to near zero, why cannot light from any source in the universe do the same? There are atoms of hydrogen, plus asteroids and dust presumably, scattered through space between galaxies where there is very little heat from radiation. Could not these be a cause of the background radiation? Also, could there not be a natural peak of heat loss at this low level?

The writer is searching for 4-dimensional explanations for the red shift and for the peak cosmic background radiation we constantly receive. It could be emanating from between the visible cosmic horizon and the exact theoretical cosmic horizon (where all light is attenuated to below visibility) and possibly beyond.

Light could travel around the universe indefinitely, like a very fast space ship, making a complete circuit every 20 billion universal years. There is a theory about ‘tired light’, which in its very long journey deteriates in energy through collisions with diffused gas or dust in space. We could receive ancient light from our sun, but it would not arrive back in our space for another 15 billion years. All electromagnetic radiation in the universe could travel indefinitely, until it became completely absorbed by matter.

The wavelength of peak intensity in cosmic microwave background radiation is 1.063 mm, corresponding to absolute temperature 2.726 K. This is theorised to have survived from 700,000 years after the big bang, with a temperature of 3000 K, 13 billion years ago, when space became clear enough for transmission of electromagnetic radiation. This cooled to the present peak temperature. The microwave background radiation is currently believed to be among the most clear-cut confirmations of the big bang theory. If the big bang never happened we need to look hard for another explanation. It seems to be a major factor in the shape of the universe theory.

How could we still receive light from the Big Bang in a 3-dimenional time-independent universe unless we were near the outer edge of the explosion? Which we clearly aren’t, because there are stars and galaxies all around us as far as we can see. If we were at, or near, the center of the Big bang, all the light would be radiating away from us. The velocity of light is greater than any moving matter, so the light would have been lost to outer space over 13 billion years anyway. It could not come back unless space-time curves into a sphere (and how big is the sphere?) as Einstein’s mathematics describe.

Once we can establish a reliable pattern of the red shift variation we can, hopefully, deduce an explanation for its existence that is compatible with all the other theories of other phenomena. Being able to travel to distant star systems at FTL (faster than light) speed. It is a much more attractive design than the present restricted and virtually isolationist view. Since the writer has come to believe in the divine mind/body nature of the universe he looks for intelligent design and interest.

All radiant energy (as well as cold matter) must eventually be absorbed by black holes, which would convert energy into new matter. Whether they emit newly created matter gradually or explode violently has not been observed so this is an open question. Professor Feynman showed by experiment that energy has mass, so the mass of the (closed) universe is almost certainly constant. But exactly how much mass is in the form of energy, and how much in matter? And how much in dark matter or ‘free’ hydrogen?

Galactic cluster formation

It seems that star systems and galactic clusters form slowly from vast clouds of dust (‘dark matter’) or hydrogen (the smallest atom), but how is the matter created? The biggest observed explosions occur in supernovas, but they don’t have enough mass to form a galaxy.

Heat death of stars

Where does the mysterious dark matter in space come from, and how is the matter formed, or reformed, from the energy constantly radiating from stars leading to their eventual ‘heat death’. Our Sun, like all suns, will eventually reach the end of its active life but, being a smaller star, its life will be longer than bigger stars which burn out disproportionably more rapidly. This is not expected to happen for a few billion years. Our sun is a g2 second-generation star, formed from matter from previous stars which created the heavier elements (from hydrogen), without which life could not begin.

Gravity in a continuum.

The universe is not under gravitational pressure to collapse because gravity is probably affected like light’s red shift, meaning that (a) universal gravitation is nearly equal and opposite in all directions; (b) all stars have cosmic horizons where gravity, like light, is reduced to zero; and (c) closer, stronger gravities exist locally, forming clusters of galaxies which revolve about a common center producing centrifugal forces to counteract gravity, which we do observe.

Nothing can escape from the universe.

Nothing can escape from the universe, because nothing can approach the edge, like the surface of a sphere has no edge. The ‘edge’ is the limit of observation, the cosmic horizon. Matter/energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The universe is finite in the spatial dimensions but infinite in the time dimension. It is in a state of constant (and dramatic) change. It evolves life from dust, which becomes intelligent, probably by some connection to another, spiritual, dimension.

Mysteries of the universe

Another mystery of the universe is the creation of matter from energy. All experiments to date have produced an equal mass, or amount, of antimatter to matter, resulting in early annihilation as the two particles touch, re-forming into energy. It is a widely held theory that for all the matter in the universe there must exist (or have existed) an equal mass of antimatter. Antimatter has opposite electrical charge to matter, otherwise it is the same. The theory applies to every form or particle of matter.

It is tempting to think that black holes contain antimatter within their boundary, but the mass, though great, does not seem anywhere near enough to balance the matter in the universe. Antimatter has the same mass and gravity as matter but the two cannot come into contact and still exist as matter. Perhaps there is another universe in another set of dimensions formed of antimatter, but we can never meet!

Is it possible that antimatter lies buried inside the smallest nuclear particle (or particles) separated by a space-time wall where time stops? Is this the source of the enormous energy locked in matter, and which can be released in nuclear explosions? The atom appears to be the most likely place for antimatter to be stored, since there appears to be nowhere else to store it. Someone calculated the size of a higher dimension and it was ‘about the size of an atom’ (the writer’s apologies to the source).

The mysteries of the universe are greater than man ever thought. Scientists need to think in four (and five) dimensions instead of three plus a limited view of time. Their minds appear to be locked in 3 dimensions preventing a true understanding of relativity, and the universe continues to mystify. If we can’t understand it we have to accept it in the face of hard evidence.

Matter or mind?

The common idea that matter is a concrete substance in the ordinary meaning of the word is being invalidated by modern discoveries. Matter turns into energy with very different properties. Space is integrated with time, forming space-time, with an amazing geometry that defies 3-dimensional logic. Every observer is always at the exact center of his observable universe, but it isn’t a sphere, it is a continuum without beginning or end. And where does consciousness come from – not just matter and energy! At least, not without a dramatic change in properties which may come through interaction with yet another dimension.

We could be justified in thinking that the universe has characteristics of a construction in a great mind as well as a concrete material construction. To use an analogy, scientists argued for a long time over the nature of light: was it formed of particles or waves, because it was observed to behave like both in different experiments. The answer was both, in the sense that the waves were formed into photons, tiny quantum ‘bundles or packets of energy’, which behave like particles but with the characteristics of waves. Nature’s potential for intricacy of design seems unlimited.

Gravity and electromagnetism: Kaluza’s theory The mathematics of Riemann, Minkowski, Kaluza, Klein and Einstein have opened the door to multi-dimensional logic, especially Kaluza’s 4th and 5th dimensional theory showing the relationship between gravity and electromagnetism, which Einstein worked on for the latter part of his life without success.

It seems strange to the writer that although Einstein (who used many dimensions in his mathematics) favourably mentioned Kaluza’s letter to him on the subject, he never mentioned it again. For the writer, the best supporting evidence for his interpretation of space-time is that several of the pieces of the 4-dimensional continuum theory fit together like a jigsaw puzzle, beginning to produce a comprehensive picture.

There seems to be no limit to the number of extra dimensions that can be devised mathematically, but this does not mean that they can really exist. Nor does it mean that we can envisage their possibly exotic or unforeseen properties if they did. Ultimate reality might be a perfectly logical construction of many dimensions. If miracles are possible then it might well be true. Limiting the properties, or potential, of the universe, with our present knowledge would be a sad mistake.

Time-dependence of curvature

Einstein’s equation for the universe shows it to be "static, spherical in shape, and unbounded. It has constant curvature" (p.156, ‘God’s Equation’ by Amir Aczel). Also on the same page: "Einstein’s universe is a three-dimensional analogy of the surface of the earth. Here, a ray of light or a particle travelling along a geodesic (a curve of shortest distance between two points) will eventually return to its point of departure – however, this will take a very long time. Such a universe is finite but unbounded. Einstein’s universe has curvature that is time-independent. The universe is homogeneous, that is, it looks the same everywhere. It is also isotropic, that is, it looks the same in every direction the observer may look - there is no preferred direction in space."

The writer agrees with Dr Aczel on everything except on the important point of time independence of the curvature. Current mainstream thinking on the model of the universe is that space is time-independent, even Einstein seemed to think like that, otherwise he wouldn’t have worried about (3-dimensional) gravitational contraction.

Einstein’s mathematics are perfect but the interpretation is seriously flawed, probably because, in those days especially, the conclusions must have seemed outrageous (and evidently still do), so everybody sidestepped the issue and assumed that space in the universe was independent of time.

But it is essential that space and time be integrated into a single continuum, otherwise light would be observed to move at infinite speed and gravity would crush the universe, also the validity of relativity theory depends on the integration of space and time as a continuum. In fact, the degree of curvature and the degree of relativistic changes are co-dependant.

If we knew the angle of curvature for 300,000 km and divided this into 360 degrees we could calculate the size of the universe. A space ship would experience the same degree of curvature (one second in time) every 300,000 km because it would be always in its local space-time frame. Einstein theorized that the size of the universe is inversely proportional to the mean average density of the matter within it. In other words: the less dense the greater the size.

If we extrapolate the total amount of matter/energy in the universe to the two extremes, with no matter/energy at all the universe would be 3-dimensional (no gravity and no curvature) and infinite; with infinite matter/energy the universe would be infinitely small and dense. Fortunately, the universe is probably the optimum size. It combines variety with sustainability. Is this a coincidence?

As telescopes see further into space they should see newer galaxies with high x-ray or ultraviolet emissions which are converted to visible light by the attenuation of wavelength. A little further then a rapidly decreasing density of visible galaxies and then nothing (except low-energy ‘cosmic background radiation’) as attenuation rapidly increases through infrared to a minimal energy level.

The universe is self-regenerating. Nasa discovery

The universe is spatially finite but it is infinite (endless) in the time dimension. It is self-regenerating, never-ending and never had a beginning. Planets, stars and galaxies begin and end but the universe goes on forever. There is much recently discovered scientific corroboration from observatories for the above cosmological statements.

"A Nasa spacecraft has detected dozens of new-born galaxies in Earth's part of the universe. These unexpected cosmic infants were discovered with the Galaxy Evolution Explorer, which managed to spy them because of the huge amounts of ultraviolet light they emit as they furiously form stars out of gas, astronomers say." (New Zealand Herald, Dec. 23, 2004).

Cosmic horizon discovered?

In the NZ Herald Sept. 15 2006 it was reported from the journal Nature that University of California astronomers, Richard Bouwens and Garth Illingworth, using the Hubble telescope exploring the limits of observation, found possible evidence for only one galaxy when they expected many. "The bigger, more luminous, galaxies were not in place 700 million years after the Big Bang, said Illingworth. Yet 200 million years later there were many more of them."

This is the most recent confirmation of the writer’s description of the 4-dimensional continuum. I believe they were looking at a region where light has rapidly attenuated to heat waves making the galaxies invisible, giving the effect of a bounded universe. This would be the space between the visible cosmic boundary and the theoretical pole where all electromagnet radiation is reduced to virtually zero energy. There is only one pole; the other one is where the observer is.

Black Holes

Astronomers recently announced that 26 thousand light-years from earth our Milky Way galaxy has "a massive black hole at its center called 'Sagittarius A', containing the mass equivalent to 2.6 million suns crushed into a very small volume" (New Zealand Herald Oct.15 03). It is thought that every galaxy has a similar black hole at its center. We can tell when one exists by the higher than expected speed of rotation of nearby stars. M87, a giant galaxy with an active, very bright nucleus, is thought to contain an object with a mass of about 3000 million stars.

Another N Z Herald (Dec. 9 06) report headed, “Black hole eats star 4 billion light years away” confirms the possibility of regeneration. “Scientists used Nasa’s Galaxy Evolution Explorer …to detect an ultraviolet flare coming from the center of a remote elliptical galaxy.” ‘This ultraviolet flare was from a star literally being ripped apart and swallowed by the black hole’ said Suvi Gezari of the California Institute of Technology. ‘We looked at the galaxy in 2003 and there was no ultraviolet light coming from the galaxy at all, and then in 2004 we suddenly saw this very bright source.’ “Scientists continue to use the telescope to observe the ultraviolet light as it fades”. When large objects approach a black hole the gravitation force is much greater on the side nearer the black hole than on the far side.

Since matter is stored energy it would take a lot of energy (the reverse of an atomic bomb) to reconstitute energy into matter. The extreme conditions within a black hole, and especially at its surface where gravity is strongest, or at the center where pressure is greatest, may make that possible. It is essential that light from constantly burning stars be reconstituted into matter to perpetually regenerate the universe. All dispersed energy (and matter) must eventually come into contact with a black hole. Thus, a convenient (but under-detailed) theory would be that black holes are the factories reconstituting atoms from energy, and atoms contain bound antimatter that enables them to be the factories producing the light and heat within stars.

A philosophical reflection: Rearranging molecules or electromagnetic waves into higher levels of order generally produces dramatic and useful results (as in laser beams). This should guide us into making experiments that do just this. We might discover something new and exciting. Incidentally, this also applies to thought: discipline, concentration or focus produces results.

Can anything escape from, or be lost to, the universe? No, we cannot even approach the edge because there is no edge, and there is no center. An endless system that is active (lively) must regenerate.

From Part 2 (written in the first person) of http://4duniverse.blogspot.com/ by the same author, Les Burgess: “Nothing that the writer has written contradicts the Bible, only the people who don’t understand the style of divine revelation.” This is for readers who are interested in the philosophical and religious explanation of the relativistic 4-d universe and why there are so many different beliefs.

Please note: the writer seeks the simplification of English spelling, such as using ’z’ for ‘s’ where appropriate as a first small step – for better communication and help to make English a more suitable international language. Spelling lags 200 years behind spoken English.