C-R Theory Jester

The Comedy-Recycling Theory

(Of the Entire Known Universe)

by Jerry A. Reynard

Comedy-Recycling Theory Blog

Date: 4/20/2014

Many Exciting New Developments, plus, welcome to our 120,000 th visitor, and beyond

Welcome to our 120,000 th visitor to this web site.  It has been a while since I blogged, but there have been many developments.  There have been many items in the news that featured topics of interest to the C-R theory.

Anything involving the multitude of ions, magnetic fields, high energy charged positive-ion particles, supermassive Black-Holes C-R , and the like has generally been good news for the C-R theory.  Only the C-R theory regards these types-of items as evidence in favor of a C-R theory like pathway of interactions in this universe.

One part in 10,000,000 as significant?

Recently, mainstream science announced that they had discovered “The Smoking Gun”, so to speak, or a “modulation pattern” in the background 2.7K radiation, indicating evidence for hyperinflation (or at least for the initial period of inflation) after the Big Bang.  The C-R theory position is that this “new” evidence is even more tentative and flimsy than what has already been accepted.  I read that they had to “discard” the other 9,999,999 parts of the 1 in 10,000,000 parts of the 2.7K radiation to find this modulation pattern.

Location [on earth], location (s) [outlying], and location (s) [more towards the center]

Of course, the C-R theory maintains that our universe has always been here, and never started off with a Big Bang.  The “uniformity” of the background radiation from all directions is not anomalous at all, but is simply both allowed and expected.  With sufficient time available to equalize, temperature-wise everywhere inside, it is no wonder that the 2.7K is so uniform.

The C-R theory also predicts that the 2.7K radiation would measure warmer at every outlying location in the universe, increasing more as we venture further outward.  If, [or when] we could travel to and from distant, outlying portions of our universe and measure the background radiation temperature there, locally, as the local time-rate (there) has slowed-down [as compared to us, here], we would note that the background temperature of the sky seemed warmer to us, locally, there.

Alternately, as we ventured closer inwards, toward “The Great Attractor”, there would be a slight cooling of the 2.7K, as we got closer to the center of the universe*. (*the center of the volume where contents were the most blueshifted to us, here on earth)  This would be because, in this volume, the universe was clocking slightly faster than what we experience on earth. [Technically, it is the LEAST slowed-down portion of space-time, and also the least curved.]

Additionally, the C-R theory predicts that, in the long-term future, the 2.7K radiation will never cool down with time, to us here on earth.  This is because the 2.7K that we do see has nothing whatsoever to do with being a red-shifted remnant, leftover from the Big Bang, but is more similar-to the roar of a waterfall, although it is spread-out all over the sky, and does not originate from just one unique location, but originates from every direction, simultaneously.  It is the result from all of the activity in this universe, averaged-out and diluted, and weakened, signal-strength-wise.

NOTE: As we ventured about in this universe, we would not sense the local time rate difference as we gradually adapted to each new location.  Rather, everything that we measured elsewhere would appear to change, relative to every new location.

If we ventured outward in this universe, everything lying further outward would appear to become less red-shifted.  Also, the 2.7K background radiation would measure warmer, because our newly slowed-down timeframe rate would be closer to the new location’s time-rate.  Conversely, everything further inward would appear to become more blueshifted to us.  NOTE: In reality, it would be our own reference frame that would be changing, and everyone else just remained the same.

Looking back towards earth, it’s temperature would change to us systematically.

Because the universe has always existed [by the C-R theory], this 2.7K background radiation is averaged-out smoothly, over time, and is uniformly equal from all directions, after small corrections for our various “local motions” as we orbit the sun, the spiral arm of the galaxy, and it then orbits the galaxy, then the local cluster.  One need not bother with interpreting the incredibly small deviations and modulations observed in the parts per million range, as they are truly insignificant.

Unfortunately, before we could observe both of those above predictions, we might have to wait millions, to a billion years, to allow sufficient time for humans to progress that far out, then return again, to share our findings.  We will just have to wait patiently for science to be able to devise tests to measure the local background temperature elsewhere, and to test for any measurable cooling rate, over time.  It is not likely that a much quicker way to test this will be available anytime soon. [Future generations may yet devise some clever strategy, or find an actual method to test this hypothesis in decades or centuries ahead, but probably not much sooner than that.]

Born Heavy, Not Just Putting on Weight Quickly

Another recent development in standard thinking is that generic black holes in the initial galaxies were already heavyweights surprisingly soon after the Big Bang.  Billion-solar-mass (generic) black holes were thought to be present when the universe was supposedly very young, under 300 million years old, and much smaller-sized than it is now.  The thinking now is that these black holes were just born big, as they did not have sufficient time to merge with other, lesser black holes, or gobble-up large galaxies to get that big that soon.

Where the C-R theory might triumph:

How to Eliminate the Paradox from the “Information Paradox” – or –:

An Exit Strategy from a Black-Hole C-R , — How Nature has the “Problem” Covered

There was a 1 page article by Michael Moyer in the Advances section in the April, 2014 issue of Scientific American, page #16, discussing the new Black-Hole C-R battle, featuring the information paradox, covering the arguments about what happens to the “information”, [or the mass], that enters the Black-Hole C-R ?  This is one area where the C-R theory has the unique new insights needed to provide the [or, a] proper solution.

Whereas modern thinkers now suspect that there is something like a “firewall” immediately inside the Schwarzschild radius* [*more commonly referred to by everyone else as “the event horizon 1 “].  { 1 The C-R theory recommends eliminating that term forever, as it is highly misleading and directs one’s focus away from natures intended purpose, completely.}  While this firewall solution covers some of the information paradox, by removing some of the consequences from incoming matter landing at the imaginary singularity, it really does not solve the problem.

Where the C-R theory has real differences is at the thin volume immediately inside the Schwarzschild radius.  Nature has gone to a great deal of trouble to accumulate exactly enough mass, at exactly the right internal density to achieve a critical mass.

This “exactly critical” inside mass provides an “at, or over the speed-of-light” escape velocity inside a thin-shelled volume.  NOTE: This special condition is critical to understanding what the Black-Hole C-R does with that situation.  What is also unique is that once this occurs, this internal mass is perfectly stable.  It becomes sealed-off, and it will no longer accept any additional matter inside this region.

The conditions inside are such that this internal mass is least energetic at the Schwarzschild radius, and most energetic at the center.  This position-sensitive energy variability thus stabilizes the structure, and does not allow anything outlying to further collapse inward, unless it can gain additional energy.

This stable, internal section [known as an Active Zone C-R ] also acts as a placeholder, keeping the conditions immediately inside the Schwarzschild radius internally stable.   With a stable base established inside, a very important condition that, only in that “inbetween” volume, the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light.  What this does is shut-down all possible “speed-of-light” based interactions inside this volume.  This special zone is therefore termed “The Neutral Zone C-R “.

IMPORTANT: Any charged matter entering this Neutral Zone C-R is never actually neutralized, but it is temporarily restrained from sensing other charges, or acting “charged” -like it used to.

ALSO NOTE: Both further outside, and further inside of this thin volume, all “speed-of-light” interactions are still allowed.  However, only inside this special zone, conditions force all electrical charges to act as if they were neutral, and ignore their internal neighbors, too, as long as they remain confined.

In conventional thinking, it is just ASSUMED that, like gravity, information about the internal electrical charges IS always coupled out.  However, NO mechanism exists to couple-out ANY information about the electrical charges trapped inside when speed-of-light limited information/communication cannot take place.  Essentially, electromagnetic force carriers, [or light] simply cannot travel fast enough to escape.

When [or if] positive charges are swallowed due to their higher mass, they act as if they are neutral, and the charge is temporarily turned-off.  Technically, measurable time also does not exist within this zone.  In other words, here, entropy is restored, or reset back to zero.


1. Positive charges, and neutrons accumulate inside this “Neutral Zone C-R “.  Everything the Black-Hole C-R eats goes into this special zone, but is NEVER allowed to fall further inside, where real time still actively functions.

2. All of the more kinetically active electrons escape, and they simply do not follow their nuclei inside.  This deliberate, mass-selected, charge imbalance distribution mechanism is critical to the overall plan.

3. Outside of this Neutral Zone C-R , no knowledge of the accumulated charges inside is permitted to couple-out. [This knowledge of the electrical charge build-up also does not couple further inside, by leaking charge-level information into the inner Active Zone C-R , either.]

4. Effectively, every Black-Hole C-R automatically creates and possesses a Neutral Zone C-R .  It then traps everything additional eaten inside this “Neutral Zone C-R “, until it builds-up vast quantities of the ONLY KNOWN FORCE that CAN actually overcome gravity in a fair fight.  {Conditions will occur later-on, to permit the release those confined Electromagnetic charges, after the Neutral Zone C-R becomes distorted enough to be unstable, then enough mass escapes.}

5. Excess electrons are freed-up outside every feeding Black-Hole C-R , creating vast electrical imbalances, magnetic fields, stray voltages, and current streams to influence the movement of matter within galaxies, rivaling the influence that “pure gravity allows”.

[NOTE: No mysterious influences from dark matter are ever needed, just a scientifically well-known force {electromagnetism}, competing against gravity, which is also 10 40 times stronger than gravity in a direct, head-to-head battle.  SAD HINT: The evidence is obvious, wherever one looks, that electromotive processes are active everywhere inside this universe.]

6. Since ALL of the trapped positive charges can eventually be liberated, or untrapped, EVERYTHING ever eaten by any Black-Hole C-R is 100%* recoverable.  [*Technically, the matter further inside the Black-Hole C-R , located in the inner Active Zone C-R , may still be out of communication with the outside world, except for the external effects from the gravity generated by the additional mass inside.]

Information Paradox: Completely Solved

Essentially, the C-R theory thus solves the information paradox, shows some potential uses involved in recycling and restoring both matter and energy using Black-Holes C-R , and explains a totally natural cause for some of the origins of cosmic rays.  [See later in this blog for a fuller explanation of the Black-Hole C-R — Cosmic Ray connection.]

The cover article in the April Scientific American magazine, starting on page 38, by Michael D. Lemonick, titled: The First Starlight, has implications which the C-R theory might help to explain.  It covered the evolving conventional view on how soon some early galaxies contained large masses.  They were present within a few hundred million years of the start of reionization of hydrogen atoms.  This took place approximately 300-400 million years after the Big Bang, right after the initial ball of hot plasma cooled-off to stop glowing, de-ionize and condense into transparent, neutral hydrogen gas.

Almost immediately, this condensed hydrogen then started to be re-ionized again, as a gas, by some mysterious process and energy source.  The galaxies available did not generate anywhere enough ultraviolet radiation to accomplish this.  The article did mention that perhaps some of the re-ionization energy came from the initial encounter of the condensed hydrogen gas by (conventional) black holes.

From the conventional view, the small amount of “early galaxies” detected with a high-enough redshift to suggest their advanced age, would not emit anywhere near enough ultraviolet radiation to reionize most of this universe’s hydrogen.

A “Starring” Role [for the C-R theory]

One of the few theories that suggests a “natural” cause of the amount, and the duration of the ionization for much of this universe’s hydrogen, is the C-R theory.  Only the C-R theory has every “eating” Black-Hole C-R playing a “starring” role to help ionize matter in this universe.  Whenever one feeds on neutral hydrogen gas, it consumes the proton/neutron combinations, and spits-out the leftover electrons.

One strong advantage the C-R theory has with an infinitely-old universe is that it faces no such time constraint, as it maintains that the universe has always existed, at it’s present size, with approximately the same appearance everywhere as it looks right now.  Matter inside simply recycles, and is continually being refreshed.

HINT: The C-R theory does claim that our universe is not the same everywhere, but is running the slowest at the outer edges.  It runs slower as one ventures further out.  This is the true cause of the increasing redshifts, with increasing distance.  This is what we do see, and the increasing red-shifts outward are not caused-by a 13.8 billion year long Doppler shift from the expansion from the initial explosion.

NOTE: This idea also does away with a need for dark energy, or a requirement for additional energy needed to drive this expansion at an ever expanding rate.

ADDITIONAL NOTE: The reason that distant type 1a supernovae appear dimmer than expected by standard theory is that they actually are dimmer.  They are not clocking as fast as they would if they existed nearer to both the center of the universe, and to the earth.  Thus, the observed supernova data do not support the supposed “expansion rate”, and that rate is not increasing or expanding with time, either.

All scientists would need to do to fix their troubles would be to change [or abandon] their initial assumptions, and pay closer attention to the known observations.

HELP WANTED: We Need a Good, Simple Explanation for Cosmic Rays

There was a 6 page article starting on page 30, by Angela Olinto, in the April, 2014 Astronomy magazine about: Solving the Mystery of Cosmic Rays.  Science is baffled by any mechanism that allows 99% of Cosmic Rays to be mostly positive charges, like protons and nuclei, and only affects 1% of the Cosmic Rays that are negative charges, with energies spanning 12 orders of magnitude, up to at least 10 20 eV.  What is excellent for the C-R theory is that it uniquely suggests just such a mechanism which selectively provides an easy to describe process, whereby Black-Holes C-R effectively concentrate mostly positive charges (ions) stripped of ALL their electrons, primed to release those concentrated charges.

The article states that above 10 17 eV, most of the cosmic rays are thought to come from outside the Milky Way galaxy.  The article wrote about a new generation of ultra high energy detectors coming on line, that may be able to shed light on the origins of the highest energy cosmic rays.  Those ultra-high energy Cosmic Rays might not be as easily deflected by stray magnetic fields as the lower energy particles would be, making it possible to discern the direction of the source..

If the C-R theory is correct, then novae, supernovae, gamma ray bursts, quasars, and active galaxies or Seyfert galaxies are all contributing to the vast pool of cosmic ray sources.  NOTE: Mainstream science has routinely DISMISSED just such a mechanism from any consideration, pre-rejecting the idea as preposterous.  Other than the FACT, that the C-R theory ideas might actually work to produce just the type of results that ARE OBSERVED in the real world, they are considered untenable and unreasonable.

This is where YOU, the home reader can help to spread the favorable consideration of these ideas, and decide for yourselves whether or not they are as unreasonable (but successful in arriving at a practical solution) as science believes them to be.

Look, and then they “Are Gone”

An additional brief mention in the quick takes column (page 15) in the same April, 2014 Astronomy magazine announced that astronomers discovered Argon containing molecules (compounds) in the remains of the Crab Nebula (M1).  While I have said publicly that I expected science to find Helium compounds, I did not think ahead boldly enough to extend that expectation to include the more bulky “inert” noble gasses, too.  Still, I consider that good news for the C-R theory.  With all of the extreme ionization going on, it is not surprising to me that any ionized chemical radicals would be attracted to, and bind (or combine) with chemically “inert” neutral Argon atoms.  I would also expect Helium, Neon, Xenon, Krypton, and Radon compounds to be out there, whether or not we can spot their chemical signatures from that region [and elsewhere, too].

On page 19 of the same issue of Astronomy for April 2014 the Astro Confidential section where Kerri Ferron asked Carole G. Mundell about what she learned from studying Gamma Ray Bursts.  Using the RINGO2 polarimeter on the Liverpool telescope, they found that shortly after a burst discovered on March 8, 2012, that the highest degree of polarization ever measured indicated that the jet’s magnetic field remained intact, and consistent long after the initial burst occurred.  This indicated that the field had originated and stabilized in the burst, and might have been what helped the acceleration of the jet’s beam to achieve such high speeds.  It indicated large scale, organized magnetic fields stayed consistent within the beam over the duration of the burst.

That is good news for the C-R theory, as the C-R theory predicts jet beams from large Black-Holes C-R should be mostly pure electrons, and particles released from Gamma Ray Bursts should be large concentrations primarily of newly-released protons, mostly positive charges.  The high velocity of the beams combined with the intense magnetic fields should keep the beam’s particles collimated far longer than random collections of these same particles (each having random energy levels) could endure.

I also would like to claim that if one truly understands just how energetic this simultaneous, confined positive charge release event can be, consider the fresh, new magnetar.  One of these newly-created “beasties” can hold a huge magnetic field, over a quadrillion (10 15 ) gauss, to start-off with.  What better way to create such huge magnetic fields than to suddenly release copious quantities of positive charges, simultaneously.  The sudden release of the positive charges, which had been slowly consumed and concentrated by any Black-Hole C-R over a long lifetime, should be a serious contender to produce or generate just such an outrageously huge magnetic field in a very short time.

On page 24 of the same April, 2014 Astronomy magazine, an article on “The Missing Universe”, by Bob Berman, addresses that some researchers suspect that we do not quite understand gravity.  In 1933, Fritz Zwicky found that the speeds of stars in the Coma cluster were high enough that the individual stars should easily escape, but they did not.  The problem repeated in other galaxies, too.

To “fix” that problem, extra gravity was imagined to be needed from an unknown and unseen source.  That was where the “mistake” was made.  Perhaps, astronomers should have guessed that another inverse-square force, electromagnetism, was also at play within most galaxies.

Instead, up to 6 times the amount of observed mass was imagined to be present, so that some-type of “gravity” alone could fix the problem in the galaxy’s arms.  Eventually, astronomers “invented” dark matter to cause the effects, holding galaxies together by gravity alone.

Every experiment done to date to show where and what this dark matter is has come up negative.  More recently, speculation on a new modification to Newtonian gravity, called MOND, for MO dified N ewtonian D ynamics has come into consideration.  This theory speculates that at extremely weak levels, Newtonian gravity’s influence falls off.

While this MOND works well within galaxies, it does not work nearly as well for gravitational interactions between galaxy clusters.

One area where the C-R theory speculates that Newtonian gravity will be found to be wrong, is after gravity has moved an object (a mass) to the point of greatest gravity, the object will not continue falling or accelerating past that point.  This can be demonstrated [but not verified], by a simple experiment.  Throw a ball up, into lesser curvature, and it will always return back to the place where curvature is the greatest.  NOTE: You might claim, OK, then from the surface of the earth, why does the ball continue falling down into a hole or a well?  The real answer is simple.  Gravity actually still increases, ever so slightly, until we would reach the Core Mantle Boundary.  From there, if would fall off, and decrease to zero at Earth’s center*. [*on average, over time, that is – In reality, the center of mass for the earth-moon system would always be located partway towards the moon, but still under earth’s surface, though not exactly at the center.]

Can we just go there, and try it?  Unfortunately, no.  The temperatures there hover around the 11,000º F range, and the pressures would crush anything we could produce. Right now, we cannot even reach the lowest portion of Earth’s crust, just a few miles down.  At those depths near the Core-Mantle, rocks become plastic-like, and would ooze back into any hole we could dig, even if we could make one.

Another recent study suggested that it is earth’s rotation which creates a striped modulation pattern in earth’s magnetic field.  The striped field used to be attributed to cosmic rays.  Such a pattern has also been observed on another rotating planet within this solar system.

In the next blog, I might try to comment additionally on the current thinking on MOND, or MOdified Newtonian Dynamics.  The C-R theory has some new ideas on just where Newtonian ideas will need to be corrected. (see earlier in the blog)

What I am hoping to do is to inundate our home readers with large lists of known phenomena, reveling in the naturalness of the data-fitting, supporting each stage in the flow of the total recycling process.  I want them to notice that just such processes might already be occurring almost everywhere in the universe, if they only knew what to look for, and where to look, and how nature worked.  When you become accustomed to these claims, then you can evaluate their truthfulness, and see for yourself whether or not something very similar to what I am describing is already being observed and reported-on.

What I am trying to convey is that, by discarding the current rejections of these ideas, and concentrating on their usefulness in reproducing just what is occurring in these remote catastrophes like supernovae, gamma ray bursts, quasars, and the like, maybe the C-R theory is not as outrageous as one might at first believe.

I am trying to show just how simple this overall concept really is to understand, and how natural it feels, if only science could accept the full-cycle process as a reasonable system, if it actually works.  I would hope to reject it myself, if it produced results which did not fit reality so closely.

Either these ideas are crazy, and wrong, or they are crazy (but very logical and straightforward) and right.  I invite home readers to test out these ideas with every new observation that is posted.  Do the C-R theory ideas work for you, or will you pre-reject them, before an honest trial,  as not how nature works?

For certain, if you insist on going by the textbooks, these ideas are just plain wrong, and untenable.  If you can get past that stage, and realize that, however well intentioned the current generation of textbook authors is, they based some their understandings on what was simply accepted as right, without ever actually being tested.

Too Late for an April Fool’s Day Posting, but around 90 years later, the Joke is still underway, and the World is Still Fooled

I expected the C-R theory ideas to be laughed at, which is why I wrote the theory as “funny” to begin with, and named it as such.  I regret that I did not have this blog ready to post before April Fool’s Day (April 1) this year.  My belief is that it is mainstream science is still fooled profoundly by nature, as to the age of this universe 1 , the stability of this universe 2 , and the very nature of the (generic) black hole 3 .

Explanation of superscripted footnotes:

1. The C-R theory posits that this universe is infinitely old, and did not come into sudden existence merely 13.8 billion years ago.  [see in the blog pages above for an alternative explanation of the 2.7K background radiation, and for the real cause of most of the redshifts observed]

2. The C-R theory claims that it is curvature which “causes” gravity.  Gravity is actually more like an after-effect, or the result from the effects already caused by curvature on matter, than a true “force”.  [HINT: A crash is like the result of two separate pieces of matter attempting to share the same physical space.  It too is a result, not the cause.  Similarly, what we think of as gravity, actually comes from curvature forcing energy out of each mass, which then shows-up as the result we see, the kinetic energy of falling.]

The natural state of our universe is a stable, fixed, closed-off, volume, like a sphere.  The matter located farthest out is worth less energy (or more curved, slowed-down, run downhill) than the matter nearer the center.  This location–time-rate difference imparts a stability on this universe, which does not need a cosmological constant to keep from collapsing inward.  [HINT: Imagine a bowling ball or a steel sphere, stable in size and content, over billions of years, unless they were somehow disturbed.]

3. The C-R theory [needs] envisions a special-type-of “brand name” Black-Hole C-R , to accomplish precisely those things that we observe that the generic black hole simply cannot do.  While I cannot say that I know that such an object exists, I can report that I feel enabled to describe a plausible situation that accounts for virtually the identical range of phenomena that seem to actually occur in nature.  While I could simply make-up or fabricate the results that I would wish to accomplish, I could not usually talk nature into going-along with my “lies” and seeming to create events in this universe quite similar to what I describe to you, after the fact.

I will leave it to the home readers to judge how well the possible scenarios I describe match the real world results, with the outcomes that scientists, astronomers, and cosmologists report on in their published articles.  Do the “outrageous” things I describe from the C-R theory  not sound similar to the observed behavior of Black-Holes C-R in this universe?

As often as I blog, I try to report on everything significant that I have found that seems to indicate some similarity to “just what the C-R theory would expect”.  I hope that, sometime soon, I can convince others that there is some merit to my “madness”, and maybe nature is not as mean and vindictive as most theorists would imagine.  I have honestly tried to show just where I think science is wrong in their expectations, and to tout my wares to feature the advantages gained by using the C-R theory.

Even if the C-R theory ideas ARE crazy, the results seem to be right [or at least, closer to the truth].  I am probably proverbially “casting my pearls before swine”, or offering the C-R theory ideas to those who simply do not want to consider them under any circumstances, and will never appreciate them.  [They would gladly trample the ideas all over the ground, stomping them into the mud, too.]  On the other hand, some readers out there really do appreciate these insights, and might find these new ideas helpful in their personal quest for knowledge.  Those readers are my primary target audience, the ones who will actually want to learn whatever helps them to understand these ideas.

If you have honest questions, suggestions, or find faults in my logic, I would enjoy your correspondence.  Use the comment form at the bottom of the home page.

You may re-post portions of this web site for discussion purposes or to comment upon my ideas.  I would appreciate your keeping the comments civilized, and not take the ideas out of their original context.  I would appreciate a mention or credit to the C-R theory to help others find it, too, if you find it helpful to you.

I would also appreciate readers suggestions for supporting ideas, revisions needed, or opposing ideas, in either books or publications, and/or on certain public web sites.  I hope to establish an “evidence locker”, where I can concentrate web links to sites containing critical ideas or phenomena of interest to the C-R theory readers.  [Pro or Con]

If any existing links no longer work, or link to inappropriate or to now irrelevant content, please indicate that, also, and I can work towards getting it corrected or removed.

Jerry Reynard   Posted April 16, last modified April 20, 2014.