C-R Theory Jester

The Comedy-Recycling Theory

(Of the Entire Known Universe)

by Jerry A. Reynard

Comedy-Recycling Theory Blog

April-Fooling Science Twice: How "Science" got "April-fooled" Twice, and remains so until this day

The first area where the C-R theory claims that vast majority of earth’s scientists have been completely “April-fooled” is both by the nature of the red-shift observed in this universe, and the expected outcomes based on those false conclusions that this universe is expanding, much less accelerating in it’s expansion.

The C-R theory does agree that we do observe red-shifts which do seem to increase with increasing distance.  Where the C-R theory disagrees strongly with the majority is in the cause of those red-shifts.  While the difference COULD just be one of a philosophy, it is very important to note that the REAL answer is there, “hidden in plain sight” for anyone to see.  All one needs is the simple explanation to understand what IS ACTUALLY seen.

The key to understanding the cause of the red-shifts is the BLUE-shifts seen inthe direction of “The Great Attractor”.  The C-R theory claims that if one understands “The Great Attractor”, this WILL explain the true cause of the red-shifts.

NOTE: If the universe WAS expanding, one should ONLY see red-shifts increasing in ALL directions with distance.  That is, in fact, ALMOST what we DO see, but not quite!!!  What we do see is, in one direction, there are blue-shifts which increase up to a location termed “The Great Attractor”.  Conventional theory claims that this “Great Attractor” has such a mass located there, that it attracts ALL nearby matter, including the earth and matter in towards it’s vicinity.

The small problem with this is that by all measurements made, there is insufficient mass detected in this area to accomplish this amount of attraction.  Additionally, there is NO back attraction visible, where the matter BEHIND the “Great Attractor” is ALSO measured as accelerating (towards us and) towards that location.

What is important now is to realize, if this universe is static, and closed-off, it MUST have a center.  With standard understanding, any circular sphere should have ONE and ONLY ONE center.  If our universe is completely filled with matter, up to closing-off this universe with exactly enough matter, at a sufficient density to make our universe completely reach the escape velocity of light speed at ALL of the outer edges; by reverse logic,the CURVATURE must lessen until one reaches the exact center.

 NOTE: If earth is NOT at this exact center, earth and vicinity will be gravitationally slowed-down with respect to that center!!! This means that IF THIS IS THE CASE, and ONLY if this is the case, a blue-shifted area, in one direction of the universe IS NATURE’S ANSWER to the cause of the red-shifts, AND THIS IS what we DO SEE!!!!

In simple terms, this means that the red-shifts we see, increasing with distance ARE caused by gravitational means!!!!!  This means that our universe is NOT expanding.  Our universe IS NOT accelerating in it’s expansion.

If this universe IS NOT expanding and NOT ACCELERATING in it’s expansion, then it stands to reason THAT IT NEVER was smaller, and it NEVER started-off with a BIG BANG.  It is VERY IMPORTANT to note, in a universe like this, space is NOT ISOTROPIC, but expresses a preferred reference-frame, specified by the very (closed-off) NATURE of the universe.

Simply stated, this means that time in this universe is NOT linear, and not identical everywhere!!!!  The time at the center of this type-of universe runs faster than here on earth.  Our location on earth is somewhat slower than “The Great Attractor”, but faster than anywhere else further out from the center.

NOTE: The 2.7K radiation measured in this type-of universe DOES NOT come from cooled-down and expanded Big Bang remnants.  It IS a measureof output processes going-on at the far reaches of this universe.  (Novae, supernovae, quasars, Seyfert galaxies, and GRB’s)

Second Note: This 2.7K radiation WILL NOT red-shift with time!!!  In a billion of years from today, the 2.7K will STILL measure 2.7Kfrom earth.  There are many other areas where the implications from the C-R theory use simple understandings, and build on observed data to provide abetter and simpler theory, much more humanly understandable than the highly-convoluted, multi-universe agglomeration of improbable ideas forced upon the competition by the simple observed data.

A second area where the C-R theory believes that mainstreamscience is totally wrong, and has made a great error is where scientists think that “space” in the rest of this universe is just like “space” in the vicinity around earth.  The technical term for that is: space is isotropic, or the same everywhere, in all directions.

Einstein guessed that this was the case when he formulated his general theory of relativity, where there would be no “preferred reference frame”.  What he never realized is, if our universe is closed-off, lets say, as in, the inside of a C-R theory-type Black-HoleC-R, nature has already made that choice for us, and mandated a reference-frame.

Because space must be “different” if we live inside a “closed-universe”, there MUST-BE a preferred reference frame.  The curvature will be minimum (or, zero), and time will be full, or 100% at the exact center, and will increase in all directions to the outermost edges, where the curvature will be full, (100%), or complete, and time will be at 0%, totally stopped.

If we were located at the exact center of this type of universe, we WOULD see ONLY increasing red shifts in all directions.  If that had been the case, we could not easily decide if we were inside an expanding universe, or simply aclosed-off universe.

That is not the case from here on earth, though, and we do nothave to make that choice.  What we do see is increasing red shifts in all directions, AND ALSO an additional region with increasing blue shifts, in one direction only.  ONLY a closed-universe will “naturally” produce that type of a visible signature, unless a second mass anomaly exists to produce the blue shift.  The C-R theory needs no such anomaly, just the known ability of curvature to slow-downtime.

Where science then gets into real trouble, is that, by assuming that space everywhere IS identical to conditions here onearth, AND THEN CORRECTING the observed visual data to “correctfor” the ASSUMED DOPPLER SHIFT, errors multiply.  After theobserved data are CORRECTED, THEN scientists draw theirconclusions on what ongoing events in this universe are like.  THIS was thesecond major area where Earth’s scientists have been completely  “April-fooled”.

What the C-R theory maintains is that, our universe MUST beunderstood USING THE OBSERVED data AS IS, at the same “real-time rate” weactually see.  When this IS realized, one can easily see that space inside ouruniverse IS NOT ISOTROPIC, but actually slows-down as one proceeds furtherout.  The simple confirmation of this is that we also see one, and only one”inner” area, where objects are blue shifted, or speeded-up to us.

Once scientists realize their error (or if they ever do), andmust start to draw their conclusions from the un-modified data, they willnotice that we live inside a closed-off universe, and time-rates elsewhere arenot identical to time measured here on earth.  They will discover that ouruniverse is NOT EXPANDING, and that the assumed acceleration of expansion isnot occurring either.  Our universe should then make perfect sense, and it willbe seen as fully compatible with conservation of energy.  It always HAS BEEN,but it would be nicer of “science” to notice and finally acknowledge that fact.

Thus, in the two simple areas listed above, the C-R theoryclaims that most (but not all) of earth’s scientists, cosmologists, and astronomershave been fooled.  I would rather it was not that case, but since it is, I feltcompelled to voice a dissenting opinion.  This “new reasoning” has not yetseriously been considered by the mainstream; but with reasonable science,paying simple attention to awkward details is too often overlooked or “avoided”in standard presentations.  This NEW solution to an old problem either hasmerit, or it does not.

I would only ask that YOU, the home readers, check what I havesaid, see if the known data and observations really fit the C-R theory conceptsbetter.  Ask Yourself if these concepts are both simpler and easier tounderstand for You.