April Fool's Day Blog for 2013
I delayed so long coming up with a new blog, I decided to hold off until April Fool’s Day to post a new blog. I will cover a few recent developments first, then I will return to a common theme for the C-R theory; that most of the world’s scientists are already completely fooled on some of the most basic properties of this universe, and that April Fool’s Day could have been designed (or designated) in their “honor” [if being designated as a fool is an honor].
I would also like to thank the visitors to this web site, now that we have passed the 70,000 visitor, 71,000 th visitor, and 72,000 th visitor mark. Whether anything from this site’s new ideas is sinking-in (or just floundering), there is no where else you can find these ideas in such a concentrated form. NOTE: Whether you accept or reject these ideas, you may freely re-post them elsewhere without needing extra permission from me. I am more interested in establishing these ideas as better alternatives to what is commonly believed. I would hope that some, if not all of our home-readers will eventually come to accept these ideas.
Is the Standard Theory already so “April Fooled” by Nature, unfortunately not just one day per year, but 365 (and a quarter more plus change) days each year, that they cannot tell the difference, or “get the joke”?
I might try to prepare a list of the types of phenomena that the C-R theory pathways should provide a much better explanation for. Standard theory has pre-rejected these ideas, without ever discussing or testing them, as they do not fit-into the currently accepted “mold” of the standard Big Bang based scenario.
They are so “April Fooled” by nature, they believe that this universe is expanding, and accelerating-in it’s expansion, without any “need” for an acceptable energy-source to pay for it, and they believe that the Big Bang has been proved beyond any reasonable doubt.
They accept that “almost” the coldest thing in this universe, the 2.7K background radiation, is the ultra-cooled [ chilling for over 13.8 billion years] remnant of the Big Bang, without ANY consideration that some alternative explanation might also be rational (and possible to accept, scientifically).
The C-R theory predicts that, elsewhere within this universe, the 2.7K background radiation’s temperature will measure differently, dependent upon the measurer’s location. The C-R theory also predicts that the 2.7K background radiation will not cool off further, as measured from earth, anytime in the future, say 1 billion years ahead, 5 billion years ahead, 1 trillion years ahead, or any time thereafter.
What a close race?
A recent item in the news released in 2013 stated that scientists previously measured 3 gamma ray photons, at different frequencies, each one arriving from a supernova blast, some 7 billion years beforehand, within 1 millisecond of each other. The most fascinating part of this detection event is that is puts severe limits to the amount of random “energy changes” that could have been made to the individual photons during the entire voyage. It also suggests that the speed of light is very consistent between differing frequencies, to a remarkably small percentage of the total trip, from location to location, traversing through varying gravitational field-strengths.
In conventional reasoning, as the photon enters a different value gravitational field, the photon either gains energy everytime as it enters into a greater gravitational field, or loses energy, as it climbs back out of those more intense fields, everytime. Where the C-R theory ideas are clearly different, no change is made to the photon’s energy values as it travels about at lightspeed. Instead, it is the final measurer’s energy values that change as they move about into lesser energy, or greater energy locations. Those “changed” measurers then measure those photons with different “reference standards”. Instead of those photons changing their values, the photon simply proceeds, at the “local” speed of light, [which the C-R theory claims actually changes from location to location], until it is intercepted.
This 1 millisecond variation (or less) for 3 “different-energied” photons over a 7 billion year-long journey, from the same initial supernova, limits the enroute energy variations that each photon could have “randomly” incorporated. I have read another article that commented that those racing-photons are also strong indications that spacetime is analog, and not digital, down at the quantum level, to justify that “simultaneous arrival time” expectation from Einstein’s original ideas.
I would be interested in finding any conventional assessment of the probable amounts of “randomness” expected in those same photons if they were each continually being “energy-adjusted”, (or changed), along their journey. I think that the 1 millisecond or less variation in photon arrival time bodes very well for the C-R theory’s specific ideas.
If anyone thinks that the 3 photon’s arrival times bodes much better for the C-R theory’s ideas, that those same photons are not changed in any way over the full voyage, (except for being deflected by curvature, and having their direction slightly changed), they might be right. If anyone has ever played with laser pointers, and tried fighting with them as light sabers, one should notice that there is absolutely no intersection pressure or feedback (or Star Wars type noises) when the laser lightbeams “collide”. I would also propose that it is just as impractical to change a photon’s energy while it is cruising on a path at the speed of light, [by intersecting potential input energies, travelling at lightspeed, from any angle and from any direction], as it would be to check and change your car’s tire pressures while you were cruising down a highway at high speeds.
I was reading the March issue of Astronomy magazine, and there was an article about a new observatory constructed to look for high energy particle showers, generated as a by-product of ultra high energy cosmic rays (UHECR’s). One of the most interesting parts of that article was that some observers now believe that the UHECR is a highly++ (positively) ionized iron atom. Conventional theory has absolutely no good idea of any known process that could impart so much energy into that cosmic ray, without also tearing apart the stressed nucleus of that atom, in the process.
One of the C-R theory ideas that could help here is the idea that the Black-Hole C-R strips off all the electrons from the matter it eats, and rejects those electrons. All of the matter eaten, the protons and neutrons, is stored-up inside in a neutralized manner (trapped inside because of the speed-of-light speed limit). After concentrating matter in this ultra-ionized manner, some type of catastrophic release mechanism allows this trapped matter to overcome gravity [described elsewhere in the C-R theory]. The catastrophic-release events could be, a coronal mass ejection, nova, supernova, quasar, seyfert galaxy, active galactic nucleus (AGN), on up to a gamma ray burst (GRB).
The point here is, that as a natural process, easily explained by the C-R theory, there is a very simple causative mechanism which provides a plausible pathway to achieve the highest energy cosmic rays, up to the observed 300 quintillion electron volts (eV.) energy level. A single ionized iron atom, at that energy level, travels at such a high speed that it’s impact energy is equivalent to that of a major league tennis ball.
Although conventional theory claims that, because of the cosmic background radiation, the UHECR’s should continually be losing energy, by drag, so they cannot have travelled in from far away; that may not be the case. In a possible new idea (new to me, within the last month), if space is indeed permeated with huge quantities of excess negative charges (freed-up, or ionized single electrons), those charges may well provide the secret to explain why those high speed UHECR’s persist in their energy extremes, instead of fade-out with distance-away.
It occurred to me that, especially for those multiply-ionized iron atoms, something like Fe +23, could be attracted-in [ahead] to the dispersed clouds of free electrons. As those electrons approach and attract the highly positive ionized iron atom, the positive ion either increases (or else maintains) its high energy. As the electrons bunch together as the multi-positive particle approaches, once it passes, those same re-bunched, more concentrated electrons will also provide a kick-push away, [at their energy-expense] after the multi-positive attraction has passed-by. NOTE: If the highly ionized multi-positive particle was not moving, but static, the same electrons would not provide such a non linear pull-push mechanism at their expense, but would symmetrically pull equally from all directions, giving the static positive charge at rest, no such advantage.
The interesting thing here is that the C-R theory might yet again provide some unexpected, but reasonable insights into known phenomena, helping science (or at least, our “informed”, incoming home-readers) to obtain understandings not available elsewhere. Mainstream science is definitely not looking for the types of items that the C-R theory predicts.
After doing a nice humorous item for last year’s April Fool’s Day blog, I thought it would be about time to get back to one of the key, central themes of the C-R theory, that most of the world has been fooled, big-time, about some of the conditions of this universe.
I try to cover this issue from a new perspective in almost every blog, but it probably is most appropriate on April Fool’s Day. There are so many areas where the C-R theory differs substantially with mainstream science, that I might just try to list some of the main ones below.
1. The biggest difference is a totally new way to understand gravity. This is critical, and just not available anywhere else. It is often covered in recent blogs, so just a mention of it here.
2. Nature NEEDS two different “inverse square”-type forces, electromagnetism and gravity, BECAUSE they ACT differently.
3. Because gravity is indirectly caused, it is expressed outside of a Black-Hole C-R , whereas electrical charge DOES NOT couple-out from inside a Black-Hole C-R , as regular science believes.
4. Nature specifically exploits the difference in mass between the “flighty” electrons and the much more massive protons and neutrons, using the extreme gravity of a Black-Hole C-R to separate electrons and sort nuclei, by mass. This obvious difference between them affects what happens at the Schwarzschild radius [the outermost portion of the Black-Hole C-R .]
5. Black-Holes C-R strip off the electrons from their dinner, and store-up the protons and neutrons immediately inside, in an electrically neutralized state.
6. Spare, excess electrons, noticed outside of Black-Holes C-R , are evidence of their diet. Those stripped-off electrons are also the root-cause of those high-speed jets, seen emanating from larger Black-Holes C-R .
7. Those positive charges which accumulate inside Black-Holes C-R also accumulate, and eventually explode. This causes novae, supernovae, quasars, AGN’s, Seyfert galaxies, and GRB’s. All these phenomena are “helped” by this new option.
8. The complete electrical currents caused by this C-R like process generate so much electrical imbalances, that the shapes, and holding power of the spiral arms of entire galaxies are affected.
9. Rather than a “mysterious” dark matter, simple electromagnetic interactions are the real “culprit” in galaxy stability, and no such things as dark matter are ever needed.
10. There was no Big Bang.
11. Our universe is stable, not expanding, and not violating Conservation of Energy in the process.
12. The 2.7 K background radiation has nothing to do with a Big Bang. It is more like a waterfall roar [but coming equally from all directions].
13. The time rate is DIFFERENT in this universe. It runs the fastest at the center [the most blueshifted region], runs at earth’s time rate from earth’s location, and runs slower outwards. The CAUSE of the time-rate differences is the different strengths of gravity, NOT acceleration.
14. The time-rate difference directly “stabilizes” our universe. Outlying matter cannot just “fall” inwards, but must acquire more energy, [or energy to supply that mass with a greater “real time-rate”], to be allowed in, to approach the center.
Sorry, but I have run out of real time to include more up-to-date items in this blog, so they will have to wait until the next blog. Please let me know if you would rather have much shorter, condensed blogs-lite, rather than the normal, multi-page blogs I normally produce.
Jerry Reynard First posted April 1, 2013, edited and corrected April 23, 2014