Search for:


Major shortcomings of modern cosmology and to confirm the existence of Black hole cosmology - by Satya Seshavatharam

If universe constitutes so many galaxies, if each galaxy constitutes a central fast growing and (light speed) spinning black hole and if black hole geometry is more intrinsic than its ‘mass’ and ‘mass density’, then considering universe as a ‘growing and light speed rotating black hole’ may not be far away from reality. Unknowingly the fundamental physical laws are being developed, being executed and being proven inside and under the background of a growing and light speed rotating black hole universe.

Major Shortcomings of Modern Cosmology A) It may be noted that, increased redshifts and increased distances forced Edwin Hubble to propose the Hubble’s law. In fact there is no chance or scope or place for 'galaxy receding'. Its only our belief in its 'given' (Doppler shift based) interpretation. Even then, merely by estimating galaxy distance and without measuring galaxy receding speed, one cannot verify its acceleration. Clearly speaking: two mistakes are happening here. 1) Assumed galaxy receding speed is not being measured and not being confirmed. 2) Without measuring and confirming the galaxy receding speed, how can one say and confirm that it (galaxy) is accelerating. It is really speculative and unfortunate also. B) During cosmic expansion, assuming past and present galaxies (which actually found to have gigantic structures) as ‘points’ and guessing photons coming from that galactic point particles seem to be ad-hoc. If light is coming from the atomic matter of the gigantic galaxy, then redshift can be interpreted as an index of the galactic atomic ‘light emission mechanism’. In no way it seems to be connected with ‘galaxy receding’. C) If cosmic expansion is continuous and accelerating and redshift is a measure of cosmic expansion, then ‘rate of increase in redshift’ can be considered as a measure of cosmic ‘rate of expansion’. Then there is no possibility to observe a ‘constant’ red shift. More over the current definition of red shift seems to be ad-hoc and not absolute hence one may not be able to understand or confirm the actual cosmic rate of expansion. D) According to the modern cosmological approach, bound systems like ‘atoms’ which found to be the major constituents of galactic matter - will not expand with cosmic expansion/acceleration. As per the present observational data this may be true. It might be the result of ending stage of expansion also. In this regard, without considering and without analysing the past data, one can not come to a conclusion. If it is not possible to collect the past data, theoretically it may be possible to proceed further in this new direction. E) Even though it was having strong footing, Mach’s principle was not implemented successfully. F) Even though the whole physics strictly follow the ‘constancy of speed of light’, cosmic acceleration seems to violate it. This is really doubtful. G) There is no scientific evidence for the Friedmann’s second assumption. We believe it only on the grounds of modesty. H) Drop in ‘cosmic temperature’ can be considered as a measure of cosmic expansion and ‘rate of decrease in cosmic temperature’ can be considered as a measure of cosmic ‘rate of expansion’. But if rate of decrease in temperature is very small and is beyond the scope of current experimental verification, then the two possible states are: a) cosmic temperature is decreasing at a very slow rate and universe is expanding at a very slow rate and b) there is no ‘observable’ thermal expansion and there is no ‘observable’ cosmic expansion. I) If ‘Dark energy’ is the major outcome of the ‘accelerating universe’, it is very important to note that - in understanding the basic concepts of unification or other fundamental areas of physics, role of dark energy is very insignificant. So far no ground based experiment confirmed the existence of dark energy. There is no single clue or definition or evidence to any of the natural physical properties of (the assumed) dark energy. J) Dimensionally it is perfectly possible to show that, the dimensions of Hubble’s constant and angular velocity are same. If so considering Hubble’s constant merely as an expansion parameter may not be correct. With these major short comings, if one feels, modern cosmology - a 'standard cosmology' - it is really illogical, speculative and unfortunate. If one is willing to think in this new direction, certainly other hidden things can also be surfaced out.

       Article Source: http://www.ElectricArticles.com