Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/24/17 at 11:20am UTC, wrote Dear Paul, Yesterday I finalized rent contract for the cultivation land as...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/22/17 at 7:22am UTC, wrote Al Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/22/17 at 6:54am UTC, wrote Ae Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/22/17 at 5:10am UTC, wrote X Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/22/17 at 4:16am UTC, wrote T Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/22/17 at 3:15am UTC, wrote Q Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/21/17 at 21:24pm UTC, wrote L Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 5/21/17 at 12:56pm UTC, wrote K Dear Paul, …………… Your words………. ...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Ken Seto: "I endorse the idea of Newton’s “absolute time”. However, we have no..." in Real-Time Physics

kurt stocklmeir: "if space is expanding and if this makes positive energy particles have a..." in Alternative Models of...

nimit theeraleekul: "Dear friends, In my early post, I said that we could see detail of..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

nimit theeraleekul: "Dear Administrator, I have tried to make several posts with an attachment,..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

Gary Simpson: "Pentcho, I did not need the postulates of SR to propose the mechanism. In..." in Alternative Models of...

Pentcho Valev: "Gary, "I can propose a physical mechanism for length contraction" You..." in Alternative Models of...

Robert Martin: "Theories of everything, he contends, can be depicted as those which draw on..." in Theories of Everything,...

Gary Simpson: "Pentcho, I'm not asking for you to comment upon my essay. I am asking you..." in We Are All Connected


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)


FQXi FORUM
May 25, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe by Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jan. 26, 2017 @ 20:19 GMT
Essay Abstract

There are many distant Galaxies whose distances are about 30 Giga light years. There are Galaxies which were born just after 400 million years after Bigbang and which were born 6 to 7 billion years after Bigbang. In Dynamic Universe Model all the Galaxies are distributed at different distances and the Universe looks similar as it is now. On 01March2016 the news of the discovery about the observation of most distant Galaxy ‘GNZ11 or GN11’having an light travel distance 13.4 Giga light years & co-moving distance of 32 Giga light years and having a red shift z of 11.1 created quite a stir. There are many such Galaxies like EGSY8p7 (with z= 8.68, age =13.2) and EGS-zs8-1 (with z= 7.73, age =13.04). To show that Universe exists further to GNz11, a Galaxy at distance of 100 times 13.4 Billion light years (1.26862E+28 meters) is simulated and named it as GNz11 in this simulation. 132 more galaxies were assumed in the range (3.02001E+26 to 1.26862E+28) meter. Later distance of the first Galaxy was reduced by 50% and found the graphs of Universe become similar in both the simulations after 102 iterations. Slowly life of the stars and hence subsequently the life of Galaxy will come to end because of their electromagnetic radiation. Galaxies tend to evolve from spiral to elliptical structure and they perish to form Blue clouds known as Galaxy "quenching". Hence we can say that our Universe had reproduction ability, which is a very slow process. Universe produces new Galaxies, and the already formed Galaxies perish slowly. Ours is single universe and is a closed one. In other words, our Universe reproduces its Galaxies, as and when light and other electromagnetic radiation condenses to form enough matter.

Author Bio

Worked in Bhilai Steel Plant for 37 years and retired in 2014. Astrophysics and Cosmology are hobby. 4 books and many papers were published in many countries on Dynamic Universe model. Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model, like existence of Blue shifted galaxies and ‘No Dark matter’ came true.

Download Essay PDF File




Avtar Singh wrote on Jan. 26, 2017 @ 22:17 GMT
The paper claims universal gravitational force (UGF) as the indomitable resultant vector of gravitational forces acted by all the other bodies in

the Universe. This is impossible since if there is no anti-gravity force to balance the gravity force, the whole universe would collapse on itself and there will be no universe, no galaxies, no stars, no planets, and no biological life.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 01:56 GMT
Lets do a small experiment which we did in our school days. Take a bucket and half fill it water. Tie a string to the handle; hold it with your hand. Now spin around yourself. As you gain speed the bucket will be lifted up to the level of your shoulders or neck. But water will not fall from the bucket due to centrifugal and centripetal forces.

The same thing will happen in Dynamic Universe model also. The bodies in the universe will not collapse into a central mass when there is non- uniform matter density. Papers were published by Dynamic Universe Model on this subject many years back. When there is uniform density distribution of matter, the whole matter will collapse. We can visualize matter distribution is non-uniform. Vacuum density and moon density are different. There are huge voids to huge super cluster structures of Galaxies in the UNIVERSE, They cannot be called uniform density as claimed by other models. All these papers were available from VIXRA or from the Dynamic Universe Model Blog.



Universal Gravitation Force(UGF) is the final resultant force vector acting on any-mass, which includes all these forces.



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 01:59 GMT
No additional anti-gravity is required



Avtar Singh replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 17:35 GMT
You are referring to a planetary gravitational model wherein a planet circling a star or planet keeps in orbit without falling by gravity due to the centrifugal force. But such a model based only on gravity does not explain the observed star velocities in galaxies and the observed accelerated expansion of the universe and far-field supernova observations. UGF cannot correlate and explain the cosmological constant, dark energy, and the observed Hubble constant.

report post as inappropriate


Al Schneider wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 07:59 GMT
I am confused. I fail to see how this paper relates a mindless universe to the phenomena of intent. Could you explain?

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 22:51 GMT
In this essay, the property of reproduction and the property of intent of the biological world are shown to be existing as properties of the universe. The Universe behaves as though it is having its own mind.

How…

I am reproducing the parts of the essay below for you to comprehend easily ……

…. Intent…..

‘….. 1.1 About Dynamic Universe Model: In our...

view entire post




Joe Fisher replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 17:33 GMT
Dear Author Gupta,

Please excuse me for I do not wish to be too critical of your fine essay.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings about imaginary invisible separated galaxies.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jan. 28, 2017 @ 21:30 GMT
Dear Author Joe Fisher,

Thank you for your comments on my essay. I did not understand why you are calling Galaxies as…” imaginary invisible separated galaxies”…They are visible to any person through a telescope. This same telescope, a similar one with lower power is used for seeing distant objects. They can be seen by anyone.

Hope you will clarify.

I will be giving my comments on your essay, near your essay only instead of discussing here.




Harry Hamlin Ricker III wrote on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 14:49 GMT
Hi, I think that this essay is very interesting and the topic well worth thinking about, but only the last paragraph in the conclusion addresses the essay contest topic. I would have liked that to have been discussed rather than what was discussed.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 1, 2017 @ 23:50 GMT
Dear Harry Hamlin Ricker III,

Thank you for the nice complements.

Main problem was the length of the paper. I have to delete many related paragraphs to adjust for the acceptable length.

In this essay, the property of intent of the biological world and the property of reproduction are shown to be present as properties of the universe. These properties were deducted from UGF- the Universal gravitational force acting on any mass, and the fact that Galaxies originate and quench at different times and at different distances irrespective of Bigbang. The Universe behaves as though it is having its own mind.

This paper was not published earlier, it was a new concept. I have to give the supporting graphs and conclusions of research. Hence I kept this discussion related to the topic at the conclusion.

I request you to please have a look at the question asked by Al Schneider (wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 07:59 GMT) and my reply in the above for some more points on your observation.



Harry Hamlin Ricker III replied on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 17:37 GMT
Hi,

As I said before I like this a lot: By seeing all these, the author proposes a new idea (not published by him earlier) that the Universe had an ability to reproduce Galaxies.

I was going to address that topic in my essay, but I wanted to keep the essay concise. Many years ago I discovered:THE ATLAS AND CATALOGUE OF INTERACTING GALAXIES by B.A. Vorontsov-Velyaminov. He talks about galaxies as if they were reproducing biologically. Halton Arp later talked about Quasars as galaxy seeds. I am wondering if you are aware to these ideas? I personally think that galaxies do reproduce by a process similar to some biological processes we know about.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 22:46 GMT
Dear Harry Hamlin Ricker III,

Thank you for so much nice information to support my paper

Thank you for your nice study. I said that the essay was not published by me earlier. That’s true.

Can you please send me some more details of that papers you mentioned..... “THE ATLAS AND CATALOGUE OF INTERACTING GALAXIES by B.A. Vorontsov-Velyaminov” and the paper “Halton Arp later talked about Quasars as galaxy seeds”, you mentioned above. I don’t k now about them. My paper uses the concept on UGF, the universal Gravitational Force, not biological processes…..

Can you please tell me about your paper and send me copy of your paper. Is that here in this contest? I searched by your name, I could not get any.

Best Regards….

snp




George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 6, 2017 @ 10:30 GMT
Dear Gupta!

Many thanks for your great opinion.

I am just happy to see that we are not alone in our views!

Maybe in any time people will be realized that the way of natural thinking is more preferable in science than any beautiful creativity! Now I am starting to study your work (with pleasure!) I will tell you about it after some time.

I suggest you to read M-r Andrew Scott’s article where I find very costly remarks!

With best wishes!

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 7, 2017 @ 10:04 GMT
Thank you very much for the nice words. Where to find this … ‘ M-r Andrew Scott’s article where you found very costly remarks’… please suggest me




George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 7, 2017 @ 08:15 GMT
Dear Gupta!

Your work is very interesting by informative and by analytical arguments, that shows the serious lacks of present representations in the cosmology. I welcome many your assertions, particularly, concerning to absence of dark energy-matter. I am also sure there are not such things, and questions should be solved by some other ways.

I see yours interesting approach to problems of living - unliving forms of material, related to contest question.

I have nothing against your serious arguments on the paradox of galaxies life and existence of our Universe; it looks you are right! However, this question also should be solved in other ways; in my view, the big bang (BB) is out of doubt. Moreover, the BB, Hubble's expansion and the gravity phenomenon become strongly interconnected each to others, as well as with the single primordial substance of all things that are the electromagnetic field. (It was Einstein's idea and I long working on this.) I have evaluated your work as high, and I only friendly asking you to check up your approach to BB; it maybe there was a few BB? Check for example work of R. Penrouse & V. Gurzadian: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.5162.pdf



Best wishes

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 7, 2017 @ 10:44 GMT
Dear George Kirakosyan!

Thank you very much for evaluating my work high. I also evaluated your work very high. I downloaded the paper by V. G. Gurzadyan and R. Penrose you suggested…

They wrote on CCC cosmology…

There are some basic problems in WMAP satellites’ instrumentation and software. WMAP cannot eliminate Microwave radiation from Stars, Galaxies and clusters. If you calculate CMB using Stephen-Boltzmann law there will be nothing left from BB generated CMB radiation…

Please have a look at my essay on CMB in FQXi few years back

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1607

Best Wishes




Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 7, 2017 @ 15:57 GMT
Dear Mr. Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta

Have you any value for UGF?

I will briefly comment on your: Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model:

No Isotropy; In fact we have an approximate uniformity in all orientations.

No Homogeneity; I do not agry.

No Space -time continuum; In fact Space and Time are phenomenon like others.

Non-uniform...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 01:29 GMT
Dear Branko

My English is poor, I am sorry for that…

Thank you for your comments, and for trying to understand Dynamic Universe model. Thank you for well esteemed comments… I did not reply on what you already agreed…..



1. About: Have you any value for UGF?

-This UGF is not constant force acting in only one direction or having only one value.

In...

view entire post





Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 8, 2017 @ 11:09 GMT
Dear Mr. Gupta

About: Proton shift … I did not understand…

Newton's gravitational theory, it always works, although few people understand.

You may not understand Proton shift based on one reading. The important thing is that it gives results. But I assure you that my Theory of Unity between the Whole and its Parts is much easier to understand than the theory of relativity,...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 04:08 GMT
Dear Branko,

Thank you for the fast reply.

Thank you for your nice offer, we will definitely do some combined papers.. no problems!

About your paper at… http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers/View


/5752

In equation (2) : 1-1 = 0, hence n^0 = 1,

Equation (2) becomes…

m = k*mq ( m with subscript q),

Probably every other equations also change

Probably there is some typographical error….

May please look once again….

Best Regards




John Edward LaMuth wrote on Feb. 9, 2017 @ 04:43 GMT
I fail to fully see how this paper relates a mindless universe to any of the phenomena of intent. Could you explain?

John L

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 04:19 GMT
Dear John Edward LaMuth,

Thank you for your interest on my essay and good question...

Please See above... my reply to the question by...

Al Schneider wrote on Jan. 27, 2017 @ 07:59 GMT

and my reply to...

Harry Hamlin Ricker III wrote on Jan. 31, 2017 @ 14:49 GMT

I hope it will clarify your question, if not we can discuss again

Best




Paul N Butler wrote on Feb. 9, 2017 @ 20:11 GMT
You commented on my paper’s page:

Dear Buttler,

Thank you for the good discussion and good essay. Your sub-heading and discussion … ‘Could the universe, as it is, have been created by chance happenings?’ is good.

I am also a firm believer of God. But I don’t think he created this universe at one stroke like Bigbang.

I request you to have a look at my essay...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 17:28 GMT
Dear Paul

I will answer your views in small different posts...

Thank you Paul for nice thinking and elaborate discussion.

….. concept that the energy photons that are radiated from stars as a by product of the fusion of light elements such as hydrogen into helium would be changed back into more matter (presumably hydrogen) as it passes near large masses. It is possible for...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 17:31 GMT
Dear Paul,

Your observation...

……… In fact, the increased density of sub-energy particles near large bodies of matter would increase the likelihood of interactions between them and any energy photons that were near the large bodies of matter, which would result in the transfer of some of the energy photons’ fourth vector motion to the sub-energy particles involved in the...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 17:34 GMT
Dear Paul,

Your another part of observation,

……… This universe is a temporary structure that was built by God to be used for the purpose of building a body for himself to live in. He made us to become parts of his body if we choose to join him in the way that he allows us to do so. Once his body members or parts are all made, he will have no more need for this world because his body members will live eternally and he knows all things, so he will not need to make a new body like a man might need to do in order for it to do some new thing that he just figured out how to do. He is also replacing this world with a new larger one that is not subject to entropy and will not end for his body and him to live in, which will be a much better life than can be possible in this world. He will then take all of the motion that he took out of himself to make this world back into himself. Since his motion is much greater than that contained in the stars, etc. of this world, this universe will effectively be burned up in the process along with everything in it. This end of the universe will occur long before the stars all burn out, etc. Only his body members will be saved from that and enter into the new world with him.…….

Here you brought the God into picture. It is general human tendency to put something as act of God, when the human understanding fails. Science will progress by searching more and more avenues of understanding….




Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 06:52 GMT
Dear Mr. Gupta

Equation (2) m=mqk^1-1/k Is OK becouse: 1-1 = 0, hence n^0 = 1, is only for k=1, therefore m=1*mq, ie. mq=mq, What is expected.

I propose to carry out a survey among the participants of contest. Questions are in attachment in Excel. There is also accompanying text. If you wish, we can together to propose this to everyone.

Regards,

Branko

attachments: Survey.xlsx

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 09:56 GMT
So Thank you Branko, So that equation (2) is correct , hence no problem…



Good survey, the there should be details of persons name and email id, in that excel sheet…

What do you say…




Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 07:40 GMT
Dear Mr. Singh

But Mr. Singh, think about that you say. “UGF can not correlate and explain the cosmological constant, dark energy, and the observed Hubble constant.” It is not part of UGF, therefore it needs to explain the one who proposed it, not UGF.

Regards,

Branko

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 09:45 GMT
Thank you Branko,

Thank you for support,

You are correct. UGF is only vectorial addition of all the gravitational attraction forces all the masses in the Universe on that body at that instant of time. UGF can not correlate and explain the cosmological constant, dark energy, and the observed Hubble constant. It is Dynamic Universe model that takes care of these things.

I replied about UGF in detail to Mr. Singh.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 09:48 GMT
Hi all

This above is my post only, I was logged out while typing

Gupta



Branko L Zivlak replied on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 21:41 GMT
On the contrary Mr. Gupta. People do not like to give personal information. What they want to give has in the biography. Many were put email in the essay. I'll send the Excel file to the translator for review.

Regards,

Branko

report post as inappropriate


Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 10, 2017 @ 23:59 GMT
Gupta,

You seem to have substituted the results of a computer model for empirical observation. There are several mentions in the essay where you claim that galaxies are being created. Presumably, you mean that galaxies are being created even now. Can you cite an empirical observation to support this claim?

Best regards,

Gary Simpson

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 12, 2017 @ 21:59 GMT
Dear Garry Simpson

Thank you very much for studying my paper so thoroughly and giving esteemed questions. I am just giving two reported cases of Galaxies / Clusters of Galaxies which are being generated after Bigbang

[35] Rakos, Schombert, and Odell in their paper ‘The Age of Cluster Galaxies from Continuum Colors’ Astrophys.J., 677 , 1019, DOI: 10.1086/533513, e-Print: arXiv:0801.3665 [astro-ph] | PDF arXiv:0801.3665v1 [astro-ph] 23 Jan 2008

[36] C. PAPOVICH et el, CANDELS OBSERVATIONS OF THE STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES OF CLUSTER GALAXIES AT Z=1.62, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.3794v2.pdf

See the CANDLES web pages also for simple language explanations.

There are many other papers and websites also if want them I will give them,

By the way, see the attachments to this post, to see these files for your quick reference…

Best Regards

SNP. Gupta

attachments: 9_Gy_age_6660b4e3d2ebf7b447d16a86803515e9c472.pdf, Candles_Gal_born_after_BB_1110.3794v2.pdf



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 20:05 GMT
Dear Simpson,

So this is not empirical observation....

Best Regards

snp.gupta




Jack Hamilton James wrote on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 04:22 GMT
Dear Gupta

Thankyou for your comments on my essay. I found your higher level approach to the essay question very interesting, and I admit I hadnt considered this route in addressing the question. I am not skilled enough in your work to offer comment, but again appreciate the avenue by which you address the question.

Best of luck with your entry and future work.

Jack

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 06:11 GMT
Dear James,

Thank you very much for your nice remarks, I request you to please have look at my blog also

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

I like to work with you for a combined paper on your subject...

best Wishes to you...

snp.gupta




Stephen I. Ternyik wrote on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 09:00 GMT
Dear SNP Gupta ! The cosmological learning model of your essay is an interesting viewpoint, i.e. the advancing dialectics of matter and energy leads to learning processes of higher order in living matter.The univeral purpose of living matter is (human) self-realization and the harmonic reflection of eternal cosmic law. Take these thoughts as my reader response to your labor of love. Best: stephen i. ternyik

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 13, 2017 @ 23:46 GMT
Dear Stephen.

Thank you for your Blessings...

Best Regards

snp.gupta




Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 11:51 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

I read with great interest your essay with new deep ideas. Your theory says that to overcome the crisis of understanding in fundamental science needed a live competition concepts and theories . Today we, earthlings, need a big brainstorming on all the problems, especially in basic science - physics, mathematics, cosmology. I give high ranking to your ideas and theory.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 12:13 GMT
I have read your wonderful essays and remembered Rabindranath Tagore, taking into account the idea of the unity of knowledge, concept of the ontological (structural, comic) memory, Raj Kapoor's song '50s, which is very loved in Russia, and the theme of the Contest:

«Tired in my way I asked the destiny:

“Who pushes me in my back so ruthlessly?” -

“Look back!” - I look - and the complaint ceases:

It is my past who pushes me forward.»

I wish you good luck!

All the Best,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 23:03 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

Thank you very much for such a moral support. I went to the link you mentioned above http://homepages.xnet.co.nz/~hardy/cosmologystatement.html . Though it was a old petition it is exactly correct even today. No research is supported even morally which is against Bigbang. Forget about the funding. I also tried to sign it, but it is going somewhere.

This statement tells about an important aspect….”FUNDING”… Who so ever is funding this research thinks against the science or technology. The funding persons think that the contrary to science to be proved. Science tells that if there is an experiment, it should give same results to anyone. Science should not predict imaginary things. It should be real. History says even Einstein did not like and did not support Bigbang based Universe models.

For the last 25 years I faced the same problem. Main stream people appreciated me in the front and they always laughed at me at the back. No support of any type. Now I am getting worried, as I am getting aged, to whom I will give out all this knowledge. So I kept all my BOOKs and PAPERs in my webpage for any person at free of cost. He doesn’t even need to inform me about his downloads.

Thank you for giving me high ranking. I am also giving ranking to your essay.

Best Wishes

Snp.gupta



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 23:07 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

Spasibo vam balshoy…Many thanks…

I was in USSR, Kiev for 6 months in 1982. I used talk and read Russian ok. Ya Jabil poruski…I forgot most the Russian language. I am still having many Russian friends, who contact me regularly. May be I will visit Kiev once again…..

Thank you very much for taking me back into such wonderful nostalgic memories.

Raj kapoor’s … ‘Avaara hu..’ song, Rabindra nath Tagor’s … “Where the mind is without fear poem”…. Indian philosophical thoughts….

I also liked the present concept of theme of FQXi contest… I got a wonderful experience of going into thoughtful wisdom of multitude of thinkers… very nice!

Best Regards

Snp.gupta




Yehuda Atai wrote on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 12:13 GMT
Dear Snp.Gupta

I read your essay and I agree that "Universe had an ability to reproduce Galaxies." as part of your conclusion, though I don't see time as you do. I see the causality operating as a spacial case in the occurrence of the phenomenon, and we are existences in a present continuous duration. the space is full of relationships with a potential movements. When a self organization chooses a movement (conscious or unconscious) it become a unique and subjective movement bound by the intrinsic and spacial state of the self organization, whether we are a "galaxy" a grain of sand or a human being.

I see space with no beginning or end. It is a space with infinite occurrence of phenomena with an end (finitude) to each of one of them.(As explained in my essay)

All the best

yehuda atai

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 07:45 GMT
Dear Prof Yehuda Atai,

Time has one directional movement as in practice we never see time going “BACKWORDS”. We don’t see any thing previous except in our memories, history or records… why should we introduce things like going into time in backwards direction? As per space is concern in can be infinite, no problem.

For your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based...

view entire post





Patrick Tonin wrote on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 14:00 GMT
Dear Snp,

Thank you for your comments on my essay, I left a reply to your question on my blog.

I have read your essay and I agree that there is something fundamentally wrong with the Big Bang model and I also agree that dark matter does not exist but I have a different view and model than yours.

I liked your reference to VAK (The mother of the Vedas) at the end of your essay, I believe there is a lot we can learn from the Vedas, and especially vedanta idealism.

All the best,

Patrick

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 23:44 GMT
Dear Patrick,

I know your words…. “At the start of the Universe there is nothing, nothing exists, not even time. The most fundamental notion, a state of existence itself, has to be defined. But as nothing exists, how can a state of existence be defined ? The only solution is simply to introduce a state of non-existence.”… are concepts from Vedas only… As I remember it is from “Shristi suktam or the Hymn of creation”…

I bow low for knowledge of Vedas….. Excellent… !

Can you please send me some more details of your paper on your universe model…..

Best wishes to your essay

=snp




sridattadev kancharla wrote on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 14:24 GMT
Dear SNP,

Yes, universe is alive and we are living in it and it is living in us. Singularity or GOD in my perspective is not the scientific unknown, but one's true self, so the question is do we really know our self? and when we do we will realize that we are all much similar in our wants and needs than not and that is universal love. There is only one singularity, how can there be multiple singularities be it mathematical or physical as the definition of singularity means just one and only, if you encounter multiple in science and mathematics it means that we have not yet arrived at the absolute one singularity. It's easy to get to that absolute singularity that lies with in us and eastern esoteric philosophies have elaborated on how to do that and they are scientific in approach as well. As we are in the process of creating AI which will become omniscient and omnipotent , i recommend that we incorporate the values we share of omnipresence of life with it and make it loving just as the creator who created the reality let all forms of life co exist naturally while incorporating certain degree of hierarchy. So doing real and practical science is important, but if it goes unchecked it could lead to disasters. “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” - AE. "Science without religious morals is dangerous, religion without scientific truth is death."

Love,

i.

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 23:02 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Wow wonderful analysis… What you said about Singularity is true, it is one only. The singularity what I was referring is from Physics and Math only, which does not exist Physically. You have clarified well about your concepts now. I am giving a good rating to your essay… I am also a firm believer of God….

Best wishes to your essay…

=snp

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 15, 2017 @ 23:10 GMT
Dear Sri Dattadev,

The above is my post only. I just refreshed web page before posting my reply to you, after few seconds the FQXi server logged me out...

Best

=snp




Anonymous wrote on Feb. 16, 2017 @ 06:27 GMT
Dear SNP,

Thank you for reading and commenting on my essay. I have now read your essay.

As I quote in my essay:

...many successes of the Big Bang model “can be traced to the initial conditions postulated … and put in by hand, without justification, other than to retrofit the data."

Of course Standard Model and General Relativity parameters must also be put in ‘by hand’. These form links in a narrative chain, linking basic principles to observed data. I discuss a number of mental/mathematical structures that we project on the universe. Rovelli agrees that we project structure onto reality:

One such structure is 'dark matter'. Only this month several papers have reported their experiment's complete failure to find dark matter.

Studying your paper, you project an absolute minimum of structure on the universe:

No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

I think this is excellent. You seem to obtain good results in spite of not projecting structure on the universe. Very impressive. Your research is also impressive.

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 16, 2017 @ 12:58 GMT
Dear Edwin Eugene Klingman,

Thank you very much for such a supporting reply.

Many results were obtained using Dynamic Universe Model algorithm.

If you don’t mind, I want to tell you that the dark energy, dark matter and black holes are not required in Dynamic Universe Model. I want to tell you a bit about this new model of cosmology……

This Model is new...

view entire post





Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 12:19 GMT
Dear Satyav,

As an Astronomer long focussed on galaxies and cosmic evolution I found your ideas interesting and novel with much agreement with my own work and (some joint) published papers. Certainly the universe is dynamic, and many current assumptions (mainly in the 'Concordance' model) are flawed, incomplete or plain wrong! but specifically;

"..our Universe reproduces its...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 17, 2017 @ 22:56 GMT
Dear Peter Jackson,

Thank you very much for the supporting reply. You touched many points, very nicely. I want to give a point by point reply. I like the idea to work in collaboration with you, we will definitely do that. You are an multi-talented person with very nice knowledge of many fields. Please give more details of your model to me….

….Your words: As an Astronomer long...

view entire post




Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 11:35 GMT
Dear Satyav,

(As posted on mine - where the links are all live!); Thank you I've come across some of your papers before (though among thousands!) and now recall appreciating your 'It from Bit' essay on the CMB etc.

I'll give the links below. I'm probably principally and Astronomer/Observational Cosmologist but as all nature is connected have been a perpetual student spending intense...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 01:34 GMT
Dear Peter,

You are very nice something like Peter Pan...!

I am giving my reply as follows

….Your words…. I'm probably principally and Astronomer/Observational Cosmologist but as all nature is connected have been a perpetual student spending intense periods studying a wide range of other specialist areas over 50 years. That's proved highly valuable for 'joined up' thinking...

view entire post





Jeff Yee wrote on Feb. 18, 2017 @ 17:01 GMT
Thanks for introducing me to your paper (based on the comment that you left on mine). I do have an interest in the Big Bang as it relates to the creation of the particles that we see. I am not as knowledgeable on measuring galaxies and their distances so it's a bid harder for me to comment but I did find it interesting to read. I was a bit unclear on the conclusion, so my suggestion if you have a chance to edit the paper at some point is to make it stronger and more clear.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 06:46 GMT
Dear Jeff Yee,

Thank you for your encouraging reply,

Thank you for your interest on my essay and good question...

Main problem was the length of the paper. I have to delete many related paragraphs to adjust for the acceptable length.

In this essay, the property of intent of the biological world and the property of reproduction are shown to be present as properties of...

view entire post





Alexander M. Ilyanok wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 15:29 GMT
Dear Mr. Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

Thank you very much for your kind comment and your encouragement. You definitely understand the point, and you clearly also see the problem.

In my article “Quantum Astronomy Part I” is described the model of the sun having a hollow core as introduced in. The model helps to explain a number of experimental facts of kinetics, energetics, and sun spectroscopy based on classic physics. The origin of the sun's energy is not the thermonuclear process taking place in its core, but the coherent, anisotropic gravitational compression of the atomic hydrogen in the solar shell at the temperature of 6298°K. https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9912537v1.pdf http://metagalactic.net/

And article “Manifesto. The Manifesto. The Galactic Internet”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26557718
7_Manifesto_The_Galactic_Internet

The temperature in Kelvin (2000 – 80000) Kelvin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification

I read your essay today, and find that we are in even more agreement than usual.

In 1998 we proposed the metagalaxy model as a hollow sphere with a shell of solid hydrogen at a temperature of about 3K and radius or 11.8535x10^9 lightyears. [Ilyanok A.M. Quantum Astronomy. Part II. arXiv: astro-ph / 0001059]. This size metagalaxy was confirmed by experiments with the WMAP satellite 2003. Jeffrey Weeks calculations have shown that the universe is finite and very compact, a radius of about 11 billion lightyears.

More details can be found in the work A. Ilyanok “Femtotechnologies. Step I Atom Hydrogen”

http://vixra.org/abs/1306.0014

https://www.researc
hgate.net/publication/264346914_FEMTOTEHNOLOGII_PERVYJ_SAG_-
_ATOM_VODORODA

Best regards

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 22:32 GMT
Dear Alexander M. Ilyanok,

Wonderful sir, probably some more details of the process, which you call... "anisotropic gravitational compression of the atomic hydrogen in the solar shell" are needed to understand it fully and to discuss it with you.....

I will post in details on your essay

Best regards

=snp.




Gene H Barbee wrote on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 15:42 GMT
Hi Satyav,

Thanks for reading and commenting on my essay. Cosmology is an interesting hobby. I have been following developments in the field and agree that there are many discrepancies. The argument for a cosmology with no big bang was argued vigorously for many years. Those that won the argument pointed to the uniform distribution of Helium4 and residual Deuterium, Li7, etc. Their measurements were consistent with a temperature of about 1e9K and a big bang. Hubble's work argued strongly for expansion. You mentioned the fruitless search for dark matter. You are right on and it concerns me too.

As others have said, I didn't find much about the FQXi topic in your essay but cosmology is definitely wandering toward a goal and many seem lost at the present time.

Gene Barbee

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 02:17 GMT
Hi Gene Barbee,

Thank you for the interest on my essay, thank you very much for taking time to comment on my essay. Hope you will discuss about this answer....

… Your words….Those that won the argument pointed to the uniform distribution of Helium4 and residual Deuterium, Li7, etc.

…… Reply….. That is not correct, they won’t contribute to the mass; as they...

view entire post





Joseph J. Jean-Claude wrote on Feb. 23, 2017 @ 03:32 GMT
Dear Mr Gupta,

You would have had a better essay if you showed how the course of evolution of a galactic formation is very similar to the developmental course of a karyot. By addressing the issue of whether or not they experience the triple cycle of birth-life-death, common to all living. And whether in the course of their existence they experience one of the key events in karyotic life, sexuate reproduction. One can reservedly assume that the observed merging of galaxies point in that direction. That should have been the central theme of your essay. Instead you only made a brief mention of Reproduction but never fully address it in your essay.

Nevertheless you have a new idea, which is much better than the vacuous “emergence” notion that too many other participating essays have evoked. Congrats on that.

Joseph

____________________

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Feb. 23, 2017 @ 12:39 GMT
Dear Joseph,

Thank you for reading my essay….

Thank you very much for your words of kindly nature. I did not understand the word “karyot” or “karyotic life”. Search in Google, Wikipedia and On line dictionary did not give any meaning. My English is poor.

Hope you will explain me what is “karyot” and “Karotic life” is it same as prokaryote… I dont know……..

Taking it as single cell biological reproduction instead of sexuate reproduction, probably at universe level the sexuate reproduction not possible!

Other problem I faced is length of the essay limitation.

Thank you for the nice and encouraging suggestions…

Best Regards

=snp.gupta



Giovanni Prisinzano replied on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 14:12 GMT
Dear SNP Gupta,

Thank you very much for reading and commenting on my essay!

I will try to read some of your papers on the Dynamic Universe Model, that I find interesting.

Best wishes for your essay too!

Giovanni

report post as inappropriate

Giovanni Prisinzano replied on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 14:26 GMT
Sorry SNP Gupta,

this post had to be placed in my thread, as a response to yours!

Giovanni

report post as inappropriate


Domenico Oricchio wrote on Feb. 27, 2017 @ 21:43 GMT
Thank you for reading all my essay; I read your essay, and usually (each year) I read all the essays because there is always someone deserve to be read.

If I understand your theory, is it a linearization of Einstein Field Equations like a parameterized post-Newtonian formalism?

Ah, I am not a professor.

Regards

Domenico Oricchio

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 28, 2017 @ 23:46 GMT
Dear Domenico Oricchio,

Thank you for reading my essay and trying to understand it…

This Dynamic Universe Model never used any Special theory or General theory of Relativity. It is Independent of relativity… or … is a linearization of Einstein Field Equations like a parameterized post-Newtonian formalism as you asked.

It is a singularity free N-body problem solution...

view entire post





Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 12:55 GMT
Dear Gupta, you raise a very important for cosmology questions and demonstrate the very great strength of mind. I believe that you could do more if adhered to the concept of moving space-matter. For example, New Cartesian Physic claims that the space-matter moves on forever, as in nature there are no "bricks" from which you can build an absolutely tight with no holes space, which it tries to fill, but it is not possible.

The concept of moving space-matter helped me:

1. To convert the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in the principle of definiteness of points of space-matter;

2. To reveal the law of the constancy of the flow of forces through a closed surface space-matter;

3. To formulate the law of gravitation Lorentz;

4. Give the formula of the pressure of the Universe;

5. To reveal the essence of gravitational mass as the flow vector of the centrifugal acceleration across the surface of the corpuscles, etc.



From New Cartesian Physic great potential in understanding the world. To show this potential, I have in my essay showed the way of the materialist explanation of the paranormal and supernatural. It is very close to your idea of Intelligence in the Universe.

I appreciate your Essay.

I hope that we will communicate to mutually enrich each other knowledge about the Universe.

I wish you success!

Boris Dizhechko

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 20:18 GMT
Dear Boris Dizhechko,

Thank you very much sir,

You have very nicely explained about your theory. It is very good you have applications like

1. To convert the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle

….Used in Quantum Mechanics… it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa… Very Good application.

2. To reveal the law of the constancy of the flow of forces through a closed surface space-matter;

……………………. I did not understand…..why it is closed SURFACE ?

3. To formulate the law of gravitation Lorentz;

It is one of the alternatives to general relativity in weak field approximation

….. ………………Is it also used in Quntum Mechanics…. ?

4. Give the formula of the pressure of the Universe;

……………. Probably you may know Aether was not found yet………

5. To reveal the essence of gravitational mass as the flow vector of the centrifugal acceleration across the surface of the corpuscles, etc.

………………. I did not understand, what is “surface” of Corpuscles?

6. From New Cartesian Physic great potential in understanding the world. To show this potential, I have in my essay showed the way of the materialist explanation of the paranormal and supernatural. It is very close to your idea of Intelligence in the Universe. …………………. Very Good, Congratulations!

7. I hope that we will communicate to mutually enrich each other knowledge about the Universe.

……. ………..Yes Boris, thank you very much, we will communicate

I know very little amount of Russian, I learned it in 1982.

Best wishes to your essay also

=snp.gupta



Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 23:10 GMT
Dear SNP. Gupta, distance, location, age and reproduction of galaxies in our dynamic Universe are constantly attention New Cartesian Physic, so I appreciated your work. However, someone us down and I say do not let perish New Cartesian Physic, still this is Descartes. 1. The certainty principle Heisenberg-Dizhechko (I added your name) in the New Cartesian Physic claims to highlight in the universe is infinitely small point independent object and make a move, you must attach to it infinitely great momentum. It speaks about absolute strength space. 2. the law of constancy of flow force in the universe is a generalization of Gauss's Law for electric charges. Closed surface is an imaginary, mental experiment. The Act gives us the inverse-square law. 3. The law of gravitation Lorentz in New Cartesian Physic has a simple form, I brought in the essay. 4. The formula of pressure of the universe I brought from the forms of ...

report post as inappropriate

Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich replied on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 23:17 GMT
4. The formula of pressure of the universe I brought from mass-energy equivalence formula, it coincided with the formula of the law of constancy of flow forces. Here's the formula-the flow of forces through an imaginary surface around the particles is equal to the product of the speed of light, Planck's constant. Stream for New Cartesian Physic is not needed-it replaces the concept of moving space-matter. All this is considered for corpuscles and before New Physic Cartesian problem of integration for the accumulation of corpuscles. I wish you success! Boris Dizhechko

report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 23:17 GMT
Your assessment:

"Slowly life of the stars and hence subsequently the life of Galaxy will come to end because of their electromagnetic radiation. Galaxies tend to evolve from spiral to elliptical structure and they perish to form Blue clouds known as Galaxy "quenching". Hence we can say that our Universe had reproduction ability, which is a very slow process. Universe produces new Galaxies, and the already formed Galaxies perish slowly. Ours is single universe and is a closed one. In other words, our Universe reproduces its Galaxies, as and when light and other electromagnetic radiation condenses to form enough matter."

I see no mention of exploding stars creating elements that did not exist before the first stars formed, elements other than hydrogen, helium and lithium. Not in your theory?

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 10:39 GMT
Dear Jim Hoover,

Thank you for reading my essay. The Novae and Super Novae (Exploding stars) produce many elements and even new flavours of neutrinos. These things are covered in another paper. Here page length limitation is there. I could not cover many points. To give a basic idea about Dynamic Universe Model…..

Dynamic Universe Model doesn’t use Relativity concepts. So the...

view entire post




James Lee Hoover replied on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 16:38 GMT
Thanks for your comments and the added information.

Regards,

Jim Hoover

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 6, 2017 @ 21:59 GMT
Dear James Lee Hoover,

Hope you will spend some more time on Dynamic Universe Model...

Best Regards

=snp.gupta




Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 9, 2017 @ 11:23 GMT
Dear Gupta

Excellent essay about the dynamic universe, it is so close to me.

You very correctly said that

«Ours is single universe and is a closed one. In other words, our Universe reproduces its Galaxies, as and when light and other electromagnetic radiation condenses to form enough matter».

I completely agree with you, although we use different terms....

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 07:59 GMT
1

Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov

Thank you very much for your encouraging support.

You wrote a big post with large number of different subjects! So I am dividing the whole post into small posts, so that individual posts can be discussed separately and easily. Probably you will not mind it.

Best regards

=snp.



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 08:01 GMT
2

Your words……………

Excellent essay about the dynamic universe, it is so close to me.

You very correctly said that

«Ours is single universe and is a closed one. In other words, our Universe reproduces its Galaxies, as and when light and other electromagnetic radiation condenses to form enough matter».

I completely agree with you, although we use different terms.

Reply……….

Thank you for your Blessings…. Lets Discuss….



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 08:03 GMT
3

……… Your words……….………………..

The energy of gravitational waves is circulating in the Dynamic Universe. ……

………….. Reply ……The concept of Gravitational waves is not required in dynamic Universe Model

......................

…………….Your words……..Galaxies emit electromagnetic waves, and the intergalactic medium…………..Reply……………….

Aether was not found



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 08:05 GMT
4

…………… Your words………. of the physical vacuum converts their energy (red shift) into gravitational waves …………..Reply……………….

We will have to device an experiment and check the conversion. Detection of Gravitational waves is not easy and they were not detected yet….

…………… Your words……….that condense the energy in Quasars. Quasars transmit energy to galaxies through their toroidal and spiral gravitational waves (honeycomb structure), which lead to the self-organization of galaxies, in the form of solitons, and leads to the emission of electromagnetic waves.

....................................

…………..Reply…
………….

Quasars are Blue shifted Galaxies, other things are to be studied for further experimental support




Don Limuti wrote on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 23:40 GMT
Hi SNP Gupta,

Please forgive me for saying that this is not an easy paper to read.

I do get that there are alternative ways to think about the universe. And I agree that your dynamic universe is a possibility, and that the goal of the universe is to keep on going.

Thanks for your insight,

Don Limuti

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 01:04 GMT
Dear Don Limuti,

Very fast response….wonderful…

Thank you for such nice comment on my essay. I hope you will study further on this Dynamic Universe Model….

Your thinking is wonderful…

Best wishes

=snp




Daniel de França Diniz Rocha wrote on Mar. 12, 2017 @ 17:16 GMT
Hi Satyavarapu,

Your essay is hard to understand, but I think it is excellent. I am trying to figure out your ideas yet, going through your other published papers, since this out of my expertise (I am a physicist, though I like biology). Indeed there is a problem with what age does galaxies peak formation. They do seem to have a rather complicated way to behave. I wonder to know how do they appear in a telescope when they are forming. If seems they are always either stable or colliding.

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 00:05 GMT
Dear Daniel de França Diniz Rocha ,

…………..Reply……………….

Thank you for your valuable time and interest, we will work together no problem

…………… Your words……….

Your essay is hard to understand, but I think it is excellent.

…………..Reply……………….

Thank you for your kind words and compliments …....

view entire post




Daniel de França Diniz Rocha replied on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 18:15 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

I noticed that you did not notice my question on discussion of my thread. So, I ask you heare:

What do you mean by before the big bang w

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 31, 2017 @ 22:15 GMT
Dear Daniel de França Diniz Rocha

Thank you for reading my essay.

That is a Good question.

There is no Bigbang according to Dynamic Universe Model. When I say BEFORE or AFTER Bigbang, it is the time frame to denote a point of time 13.8 gega years back. This is generally believed by Bigbang based cosmologists at that time there was a big explosion and Universe was started from that time.

Just to mention about that point of time I used those words “BEFORE or AFTER Bigbang”.

I hope this clears.

Best

=snp




William B Goodwin wrote on Mar. 14, 2017 @ 16:17 GMT
Dear S.N.P.Gupta,

You present a very interesting theory that is different from the mainstream theory of the universe. I like original ideas. You conclude: “Here probably the ‘a-biological world’ learned from the Universe and subsequently the physical systems learnt to pursue the goal of reproduction and formed the “Biological world”. Slowly these biological life forms acquired intelligence and now trying to understand Universe! That way probably the goal-oriented behavior is a physical or cosmological trend of the Universe.......”

While you have already replied to other commentators on the brief connection between the content of your essay and the question of intent for this essay, I too would have liked to hear more on the connection between the two. I know that the page limit makes it difficult to explain the Dynamic Universe Model and to explain the connection to aims and intent, but in the future revision of this essay I wish that you would give more depth to the connection.

Early in my career I learned to be cautious about interpreting the results of simulations. Would the results of your simulations change if you allowed for black holes?

William Goodwin

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 00:15 GMT
Dear William B Goodwin,

You present a very interesting theory that is different from the mainstream theory of the universe. I like original ideas. You conclude: “Here probably the ‘a-biological world’ learned from the Universe and subsequently the physical systems learnt to pursue the goal of reproduction and formed the “Biological world”. Slowly these biological life forms...

view entire post





Christian Corda wrote on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 09:20 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

You wrote an interesting and pleasant Essay. Despite I do not agree with all your claims, I feel that your work and your ideas deserve a better spreading in the scientific community. Therefore, I decide to give you the highest score.

Congratulations and good luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 11:05 GMT
Thank you Very much Corda,

For your kindness and support.

Best Regards

=snp.gupta




David Pinyana wrote on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 10:52 GMT
2.3. Galaxies born before Bigbang : We know we can see Galaxies from 32 billion light-years distance, for example GNz-11. See Oesch, P. A. et al. [34] in their paper in March 2016 [34] observed a very bright at Galaxy at z=11.1 measured with HST. This remote galaxy GN-z11, existed only 400 million years after the Big Bang, at a co-moving distance of 32 billion light years. We can see many instances and many Galaxies at very large distances as discussed in the introduction. Most probably these Galaxies are

Do you propose that there are galaxies before Bid-Bang ?

Do you propose that Energy Matter is due to centrifugal and centripetal forces.because the UNIVERSE is Turning on itself ... possibly on a 3-dimensional axis?

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 19:17 GMT
Dear David Pinyana

Thank you for studying my essay, Thank you for your nice doubts, I hope my answers are ok for you….

Your words……….

…………………….2.3. Galaxies born before Bigbang : We know we can see Galaxies from 32 billion light-years distance, for example GNz-11. See Oesch, P. A. et al. [34] in their paper in March 2016 [34] observed a very bright at Galaxy at z=11.1 measured with HST. This remote galaxy GN-z11, existed only 400 million years after the Big Bang, at a co-moving distance of 32 billion light years. We can see many instances and many Galaxies at very large distances as discussed in the introduction. Most probably these Galaxies are

Do you propose that there are galaxies before Bid-Bang ? …………..Reply……………….

Yes, Before Bigbang.

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

Do you propose that Energy Matter is due to centrifugal and centripetal forces.because the UNIVERSE is Turning on itself ... possibly on a 3-dimensional axis? …………..Reply……………….

No, Not that way, the Universe is here without any birth or death continuously. Galaxies are born and quench. Something like Hoyls steady state model without expansion.

When we watch a children’s rotating giant-wheel, some buckets come near, some go away. Like that Galaxies come near and go away….

Blue shifted and red shifted Galaxies will be equal at the center of universe. We are not at the center of universe.

See a Rotating universe….

https://resonance.is/the-rotating-universe/

Best Regards

=snp.gupta




Biswaranjan Dikshit wrote on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 12:31 GMT
Dear S.N.P. Gupta,

I agree with your intuition about the universe that every inanimate object in the universe has some kind of life within it. I also appreciate your effort to give this idea a scientific form through your Dynamic universe model. However, your model seems to be trying to pose a challenge to the general theory of relativity (GTR). This can be taken seriously by the main stream science only if you are able to mathematically reproduce important results of GTR which have been experimentally proved (such as bending of light near sun, Precession of perihelion of Mercury etc.).

Thanking you and all the best,

Biswaranjan Dikshit

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 20:08 GMT
Dear Biswaranjan Dikshit ji

I agree with your intuition about the universe that every inanimate object in the universe has some kind of life within it. I also appreciate your effort to give this idea a scientific form through your Dynamic universe model. …………..Reply……………….

Thank you for the complements and blessings

……………
Your...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 20:19 GMT
My essay on CMB published in FQXi two years back is also against Bigbang cosmologies

Best

=snp.gupta




James Lee Hoover wrote on Mar. 18, 2017 @ 23:10 GMT
Gupta,

Your blog reference indicates that Laura Mersini-Houghton at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the College of Arts and Sciences declares there are no black holes. What super-massive phenomenon is responsible for the orbit of solar systems around thus galactic mass and that of others throughout the universe?

Regards,

Jim

report post as inappropriate


Lee Bloomquist wrote on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 00:59 GMT
Dear Mr. Gupta,

Thank you so much for your your very interesting post on my essay. I must confess that I haven’t worked through your equations. But does the blue shift in galaxies relate to galactic filaments (I wonder). Best wishes to you in your on-going work. As far as blessings— I know very little of your area of the world, but from my perspective here in the US, where rule of the jungle-- big fish eat little fish-- is breaking down civility and civilization, the blessings which you seek, I feel, are within you. Again, thank you for your post! I do enjoy seeing your equations. LGB


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 07:07 GMT
Dear Lee Bloomquist

……………
Your words……….

…………………….Thank you so much for your your very interesting post on my essay. I must confess that I haven’t worked through your equations. But does the blue shift in galaxies relate to galactic filaments (I wonder). …………..Reply……………….

No Galactic filaments sir. I will give an...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 19, 2017 @ 06:08 GMT
Dear Jim,

Thank you for your Nice question….............

Your blog reference indicates that Laura Mersini-Houghton at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the College of Arts and Sciences declares there are no black holes. What super-massive phenomenon is responsible for the orbit of solar systems around thus galactic mass and that of others throughout the universe? ...........…………..Reply……………….

There is no Super massive Blackhole at the center of any Galaxy. It is dense-mass without any infinite mass density. It is a cluster of large number massive stars in a close grid of half to one light year; or even less. This set of stars supports and balances whole Galaxy rotating about it.

Best Regards,

=snp.gupta




Eckard Blumschein wrote on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 07:35 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Paramesvara Gupta,

My humble intent to appeal on responsibility for the evolution of mankind forbids ignoring your rich work, although I have no knowledge in astrophysics and cosmology.

I learned from you that the Big Bang is based on SR. Having dealt with oddities of Poincarè synchronization, I am not persuaded that relativity of time is correct.

I merely accept what is evident from experiments with accelerators: electromagnetic mass increase.

Kind regards,

Eckard

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 20, 2017 @ 18:52 GMT
Dear Eckard Blumschein,

Thank yoiu for nice comments and spending time on my essay......

Your words……….

…………………….My humble intent to appeal on responsibility for the evolution of mankind forbids ignoring your rich work, although I have no knowledge in astrophysics and cosmology. …………..Reply……………….

Thank you for such nice words and Blessings

…………… Your words……….

…………………….I learned from you that the Big Bang is based on SR. Having dealt with oddities of Poincarè synchronization, I am not persuaded that relativity of time is correct. …………..Reply……………….

Bigbang is from GR the General relativity. Dynamic Universe Model is a solution of N-body problem, which Poincare also tried long back. Thank you for saying about time, time has one direction only. Time will never go back….

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I merely accept what is evident from experiments with accelerators: electromagnetic mass increase. …………..Reply……………….

Sir, Mass increase is a proposal from Dynamic Universe Model, experiments were not done yet. Probably you may please initiate one such experiment….

I work on theoretical side only….

Kind regards,

=snp.gupta




Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Mar. 23, 2017 @ 04:49 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu Naga Paramesvara Gupta

I have gone over your fqxi as well as your website. I congratulate you for your perseverance and dedication to study and explain how the the Universe acts on the scale of galaxies. I cannot pretend to have understood everything, nor am I qualified to judge your work, but I like the sense of a dynamic Universe that is ever-evolving obeying laws that we humans can understand.

With best wishes,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 23, 2017 @ 05:56 GMT
Dear Vladimir F. Tamari,

Thank you for your blessings given to this essay so kindly. You are definitely qualified sir for the judgement.Thank you once again for your such nice complements.

Best Regards

=snp.gupta




Shaikh Raisuddin wrote on Mar. 23, 2017 @ 16:36 GMT
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Guptaji

I appreciate your knowledge of cosmology.

I agree, "The Universe also must have life or some form of intelligence of its own."

From genetic science to Periodic Table of elements all certify that,

PROPERTIES = F (STRUCTURE)

Living or non living is just a matter of DESIGN of structure.

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 23, 2017 @ 22:51 GMT
Dear Shaikh Raisuddin sab,

Thank you for kind appreciation. You are exactly correct about DESIGN of structure!

Definitely correct sir, "The Universe also must have life or some form of intelligence of its own."

I will give an example….

You take the attraction between a boy and girl in their youth in human society. They love each other, marry and give birth to children. The couple work for children, their upkeep, education and their health etc. Everybody does this. Enjoy the old age and go away, it is natural…….

But if anyone (male or female) sits peacefully & silently and think a little, one understand that this whole thing is “MAYA” as said in Hindu philosophy. It is all nothing but some kind of magic that forces one to this work (MAYA). All these are ties and handcuffs making one as prisoner to do this family work and REPRODUCTION.

So the immediate thinking comes to our thinker, is why should I do all these work. I will resign and sit back and do nothing. As because, it is not profitable to anyone, why should anyone do anything about this REPRODUCTION, which involves large amount of work, which is not beneficial…………..

Now the question comes who gets benefit and who is forcing us to do all these REPRODUCTION? Who wants us to do all these things? It is probably the GOD or the Mother Nature. They created the ATTRACTION between boy and girl. Not only in humans, but in other animals also had these instincts. So the God and Mother Nature are FORCING even the Universe to REPRODUCE. They know perfectly well nothing is permanent in this Universe …..!!!!!!

Best regards

=snp.




Michael Zane Tyree wrote on Mar. 24, 2017 @ 06:39 GMT
Dear Gupta . . .

Your essay contains many interesting ideas, the main one being that the universe has the propensity to reproduce itself, in the form of galaxies. If your cosmological ideas are found to be consistent and can be demonstrated experimentally, I would go with them. I had previously not viewed the "Big Bang" explanation favorably. But I would ask you if you had any thoughts on how the universe came into being to begin with?

In addressing the theme of the contest in your conclusion, you have said: "Here probably the ‘a-biological world’ learned from the Universe and subsequently the physical systems learnt to pursue the goal of reproduction and formed the “Biological world”. Slowly these biological life forms acquired intelligence and now trying to understand Universe! That way probably the goal-oriented behavior is a physical or cosmological trend of the Universe........"

Did you have any specific ideas on how this "trend" began? What initial cause set the whole thing in motion?

Great work on an original approach to a cosmological model!

Sincerely,

Michael Z. Tyree

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 25, 2017 @ 00:30 GMT
Dear Michael Zane Tyree,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. Your essay contains many interesting ideas, the main one being that the universe has the propensity to reproduce itself, in the form of galaxies. If your cosmological ideas are found to be consistent and can be demonstrated experimentally, I would go with them. I had previously not viewed the...

view entire post





Akinbo Ojo wrote on Mar. 24, 2017 @ 13:37 GMT
Dear SNP Gupta,

Nice essay rich in astrophysical facts. You may want to check this website (http://home.earthlink.net/~rarydin/critique.html) for additional facts to improve your theory.

I found your paper interesting and will rate it very well. The only thing I disagree is your statement that, "... we know now that Dark matter is not found experimentally,..."

- Anytime outlying stars are found to be moving at high speeds yet not escaping it is because of dark matter.

- Anytime you observe bending and slowing of light grazing the surface of large celestial objects like sun, it is due to the gravitationally enhanced density of dark matter around those objects.

- Anytime you perform a Michelson-Morley experiment and obtain a null result, it is a result of an earth-bound matter-medium called dark matter.

- Anytime you observe variation of light speed with altitude, it is a result of variation of dark matter density with altitude.

So if researchers look where they should rather than gaze inside deep holes in the ground they would see abundant evidence for dark matter.

Best regards,

Akinbo


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 25, 2017 @ 08:34 GMT
Dear Akinbo Ojo,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. Nice essay rich in astrophysical facts. You may want to check this website (http://home.earthlink.net/~rarydin/critique.html) for additional facts to improve your theory. …………..Reply……………….

I will do, and tell you ASAP….

…………… Your...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 06:53 GMT
Dear Paul,

In accordance with our discussions I prepared a paper which (Full paper)I will try to upload viXra also. I will give the link ASAP

I am uploading the paper whose Abstract and title are given below.....

Nucleosynthesis after frequency shifting in electromagnetic radiation near gravitating masses in Dynamic Universe Model

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta (SNP Gupta)

Retired Assistant General Manager, Bhilai Steel Plant,

Res 1B / Street 57 / Sector 8 / Bhilai 490008

snp.gupta@gmail.com

Abstract: This paper is further to Dynamic Universe Model studies of the “light rays and other electromagnetic radiation” passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its frequency .This change in frequency will depend on relative direction of movement between mass and radiation. All these particles like “neutrinos, positrons, electrons, protons and neutrons” behave like waves also. We should remember the wave particle duality. Hence frequency enhancing is applicable here also. So in other words change in frequency can go further to converting radiation into matter like micro particles as stated above. Here in this paper we will discuss further into different element formations. And we will see some possible electrochemical reactions that are possible at high temperature and pressure for formation of these different elements.

Keywords: Dynamic Universe Model, Hubble Space telescope (HST), SITA simulations , singularity-free cosmology, Blue shifted Galaxies , Red shifted Galaxies, Grazing radiation frequency changes, Formation of Elements, Nucleosynthesis

attachments: 1_VDUMOC7_ref_FQXi_Nucleosynthesis.doc



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 07:05 GMT
Dear Paul

I prepared and Uploaded this paper 6 days before the contest closing , I request you to please have critical look at this paper and give your esteemed opinion on this paper.

I hope this will answer all the questions you rised....

Best Regards



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 23:08 GMT
Dear Paul,

I uploaded the full paper with Dynamic Universe Model Math to viXra. Now I got the web link address

http://viXra.org/abs/1703.0263

Hope you will have look and give your esteemed comments...

Best regards

=snp.



Paul N Butler replied on Apr. 2, 2017 @ 17:24 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

I looked at your paper and the biggest problems that I see are ones that I have already mentioned to you earlier in the comments.

1. The first problem is that experimental observations show that when a photon is emitted from a source that is located in a gravitational field and received by a receiver that is located at a place closer to the center of the field where...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 10:07 GMT
2

Dear Paul N Butler,

Thank you very much for studying my new paper and giving some fast comments. You are confusing a bit. They are no problems at all……………… Your words……….

……………………. 2. The second problem is that the middle range atoms that are produced in stars as by products of the fusion processes that take place in them cannot be broken...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 11:32 GMT
3

Dear Paul N Butler,

…………… Your words……….……………………. There are two things that are built into the most basic structure of our current universe that cause things to work in this way and they cannot be overcome or changed without completely changing the structure of the universe and that is something that man will never be able to do. They are: ....

view entire post





basudeba mishra wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 13:59 GMT
Dear Sir,

You are right that the “resultant UGF vector force is varying according to ever varying dynamic movements and positions of all the masses in the Universe from time to time”. It is not a two-body problem. The Model has to be singularity free and body-body collision-free n-body problem solution based on UGF acting on each and every body with some mass in the Universe. The nature of gravity is not attraction, but stabilization of bodies in the maximum permissible distance around their common barycenter determined based on their respective masses. Time has to move in one direction i.e. into future only.

The big bang, as it is presented, is now a discredited and discarded model. As you have pointed out, “The Galaxy GN-z11, born only 400 million years after the Big Bang, exists at a distance of 32 billion light years”. This is impossible to explain in the big-bang theory – particularly after adding inflation. But big bang, if explained properly, could explain everything. In that model, there is no place for inflation, but a gradual reduction of the speed of light over the years. If we consider that, the age of the universe could be different. You have tried to explain it in a different way based on your model.

It is true that the distance changing has no effect on overall shape of the Universe. Thus, galaxies can be at any distance. You have given one explanation for it in your Dynamic Equilibrium of UGF in this model.

Your conclusion: “Here probably the ‘a-biological world’ learned from the Universe and subsequently the physical systems learnt to pursue the goal of reproduction and formed the “Biological world”. Slowly these biological life forms acquired intelligence and now trying to understand Universe!” is interesting and has the scope to develop it further.

We enjoyed your essay thoroughly.

Regards,

basudeba

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 22:13 GMT
Dear basudeba mishra ji,

Thank you for your nice complements and blessings

…… Your words……….…………………….You are right that the “resultant UGF vector force is varying according to ever varying dynamic movements and positions of all the masses in the Universe from time to time”. It is not a two-body problem. The Model has to be singularity free and body-body...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 14:00 GMT
Dear Paul,

6

…………… Your words………. ……………………. 2. Motion entities that exist in higher density areas tend to disperse into locations of lower density. This is largely due to the fact that any entity that travels toward the center of density is likely to enter into an interaction that will change its direction of travel, but one that travels away from the center of density is less likely to interact with another entity, so it will likely be able to continue in its path away from the high density area. …………..Reply……………….

Non uniform density of masses (energy)is one of the fundamental axioms of Dynamic Universe Model

7

…………… Your words……….……………………. This is why the motions that are freed up in the fusion process are radiated away from the star and don’t just stay in it. Space is very large and if you dispersed al of the energy photons evenly throughout it, the energy density would be very low everywhere. Also, living creatures not only require energy, but require differences in energy to function and man requires these differences to power his machines, etc. We live by transferring motions (energy) from entities that possess greater motion amplitude (speed) to those with less motion amplitude and in the process we extract desirable work to function and to build the things that we build. No matter how much energy was available we could not survive if it was evenly distributed everywhere. …………..Reply……………….

No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); Non uniform density of energy etc are some of the fundamental axioms of Dynamic Universe Model

best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 14:21 GMT
8

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words………. …………………….That is why this part of entropy is so detrimental to man and all living creatures. As man transfers motion from entities that contain larger amounts of motions to those that have less motions in order to extract the desired work from those motions, he also contributes to entropy item number one above and because some of that motion always gets dissipated into space in the form of energy photons, etc. he also contributes to entropy item number two above also. …………..Reply……………….

Ok

9

…………… Your words………. …………………….The natural world works the same way. In order for it to do the work of reversing the fusion reactions of stars, all of the original motion content that was present in the hydrogen atoms would have to be added back in from some other higher energy source and in addition to that extra energy would need to be added from that source to allow for the amount that would go into the energy dispersion that would occur as part of the process. You have not given such a higher energy source in your theory. …………..Reply……………….

All the stars are my energy sources. No single energy source is possible.

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 3, 2017 @ 14:55 GMT
10

Dear Paul

…………… Your words……….

…………………….The gravity shifting that you mention in your theory would not work because of the equal down shifting that would occur when the photon traveled away from the gravity source and there is no other such source present in nature either. …………..Reply……………….

Thank you very much for giving so elaborate study on my new paper. The frequency change happens due to gravity of star mass, not due to relative direction of movement between grazing light ray and the star. You are confusing a bit. They are no problems at all…

Here you are talking about the Gravitational redshift, this is a much smaller effect. What Dynamic Universe Model proposes happens on the light rays that goes GRAZINGLY near some gravitational mass. See my first reply for full details and equations.

11

…………… Your words………. …………………….There are some other problems also, but I don’t want to cover too much at a time because you seem to not be able to follow that many. There are, of course, also some good things in your theory, but it is not worth going into them until the above mentioned road blocks are removed. …………..Reply……………….

I repeat that the gravitational field will act as some brake on the energy of the incoming light ray. There will be a lot of difference between ‘speed of star’ and ‘speed of light.’

Please feel free to give any other problems also, we can discuss. I hope by now all the road blocks are removed.

Best Regards

=snp



Paul N Butler replied on Apr. 19, 2017 @ 14:57 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

I believe that in an earlier comment to you I said that it looks like there is some observational evidence by man that gravitational red and blue shifts are generated in photons as they pass through gravitational fields. As I looked into it a little more, however, I found that it has not yet been determined either way in all of man’s experiments that I have seen so far....

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 21, 2017 @ 02:37 GMT
Dear Paul,

Thank you for remembering my essay even after the contest virtually (voting) ends!

I am giving detailed replies to your post separately below...

Best Regards

=snp




Vladimir Rodin wrote on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 09:44 GMT
Dear Mr. Gupta,

I have already read your essay for a long time. The gravity and relevance of your work is doubtless. Of course, I highly appreciate your paper.

Best regards and good luck,

Vladimir A. Rodin

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 15:06 GMT
Dear Vladimir A. Rodin,

Thank you for your blessings....

Best

snp.gupta




Jonathan Khanlian wrote on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 22:49 GMT
Hi Satyavarapu,



You say your model has no singularities, no space-time continuum, and no need for analysis under differential equations… This almost sound like “Digital Physics”! Check out my movie essay on iTunes, Vimeo, or Amazon Prime (sorry for the advert)



Jon

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 6, 2017 @ 23:09 GMT
Dear Jonathan Khanlian,

You can down load whole book from viXra, it was my first book.

Thank you for your post Jonathan. Dont say it is advt. I would love to see that movie. Can you please give some web address reference?

Best Wishes to your essay....

Best Regards

=snp




Jeffrey Michael Schmitz wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 03:49 GMT
There are many essays and I wish I had more time to put into each work.

You posted a comment about my essay and I feel I should say a few words about your essay.

I don't know how this essay fits in with the goals of the contest, but I also do not have the time needed to fully understand this essay.

I am not going to rate this essay.

I hope you do well in the contest,

Jeff

report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 05:55 GMT
Dear Jeffrey Michael Schmitz,

Thank you for you nice words. Dont worry about rating the essay. As the time getting over, one can not read and understand any more new ideas, mind will get saturated....

What I request will me, you take time and visit again read this coolly and we can discuss with each other. Please correspond with me on the id...

snp.gupta@gmail.com

Best regards

=snp




Aron Barco wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 21:34 GMT
Dear Gupta,

I have never heard about this dynamical model you mentioned, so I would like to ask you what do you mean by UGF? You mentioned is a vector, does that mean that gravity is a vector boson and if this is the case how can it be reconciled with the expected polarisation of gravitational waves?

Best,

Yafet

report post as inappropriate

Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 8, 2017 @ 00:20 GMT
Dear Aron Barco

This question is answered in the first question itself...

See above, but I will repeat it in the next post

Best

=snp



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 8, 2017 @ 00:51 GMT
Dear Aron Barco,

One cannot solve all gravity problems by using just Newtonian two body problem or by using uniform density throughout universe. One has to consider gravity of other bodies on any single mass. Just two body problem can not solve problems on earth itself. Tides are caused by Sun or moon or both on the oceans and seas.

Universal Gravitation Force(UGF) is the final...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 8, 2017 @ 00:53 GMT
Thank you for reading my essay and giving your esteemed comments

Best Regards

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 21, 2017 @ 11:40 GMT
1.

Dear Paul,

Thank you for your valuable time you are spending on this essay… I am making your observation into small posts and posting them as usual…..

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I believe that in an earlier comment to you I said that it looks like there is some observational evidence by man that gravitational red and blue...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 21, 2017 @ 11:48 GMT
dear Paul,

3.

…………… Your words……….

…………………….The problem is that there are two main theories and some variations of both of them. One of those theories is that the photon’s frequency is increased (blue shifted) as it travels from a lower field strength area into a higher field strength area and decreased (red shifted) as it passes from a higher field strength area into a lower field strength area as it travels through the gravitational field. …………..Reply……………….

Gravitational redshift

4.

…………… Your words……….

……………………. The other theory is that the photon’s frequency is shifted at the time it is emitted and received and is not shifted at all during its travel. …………..Reply……………….

Present day Bigbang is based on this principle

5.

…………… Your words……….

……………………. Although it is possible to determine which theory is the correct one (one method requires the ability to generate gravity fields and to turn them on and off as desired, which man in this world cannot currently do, as an example), man in this world has apparently not yet made that determination. …………..Reply……………….

Yes you are correct, it is not possible today.

Remember Jules Verne the famous science fiction writer in his novel “From earth to moon” in 1865, uses a similar concept. In his spherical travelling ship he can shield gravitation field. There the travellers or astronauts can open a window to activate gravity in that direction and their ship will move in that direction ….

Similarly no gravity shields were found till today!

Thank you...

I will continue

Best

=snp



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 21, 2017 @ 11:54 GMT
Dear Paul,

6.

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I must, therefore, stay within the bounds of man’s current technological advancement level as much as I can, so I can’t go farther into that area with you at this point. It looks like the above mentioned red and blue shifts are the ones that you consider small compared to the large blue shift that...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Apr. 21, 2017 @ 12:37 GMT
Dear Paul,

9.

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I believe that many experiments have been done during total eclipses of the sun for various reasons, such as to measure the curvature of photons in gravitational fields, etc., so the data may already be there if spectroscopic readings were done. The data for the stars when they are not aligned closely with the sun should be even more readily available. …………..Reply……………….

I will search internet for such results. I will try to check in this direction also, and thank you for all this support. I will surely let you know if I find any old experiment giving such result.

10.

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I do not currently have time to check it out because of the other project that I am currently working on now, so I will leave that up to you to check out. I would like to know what you find out about it, however.

…………..Reply……………….

What is the project you are working currently?

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Apr. 30, 2017 @ 01:44 GMT
1

Dear Paul,

Thank you for the wonderfully analyzing reply once again, even after the contest voting closing!

This time also I will post my replies part by part as and when I finish my reply to that part of nice scientific analysis. I am posting outside the thread so that the visibility will be better.

Thank you for the interest on my essay and Dynamic Universe Model once again.

Best Regards

=snp

2

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I hope you realize by now that I am not interested in the politics or the prizes in the essay contests. …………..Reply……………….

Probably you also might have realized by now, I am also something like you only. I also work for truth and experimental results. I did not bother about money, awards and prizes. Some Indian Mainstream professors offered money to me to stop writing against Mainstream physics and come into their line. I am not a rich man, I need money, but I did not change. That why NO university offered a PhD student ship even All main stream publishers just bluntly refused, some were saying that I should try sending my papers to another journal.

There are very few people like FQXi who encourage logic, experimental results and observational physics.

There are still fewer people like you who are really knowledgeable in present day physics, know all the POLITICS in here, and had the power but work for banishing myth, dogma and superstitions of present day physics. But they encourage people like me!


Best

=snp



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 1, 2017 @ 00:30 GMT
3

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….I am interested in transferring new information to man that is required in order to allow man to progress to the next level of understanding to keep advancements in line with the goals and intents that must be accomplished at their appointed times. Those goals and intents will be accomplished, of course, but, my desire is that man can participate in their achievement in as closely as possible to an equal participation level with all involved. …………..Reply……………….

Very Nice objective and you are doing good hard work to achieve it

4

…………… Your words……….

……………………. There are, however, other lower levels of participation available to man if he proves to be inadequate for equal participation, but these would not likely be considered to be= good results by man. This would result in great suffering for man, Even though I have tried to stay within the context of man’s current level of understanding, as much as possible, man has not yet shown the ability to observe, input, understand, and assimilate the new information into his current understanding. …………..Reply……………….

You are correct

best



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 1, 2017 @ 00:35 GMT
5

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I have seen some beginning conceptual understandings, but they all consider space to be more than it is and the motions that exist in that space to be less than they are and to act or behave in ways not in accordance with their actual observed behavior. …………..Reply……………….

You are correct. There are many theories professing this concept. I think the observation of bending of light lead to these theories. But mixing up of bending with space created this problem.

6

…………… Your words……….

…………………….Most don’t even want to try to understand the true nature of forces, energy photons, and matter particles. They are content to just understand what interaction outcomes can occur and the probability of occurrence of each outcome (to only know their outputs) and don’t have any desire to truly understand the underlying structure and the interaction path flows of that structure that generate those outcomes and their probabilities. Of course, many might investigate structural concepts in more detail, except they have been scientifically neutered by acceptance of uncertainty principles or other concepts that take away the possibility in their minds of their willingness to proceed in that direction. From what I have seen in this contest though, it is a belief, whether it is in God or a god or no God and the belief of what would, therefore, be required in the structure and operation of the universe to support that belief that determines what many are willing to believe scientifically. This blinds most from seeing any concepts except those few that could support their belief. …………..Reply……………….

You are correct. Concept of God sprung in……. !

Probably it is required?

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 00:53 GMT
7

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

I have found that the only way to get the true understanding of the structure, operation, and purpose of the universe is to first put all of those things aside and just observe the universe to begin to gain an understanding of it. The next step is to interact with it to get a better understanding of it than could be obtained by observation only. The third step is to search out for other(s) who can give more understanding because their position or ability is different in such a way(s) as to allow the knowledge of things that you could not access from your limited position. Once all of the understandings that have been gained by these processes have been fully explored, it is then time to see what beliefs would be supported by the way that the universe is constructed and operates, etc. In this way the mind can remain open to all new possible concepts until all of the information leads to the only possible true belief(s). …………..Reply……………….

You are correct again. I am just doing this only, for the understanding of Universe….

8

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

What other ways do you believe would allow you to sense the great gravitational blue shift that your theory predicts? …………..Reply……………….

Nothing great in it, this Gravitational blueshift came as a possible logical development for the understanding of Universe….

What do you mean by …. “What other ways….” I did not get you….



Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 1, 2017 @ 05:40 GMT
9

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I am currently constructing a structure in outer space.

In all interactions so far observed by man, the total amount of energy (motion) is conserved. This means that energy is neither created nor destroyed in interactions. Gravity fields work in similar ways. As an example, when an entity approaches a large mass, the gravity field of that mass adds energy to the entity by increasing its rate of motion (motion amplitude). If the entity does not actually strike the large mass, but just passes closely by it and then travels away from it again, once it passes the point of minimum distance from the center of gravity of the large mass and begins to travel away from its center of gravity, the gravity field begins to remove the energy that had been added during its approach to the large mass. …………..Reply……………….

You discussed this concept a month back

10

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

By the time the entity effectively exits the gravity field, it has lost all of the energy it had gained during its path into the gravity field, so that it is restored to the velocity that it had before it entered the gravity field. The effect that you call gravitational red shift, which actually produces both red and blues shifts that are equal depending on the direction of travel in the gravity field, also works in this way. …………..Reply……………….

In Dynamic Universe Model this will be mostly blue shifted. But until some experimental results are not seen, it will be difficult to say…

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 06:31 GMT
11

Hi Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. Travel toward the center of gravity from point A to point B produces a blue shift while travel away from the center of gravity from point B to point A produces an equal amplitude red shift. In the energy conversion process that you mention, after the original photons have their frequencies up shifted they would contain more energy than they originally contained before the upshifting. If this process works according to the principles of energy conservation as you mention, so that the total amount of energy in the universe remains the same, where does that extra energy come from? …………..Reply……………….

You discussed this concept a month back , my reply is sae again.

Basically, the total energy and energy to matter ratio in the Universe will remain same. In the stars matter will be converted into energy and energy will be converted back into matter in the gravitational frequency shifting near the star. That way both the balances will be achieved.

12

…………… Your words……….

……………………. If it is not transferred into them by the input of energy from some external source that then contains less energy as a result of the transfer, the new energy that is added to the photons to upshift them would be newly created energy that would increase the total amount of energy in the universe. I believe this is contrary to your theory. …………..Reply……………….

Mostly blue shift happens and as the velocity of light will be high compared to velocity of star. The quantum of blue shifting will be high low at the normal star velocities.

When the star velocities are comparable to that of light then the redshift will be observable.

Hence that will not contradict the “FOUNDATIONS” of Dynamic Universe Model.

Sincerely

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 07:24 GMT
13

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. When that new energy is changed into matter particles, those new matter particles would increase the amount of matter in the universe. Since the energy photons were changed into matter particles, the energy photons that had been converted would no longer exist and, therefore, the energy level would be...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 07:30 GMT
15

…………… Your words……….

……………………. There are also unstable isotopes of some lighter element atoms that would fission, but for the most part the final output atoms generated by the fission process would be stable and still above the size range of the atoms that stars can use as fusion fuel. Like in fusion, fission does not generally actually change matter particles into energy photons. The energy photons produced come mainly from freed binding energy, etc. …………..Reply……………….

Dynamic Universe model also does not say so… Higher atoms will not be produced just by frequency shifting……

16

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

Since your upshifting would produce all of the new protons needed to replenish the fuel to be fused in the stars, if you were in some way able to break all of the heavier atoms down into lighter atoms that could also be used as fusion fuel in the stars that fusion material would then build up in the universe cause a runaway increase in the formation of new stars and galaxies that would ultimately fill up all of space. …………..Reply……………….

I am very CONFIDENT; the whole thing can be worked out well; but this working out will take some time. It may take some years to work-out this and show. I can spend an hour or two maximum per day.




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 09:09 GMT
17

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. This is because you would not be addressing the basic problem of the continual increase of energy in the universe due to the photon upshifting. Transferring that increase in energy into an increase of matter particles does not solve the problem that the increase in energy would ultimately fill the universe whether it is in the form of energy photons or matter particles. …………..Reply……………….

You are contradicting, Challenge it, put some betting money on it, frame your question properly and fully. Provide some infrastructure to me for experimentation for final proofs…

Will that be ok for you? Can you do that?

I will work-out and show simulations for positive affirmation from Dynamic Universe Model.

Best Regards

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 10:10 GMT
18

…………… Your words……….

……………………. On the other hand, if the new atoms were not broken down into fusible atoms, as the new matter built up in the universe, more and more of it would be drawn into stars making them denser, so that they would consume their fusible materials faster and more of them would end in super nova explosions, thus creating more of the heavier atoms. You are right that it would not only be new stars that would be affected, but existing stars would also pull some of that extra matter into themselves and also become denser with the same results. …………..Reply……………….

No, no no Paul, not correct. You discussed this concept a month back

19

…………… Your words……….

…………………….As you say some of that matter would be in the form of larger objects like planets, meteors, and comets, etc., but even some of those would be drawn into stars as the universe became more crowded with such matter objects. No matter how the matter was dispersed in space the continual buildup of matter would ultimately result in large amounts of that matter being drawn into stars and adding to their density, which would make the stars burn out quicker, but would not add any usable fusion material to the stars. …………..Reply……………….

You are not accepting, Do some betting.




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 10:12 GMT
20

…………… Your words……….

…………………….The less dense stars like the sun generally currently outnumber the denser stars that end in a supernova, but as the matter density of the universe increased over time due to the extra midrange atoms generated by the photon upshifting, that would change. Stars would take in some of that extra matter and become denser until most stars were in that denser size range and end in supernovas. Since the denser stars have much shorter lifetimes, this would lead to an increased cycling rate for the photon upshifting, thus generating more new midrange atoms much quicker and at the same time it would also generate large amounts of heavier atoms also in a shorter time due to the greater number of supernovas. …………..Reply……………….

No no no not that way…. No extra Super novae.

21

…………… Your words……….

…………………….The big bang theory does not say that all stars were created at the same time. It just says that most of the hydrogen atoms in the universe were created in a relatively short time. The stars formed over time due to instabilities in the density of the hydrogen atoms in various places at various different times that led to the formation of denser hydrogen concentrations that created increased gravity in those places, which attracted more hydrogen into those areas to form gas clouds that ultimately contracted into stars. This process still continues as new instabilities form and will continue until the density of hydrogen in the universe gets too low to allow it to continue. …………..Reply……………….

OK, thanks for correction, Dynamic Universe Model proposes almost same. They are formed in the star forming regions of AGNs.




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 10:15 GMT
Dear Paul,

22

…………… Your words……….

……………………. If your great blue shift does not exist, that hydrogen will be consumed by stars long before the buildup of midrange atoms would cause much of a problem. The stars would then all go out and the buildup of midrange atoms would then stop. …………..Reply……………….

Yes you are...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 1, 2017 @ 10:19 GMT
25

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. It would be likely that some galaxies would die out before others, but as each galaxy died out it would leave a large area of space that contained too high a density of non-fusible matter to allow a new galaxy to form in it. New galaxies could still form in other areas, but in the long run all of...

view entire post




Paul N Butler replied on May. 21, 2017 @ 02:43 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

2. One thing to remember is that experimental results that are not connected directly to reality, such as computer simulations allow for the introduction of extra levels of error production, such as in conceptual errors in how the world that is being modeled actually works and mathematical and programing errors, etc. that can give invalid outputs that can be misleading. ...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 6, 2017 @ 08:10 GMT
Dear Paul,

You have not replied any to my answers….

I wrote those words in that way because of three or four reasons….

1. Your question was not directly related to our topic of discussion “Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe”. My task here is for solving one of the unsolved problems using Dynamic Universe Model and this topic is related to Dynamic Universe model in that way.

Your question is also another one of many unsolved problems of Dynamic Universe Model and it is related to Dynamic Universe Model in that way only. What I can say here is Bigbang based cosmologies solve one problem compared to twenty one problems (Including the one solved by Bigbang Cosmologies) solved by Dynamic Universe Model. Of course there are many more problems to be solved by Dynamic Universe model.

2. Tomorrow (Sunday) I will have to finalize my contract for about the 2 Acre of cultivation land rental agreement and then I will have to start working for food. I spent most of the savings money earned before retirement. Hence what I thought was…. if you finalize I may earn some money in the meanwhile for my living.

3. The project nucleosynthesis and synthesis process of the elements you indicated will take quite a long time to get the results fully.

4. Already I answered this question in this thread and you asked a similar question again with some more detail. That means you require detailed proofs and evidences.

I will work-out your question also. No problem…..

Best Regards

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 9, 2017 @ 13:02 GMT
1

Dear Paul,

I am also a person who works for the sake of knowledge and not for money. It was just my pain I asked for betting. I accept even those challenges without any financial benefits. For the work on Dynamic Universe Model, I accept all the challenges, without any problem. I didn’t work for money in Physics all my life.

I just wanted to see if you will hold...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 9, 2017 @ 13:05 GMT
1

Dear Paul,

I am also a person who works for the sake of knowledge and not for money. It was just my pain I asked for betting. I accept even those challenges without any financial benefits. For the work on Dynamic Universe Model, I accept all the challenges, without any problem. I didn’t work for money in Physics all my life.

I just wanted to see if you will hold...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 11, 2017 @ 00:34 GMT
2

Dear Paul,

The answers from 11 to 17 will remain same as in my earlier reply few days back

. …………… Your words……….

…………………….Like in fusion, fission does not generally actually change matter particles into energy photons. The energy photons produced come mainly from freed binding energy, etc. Since your upshifting would produce all of the...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 11, 2017 @ 01:33 GMT
3

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words………. The process would speed up because as the amount of midrange atoms built up over time, more and more of that matter would be taken into stars, the stars would become denser and have shorter lives because they would consume more fusible material in shorter times. The hotter more dense stars would generate more photons to upshift per...

view entire post




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 11, 2017 @ 01:39 GMT
I dont know why those question marks came in this post... I did not change any thing except my answers.They were not seen in the preview... FQXi to check...

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 11, 2017 @ 06:23 GMT
4

Dear Paul,

I am giving the full derivation part for frequency shifting below again… I hope that answers …

Derivation of equations for the effect of movement of gravitational mass on the frequency of the incoming light ray with c:

The rest mass of the photon is = m = E / c2 . Gravitational field of the mass (Sun or star or some gravitational mass) = go . The...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 19, 2017 @ 10:19 GMT
Dear Paul,

Remembering your words ….

“Paul N Butler replied on Apr. 19, 2017 @ 14:57 GMT

…………………………If this great blue shift exists it should not be difficult to observe it. It should be as simple as measuring the red or blue shift of the light photons from a star when the path of its light to the earth is very close to the sun during a total...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 21, 2017 @ 07:46 GMT
A

Dear Paul,

Thank you very much for your point by point reply. I will be replying them and posting as and when I finish my replies as usual

….…………… Your words……….

…………………….

2. One thing to remember is that experimental results that are not connected directly to reality, such as computer simulations allow for the introduction of extra levels of error production, such as in conceptual errors in how the world that is being modeled actually works and mathematical and programing errors, etc. that can give invalid outputs that can be misleading. It is best to stick as much as possible to data that comes from actual real world observations. I can sympathize with you on the lack of support from the established scientific community.…………………….

…………..Reply……
………….

It may please be noted that experimental results are different from simulations. Experimental results are from the laboratory tests, which are conducted to find reality. These are conducted in the field or in a laboratory. They may be observational results using some telescopes or some other sensors. These results are repeatable by anyone who conducts similar experiment in similar conditions.

On the other hand simulations are done in the computer assuming similar conditions as physical realities. These conditions should have same effects as their realities mathematically. These effects are simulated mathematically on a computer. These are also totally repeatable and their results will depend on the simulation equations used.

In both the cases there can be errors and misinterpretations.

Thank you for your support. I don’t enough finance to support a student to teach him or her; so that the student can earn some money on the basis of what he learnt. I came to fag end of my life. Now I left it to time (God) to decide upon the further course of action………….

Best Regards

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 21, 2017 @ 09:04 GMT
Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. I agree with you that FQXI has allowed the expression of new alternative concepts through their contests that don’t always agree with mainstream scientific beliefs, which is a very good thing. It would be good if the scientific community as a whole was more open in this respect....

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 21, 2017 @ 12:28 GMT
D

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

Since I am trying to transfer information that is beyond man’s current level of knowledge and, therefore, comes close to man’s maximum believability threshold, I try to stay within man’s current level of understanding as much as I can in other areas, so as not to increase the probability...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 21, 2017 @ 12:32 GMT
Typo

5. You are right. Space does not need to bend. It just needs to have positions in which motions can exist and move.

…………………….

…………..Reply………


�…….

Thank you, it is correct. There is NO observation that space is bending, but the path of the light ray bends near gravitational mass.

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 21, 2017 @ 12:56 GMT
K

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

6. I am not saying that the concept of God is wrong. I am just saying that one must start by gaining understanding of how the observable world works and then the structure and operation of the world will reveal if it could have come about naturally or if it requires that God created it. I spent over twenty two years learning about the world’s structure and ultimately came to the conclusion that because of its extreme complexity and hierarchical structure it could not have come about from natural chance occurrences, but had to have been created by an extremely intelligent God, especially the extreme complexity of even the simplest living creatures. I could then look at the various religions ‘texts that said they were the word of God and see if what they said about the world agreed with observations. This led me to the true understanding of God.

7. That is a good beginning goal. I have found that when that understanding is completely achieved, it leads to the next goal that is more important than the first, which is to understand God as much as possible. …………………….

…………..Reply………

I started working on this Dynamic Universe Model for the last 35 years and started presenting papers for the last31 or 32 years. Many concepts were not published but I worked out for my self to check stability etc. Some initial errors were corrected.

But I sincerely feel all these work was due to grace of the Almighty or God. I know I was never capable of doing anything like this. I don’t even have the background education for this. I am a firm believer of God…

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 21, 2017 @ 21:24 GMT
L

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

8. When I say great gravitational blue shift I am referring to its greater magnitude in comparison to the normal red and blue gravitational shifts that you refer to as the gravitational red shift even though it also produces a blue shift of equal magnitude in the opposite direction of travel of...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 22, 2017 @ 03:15 GMT
Q

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

11. There are several problems with your concept of energy conservation. First, in order for the total amount of energy to be conserved or continually remain the same, each time an energy photon is upshifted, thus increasing the amount of energy it contains, the same amount of energy would also need to be simultaneously destroyed to maintain the same total amount of energy in the universe. …………………….

…………..Reply……………
.

This energy is being generated in Stars from mass. That energy will be converted back into mass in this frequency upshifting.

R

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

To allow this to occur, there would have to be a causal link (some form of communication) from the photon upshifting to the energy destruction mechanism. Since the two could be separated by large distances, this could not work without faster than light information transfer. …………………….

…………..Reply……………
.

I don’t think it is necessary. Why you feel some communication links are needed?

S

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

In reality energy conservation is achieved in each and every interaction between two or more entities. This works because energy conservation is just a part of energy transfer between entities. …………………….

…………..Reply……………
.

Why that is needed? It is not necessary that every energy photon / particle will be converted into mass and vice versa. Some of the energy photons and some particles may be moving in the Universe for trillions of years.

Even for those energy photons that were converted into mass, there is no need to have any communication link.

Best

=snp




Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 22, 2017 @ 04:16 GMT
T

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

……………………. When an entity experiences an increase in its energy content, it is the result of reception of energy from another entity that has transferred some of its energy to it. As a result, the entity that transferred some of its energy to it, experiences an equal decrease in its energy content. All energy...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 22, 2017 @ 05:10 GMT
X

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

12. I do not follow your logic concerning how the star’s velocity would affect the amount of blue or red shift that would occur during the upshifting, since it seems that you are not talking about the Doppler Effect. Please explain step by step the details of how the upshifting works in simple...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 22, 2017 @ 06:54 GMT
Ae

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

15. You are right that the frequency shifting would not directly produce higher atoms. If it worked, it would only produce energy photons that contained enough energy to be converted into matter particles (protons). The protons would then be fused into midrange element atoms in stars. The...

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 22, 2017 @ 07:22 GMT
Al

Dear Paul,

…………… Your words……….

…………………….

23. At this time, I could not go into the internal concepts of black holes, so that is ok with me at this time.

24. Again the “No no no not that way, you are confusing….” is not a valid counter argument. It tells me nothing about your objection to what I said....

view entire post





Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on May. 24, 2017 @ 11:20 GMT
Dear Paul,

Yesterday I finalized rent contract for the cultivation land as suggested by you.

Thank you for your valuable advice and guidance.........

Best

=snp




Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.