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

Giovanni Prisinzano: on 2/28/17 at 14:12pm UTC, wrote Dear SNP Gupta, Thank you very much for reading and commenting on my...

Domenico Oricchio: on 2/27/17 at 21:43pm UTC, wrote Thank you for reading all my essay; I read your essay, and usually (each...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 2/23/17 at 12:39pm UTC, wrote Dear Joseph, Thank you for reading my essay…. Thank you very much for...

Joseph Jean-Claude: on 2/23/17 at 3:32am UTC, wrote Dear Mr Gupta, You would have had a better essay if you showed how the...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 2/21/17 at 0:34am UTC, wrote Dear Peter, So you are a Physically strong Peter Pan ! Really Wonderful !...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 2/20/17 at 2:17am UTC, wrote Hi Gene Barbee, Thank you for the interest on my essay, thank you very...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 2/19/17 at 22:32pm UTC, wrote Dear Alexander M. Ilyanok, Wonderful sir, probably some more details of...

Peter Jackson: on 2/19/17 at 18:01pm UTC, wrote Satyav I'm not sure 'Peter Pan' is appropriate for an ex rugby player! I...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jose Koshy: "James Putnam, What do you mean by the acceleration of light? Do you mean..." in Alternative Models of...

Jose Koshy: "Steven, Because we are not sitting face to face, I may not be replying..." in Alternative Models of...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at online resume..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

Mohan rao: "Voot app free download Flash Recovery" in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Mohan rao: "My partner and I stumbled over here different website and thought I might..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, BTW, it is the community vote that matters ... not the public vote...." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, You statement regarding your score does not make any sense. You..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at custom..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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)

Rescuing Reality
A "retrocausal" rewrite of physics, in which influences from the future can affect the past, could solve some quantum quandaries—saving Einstein's view of reality along the way.


FQXi FORUM
February 28, 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.

This essay's rating: Community = 5.0; Public = 3.6


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


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


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


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'C' and 'E':


Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.