THE POPCORN UNIVERSE
There's no such thing as gravity?
Even Einstein stated it once shown here ‘There’s no such thing as gravity”. If there is - what is it?
THE POPCORN UNIVERSE and what scientists don’t know about the universe and its origin...is here avialable for a new view about space. Physics argues that universe exist relative to an expanding bubble or balloon discovered in Hubble Theory. Albert Einstein and others rely mostly on the conclusion all matter resides inside this bubble. On the other hand...Rod Kawecki has developed a new theory but with the conclusion that all matter and life which also includes a black hole seed explained in this story matter and life exists outside the bubble and explains why..................
The universe is made up of massive galaxies of different origins. There are no large broken pieces or chunks maximized as solid masses but only galaxies making up different chemistry substances planets, stars and gaseous type clusters and all different in some way possibly meaning they all are embryuses of a different growing seed. One does not need to go into the theory of gravitationally collapsed objects or the evidence we have today, some impressive, some less convincing, for black holes: one of some ten solar masses in the constellation Cygnus; others in the range of a hundred or a thousand solar masses at the centers of five of the star clusters in our galaxy; one about four million times as massive as the sun at the center of the Milky Way; and one with a mass of about five billion suns in the center of the galaxy M87.
How such a stellar BH? (cosmic seed) could grow by 6-7 orders of magnitude in mass, in few hundred million years, is another daunting task given the limits on accretion. The idea, that a set of very specific physical conditions found only in the early Universe, In this study we refer to a black hole with mass > 106M? as super massive.
Explaining the first super massive black holes could have allowed for the formation of massive seed black holes with masses in the range of 104-5 M, could be a potential solution to this problem as the seed would now need to grow by only 3–4 orders of magnitude in mass to attain super massive scales. Direct collapse (DC) channel of forming massive seed black holes aim of this is to understand the plausibility of the set of physical conditions required for direct collapse and its impact on the evolution of the first galaxies.
A nick name theory addressed in The Quanta Physics Theory applauds a new theory that besides the big bang theory the universe was formed by the multiple collapse of the earliest spheres as in the result of a black hole explanation here and nick named “The Popcorn Universe Theory” and which addresses the probability that matter manifested through the brethrens three-dimensional generalization surface of a rubber balloon as prehistoric spheres (seeds) called ‘embryus’ procured out of the fabric surface mass not as a single bang as in the big bang theory expalins but as in an multiple entre of young spheres that manifested later exploded into the existing galaxies saw today the beginning entre point from over 14.8 billion years ago. Each bang is a galaxy by itself. The emphasis is on understanding how frequently do the conditions required for DC occur at z > 6 and not on the actual formation process itself occurs it’s more analogical to understand that the early prehistoric universe was by the independent formation of the galaxies forming and not as a singularity theory.
The birth of the Milky Way comes from the measurable collapse mass of a gigantic black hole one with a mass of about five billion suns as the one in the center of the galaxy M87 is evidence from relativity that the galaxy is the aftermath of a massive collapsed deity. (Embryus) Black holes what are they? Where do they come from? And what is their origin? To some it is thought to be what is called The Big Gun a portal where matter arrived through the fabric of space the manifestation of the cosmic egg to some. There exists no evidence on which way the black hole is spinning whether inwards or outwards. Assumed to come from a galactic collapse the portal is assuming matter and energy towards it and not away from it. A collapse followed by a bang allows matter to be formed creating dense matter.
A body's mass also determines the degree to which it generates or is affected by a gravitational field. If a first body of mass mA is placed at a distance r (center of mass to center of mass) from a second body of mass mB, each body experiences an attractive force Fg = GmAmB/r2, where G = 6.67×10−11 N kg−2 m2 is the "universal gravitational constant" that all matter is limited by the speed of light even if it is mass and not light is the mathematical assumption. This is sometimes referred to as gravitational mass. The problem with relativity is the assumptions it makes. It mathematically determines a sum from separate masses it calculates based on E=mc2. The problem there is no way to physically test these sums. The reason I say this is because an objects mass has two elements as a material matter deity. One is its chemistry that defines its nature and secondly the energy equal to its mass as a material element or substance. If the object is accelerated its mass changes raising the sum of its energy but not its solidity as a piece of mass. For instance an orange is an orange before it is thought as a generated energy of a define substance. We observe matter as masses and energy that might well be the facts but - whether adding speed to the mass increases its eternal energy as a solid is still un-determined. The effect of energy traveling through a gravity field always is changing as it travels. There is no real way to measure this effect of momentum. In any effect we would be trying to measure the change of energy as it moves which is said to be an impossible task. For these reasons the basis of theoretical physics is undetermined as a science so it’s a theory. In any event a moving mass its weight its mass its energy can not actually be measured. Our orange travels through space which is measured to having zero energy detectable in its area mass. Yet relativity raises the energy content of the mass. In affect accelerating a mass or object is not changing its physical mass or its energy especially in a zero point field - it is being pushed in the same way the galaxies are being pushed due to the expansion of the field. The orange are ship is being pushed by a propulsion force that doesn't change its physical content or its energy it just pushes it through space. Any change in its physical nature cannot be determined unless it is pushed into something in its path some field deterrent no matter what that changes its straight line of direction.
The question here is why acceleration affects the energy content especially only the energy content of a mass that is of its own nature and origin. Why does an object slow during acceleration when it travels through the earth’s gravity intent? Is it its weight or energy that is affected? This notoriety has never been changed in physics. Weight or energy? Or both or nether? Rod Kawecki has open the door way to this phenomena. In his book he opens the doorway in Isaac Newton's theory on gravity and attraction. He has opened a new view for the theory of gravitation that fills pieces never answered earlier in the century. Science can be slowed from advancing when looking at something in the wrong way. Kawecki has reviewed the facts that lay upon the affects gravity has or is there no such thing as gravity?
No comments:
Post a Comment