 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
lyndonashmore
Administrator
|
Posted: Fri Aug 4th, 2006 08:30 pm |
|
Recent measurements push back the age of the universe to 15.8 billion years. That is 4.7x10^17 seconds. Ashmore’s paradox states that since the Hubble constant, H equals hr/m for the electron in each cubic metre of space, then the universe is not expanding. In BB theory, the age of the universe is 1/H. Since I showed that H = hr/m for the electron in each cubic metre, the Big Bangers imply that the age of the universe is m/hr. What do you think the magnitude of m/hr is? 4.8 x 10^ 17. SPOT ON.
Why is the age of the universe equal in magnitude to m/hr for the electron if they are not related?
Last edited on Fri Aug 4th, 2006 09:10 pm by lyndonashmore
|
Pete Carroll
Guest
|
Posted: Tue Sep 26th, 2006 09:07 am |
|
Lyndon, I'm just wondering about your H = hr/m equation. Could you please clarify the dimensional equivalence of both sides and the numerical equality of units?
It seems to my untrained eye that H is in dimensions of l, t^-1, l^-1 and that hr/m is in dimensions of m, l^2, t^-1, l, m^-1.
Furthermore I cannot quite see how you get numerical equality with units as big as megaparsecs in the equation.
Pete.
|
lyndonashmore
Administrator
|
Posted: Tue Sep 26th, 2006 02:21 pm |
|
Hi Pete,
The full equation is h = 2nhr/m where n is the number of electrons in each cubic metre of space. 'n' is known to be between 0.1 and 10 hence the concidence and paradox - observation is tellng us that n is 0.5 electrons per cubic metre.
When I use the 'paradox' I always give "H = hr/m per cubic metre of space" - ie the Hubble constant is 'this much of an electron in each cubic metre of space' where 'this much' is hr/m.
Only astrophysicists use Megaparsecs - 'proper' scientists use metres, seconds and so on.
The units of H in astrophysics is km/s per Mpc. Why do they use two different units for distance - km and Mpc?
Because it is a fiddle that s why. If they used the same units they would have km/s per km or Mpc/s per Mpc and everyone would then know that it is not a velocity or an expansion since the distance units cancel!
H in 'proper units' is '2.1x10^-18 per sec' and this is hr/m per cubic metre of space.
Cheers,
Lyndon
|
Pete Carroll
Guest
|
Posted: Wed Sep 27th, 2006 02:37 pm |
|
Ah yes, I see what you mean now, the maths checks out nicely.
How about this as well, H = 1/T = GM/cL^2
where M,L, and T represent the mass length (hyperspherical antipode distance) and time (temporal horizon) of the universe, and that each of these quantities equals 6.63 x 10^60 times the value of the corresponding Planck quantity*.
*(based on the measured value of the Anderson decelleration, A = GM/L^2)
Where the Anderson decelleration itself makes the light tired.
(I know this gives a value for L of only 11 billion light years, but I think hyperspherical lensing may make it look a bit bigger)
For further musings upon this idea see my http://www.specularium.org
Pete.
|
Current time is 05:16 am | |
|
|
|
|
