Time and Relativity

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
If scientists have estimated the age of the universe by the Doppler effect of light from retreating galaxies... then how can astrophysicists be so certain as to the age of the universe
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That's hitting the nail on the head. The fact is that astrophysicists have hung thier hat on a pretty flimsy pole, that of the doppler interpretation of redshift. The Meta Model disputes the doppler effect as the cause of redshift of light. Instead, light loses energy as a result of it being a manifestation of the light carrying medium - thus becoming redshifted - as a consequence of being propagated by a phyical medium called the light carrying medium.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Also, it seems to me that time is running differently for each individual object traveling away from us depending on its speed. Any solutions? <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I'd tackle basics first. Time is a relative thing even in the Meta Model but you need to understand Le Sage gravity principles before you think about time. I think you would benefit greatly by reading Pushing Gravity and Dark Matter, both of which are available through this website. Dark Matter describes the Meta Model and uses a lot of analogies with little mathmatics to make its points, Pushing Gravity is a little more rigorous with the math but is quite readable especially if you have had a good survey course in physics.

You are asking the right questions though. Don't be suprised if those 'far away' galaxies turn out to be in your back yard instead of across the universe. I'll tease you even more - don't be surprised to learn that the universe is infinite in extent, in scale and in duration, too.

Best,
Don Holeman

Still all guess work but my view in UniKEF is that the doppler shift may in fact be caused by an attenuation of the light energy through its medium (Chiral Condensate) but that would also ascribe a distance for given attenuation. So while they may have mounted the wrong horse, I think they are still in the race in terms of distance.

UniKEF also anticipates a false acceleration to be present in that it views the UniKEF field as also being attenuated through distance and ultimately forms a "Quantitative Domain Limit- QDL1)or boundry to our universe. That is our universe is FINITE due to dimensional collapse, the collpasing dimension creates a false acceleration.

But I also believe that energy is flowing into our universe via the anhiliation of virtual pairs coming from the Chiral Condensate and that this represents an actual expansion of the universe. We may be viewing the result of the Big Bang still going on in the continued creation of time-space.

In this view we each have our own individual universe, not identical to any others but seperated by a few feet to ly but still for the average purpose virtually congruent.

What is beyond our univeses, more of the same. I differentate between the Universe and Creation. I see our universe as a bubble in a boiling pot of creation. You can leave this universe and enter another when you exceed the QDL1 or by exceeding a "Qualitative Domain Limit - QDL2" by exceeding v = c. The Lorentz Dimension Contraction velocity.

Creation exists all along an energy spectrum but physics are limited to v = c for each observer but that doesn't limit observers from having velocities v>c in that there is no "Absolute Velocity".


Mac