Scinan Heorte
01.07.05, 03:05 PM
Hello my friends,
I have come for help. My son and I have been cooking up trouble, and now it escapes our ability to deal with it properly.
Begining with an effort to calculate the size of the Universe beyond the light horizon, it has blossomed to become something which has turned my understanding of what I thought I knew upside down, and reconstructed the universe according to a different rule set I was taught... one which makes sense of several mysteries which seem to plague astronomers.
It promotes a new way to calculate the age of the Universe (so far as I know).
It promotes a new way to calculate its size, and accompanies arguement which rationally explanes a remakable difference between current observation and its conclusions. A difference now supported by direct observations.
It has impacts upon current issues in astronomy, and arguments against current astronomical theories which seem to be quite popular.
Its math is simple, and clear.
Yet, I am not sure if it is appropriate for this forum to field, as it is lengthy and detailed in its explanation, and broad in its impact.
I do need an opinion, and seek to find this theory survive by its own rational merit, or flounder.
Tell me please, as I know of no place else to field such an issue, can I bother you for your patience in considering a theory I am convinced holds merit and explanation beyond current contemperary thought which I have been exposed to?
I have come for help. My son and I have been cooking up trouble, and now it escapes our ability to deal with it properly.
Begining with an effort to calculate the size of the Universe beyond the light horizon, it has blossomed to become something which has turned my understanding of what I thought I knew upside down, and reconstructed the universe according to a different rule set I was taught... one which makes sense of several mysteries which seem to plague astronomers.
It promotes a new way to calculate the age of the Universe (so far as I know).
It promotes a new way to calculate its size, and accompanies arguement which rationally explanes a remakable difference between current observation and its conclusions. A difference now supported by direct observations.
It has impacts upon current issues in astronomy, and arguments against current astronomical theories which seem to be quite popular.
Its math is simple, and clear.
Yet, I am not sure if it is appropriate for this forum to field, as it is lengthy and detailed in its explanation, and broad in its impact.
I do need an opinion, and seek to find this theory survive by its own rational merit, or flounder.
Tell me please, as I know of no place else to field such an issue, can I bother you for your patience in considering a theory I am convinced holds merit and explanation beyond current contemperary thought which I have been exposed to?