- #1
RichyRich
- 30
- 0
I have it on good authority that the universe is rotating, and rotating about ALL its axes simultaneously and instantly! Therefore no directional observations in motion or CMBR will be or can be found.
From whom? What is their evidence?I have it on good authority
This goes against all current evidencethat the universe is rotating
How can something rotate about all its axes?, and rotating about ALL its axes simultaneously
What do you mean by instantly?and instantly!
But directionality (i.e., a dipole) has been found in the CMB.Therefore no directional observations in motion or CMBR will be or can be found.
Chronos said:To my knowledge, no one has claimed evidence of 'rotation' from WMAP date.
RichyRich said:...Radrook, are you stating Machs principle is broken or not? I would be grateful if you could state your evidence against my idea in more layman terms please. ...
Radrook said:One thing to keep in mind about Mach is that virtual subatomic particles, perticles that flitt in and out of existence, had as yet not been discovered. Such particles can be used as a reference point to determine absolute motion of objects within the universe.
Please clarify the meaning intended by 'All axes'.RichyRich said:... For one, I am definitely missing something, if 'we' think 'we' can measure a rotation we are part of! How could we measure/test the idea of rotation about ALL axes then...to my limited thinking, we could only do this indirectly. Would it be such a waste of time if someone were to plug the numbers into a programme and see if it produced anything like the universe we 'see'?
It has been considered and deemed unlikely. Rotation about multiple axes has not been addressed to my knowledge. Probably because the notion appears illogical.RichyRich said:... Am I correct in thinking cosmologists have rejected (and therefore, thought of) a universe rotating about 1 axis? Has anyone even considerred that it may be rotating about multiple/or as think, infinite axes? Is this such an outrageous idea? Is it more outrageous than (mem)branes, many world theories etc?
No cosmologists are completely happy with inflation. It is merely an ad hoc explanation that fits observational evidence.RichyRich said:... I have great respect for scientists, and even envy them. I have to provide for my family by decorating. I have always had a great interest in cosmology and read considerably about it. It seems to me that the scientists who do not 'toe the party line' make the biggest strides. I do not poopoo everything i read but I guarantee all of you that believe in inflation will be proved wrong! Not to say this will replace it, but something will. It may add up mathematically,but that does not mean it happened.
Your concept still makes no sense.RichyRich said:... My reasons for believing in a universe rotating about infinite axes:It is an attempt to explain dark energy and dark matter (dark meaning 'we' have no idea).
Dark matter comprises about 25% of the energy content of the universe according to the LCDM model [our current best guess].RichyRich said:... Also, I have heard of something called dark flow. All of which means we cannot explain all the movements we observe. Some believe that most matter is dark matter(i think the figure is aprox 90%). Is this not as far-fetched as my idea?! All the questions asked of me, could be asked of dark matter...dark fairy perhaps!
How does this rotation thing work? The BB was not an 'explosive' event.RichyRich said:... The flatness problem ONLY solved by inflation. What if the BB was a result of a rotating force and not an explosive (for want of a better term) force. I presume that at the end of the BB no more matter/energy is created. The matter/energy levels are set for the universes lifetime-cannot be destroyed or created post BB or post Planck time.
The fairies are still in play.RichyRich said:... If the singularity 'rotated' itself into existence, then the level of mass/energy in the universe could be set by the amount of rotation. An infinite rotation provides an arbitrary figure for mass/energy. A larger, infinite rotation would provide a larger arbitrary figure for mass/energy. Rotation is directly linked to mass/energy contained in the universe. This could mean that rotation/mass/energy and expansion are all linked. This may GUARANTEE a flat universe. So, any universe that came into being would have to be flat, and stay flat. Its not a coincidence that it is, and inflation is not needed. I believe it is possible to have a bigger infinity than infinity!I would be grateful for more thoughts/ criticism of this. But please keep it simple...like me I hear you all say.
bcrowell said:I don't think this is right. Quantum field theory has virtual particles, but QFT has exact Lorentz invariance.
Imax said:If you look at it in terms of relativity, it could be difficult to observe a rotating universe in the absence of external reference points, which cannot be observed because they would lie outside the observable universe.
RichyRich said:Aside from whether the universe is rotating, or not, would you say evidence of rotation is evidence of another dimension? If rotation is occurring, it must be in/about a different frame of reference?