The predictions it makes don't agree with reality. Enough said

[Tapsnap]

I posted the thread below last night and was promptly shut down by CHROOT (Warren) with the following reply.

"The predictions it makes don't agree with reality. Enough said."

- Warren.
I came to this forum looking for answers and and a better understanding. I came with an open mind and a willingness to listen to others. I can accept critism and a alternative argument pretty well, if it is clearly explained. Warren, your answer gives me nothing.

Here is what I wrote.

So I was flying into Mexico City about 5 years ago. Its huge, but from the perspective of my window seat it was as small as a dinner plate. I began thinking about the universe, as one does in those situations and it suddenly occurred to me that maybe the universe isn't expanding at all - maybe its just that matter is shrinking.
I'm no scientist, in fact I'm an artist, and I don't know too much about this stuff so if this theory is dumb let me know.
Einstein said that the ultimate force in the universe is gravity, but then Hubble observed that the universe was expanding and in every direction at once. Then it was discovered that the expansion is accelerating. How can this be? What force is driving it to expand faster? What if Hubble's conclusion to what he observed was wrong. And Einstein was in fact right.
Imagine two wooden boats in a bath tub ( the water is space). They are floating exactly one foot apart. Now Imagine the the boats shrinking and the ruler that you used to measure the distance between them is also shrinking. If we were to measure the distance between them when the boats and the ruler have reached half their size, the distance would be two feet according to the ruler. To an ant observing from the deck of one of the boats, the other boat seems to be drifting away.
At the same time that we are shrinking we are getting denser and denser. In fact it is gravity that is causing the shrinkage. The denser we get the faster we shrink. This is why, in my theory, it appears as though the expansion is getting faster. Imagine that just one second ago we were 1000 times bigger, but our mass is the same.
This is entirely speculative but, maybe at the time of the big bang all matter puffed up like popcorn in a pan and filled the entire universe The big bang happened everywhere at once. Ever since it has been shrinking and getting denser until gravity collapses all matter, at which point it puffs up like popcorn again.
We use light and time to measure distances in the universe. For this theory to work our measuring stick (light) must be slowing down too. Maybe this is why there are so many black holes. When the density of a body gets so great, its gravitational pull slows down light so much it makes it stand still.
Any one think there is any validity to this theory?

 

[Garth]

Check out the Jordan conformal frame of Self Creation Cosmology .

What you are describing is a conformal gravity theory first propounded by Fred Hoyle and Jayant Narlikar, as in Hoyle & Narlikar, Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 1966, vol 294, 138 or perhaps a quantum approach in a paper by Antonio Alfonso-Faus: A Quantum Approach to Cosmology

The static Universe has immersed in it a local shrinking atomic world: a fundamental change in the interpretation of the Hubble's observations

and for CHROOT

The agreement with the present values of the cosmological parameters is very satisfactory.

as indeed it is in SCC.

But note Tapsnap The density does not increase because it is 'squashed by gravity' but because the masses of fundamental particle are increasing due to the action of a 'mass field'. And BTW a very warm welcome to these Forums!

Garth

 

[Tapsnap]

Thank you Garth. This is helpful information.

 

[Janus]

If you have a problem with Chroot's closing your thread, then you need to discuss it with him by private message. (just click on his Name next to his post). Trying to do an "end around" by reposting the thread will not fly. It will just result in this thread also bieng locked.