Suggestion Yet another solution to the Einstein field equations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the submission of a new solution to the Einstein field equations, with emphasis on the necessity of publishing in a peer-reviewed journal before engaging in forum discussions. A participant questions the openness of cosmology peer-reviewers to new ideas, suggesting a potential bias towards established theories like the Friedmann equations. The forum's mission statement highlights its role in discussing science as understood by the professional community, indicating that unconventional ideas may not be welcome. The original post also notes missing elements that could enhance the argument, including details on cosmological time dilation and calculations related to the particle horizon. The thread is currently closed pending further administrative discussions.
questi0ner
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I've already got "Personal Speculation Warning" and I had a private conversation with @Nugatory, who told me, that I have to publish it in an appropriate peer-reviewed journal before it can be posted for discussion here. I replied with a question, if he is willing to believe, that cosmology/astronomy peer-reviewers are fortified with the Friedmann equations and they will not surrender their fortress. He replied
That may be, but if so this forum is not the place to take up the issue. From our mission statement (emphasis mine):
Our mission is to provide a place for people (whether students, professional scientists, or others interested in science) to learn and discuss science as it is currently generally understood and practiced by the professional scientific community.
The "new" solution is actually one of the oldest ones from the new point of view, it's based on Leonard Susskind's physical intuition and it's seemingly paradoxical. Is this forum really not a place to ask about its correctness?

PS. I chose "Suggestion" prefix, because I don't want it to be Complaint. My original post is missing a few words here and there, an emphasis on cosmological time dilation, two additional paragraphs and one extra calculation of the proper distance to the particle horizon in the radiation dominated era based on the Friedmann equations for comparison. Here is the screenshot of the latest version.
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Likes weirdoguy
Physics news on Phys.org
From the PF rules that you agreed to when joining here:

PF Rules said:
Acceptable Sources:
Generally, discussion topics should be traceable to standard textbooks or to peer-reviewed scientific literature. Usually, we accept references from journals that are listed in the Thomson/Reuters list (now Clarivate):

https://mjl.clarivate.com/home

Use the search feature to search for journals by words in their titles.
 
Please check your PMs -- I have asked you an administrative question. Thank you.
 
This Feedback thread is closed temporarily pending the outcome of my PM conversation with the OP.
 
I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
This came up in my job today (UXP). Never thought to raise it here on PF till now. Hyperlinks really should be underlined at all times. PF only underlines them when they are rolled over. Colour alone (especially dark blue/purple) makes it difficult to spot a hyperlink in a large block of text (or even a small one). Not everyone can see perfectly. Even if they don't suffer from colour deficiency, not everyone has the visual acuity to distinguish two very close shades of text. Hover actions...
About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
502K
Back
Top