• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Cosmological Models with no Big Bang

S

scalyblue

Active Member
arg-fallbackName="scalyblue"/>
http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.1750
In the late 1990s, observations of Type Ia supernovae led to the astounding discovery that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. The explanation of this anomalous acceleration has been one of the great problems in physics since that discovery. In this article we propose cosmological models that can explain the cosmic acceleration without introducing a cosmological constant into the standard Einstein field equation, negating the necessity for the existence of dark energy. There are four distinguishing features of these models: 1) the speed of light and the gravitational "constant" are not constant, but vary with the evolution of the universe, 2) time has no beginning and no end, 3) the spatial section of the universe is a 3-sphere, and 4) the universe experiences phases of both acceleration and deceleration. One of these models is selected and tested against current cosmological observations of Type Ia supernovae, and is found to fit the redshift-luminosity distance data quite well.
Click to expand...

This is a very interesting theory that I ran into, if I'm reading it right, it establishes a constant conservation between time, mass, and length and allows the speed of light and the gravitational constant into variables. Wouldn't this eliminate any singularities, dark energy, and the Big Bang? I'd love to have someone's input on this who is more capable of understanding the meat of the paper than I.
 
arg-fallbackName="Nelson"/>
This paper has been discussed already in this thread:

http://forums.leagueofreason.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5263

The ideas are fairly crackpot, hence the reason it was uploaded straight to the arxiv and not submitted to a journal.
 
arg-fallbackName="scalyblue"/>
Nelson said:
This paper has been discussed already in this thread:

http://forums.leagueofreason.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5263

The ideas are fairly crackpot, hence the reason it was uploaded straight to the arxiv and not submitted to a journal.
Click to expand...

Oh, my..sorry! I didn't realize it'd been discussed, I searched for the link I posted ( but the OP of the other post used a physorg link )

I didn't realize it wasn't submitted to a journal, I was looking for the name of the published journal and I couldn't find it. Than's for clarifying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top