WHAT'S AT THE CENTER OF THE COSMOS...A POSSIBLE SOLUTION BY WAY OF "COSMIC JET COSMOLOGY"

What might we see at the center of the universe if we look up? Licensed cosmotologists say we can't fall out of the cosmos! 

First of all consider the center of the universe.

 Conventional cosmological wisdom tells us that in the cosmos space itself is expanding and at every point.. everything's accelerating away from every other point so there is no center.

 This reminds me of Einstein's idea that gravity has no source, yet if you take a pendulum and you let it oscillate it continues and stops towards the center of the Earth, it has a source and this is one of my ideas about why relativity for gravity at any rate may be incomplete. Einstein like Mach believed that gravity is essentially the same thing as the inertia, and inertia has no source so Einstein then concluded the gravity has no source.

 Here Einstein says because inertial forces have no source and move in many directions and because Mach and Einstein believed gravity and inertia are essentially the same thing, inertia has no source, inertia is gravity, so gravity like the pendelum has no source. 

 The universe has no center? I don't necessarily agree..

 We can imagine a hand grenade or other explosive event and our cosmos' outward radiance is also powered by a radiant explosion of something like gas from the center. If we think of the shrapnel as like the galaxies or other points to the cosmos we can say that every point is radiating away from every other point powered by the gas also causing the explosion, but this in no way means there is no center.

 One cosmological solution that has been devised is called cosmic jet vortex cosmology. And while I'm not its author I was having a fast month months ago! Edison and Sir Issac Newton were both common improvers. I think jet cosmology is an idea that has potential value, and as you'll see in this post I've made  improvements about it as with my ideas about how relativity, gravity and inertia may be much involved with cosmology.

  Vortex Jet cosmology hopes to compare what we might find out about the universe to the idea that the physics on the most huge scale we might find yet or eventually, are reasonably much like what we find on the level of the galaxies or even the gravitational and magnetic field of the earth.

 In Cosmic Jet Cosmology therefore the same magnetic fields like the Earth has are involved. There are two poles and we're inside of one of them radiating outward, this is the cosmic expansion and acceleration powered by the huge magnetic fields of the cosmos. There's a cosmic equator of the disc as the WMAP probe may have found and this version of the cosmos doesn't violate energy conservation because it has a connecting loop of the field, so energy is neither created or destroyed. I consider this possibility to be a major advantage if it is proven as more evidence is found.

 The magnetic fields may be coordinated and accelerated by the dark energy which I would think may be the same thing as what's causing the pulsars to slow down for which they won the Nobel prize by way of the gravity waves. This is the low energy reradiant electromagnetic field that Einstein thought was the cause of the balance of the cosmos so it didn't collapse into zero over long periods of time.

 

 I think of this inertial radiation as electromagnetic and so it's at the speed of light and fits well with relativity and its speed as by LIGO.

 More particularly, since Einstein thought of light as a particle unchanged from emission to absorption in special relativity, LIGO particles radiate out not in, and because they have sides so they're disconnected like particles of gas, they are at the speed of light, and I believe faster than light in waves that may be inducing the particles outward. In any physical system there's a fundamental need for both waves and particles (or waves at any rate. Einstein said it's impossible to imagine a fundamental particle that can both omit and absorb waves).

The particles of LIGO move out at the speed of light but the waves may change phase and move much faster by Maxwell's method, you lighten up to move faster and the flexing of the field combined with a phase change may wrap around the quanta so relativity is not as much involved. This might give the low energy field enough power to power cosmic acceleration outward, also explaining the early rapid expansion at faster than light of the cosmos.

ABOUT THE HUBBLE SHIFT

According to the Hubble evidence and later research like the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, the cosmos is completely isotropic about the galaxies. This doesn't disprove the possibility of Jet Cosmology, because we can imagine it's a reasonable assumption that if we're in the jet as it begins to expand outward and upward in a cone so it's possible we would be near the center top of that cone just by a random bet.

  By cosmic jet cosmology this would say even while it looks like the distribution of the mass around us is uniform, even if with more distance it isn't because we're at the top central area of the cone even if  this may seem like stretching the idea that we're special in science. 

 In the history of science, first the Earth was thought to be the center of universe, then the solar system, then the galaxy and the idea that we were special was more and more uncommon.  

 It might seem improbable that just by luck where we are in the cosmos is right at the center of all this expansion where the motion of the matter and the jet looks like it's more uniform as we look outward into the cosmos. Even so it would seem a near probability we would be in the cosmic disc if it exists, but there seems to be as much probability we are in the jets as the disc. But it might be 30% we are in the jet. However like a stream flowing most at the center the chances might only this much. For eclipses it's just luck that here and now the moon fits the sun in size. Events like this aren't uncommon.

At the same time this may solve the problem of how you can't pull the universe out of a hat because it would violate energy conservation at the beginning. If the universe has always existed and is more like a symmetry than an event with time in general, it's existed forever at any rate in time with respect to energy conservation and so there was no necessity to solve the moment of creation. 

This could also solve the problem of why there's more matter than antimatter all around us. When physicists create matter in the lab with particle accelerators they also create just as much antimatter and yet all around us all we find is matter supposedly. 

 This could be explained with cosmic jet cosmology if like the jets of galaxies one of the cosmic jets that we're in has matter, plus the other one the other side has antimatter as the strong force in the center of the cosmos may separate the two charges like a giant Van de Graaff generator.

 

 It's not yet known but I believe if this is so we will look to the jets of galaxies to see if one is matter and the other is antimatter.

Currently it's believed by astronomers that the jets have matter and some antimatter but they are mostly matter. I would think the cosmic jets may be with somewhat modulated physics and with so much energy they might make more pure antimatter and matter jets. A possiblity is that one jet of each galaxy is mostly matter and the other mostly antimatter. If we looked at the higher power jets and this is more distinct with more change like this, it may imply that it may also work on the cosmic level and this may be possible to find with more research.

 Carl Sagan would say strong claims need strong evidence. Hawking's idea that the cosmos began in nothing and ends in nothing in a way contradicts all the evidence there is anywhere around us. All around us are connections by energy conservation, one of the most well proven ideas in the history of science (or the most if we disagree with general relativity, which I tend to). Instead of the beginning and end cut off by artificial evidence or no evidence, Jet Cosmology offers a loop connecting the beginning and end, so like the electromagnetic fields in all the events around us, connection is maintained.

And what about the evidence about the isotropic low energy microwave field?

 I think this might be related directly to dark matter or gravity which is more spherical around the galaxies and if it's faster than light then it's connecting by it's ability to smooth itself out more continuously, not because of the inflation event necessarily but because gravity is connecting it up. 

 Even so I believe that the low energy microwave field itself may be slightly anisotropic more towards the area of what might be the cosmic jet.

The main reason we can't even see yet the edge of the jet may be because of the huge scale of the cosmos. Historically this isn't to be unexpected.. most people in history had no idea how huge the cosmos already was going to be!

 The reason everything seems to be expanding out in all directions might be because the central part of a stream moves the fastest and so there's considerably more probability that we are in the center of the jet where it's starting to expand out the most to the side and earlier on it would have been expanding more by the jet than by the sides, in a more linear or tubular flow like that of the jets of some masses like black holes.

 The jet will slow down the acceleration as the galaxies move outward by simple change of the radiant energy from the center of the cosmos. Some preliminary evidence seems to show a possible reduction of the acceleration. CLICK HERE or see link at the end of post for the phys.org page about this.

But as I say due to the phase change on the cosmic scale the jet of the cosmos would be more fizzled out and so it doesn't look like a solid jet as by the galaxies.

One idea I've had is that as the cosmic inflation event took place, part of the fields of more massive quanta like the baryons were moving faster than light by way of events like Chou's tunneling experiment.

He found the speed of the tunneling through nuclei measured on a shelf top machine was about 1.3 times the speed of light.

Chou himself believed that while the information component of the wave was partially moving faster than speed of light as long as it was trimmed off it would seem to still fit relativity, but I tend to believe that relativity tells us there's nothing to trim.

 If the tunneling is about 1.3 times the speed of light this would fit the idea that the fractional charges of QCD are lightening up that much lighter to travel faster than light as by Maxwell's idea. The fractional charges average out to about a third lighter than 100% like an electric charge and so in my idea GWD  they move about that much faster than the speed of light. I suggest that people with machines like Chou's look for evidences of changes in the spectra associated with the tunneling. I'm not an experimental or mathematical physicist but I am good with lots of machines and to me physics seems to be a good machine to be involved with.

For cosmology this might imply that during the time of the inflationary event (which actually will be a continuous event for that part of the energy of the jet as we might look towards the center of the cosmos) the heavy quanta might be accelerated faster than light by the superfusion jet from the center of the cosmos, and so we might look for fractional charge spectra related partially to both jets of masses like black holes and briefly about supernova at the time their reverse the inward to outward force as I say and also perhaps even in lightning on Jupiter type worlds in other exo star systems which may be from the same source as cosmic rays and so we might look in the cosmic rays for also for evidence of superfusion in the spectra. 

Physicists have believed that there's no limit to the number of forces possible, so my belief is that perhaps in addition to the spectra of the fractional charges from the inflation event as we look towards the center of the cosmos, we might also see evidence for faster motion at higher energy yet and so there may be many complex types of spectra as we look to the center of the cosmos none of which may be caused by conventional physics.

 

You may ask what about the friction of the particles and as I say on my general physics page (see the link below if you like) this could be solved by having the particles around what I call the radius of action (ROA) of the heavy quanta, and in addition to a generating the code of the EPR that only those two quanta find, this small constellation of particles around each quanta would also generate a sort of torsion force that would make the waves flex outside the radius of action (ROA).

 So by way of the force, the small particles around the ROA of the electron and positive charge generate a force between them conveyed by the waves that moves the light by way of Maxwell's idea that there's a resilient medium there.

 The tension itself may be maintained by a phase change inside the heavy quanta that makes it faster than light and gives the heavy quantum more massive spinning energy. By relativity rest mass has no more more than plus or minus one with the electric charge of the spin of the quanta merely at the speed of light, but if mass is indeed spinning energy we have the cause of rest mass relativity doesn't explain.

  The waves themselves are made of dark matter and dark energy and if they have the change of phase so while they aren't easy to find there's a lot of roundabout evidence this might be something to do with this as the entire generation of mathematical physicists devoted themselves to consideration of what they thought was not an improbable belief about this.

Einstein said if the low energy field is found relativity totally fails but I strongly believe special relativity is not going to fail, so instead I believe the waves simply have a change of phase and operate between the lines of the classical electromagnetic field lines so that their interaction with those lines tends to not be picking up a lot of relativistic mass and the other effects we can see with machines like accelerators.

 I can compare my own ideas to those of established cosmologists, and the idea of Hawking was that the center of the cosmos was a black hole and will end in a black hole.

  But this relates to what I think about T hooft's idea and others. T hooft, the Nobel Prize winner, believes that, as I do too, the center of a black hole actually doesn't have a singularity where everything disappears because it would violate energy conservation here and this would explain why you can have different size of black holes because they have different masses and they aren't all infinite as as astronomy shows and thus often aren't the same.

But instead there's this force inside converting to the reaction force in action reaction pairs with the gravity and what I call superfusion and superfusion is a stronger force. So it explains the cosmic jets of galaxies or even supernovas by brief reversal of the force that goes inward to then reradiate the supernova outward. No other known physics theoretical or not can explain this about supernova reradiation. 

 I think superfusion is not stable, that is to say it would fizzle out really fast in the supernova. So we don't find the superheavy superfusion quanta around us and for the supernova at any rate we can't find much evidence of unusual spectral lines for this event, so I believe we might also look for this in the spectra of the cosmic jets as well as the supernovas or perhaps in lightning from like Jupiter type worlds where perhaps most of the cosmic rays might also come from.

 So we might look in the spectra for evidence of superfusion. And instead of looking to the center of universe where we just see nothing, we'll see instead structure. This is because cosmic energy is not created or destroyed.

 By way of cosmic jet cosmology at any rate we would be merely in the center of one of the jets like the jets of galaxies yet on a giant frame and these are powered by superfusion. So the cosmic radiance outward will be powered by superfusion but it has structure inside. 

 The singularity, by Hawking's or Einstein's idea, would just go to zero. There's no structure at all. And still we might find complex structures, like they find some black holes that have jets and others that don't. In my belief as Maxwell said because of the uniformity of all the physics around us, all the waves and quanta of all sizes and energies, are manufactured not created. And if this action reaction creates all the quanta we find around us and then it radiates out of the jets to reach us, this is essentially from gravity and so if it fundamentally relates to the other forces, gravity is not simple as Einstein believed.

This might be because it may have shielding from the particles inside the event horizon perhaps. So it points to a more complex structure than Einstein thought because gravity is more complex. And if you look at the galaxies, they're really small compared to the size of the cosmos.

And so I think that maybe there's a phase change for the jets of the cosmos that make it so that the galaxies are smaller on the more cosmic level than the giant blobs we see for galactic jets and for this I think there might be a change of phase. 

While the galaxies all rotate as solid masses and also they're spinning faster than they should be, they should explode by centrifugal force. This may be because the gravity is faster than it should be otherwise because  the radial lines of centrifugal force are like the classical electromagnetic field lines that lay down the tracks outward for the gravity to follow in and so it rotates as a solid body but faster with the gravity stronger and also the inertial lines are stronger with the gravity so it spins faster than it should and the phase change is causing that. I think this relates to my idea that gravity is faster than light, so it's actually not radiating out like they found with LIGO.

In my belief they found only the inertial particles which are radiating out only at the speed of light by relativity, which is so important about inertia and uniform motion. 

 Relativity can't describe acceleration well. Because like mass and inertia an acceleration really isn't is the same thing as linear motion.

  I've been saying for years and  experiments now show that hot and cold, heat and cooling are not the same thing as had been believed. You can't just reverse them 100% in time. And so there's something fundamentally different to a considerable degree like I believe about mass and energy also. 

 It's easier to convert mass to energy than energy to mass. While mass and energy are conserved and not converted, this seems like relativity is incomplete.

 And I think that the galaxies are changing phase. So what you have is a sort of inward radiation of the gravity particles at the center of the universe and other masses following the classical electromagnetic field lines and the inertial waves might also radiate inward with the inertial particles outward causing the force outward of cosmic acceleration, which are like the lines of inertia, but they're both much stronger and they're powered by superfusion also.

So the superfusion is going to power the giant magnetic fields and this would explain the cosmic acceleration.

At the center of the cosmic jet we might see faster motion like a stream or a river where the center flows the fastest.

We can't see the cosmic disc because  refraction of light through the jets as the shear force might change from the inside to the outside of the jet. Even so I think some of the light might be able to reach us.

Supposedly the WMAP probe has found a cosmic equator that this isn't yet consensus by astronomers.

 In the Cosmic Jet Cosmology this might be because by one jet of matter and the other of antimatter and they bend over to reach the cosmic equator where they then release a lot of energy as they combine. So in cosmic cosmology we might look at this for the anti-matter matter interaction. 

Superfusion is unstable in the mass and energy around us because unlike in relativity the more mass you have for the quanta in subatomic physics it's half life is generally reduced. Relativity tells us mass slows down time but more mass makes the small quantum clocks spin faster and they have a shorter half life to they're less stable. I  believe that superfusion could only be stable inside the singularity because of the disproof of relativity by this method or certainly by extension. The superfusion quanta are spinning faster than light and this is the only way they could develop enough centrifugal force to withstand the super strong gravity at the singularity.

Superfusion is the only force strong enough to power the jets. Fusion because it's not strong enough has already been ruled out and gravity is only attractive. I believe that the same spectrum may be present for superfusion and also the cosmic jets nearer to the center of the universe.

 If the universe is a giant black hole as some have believed then we would all be accelerating at the speed of light to the center not outward.

About the Multiverse I would tend to think we only consider evidence that explains things we already know of and makes predictions which mostly the Multiverse doesn't do. 

 One reason those who promote this idea believe the universe is much much larger than we see is because of the inflation event.

If it was actually high speed on a large scale then the Multiverse idea especially Eternal Inflation implies that there's essentially no limit to the expansion at faster than light.

At least anyway this would seem to be a logical event if we accept the inflation event. And this also seems to be evidence against inflation, why didn't it continue at faster than light?

But if we have a jet at the center of the Cosmos due to the gravity moving inward to power it by the reaction force it's not infinite.

Anything infinite in the cosmos would overpower All the Rest by its Absolute Energy and so we couldn't be here by the Multiverse inflation idea.

If instead the cosmic jet is powered by gravity moving inward and radiating back outward, it's finite and this both solves the cause of inflation, and also means it's not infinitely outward. We can accept based on the evidence of the universe may be considerably more vast, but since there's no evidence yet for any kind of infinite inflation I believe just like everything else around us we see that the universe is finite.

 Click Here for the phys.org page that offers evidence the cosmic accelerstion may be slowing down as predicted by the Jet Cosmology.

CLICK HERE for what I consider to be my more advanced physics page. Some of my earlier pages were considered to be incorrect because they weren't up to date and so I thought more about why I believed for example why there are 40 reasons to believe that relativity is incomplete and you see what I've come to think of as my more mature point of view about physics of this type on the post of the link.