This letter was rejected by International Knowledge Press because "we are unable to conclude that these findings would warrant publication in this journal." The letter is suggesting that dark energy, dark matter and universal expansion are intimately related. However, they aren't viewed as revolutions in cosmology which are essential to a complete understanding of the modern universe. They are instead viewed as properties which need to be added to the cosmos when Einstein's theory of gravity (General Relativity) is apparently still not thoroughly comprehended a little over a century since it was published

Bartlett, Rodney

English

PhilPapers

Title - General Relativity eliminates Dark Energy, Dark Matter and Universal ExpansionAuthor - Rodney Bartlett (non-affiliated)Email - rodney.bartlett22@yahoo.comAbstract -This letter is suggesting that dark energy, dark matter and universal expansion are intimately related.However, they aren't viewed as revolutions in cosmology which are essential to a complete understandingof the modern universe. They are instead viewed as properties which need to be added to the cosmos whenEinstein's theory of gravity (General Relativity) is apparently still not thoroughly comprehended alittle over a century since it was published.Keywords -Universal expansion, dark energy, dark matter, General RelativityLetter to the Editor -General Relativity says gravity is a push exerted by the curvature of space-time. "(Bodies) merely followthe line of least resistance through the hills and valleys of the curved space that surrounds otherbodies. Objects that fall to the earth, for example, are not "pulled" by the earth. The curvature ofspace-time around the earth forces the objects to take the direction on toward the earth. The objects arepushed toward the earth by the gravitational field rather than pulled by the earth." (1) (I've also heardthe modern physicist Michio Kaku agree that gravity is a push.) So the Dark Energy giving the universe a push just doesn't seem necessary. Why doesn't the push ofgravitation simply replace the push of dark energy ... and continue to expand the universe? This questionrelates to the entire universe, not merely our gravitationally-bound local part of it. The accelerationknown as cosmic expansion is offset by the relativistic proposal that the space-time composing the cosmosIS gravitation. According to James Overduin, a physicist at Towson University in Maryland, USA whospecializes in gravitation -  gravity is just another term for the curvature of space-time. (2) Inastrophysics, gravitational redshift or Einstein shift is the process by which electromagnetic radiationoriginating from a source that is in a gravitational field is reduced in energy and in frequency, orredshifted. Since gravity is just another term for the curvature of space-time, the gravitational fieldwhich electromagnetic radiation originates from - see letter's final two sentences - is not limited to aparticular galaxy or galaxy cluster but spans (indeed, is) the whole of space-time, in agreement withgeneral relativity.The further away a galaxy is, the greater is the amount of gravitation which any electromagneticradiation has to traverse. So the electromagnetism weakens more than expected and the gravitational redshift, which is larger than anticipated, naturally increases with distance. All of thedistance-indicating redshift not due to the Doppler effect is always grounded in gravity and isgravitational redshift. It never indicates universal expansion, which would make it what is calledcosmological redshift and would require space-time and gravitation to be separate things. Thisgravitational redshift can be applied to anything and everything, including the type 1a supernovae usedby the Supernova Cosmology Project and the High-Z Supernova Search Team when they supposedly discoveredaccelerating expansion of the universe in 1998 (they compared the stars' brightnesses with their measuredredshifts, and attributed the apparent expansion to dark energy). (3) Dark Energy is only required if wecontinue clinging to the Newtonian view that, instead of pushing objects together, gravity is amysterious force whereby objects pull themselves together. Nor does Dark Matter seem to be necessary. The first formal inference about the existence of dark matter(4,5,6,7) said that some unseen matter provided the mass and associated gravitation to hold the Comacluster of galaxies together. A minority of astronomers, motivated by the lack of conclusiveidentification of dark matter, or by observations that don't fit the model, argue for variousmodifications of the standard laws of general relativity (eg, 8). A galaxy or galaxy cluster would indeedtend to fly apart if its gravitation is considered to be a pull from its centre that weakens with thedistance to its edge.* But thinking of general relativity's definition of gravity as a push means thegalaxy's or cluster's edges are being accelerated towards its centre** (this is offset by the orbitingspeeds of outlying stars), thus holding it together. * The inverse-square law says that if stars A and B emit light of equal intensity but star B is twice asdistant, it will appear one quarter as bright as star A i.e. as the inverse square of 2 (1/4). It also says the gravity between any 2 objects is only one quarter as strong if the distance between theobjects doubles.** Since gravity is the weakest force in the universe, it's entirely reasonable to think that thisacceleration towards the centre requires the 10^36 times more powerful electromagnetic force. In thatcase, the phrase in the second paragraph "the gravitational field which electromagnetic radiationoriginates from" could be interpreted as G (gravitation) and EM (electromagnetism) constituting a unifiedGEM force.REFERENCES(1) "Gravitation" by Robert F. Paton, MS PhD in "The World Book Encyclopedia" (Field EnterprisesEducational Corporation, 1967) (2) "What If There Were No Gravity?" by Natalie Wolchover | January 9, 2012 <https://www.livescience.com/17809-gravity.html> (3) Overbye, Dennis (20 February 2017). "Cosmos Controversy: The Universe Is Expanding, but How Fast?".New York Times(4) Some details of Zwicky's calculation and of more modern values are given in Richmond, M., Using thevirial theorem: the mass of a cluster of galaxies, retrieved 10 July 2007From <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter> (5) "The redshift of extragalactic nebulae", Fritz Zwicky's first paper on this topic appeared in 1933 inthe obscure journal Helvetica physica acta, vol. 6, p. 110(6) English translation by David Parker, August 2014 - (http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys440/lectures/gal_clus/zwicky_1933_en.pdf)(7)  "On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae" - Astrophysical Journal, vol. 86, p.217, 10/1937, a second paper by Zwicky, was more widely read(8) "Conformal theory: New light on dark matter, dark energy, and dark galactic halos." (PDF) Robert K.Nesbet. IBM Almaden Research Center, 17 June 2014

General Relativity eliminates Dark Energy, Dark Matter and Universal Expansion

<p>This
letter was rejected by International Knowledge Press because "we are
unable to conclude that these findings would warrant publication in this
journal." The letter is suggesting that dark energy, dark matter and
universal expansion are intimately related. However, they aren't viewed as
revolutions in cosmology which are essential to a complete understanding of the
modern universe. They are instead viewed as properties which need to be added
to the cosmos when Einstein's theory of gravity (General Relativity) is
apparently still not thoroughly comprehended a little over a century since it
was published.</p

Rodney Bartlett (834079)

FigShare

https://philpapers.org/archive/BARGRE.pdf

General Relativity eliminates Dark Energy, Dark Matter and Universal Expansion

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

PhilPapers

FigShare