Hi, I’m Mike, and I used to believe the big bang theory.
The standard model of cosmology suggests that space changes size over cosmic time. Our 4d spacetime is the surface of a 5d shape, which has a singularity sometime in the past.
I was OK with that.
Then I rebelled. I thought, like many others, that it wasn’t space changing, it was the light changing. I became interested in tired light.
Thinking about observations of time dilation, I thought, maybe light doesn’t change, and space doesn’t change, but time does.
Now we get to the good parts.
Idea 1: space is expanding
Suppose two objects 1 billion light years away from each other, at rest with respect to each other. As time goes on, the two objects will become farther apart, the duration of light signals between them will increase, and their mass remains constant.
Idea 2: time is getting faster
Suppose two objects 1 billion light years away from each other, at rest with respect to each other. As time goes on, the two objects remain at the same distance apart, but the duration of the light signals between them will decrease, and their mass remains constant.
Idea 3: Everything gets bigger, faster, heavier
Suppose two objects 1 billion light years away from each other, at rest with respect to each other. As this universe evolves:
- the two objects get farther apart in space
- time runs faster
- mass increases
And with thees factors considered together, nothing changes. The world would appear to be the same, with the same physical constants at any epoch.
The only give away would be signals from the past.
@mikehelland you’re proposing that: time runs faster AND? OR? mass increases
Because an increasing mass will slow its own clock and everything else will appear faster. (IOW blueshifted?) OR are you saying?: In increasing mass will slow its own clock but if at the same rate ‘time runs faster’ for let’s say, objects with mass, then nobody notices anything?
I’m proposing a combination of expanding space, my time dilated past hypothesis, and Han’s variable mass theory.
Space gets bigger, but time also gets faster, and thing also get heavier. Essentially it would have to be arranged in a way where the laws of physics appear the same at all times.
With expanding space, the distance between galaxies increases.
With time dilated past, the distance between galaxies stays the same, but time gets faster and light gets faster, so the travel time between galaxies actually decreases.
If they did both, the travel time galaxies remains relatively static.
If particle masses scaled with the increasing space and increasing speed of light, then you’d get something like the perfect cosmological principle. The universe looks relatively the same no matter when you look at it (past, present, or future).
Why space gets bigger? That is what we (ACG) are against, I think. The whole is not expanding, some parts might sometimes, not our subuniverse, not the whole universe.
@mikehelland . >I’m proposing a combination of expanding space, my time dilated past hypothesis, and Han’s variable mass theory.
Okay, guess I’m expected to come in …
Key reference, insofar as VM is partly finished: Atomic Time, Orbital Time and the Variable Mass Theory. Formula (3) in the paper shows that real atomic distances are found by multiplying the dimensionless ones with the Compton wavelength of the electron, where the mass of the electron is in the denominator. With increasing elementary particle mass this means that real atomic distances are decreasing. Formula (4) shows that this also holds for the emitted (redshifted) light by the atoms. Meaning that all measures that we have for observing distances in empty space are shrinking. Which in turn means that empty space appears to be expanding. Formula (6), at last, shows that (atomic) time ticks become shorter with increasing Variable Mass. Summarizing:
So far so good. Besides VM no other hypotheses are needed. But
With time dilated past [ .. ] time gets faster and light gets faster [ .. ]
Mike is employing Einstein clocks for his time measurements:
Assuming the same arm length of this apparatus in the past and in the future means that lightspeed must be increasing for obtaining shorter time ticks. Variable Mass tells something else, however, as is explained in section 9. C-decay of the paper: lightspeed is an invariant in atomic time and light gets slower in orbital time. Also note that in the atomic time frame of VM arm lengths of Einstein clocks are shrinking, which is consistent with constant $c_0$ in that frame.
Let’s conclude with a formal comparison of the two approaches. Naming first.
With Time Dilated Past, where $\tau=$ Minkowski time, $t=$ Expanded time and $H=$ Hubble parameter, the basic formula is
$$ \large 1+H\tau = e^{Ht} $$
With Variable Mass, where $T=$ orbital time, $t=$ atomic time and $H=$ Hubble parameter:
$$ \large 1+\frac{1}{2}HT = e^{\frac{1}{2}Ht} $$
Differences are in what’s in a name, $\tau \to T$ and the definition of the Hubble parameter:
$$ \large H_{Mike} = \frac{1}{2} H_{Han} $$
Is this for the universe or our subuniverse, or for both?
Its not coming more space. It is coming more time, movements of particles. The time of the universe is eternal time, no beginning, no end.