Theory of Non-expanding Universe
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Theory of Non-expanding Universe |
| Read in full | Link to paper |
| Author(s) | Rati Ram Sharma |
| Keywords | Big Bang, Steady State Theory, Expanding Universe, Non-expanding Universe, Unified Theory |
| Published | 2010 |
| No. of pages | 12 |
Read the full paper here
Abstract
In a universe expanding as per the Big Bang or Steady State theory the cosmic redshifts should increase exponentially with time, which is not actually observed. So the universe is NOT expanding. In Unified Theory's non-expanding universe the total energy-mass content is eternally conserved with NO 'initial creation of matter from nothing' in a single big explosive event of the Big Bang theory or continuously as in the Steady State theory. The cosmic redshift is caused not by Doppler effects of receding velocities of stellar light sources but by depletion of photon energy during long passage through the sharmon medium due to non-Doppler effects of gravitational, electromagnetic & viscous losses. Cosmic microwave background follows naturally and plausible explanation given to the observation on Ia type supernovae, which has amazed & horrified the astronomers. Halton Arp's observations of high-redshift quasars in the vicinity of low-redshift parent star systems, negative redshift, and the ejection of two huge mass bodies in opposite directions are also explained. But his 'quantization of redshifts' is not a natural phenomenon. There is no antigravity force permeating space and no likelihood for the universe to become empty ever in future. Age of the non-expanding universe is about 45 billion years. Dark energy and dark matter are related to the Sharmon medium. Realistic theory of Non-expanding universe replaces Big Bang & Steady State theories of expanding universe.
Overview
This is the cosmological chapter of Rati Ram Sharma's Unified Theory, the system he developed across four books between 1990 and 2009. Its premise is that all mass and energy are built from two elementary particles of about 10−33 cm — the positive positrino and the negative negatrino, collectively cosminos — and from the electrically neutral sharmon composed of one of each. Space is filled by a real sharmon medium, an aether in the working sense of the word: a material medium with a density, a rigidity, a viscosity and a characteristic impedance. Sharma's cosmology is what follows if light is a propagating disturbance in that medium rather than a signal crossing empty expanding space.
The claim is that the universe neither expands nor contracts. Cosmological redshift is not a Doppler recession effect but a depletion of photon energy accumulated over the journey — a tired-light mechanism, though Sharma prefers to itemise it as three separate losses: gravitational, electromagnetic and viscous. This departs from the mainstream account at the root: there is no scale factor, no Hubble expansion, no cosmological horizon, no beginning, and no "creation of matter from nothing" in either the Big Bang or the Steady State version. The eternally existing reservoir of cosmic substance he names the Megovum — "big egg" — from which the perceptible universe condenses and into which it can dissolve, possibly one of many.
The argument
The proposed falsification test
Sharma's headline argument is a proposed decisive test. In an expanding universe, he writes, Z = V/c combined with Hubble's law HD = V = dD/dt integrates to Z = Z0exp(Ht), so the redshift of any individual galaxy should climb exponentially with time. In a non-expanding universe Z = KD with D fixed, so the redshift of a given galaxy never changes. Since individual redshifts "have never been found to increase exponentially with time", he concludes the galaxies are not flying apart. He adds a spectral signature: because c = λν, the drift should be most marked in wavelength at the red and infrared end and most marked in frequency at the violet and X-ray end.
Three non-Doppler losses
The redshift is written Z = Δλ/λ = −Δν/ν = −ΔE/E, with K = Kg + Kem + Kv and Z = KD.
- Gravitational. Passing through regions of acceleration gn over lengths Dn costs the quantum ΔE = (hν/c2)∑gnDn. Because +g and −g regions alternate along the path, Sharma expects the net Kg to be negligible.
- Electromagnetic. Propagation involves real displacement currents in the medium, so resistive and inductive losses accrue linearly with distance. These too are made negligible by the very high impedance of the sharmon medium, ζ0 = 1/cε0 = 376.73 ohm, set against the tiny cosmino charge 1.3729×10−30 esu.
- Viscous. This is the dominant term and the load-bearing part of the paper.
Rigidity and viscosity of the sharmon medium
Sharma fixes the medium's shear elasticity by requiring transverse gravitational waves to travel at c: Vg = (er/ds)1/2 = c gives er = 4.6875×10−12 dyne/cm2. He stresses the contrast with the classical ether: this medium is some 1018 times less rigid than air, not "more rigid than steel". The viscosity is then obtained by analogy rather than derivation — since air's viscosity is 1.22×10−10 times its volume elasticity, he scales the sharmon rigidity by the same ratio and multiplies by an empirical factor 0.1 to allow for the elongated shape of the sharmons and the contribution of the 0-spin population, giving η = 0.5709×10−22 dyne·s/cm2.
Viscous redshift by Stokes' law
The photon is modelled as a sphere of closely packed cosminos of radius r = rcnc1/3, so that r varies inversely as the cube root of the wavelength. Applying Stokes' law over a path D gives an energy loss ΔE = 6πηrDc and a viscous redshift Zv = 6πηrDλ/hc = KvD. Crucially the loss appears as increased wavelength, not reduced speed: "the velocity c of the photon remains unaffected", in contrast to a massive body in a viscous fluid, which loses v. For sodium yellow light Sharma obtains Kv = 0.69249×10−27 cgs, hence cKv = 2.076×10−17 cgs, which he equates with the Hubble constant. Distance is then recovered as D = Z/K rather than Zc/H.
Origin, age, and the microwave background
The Megovum's ground state contains only 0-spin sharmons: no momentum, no exchange, no perceptible space or time, a condition he likens to absolute zero. The perceptible universe begins when the opposed half-spins of some cosminos become co-directional, raising sharmons to the 1-spin state — the photon — and some further to 2-spin gravitons, while detached cosminos build the fermions. The electron is 3.50×1020 negatrinos plus 3.944×1017 sharmons; the positron the mirror composition. The primordial radiation has the energy of a single sharmon (ms = 5.19×10−48 g), wavelength λ = h/msc = 4.25×1010 cm, with the n = 2, 3, 4, 5 harmonics at 2.12, 1.42, 1.06 and 0.85×1010 cm. Because this "cold" pre-radiation and radiation era preceded anything Gamow's scheme describes, Sharma takes the total evolutionary span at about three times Gamow's figure — about 45 billion years.
The cosmic microwave background is, on this account, simply the residue of an isotropic evolutionary process that had a cool rather than a hot beginning; isotropy needs no explaining because nothing exploded. Dark matter is identified with 0-spin sharmon and cosmino aggregates, dark energy with 1-spin sharmons — both invisible because their constituents are ~10−33 cm.
Supernovae and Arp's observations
The Type Ia supernova result is handled by a local mechanism: an exploding star showers sharmons into its surroundings, raising the local η and hence Kv, inflating the observed Z, and so inflating the inferred distance and expansion rate. The apparent acceleration is therefore a local medium effect, and no antigravity force and no cosmological constant is needed. Of Halton Arp's results, the high-redshift quasars near low-redshift parents follow from the same non-Doppler K; negative redshifts are read as genuine Doppler approach outweighing the intrinsic term; and the back-to-back ejection of massive companions along a galaxy's minor axis is attributed to nucleon-antinucleon annihilation in the core, with N + e− producing a 940.061 MeV antiproton that annihilates a 938.26 MeV proton for ~1878.3 MeV per pair, against 1 MeV per nucleon in fission and 6 MeV in fusion. Arp's redshift quantization, however, Sharma rejects: the periodicities are local causes that "cannot be generalized into any inherent property of the emitted photon".
Assessment
The attractive feature of this paper is that it is an honest attempt to make a tired-light cosmology quantitative rather than merely rhetorical. Sharma does not simply assert that photons lose energy en route; he names a medium, fixes its shear elasticity from an independent requirement (that transverse gravitational waves travel at c), estimates its viscosity, models the photon as an extended sphere, and pushes Stokes' law through to a numerical Kv. He also states a falsification criterion in advance, which is more than most redshift-mechanism papers do. And his structural objection to both rival theories — that "creation of matter from nothing" is equally irrational whether it happens once or continuously — is fairly made, and he is scrupulous enough to quote Fred Hoyle at length making the same charge against the Big Bang.
The difficulties are severe, and several are internal. First, the numbers do not survive checking. The paper's own cKv = 2.076×10−17 s−1 is correctly obtained from Kv = 0.69249×10−27, but converting it to astronomical units gives H ≈ 640 km/s/Mpc, not the 67.5 km/s/Mpc claimed; the same 9.5-fold error converts Gamow's 1.916×10−17 into "62.3" instead of ~590 km/s/Mpc. That his cgs figures really are 1950s-vintage is confirmed by his own opening value H = 1.8×10−4 km/s per light year, which is 587 km/s/Mpc. So the celebrated agreement between the viscosity-derived constant and the modern measured Hubble constant is a unit-conversion artefact: taken at face value his Kv implies a characteristic time 1/H of only about 1.5 billion years — an order of magnitude short of the age he assigns the universe elsewhere in the same paper. Second, the sodium-light worked example is internally inconsistent. The sharmon energy quantum is printed as Es = 4.66×10−25 erg, but the paper's own sharmon mass gives msc2 = 4.66×10−27 erg — the mantissa matches exactly, so the exponent is wrong by 102; and even with the corrected value hc/λEs = 7.24×1014, twice the quoted ns = 3.6146×1014. The subsequent photon radius 7.24×10−29 cm follows from the quoted count, so the factor of two propagates into Kv and thence into the Hubble comparison.
Third, the central steps are asserted rather than derived. The viscosity is not calculated from the sharmon medium's own kinetics; it is transferred from air by a dimensionless ratio and then multiplied by an admitted "empirical multiplication factor 0.1". Since Kv ∝ η, that single free parameter fixes the Hubble constant, and the agreement Sharma reports is therefore not a prediction. Stokes' law is likewise applied to a photon — an object with no rest frame and no terminal velocity — while simultaneously stipulating that the drag does not slow it, which is the one thing viscous drag does to everything else.
Fourth, the conflicts with measurement are direct. The proposed decisive test is not a test: the predicted redshift drift in standard cosmology (the Sandage–Loeb effect) is of order 10−10 per year, so "individual redshifts have never been observed to increase" is a statement about instrumental limits, not about the universe. More seriously, any scattering-type energy-loss mechanism must blur distant images and must fail the light-curve test: the light curves of Type Ia supernovae are stretched by exactly (1 + z), which follows from expansion but has no cause in a static medium — and Sharma's supernova argument makes this worse, since he needs a burst of sharmons around each supernova to redden its light without also degrading the standard-candle photometry on which the same data set rests. The microwave background is treated as "the 7 cm cosmic background radiation", whereas the COBE/FIRAS measurement is a 2.725 K blackbody peaking near 1 mm, whose spectrum is the most precise blackbody ever measured; a superposition of sharmon-multiple wavelengths at 1010 cm is not that spectrum. He also dates Penzias and Wilson's detection to 1955 rather than 1965. Finally the antimatter mechanism N + e− → antiproton conserves charge but reverses baryon number, which no observed process does.
The paper is best read as a statement of a position — that a material medium and eternal matter are preferable to expansion plus creation — rather than as a completed quantitative cosmology. Its own arithmetic does not yet support the agreement it claims.