1) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Could the speed of light have a different value in different universes? (Message 9338)
Posted 15 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes
2) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Could the speed of light have a different value in different universes? (Message 9336)
Posted 15 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes
Rudy, you say the speed of light has changed. I want to know, compared to what?

The speed of any wave is the frequency times the wavelength measured in units of time and distance. So there must be clearly defined units of time and distance against which to measure speed.

Until 1960, meters and seconds were defined in terms of the size and rotation of Earth. Earth is only 4.5 billion years old, so by those definitions, meters and seconds did not exist 5 billion years ago.

The modern definitions are based on emissions from cesium 133, but cesium did not exist prior to the first supernovas. So by the modern definitions, meters and seconds did not exist before supernovas.

We could easily adapt the modern definition to H-alpha emissions, which would have been present as soon as the universe cooled enought for atoms to form. But according to the big bang scenario, space did not become transparent until about 300,000 years after the alleged big bang. Even then, it makes no sense to talk about the speed of light in empty space because there was no empty space; it was still quite a dense fluid.

Before that, according to the big bang scenario, there was only a hot soup of quarks and leptons. So any definition of meters, seconds and the speed of light, at that time, would have to be based on electromagnetic waves emitted by interactions of quarks and leptons in that hot soup. The existence of e/m waves at that time would be as speculative as the big bang scenario, itself. If there was no light, there was no speed of light. So it makes no sense to talk about the speed of light in that hot and dense soup, either. You might as well speculate about how many angels could sit on the head of a pin before the universe existed.

What speed of light are you talking about? Stephen Hawking talks about events 10^42 seconds after the beginning. I wonder, by what definition of second?
3) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Could the speed of light have a different value in different universes? (Message 9330)
Posted 10 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes
... C is the ratio of wavelength to frequency, expressed in meters per second.

Sorry, folks; I meant, "C is wavelength times frequency." That is true for any wave. You just have to define a unit of length and a unit of time in terms of a particular wave which can be duplicated and measured reliably.

The SI committee chose cesium 133 because it is the only stable isotope of cesium, making the pure isotope easily obtainable by chemical means.
4) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Could the speed of light have a different value in different universes? (Message 9328)
Posted 9 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes
Read and understande the modern definitions of second, meter and speed of light. You will see that the speed of light is fixed by definition. The definitions are based on emissions from cesium 133 atoms. C is the ratio of wavelength to frequency, expressed in meters per second. It cannot possibly change except by changing those three definitions.

By today's definitions, days contain more seconds than they used to. Earlier definitions were based on Earth's size and rotation; a mean solar day was always 86,400 seconds, exactly. But how long was a day 5 billion years ago? Earth did not exists, so meters and seconds did not exist.

However, in the Big Bang Scenario, Hydrogen atoms did not exist in the first seconds of the universe, elements up to iron came much later in first generation stars, and elements as heavy as Cesium had to wait for the first supernovas. So meters and seconds did not exist by today's definitions.

It is meaningless to discuss the speed of light in the context of that early universe until new definitions are adopted. We could easily convert from Cesium 133 to H-alpha emissions. That would suffice for times after the first hydrogen atoms condensed from the hot plasma. Before that, perhaps we could use the energy of beta decay as a standard.

As for the inflation of the universe exceeding the speed of light, the same is true today. Objects beyond the Hubble limit are moving away faster than light, but that is not considered to be a velocity. The speed of light limits relative motion between nearby objects, it has nothing to do with the expansion of space. In general relativity, even minor acceleration of the reference frame can expand or shrink space in the direction of relative motion at a rate faster than light.
5) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Where is the antimatter in the universe? (Message 9322)
Posted 9 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes
Welcome to Cosmo@home, DNLHM. I just joined the site, myself.

I see many parallels between your explanation of antimatter and my own. In fact, we are so close together on this that I think one of us must have been influenced by the work of the other. Perhaps you read a second or third hand account of something I wrote. I have addressed this subject many times on Yahoo!Answers, and elsewhere over the last 3 or 4 years.

See the "ANTIMATTER" paragraph in my original post to "FRACTAL FOAM MODEL OF UNIVERSES". You will see how this concept of antimatter fits in a larger context.
6) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Fractal Foam Model of Universes (Message 9321)
Posted 9 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes

If the "universe" is everything that "is", then like Bill Clinton, we should ask, "what the definition of IS is." My imagination IS, so in a sense everything I can imagine IS. We need more restrictive meanings of "universe", and to keep them straight, we should attach descriptive labels. When we hear the word "universe", most of us think of the physical universe, and we think we have an inkling what that is. I have a cosmological model in which "our universe" is a scale-wise subset of a greater fractal physical universe. My fractal universe, though infinite in time, distance and scale, shrinks in comparison to the multiverses envisioned by some other cosmologists. So when I describe my Fractal Foam Model of Universes, I don't mean to disparage, belittle, scorn or deny the possibility that my universes are contained in a unichapter of a unibook in a unilibrary. With that in mind, I shall try to condense my model to a few paragraphs, as follows:


The cosmic foam of our universe is the ether foam of a super-universe, and the ether foam of our universe is the cosmic foam of a sub-universe. These are but 3 infinite universes in an infinite scale-wise sequence. (Each verse in this chapter may, itself, have infinite tangents existing in the same time, scale and location; but I shall not attempt to develop that idea any further.) The expansion of our space enlarges the cosmic voids (bubbles), thus increasing the distance (stress) between neighboring galaxies. On the assumptions that gravity is perfectly described by Newton's law of universal gravity, and that gravity is the only force acting between neighboring galaxies, we might suppose that increasing stress means decreasing strain. For an isolated pair of galaxies, we might expect strain to be inversely proportional to the square of stress. The stress-strain relationship in a foam whose bubble walls consist of thousands of galaxies is well beyond my meager math skills to analyze, but I imagine the galaxies can only be stretched so far apart before the integrity of the foamy structure breaks down, and a bubble wall "pops".

Eventually, a gap opens near the middle of a wall, and the galaxy clusters around the perimeter of the wall exert greater attraction than the galaxies across the gap. The galaxies near the gap accelerate toward the surrounding clusters, and after a billion or so years, collisions occur. Zooming out to view a larger portion of the foam, we should expect to see momentum and energy conserved by radiating pressure waves. (These waves are analogous to the sound we hear when we pour a glass of beer.) In the plane of the ruptured wall, surrounding galaxies move first away from the rupture, then back to a new equilibrium position. Perpendicular to the ruptured wall, galaxies move first toward the rupture, then away to a new equilibrium position. The kinetic energy gained by galaxies in the ruptured wall is transferred to the radiating pressure waves. I cannot say what the speed of those waves might be. Perhaps they move away at the speed of gravity (which I believe to be at least 20 billion times the speed of light), or perhaps the move at the speed of light. This is one of the major gaps in my understanding of my own model.


The pressure waves radiated from popping cosmic-foam bubbles in one universe are the dark energy of the next scale-wise universe. The concept of dark energy was invented to explain where the energy comes from to create new space in our universe. In this model, space can be quantified as median-size ether-foam bubbles. More bubbles means more space, so expansion of space means the number of ether-foam bubbles must be increasing. When a bubble wall pops, two bubbles are united into one, which represents a decrease in the number of bubbles. (Of course, the number is infinite, so we must talk about the number of bubble in a given region of space.) For the number of bubbles to increase, ether-foam bubbles must un-pop, but that violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Bubbles don't un-pop in forward time. The paradox is resolved by reversing the arrow of time from one universe to the next. As our universe gets older, the super-universe and sub-universe get younger. From a sub-universe perspective, a cosmic-foam bubble pops, and pressure waves radiate. From our perspective, the dark energy pressure waves converge to a point where an ether-foam bubble un-pops, converting dark energy to new space.


Regular energy consists of ethereal shear waves, which propagate at the speed of light in the manner of acoustic shear waves in ordinary solids. The speed of sound in a bulk solid is given by the formula, c = sqrt(G/rho), where G is the shear modulus and rho is the density. So the ether must be ultra-dense and ultra-stiff. E/m waves are regular energy shear waves caused by acceleration of electric charges. Electric charges have an architecture composed of a finer grain of shear wave. I cannot yet describe in detail what distinguishes that structure from the structure of other particles. That difficulty will be evident when I discuss the formation of fundamental particles from shear waves.

The origin of shear waves (other than e/m waves) is an interplay between pressure waves and minute variations in the foamy texture of the ether. The median size ether-foam bubbles is presumed to be roughly a Planck length (1.6e-35 m) across with a volume roughly 4e-105 m^3. At the scale of electrons, variations of individual bubbles average out very precisely, so the median size is the same everywhere (probably even beyond the visible universe). At the scale of a few Planck lengths, though, there must be blobs (for lack of a better word) where the median bubble size is significantly different. Such variations must surely affect the speed of pressure waves. A pressure wave imparts momentum to the blob going in and recovers it coming out; this leaves the blob ever so slightly out of its equilibrium position. Shear stress surrounding the blob pulls the blob back to equilibrium, and shear waves radiate like ripples on a pond perpendicular to the path of the pressure wave. That is my best guess as to the origin of regular energy in our universe. I can't say whether that process is happening in the present epoch; perhaps it ended when our universe became transparent, or even sooner.


All forces in our universe result from exchange of momentum between regular energy shear waves and dark energy pressure waves. I have no proof that momentum is exchanged between the two types of waves. I have no research budget and no laboratory in which to test this concept with chemical foams. I suspect it may take a huge block of foam and ultra-sensitive sensors to detect the effect, and I cannot be sure that chemical foams behave like the ether foam or the cosmic foam. A virtual experiment in cyberspace should come first.

When a pressure wave passes thru a shear wave in the shear wave's plane of polarity, one side of the pressure wave (moving against the sideways motion of the medium) is delayed and the other side (moving with the sideways motion of the medium) is advanced. The effect is extremely small compared to the wavelengths of the two waves, but in an infinite universe, any effect is significant. The magnitude and direction of the exchanged momentum is a function of phase and polarity.

With a white noise flux of dark energy coming equally from all directions, the flux is altered in a particular pattern around the shear wave. Consequently, one shear wave will "see" a disturbance of the dark energy flux in the direction of another shear wave. Depending on the phase and polarity relationship between the two shear waves, they may "feel" a force of attraction or repulsion toward each other. This is the ultimate source of all forces.


One such force of attraction can cause a pair of shear waves (with the right amplitude and wavelength) to orbit one another. Orbiting converts the radiant energy of the shear waves to the rest mass of a particle. Accelerating the particle, from one inertial reference frame to another, changes the energy of the orbiting shear waves in accordance with relativity. The change in energy of the orbiting shear waves is the change in mass of the particle. The shear waves continue to move at the speed of light in all reference frames, which accounts for the length contraction and time dilation of the particle.

The dark-energy flux disturbance around each shear wave is spun into a spiral pattern. Those spiral patterns may mesh with other spiral patterns to form larger particles. Some spiral patterns may be complementary or opposite to others, accounting for both electric and color charge. Unfortunately, I cannot yet explain how the patterns are complementary or opposite.

At greater distances, the spiral patterns become blurred, and inverse square forces take over. Again, I cannot yet explain in detail how this makes gravity different from electrostatic forces. There's a great deal of mathematical development to be done before the model can be used to derive the electrostatic and gravity constants from fundamental principles (or vice versa).

Make no mistake about it; this is NOT the wave theory of matter, WTM. Not even close!


Since antimatter behaves like regular matter in reverse time, and since alternate universes run in alternating time directions, it seems likely that the super-universe and sub-universe are anti-matter universes. If we can turn the clock back on expansion to an epoch when our cosmic foam and our ether foam existed at the same scale, we might discover that each universe shrank from the other universe's perspective because they were made of opposite types of matter. Of course, this raises the question of what medium both universes existed in at that time. Today, the sub-universe's cosmic foam is our ether foam; we exist as waves in that medium. At the beginning of time as we know it, both universes must have existed as waves in the cosmic foam of another universe.


No doubt, Asperger syndrome was an asset in developing my model up to its present form. The other side of that coin is that I am severely handicapped in interpersonal relationships and communication skills. It is difficult for me to reach out for help from others, and I am not qualified to lead any kind of project. I am living on so shallow security, and I don't anticipate becoming famous in this lifetime. So I don't mind sharing credit with anyone who can get the ball rolling, either as an administrator, researcher or technician. They don't give Nobel prizes to theorists; that honor will go to those who discover whether the theory is true or not.

at my website
7) Forums : General Topics : Why do you participate in Cosmology@Home? Who is the \"most surprising\" participant? (Message 9319)
Posted 8 Feb 2011 by Profile Philip Janes
I Googled "cosmology Washington" in the hope of finding someone in my home state with whom to share my cosmological model. I landed here. Perhaps I will get more than I was looking for. For now, I anticipate becoming a beneficiary of BOINC, more than a contributor. I envision several projects related to my model, which might require many days of computation.

I am resisting the urge to dive straight into a description of my model, here. Suffice it to say, for now, that a whole new branch of chaos theory is needed to analyze the exchange of momentum between regular energy and dark energy. I am not a mathematician, and my computer skills are lacking. I must plead with the community for volunteers to assist in illustrating my model with 3D animations, as well development of experimental tests.

For Christmas, I bought myself a new 6-core Acer computer from Sears online, which would have been about 10 times faster than my old computer. Unfortunately, it was dead on arrival, and it took 8 weeks of hounding Sears before they sent UPS to retrieve it. So my money is tied up for who knows how much longer before I can upgrade. I appreciate any tips on what's good for this project for under $2K. I'm considering a local shop that builds to order.