PDA

View Full Version : JoeBakhos' reversed gravity idea



JoeBakhos
2018-Dec-08, 12:14 AM
I propose that gravity reverses and becomes repulsive at approximately 1.5 million light years. It becomes more and more strongly repulsive, reaches a peak, and then decreases trailing off to zero.

This does away both with dark matter and also dark energy. It would explain why most galaxies are accelerating away from each other – leaving no need for cosmological expansion or dark energy.

It also explains gravitational rotational rates without the need of dark matter. Galaxies are pushing dust and gas into the interstitial space between galaxies. This dust and gas means that each galaxy or small galaxy cluster is surrounded by a womb of material at a distance that repulsive gravity operates. This repulsive womb, along with the pressure from other galaxies, holds outer stars in place, explaining higher than expected rotation.
You may read the justification for this theory here, along with responses to objections at the bottom:
<link removed>

I think that General Relativity can be adjusted such that we keep time dilation, BUT ditch curved or dilated space. I.e. we should work with flat, 3D , Euclidean space + time dilation. I explain about this in the notes at the bottom of the article.

slang
2018-Dec-08, 10:24 AM
Hello JoeBakhos. Welcome to Cosmoquest.

New theories or ideas that go against mainstream science may only be advocated in this section of the forum. Please be aware that special rules apply, ie a maximum duration of of 30 days, your requirement to answer every pertinent question or challenge, and more. I suggest reading the relevant forum rules, and the special sticky threads in this subforum, to prevent any future difficulties.

If you do not wish to defend your idea here, please let us know and we'll close the thread (and probably remove any links).

(Note to other readers: this post was moved from this thread (https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?170597-Negative-mass-say-what) to its own ATM thread.)

giorgio
2018-Dec-08, 03:57 PM
Two questions:

1. The CURRENT form of gravitational force is (and has been ever since the humans observed it) ATTRACTIVE, no sign of "repulsion". How do you explain that the Universe has been EXPANDING, thus nullifying your theory?

2. The EXPANSION of the Universe is accelerating. Your theory does not explain this phenomenon, so how would you account for the accelerated expansion?

Strange
2018-Dec-08, 04:26 PM
I propose that gravity reverses and becomes repulsive at approximately 1.5 million light years. It becomes more and more strongly repulsive, reaches a peak, and then decreases trailing off to zero.

This does away both with dark matter and also dark energy. It would explain why most galaxies are accelerating away from each other leaving no need for cosmological expansion or dark energy.

Can this explain why the expansion of acceleration started quite late in the universe's existence (about 5 billion years ago). Did it start being repulsive at this time? If so, why?


It also explains gravitational rotational rates without the need of dark matter.

Can you show, in mathematical detail, that this model reproduces the observed galactic rotation curves and the orbits within galactic clusters?


Galaxies are pushing dust and gas into the interstitial space between galaxies.

What evidence is here for this?


This repulsive womb, along with the pressure from other galaxies, holds outer stars in place, explaining higher than expected rotation.

You are suggesting that the surrounding matter is pushing matter into the galaxy. Does Newton's Shell Theorem not apply here?

I had a quick look at your link. There seem to be lots of erroneous statements there which I will comment on if/when you post them here. (You seem to spend an awful lot of effort explaining why there can only be three spatial dimensions. But as no one thinks otherwise, that seems a bit pointless.)

Reality Check
2018-Dec-12, 01:00 AM
I propose that gravity reverses and becomes repulsive at approximately 1.5 million light years. It becomes more and more strongly repulsive, reaches a peak, and then decreases trailing off to zero.

This does away both with dark matter and also dark energy.
Hi JoeBakhos.
I assume that you mean that gravity reverses at scales of "approximately 1.5 million light years". Or we have a "we are special and at the center of the universe" fallacy.

One line of evidence for dark matter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter) is galaxy rotation curves (the velocities of stars inside galaxies). You mention this. Galaxies are much smaller than 1.5 million light years.
There are structures in the universe that are held together by gravity ands are larger than 1.5 million light years.
The Andromeda Galaxy is 2.5 million years away and not being repulsed (it will eventually collide with the Milky Way).
Galaxies did not exist at the Big Bang and need gravity to collapse from clouds of gas. But you have no gravity at large distances, i.e. in the early universe.

Thus your idea is incorrect.

If we remove curved spacetime from General Relativity then it is Special Relativity and no longer describes gravity. Using "flat, 3D , Euclidean space" brings us back to classical physics with no time dilation, etc. It is the relativity part of SR and GR that give the measured time dilations due to speed and gravity. A valid ATM idea cannot just plug time dilation into classical physics, it has to show how time dilation happens. Otherwise we could throw all physics away and just list physical phenomena!

cjameshuff
2018-Dec-12, 02:10 AM
On top of what others have said...gravitational lensing shows no evidence of gravity reversing direction at any distance. Lensing does, however, show some objects where the mass does not line up with the visible matter, the Bullet Cluster being a clear example. And rotation curve and lensing observations show galaxies where the ratio between mass and visible mass varies widely from the norm. Dragonfly 44 has about the same total mass as the Milky Way, but almost all of that appears to be dark matter.

giorgio
2018-Dec-15, 04:08 PM
Two questions:

1. The CURRENT form of gravitational force is (and has been ever since the humans observed it) ATTRACTIVE, no sign of "repulsion". How do you explain that the Universe has been EXPANDING, thus nullifying your theory?

2. The EXPANSION of the Universe is accelerating. Your theory does not explain this phenomenon, so how would you account for the accelerated expansion?

Are you going to answer?

Swift
2018-Dec-18, 07:31 PM
JoeBakhos

It was explained when you first posted that you must defend your idea here on CQ. Yet after your first post, you never returned, nor did you answer the questions put to you. It seems you are just advertising your discussion on another forum.

Therefore, the thread is closed, your link is removed, and you have had your one chance with this idea here. Oh, and you get an infraction too.