International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   The Theory of Relativity will begin to fall apart in 2016/2017 (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=303204)

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 06:39 AM

The Theory of Relativity will begin to fall apart in 2016/2017

The Elastic Universe

ABSTRACT

For decades, two aspects of nature have been overlooked and poorly / not understood.
• The one is Anisotropic Dark Flow Acceleration (DFA).
• The other is Relativistic Resistance against Motion (RR).
• The consequences for our picture of the Universe are tremendous.
• Prediction: The theory of relativity will begin to fall apart already this year (2016) and next year 2017, when the theory of relativity will be tested on board the ISS and galileo 5 & 6.

1. Anisotropic Dark Flow Acceleration.
In order for even a rather significant anisotropic acceleration to be measurable on Earth (e.g. with a gravimeter or various pendulums), it requires rather specific conditions to be present.

Regardless of the inclination of the solar system in proportion to a (theoretical) anisotropic acceleration direction (in the following referred to as the Dark Flow Acceleration Direction (Fig3.), (in short DFAD)), it wouldn’t be possible to directly measure such a DFA even if we presume its strength to be somewhere around 100 µGal. It is somewhat similar to the situation that it is also impossible to measure the acceleration of Earth’s orbit acceleration from Earth (given that everything on Earth is part of the same acceleration frame of reference).
However, there is an indirect method of measuring Dark Flow Acceleration (in short DFA), which is the same force / acceleration responsible for the Allais Effect [1]

The following are required:
1.The Earth must accelerate slightly opposite DFAD, and the cause of the acceleration must be due to the force of gravity of the Moon or the orbit acceleration of Earth.
2. A testing body on Earth (able to measure DFA) must be unaffected by the force accelerating Earth opposite DFA.
3. The measurement device must be situated at a place where it (more or less) can interact with DFA.

http://science27.com/wp-content/uplo...15/05/aa11.jpg
Figure1.

According to a NASA team led by Alexander Kashlinsky, the Dark Flow Direction is directed towards the area between Hydra, Vela and Centaurus.

The Allais Effect
Common for all reported Allais Effect [2] phenomena is acceleration of Earth away from DFAD.
All kinds of Allais Effects as well as gravitational anomalies reported by an eclipse – right before an eclipse or after an eclipse – are all caused due to interaction with DFA.

Figure 2.

The illustration shows a solar eclipse where the moon is located 1,500 km higher relative to a parallel, linear line, ‘X’, between the Sun and Earth. This corresponds to approx. 0.5°. In that way, the Moon’s acceleration due to gravity pulls the Earth in the northern direction with an acceleration which can be calculated by GM/r2 divided by a factor of 180 = 0.0000007m/s2(70 μgal).

Dark Flow [1] been discovered to happen in the Earth’s southern direction and is caused by the same acceleration that is also responsible for the Allais Effect. (The magnitude is about 70 μgal)
• Testing body A (see illustration) will therefore not be directly affected by the Earth’s upward acceleration and is thus exposed to influence by DFA.
• On the other hand, testing body B (near the Equator) will be in the same frame of reference as the accelerating globe and will therefore not by exposed to DFA.
• Neither will testing body D (and others located south of B) be exposed to DFA influence as the testing body must be capable of neutralising the upward acceleration.
• Testing body C is fully affected by the upwards acceleration of the Earth (in the same acceleration reference frame) and is therefore not exposed to DFA.
• Testing bodies located between A and up towards C will gradually be more affected by the Earth’s upwards acceleration and will therefore also be poor testing areas for detecting pendulum anomalies.
Another condition for revealing the Allais Effect is the fact that the measuring is usually the most effective right below the Moon. Naturally, this is because the impact forces (explained and illustrated by Fig 2), especially on the northern hemisphere, will be the strongest when the Moon is located directly above the point of measurement. Another precondition is that the testing body must be affected by a downwards pull towards the Sun/ Moon which will be capable of contributing to the downwards pull.

In many cases, the emergence of the anomalies is delayed.
The reason is that the Earth’s rotation first needs time to bring a testing body below into the correct position.
An example of this is the measurement of 2 August 2008. The measurement is described below.

http://www.science27.com/forum/aa4.jpg
Figure3.

The image shows that the onset of the 2008 August Allais anomaly was delayed for several hours.
The anomaly was measured several hours after the Solar Eclipse had finished.
The cause is that testing bodies A1 and B1 (in Romania and Ukraine) first had to be brought below the Moon (to position A2 and B2). Of course, this happened due to the rotation of the Earth.

The same principle for the anomaly delay is responsible for the below anomalies in 1961 and 2009 (and many more). [3] Graph sources [4] and [5]

Note that to the extent that the upward acceleration (of Earth) exceeds the (downward) DFA, exposure of DFA will be similarly weakened.

The theory is consistent with all proven Allais Effects except for the measurement of 26 January 2009 where the upward acceleration of the Earth must be presumed to be due to Earth’s orbit acceleration. This means that Earth’s inclination must be between 90.5° and 91° relative to the DFA axis, (+0.5° to 1.0° relative to the ecliptic axis). Later in this article, we will see why the solar system is angular relative to DFA.

2. Relativistic Resistance.
Preface
We know that it requires ever more energy to maintain constant acceleration.
No scientific method has ever proven that such relativistic resistance against motion only applies during the acceleration period. This theory claims that resistance against motion also happens by constant speed. We will refer to this as Relativistic Resistance against Motion (Hereafter “RR”). This, of course, means that Newton’s first law is incorrect.

Basics
A possible cause of this could be that the speed increment of an object causes energy and therefore also mass increment. Due to mass increment, the curvature of space near a moving object also increases.
Space resists deformation (e.g. the release of tension of space results in a gravitational wave). There are several reasons to believe that the process by which kinetic energy converts to the mass/energy is a reversible process. Space must have some kind of elastic nature woven together with matter, allowing space to convert and conserve relativistic energy to reversible elastic space deformation / tension.

So the Lorentz transformation is also an expression of the tension increase of space that a fast-moving object exerts. When the force (causing the speed of an object) stops, speed-related tension on space is automatically released too, so the Lorentz transformation factor is also a resistance factor. Relativistic resistance is a reversible process, and the Lorentz equation reflects the magnitude of resistance against motion and the magnitude of possible deceleration at the same time. A Resistance factor can be calculated based on this equation 1m/s/√(1 – v²/c²)-1.

Thus, this article claims that the Lorentz transformation factor on the one hand is the factor responsible for how much tension the speed of an object causes on space (due to M and E increasing), but on the other hand, the same transformation factor is also a factor reflecting the resistance against motion. It only requires a slight modification of the same equation to understand the resistance aspect mathematically. (Note that the deceleration is not linear).

When the energy / force responsible for accelerating an object stops pushing an object forward, the object decelerates. This is a universal law of nature, so all orbits are affected. Note that this only applies for matter, not for massless particles.

3. Consequences.
We have recently discovered several space probe anomalies, some decelerating and some accelerating. The biggest mystery has been why only small objects were affected and apparently not bigger objects such as astronomic objects. The answer is that all objects and all orbits are in fact affected, but many anomalies cancel out after a certain period, some have not yet been discovered, and some are only active in certain periods. Even Earth is constantly affected. As a whole, RR and DFA have several significant consequences. These can be verified and recognised in many orbits and trajectories. On the biggest scale, galaxies and clusters of galaxies are affected as well. The same law of nature is responsible for the strange orbits and motion that we believe is caused by so-called dark matter.

Thinking of RR as a reversible process combined with DFA leads us to a different understanding of the nature of the Universe whereby a long list of kinematic orbit and trajectory anomalies and mysteries [6] are solved nearly automatically. This includes the true cause of the orbit anomaly of Mercury’s precision anomaly [7]. Furthermore, this theory is the first step to understanding why general relativity and quantum gravity are inconsistent which each other and what went wrong.

Absolute Motion, Absolute Acceleration, and Relativistic Resistance against Motion

-----Figure 4.

Principle 1
As long as there is no orbit acceleration or motion away from the Dark Flow Direction (hereafter DFD), the maximum Dark Flow Speed (DFS) will be reached. As soon as this happens, the Dark Flow Acceleration (DFA) and Relativistic Resistance against Motion (RR) counteract each other. This is possible to calculate because the speed of Dark Flow is known (600km/s). What remains is therefore only to calculate the magnitude of RR by that speed based on the assumption that 600km/s must be the maximum possible Dark Flow speed, and the magnitude of DFA is thereby also (indirectly) known.

http://science27.com/wp-content/uplo...5/05/rr100.jpg
Dark Flow and a galaxy moving opposite
Figure 5.

Principle 2 – Local RR Magnitude.
The magnitude of RR (seen from an absolute motion frame of motion) always depends on true speed. When the dark flow is e.g. 300 km/s and a galaxy moves in the opposite direction at 200 km/s, the true, absolute speed of this galaxy is reduced to 100 km/s whereby RR is reduced to only = 5.6 ×10-8m/s. This means that speed is reduced to 1/3 compared to the dark flow, but RR is now 9 times less.

http://science27.com/forum/bue.jpg

Principle 3 - RRPKE
RR is a reversible process. This means that if no force pushes / pulls an object (further) towards the RR direction (see principle 4), the object will decelerate.
The RR affecting an object can be compared to a retracted arrow. All that is required for the retracted, potential, kinetic energy of the arrow to be released is that the force of the string is released (which also illustrates that motion opposite DFD will cause less RR, also simple to calculate based on the Lorentz equation).
Release of Retracted Potential Kinetic Energy (in short RRPKE) will affect any object moving more or less away from DFD (or any other RR affected direction) , depending on the angle of movement away from DFD.

http://science27.com/wp-content/uplo...5/05/dfa71.jpg
Figure 7.

Principle 4 – RR Directions
The RR dependent on speed is the same magnitude due to any movement perpendicular to the DFD axis (see P in the image to the right) as it is moving straight towards DFD while it is gradually decreasing, starting from perpendicular movement to movement opposite DFD (any northern direction).

Principle 5 – Local & Absolute Relativistic Resistance
Seen from a local perspective, absolute motion (for instance of the Earth or Solar System) against any direction is affected by RR. Regardless of the basic absolute motion speed of the astronomic object, RR must always be calculated based on the Lorentz equation based on a certain reference frame.
Even though Earth is already travelling fast (for example 300 km/s), this already affects the reference frame (time and distance) on Earth.

http://science27.com/wp-content/uplo.../orbitttt7.jpg
Spacecrafts X, Y, Z, Q and W will all decelerate.
Figure 8.

Principle 6
Any additional speed relative to the Dark Flow Speed (DFS) triggers additional (local) Relativistic Resistance against
Motion (RR), and it triggers additional local Release of Retracted Potential Kinetic Energy (RRPKE) by movement opposite any RR direction.

Orbit A – Circular orbits.
Predominantly Perpendicular Relative to the DFD
(inclination 45 to 90°)
Astronomic objects following these orbits appear to be unaffected by RR. However, this is not true. RR is a reversible 'elastic' property of space (see principle 3).
Thus, on the one hand, objects increasing its Dark Flow Speed will also feel an increasing RR.

On the other hand, as the object is continuously changing direction of movement, a circular orbit is also an expression of equal movement away from a direction in which it was previously affected by RR.
In a completely circular orbit, Release of Retracted Potential Kinetic Energy (in short RRPKE) on the one hand and RR on the other hand equalise each other completely since these are equal, opposite forces.

But object following elliptical orbits (Predominantly Perpendicular Relative to the DFD) is periodical following elongated path of the orbit and therefore following paths periodical dominated by RR, - due to the loss of support from RRPKE.. such object will decelerate.

Orbits B, C & D
Predominantly Linear to the DFD Axis (inclination 0 to 45°)
Objects following such orbits (both elliptical as well as circular) will periodically (when moving south) feel an increased RR (and will therefore be less affected by effective Dark Flow acceleration). This causes an orbit collapse.
By opposite motion (when moving towards the north), the objects feel a decreased RR and will therefore increasingly be affected by a stronger Dark Flow Acceleration. These contributions counteract each other.
By motion (45° north), DFA and RRPK will also cancel out each other, and no orbit anomalies will occur.
However, any motion towards another direction will cause an unexpected time dilation; this will be covered later in this article.

Galaxies and Clusters
Galaxies following an orbit inclination (or path) which is predominantly linear relative to DFA will collapse.
Initially, such galaxies will be gradually more compact and will finally end up as quasars. This also solves the mystery of why blue stars are found near Andromeda’s black hole – why do all galaxies not have black holes - and several similar mysteries.

http://science27.com/wp-content/uplo.../05/DFDORB.jpg
Figure 9.

Galaxies following the inclination of orbits predominantly perpendicular relative to DFA will expand due to the centrifugal force.
An object (for example spacecraft Q) moving (north) opposite DFD is affected by a relatively weaker RR than Earth and is consequently affected by larger effective acceleration towards the DFD (due to DFA). On the one hand, the Effective Dark Flow Acceleration (EDFA) will increase, but on the other hand, RRPKE will equalise the influence.

Figure 10.

This also means that orbits will always try to establish and maintain angular inclination relative to DFA. However, the force responsible is weak and may periodically be outplayed by stronger forces. This will be covered further below.

Orbit inclination more than +/- 45° relative to the plane of elliptic will lead to an orbit collapse due to RR. However, because an astronomic object is approaching the orbiting object during the process of collapse, they will increase speed.
This new aspect of science makes it possible to predict any space probe anomaly and also solves the already existing mysteries.
The theory even sheds light to the cause of the perihelion precision anomaly of Mercury (which is not solved by GR).

4. Prediction.
The magnitudes of these anomalies depend on true absolute speed (relative to the DFA axis).
For example, based on e.g. 7.66 km/s (which applies to ISS), the maximum resistance can be calculated to a factor = 3E-10 m/s. and for Near (speed 12.739 km/s) = 9E-10m/s.

Special Relativity (SR) can only be correct when understood in an absolute Dark Flow motion reference frame. Motion opposite Dark Flow will reduce RR. Of course, this also means that time will go faster when moving opposite DFA.
In 2016, it is planned that the ISS will be equipped with advanced testing equipment [8].
We will then realize partly that something is wrong with Special Relativity, and also that we do in fact face predictable evidence showing that Dark Flow must be real.
Furthermore the results of ISS measurement should be significant enough also to reveal that Relativist Resistance also is a matter of fact.

Figure 11.

ISS – Kinematic Time Dilation.. (orbit aligned with the dark flow inclination)
If we assume the ISS would follow an orbit aligned to the ecliptic south / north (dark flow) axis, deviation from the time dilation predicted by special relativity (during one ISS orbit) can be calculated as follows;

The ISS orbital period = 5561 second. A quarter of that period (1390 second) the ISS will gain time due to gradually slower absolute dark flow speed. When starting at ‘X’ (see fig11) the speed opposite dark flow, will be zero (seen from Earth), and from here increase until the dark flow speed is reduced with 7660 m/s at point ‘Z’.

The average Lorentz factor for this period (based on integral calculation) is factor 5,91e-11. If multiplied with 1390 second, - we get 8,2e-8 second. Because there are 2 periods the ISS will gain total 1,6 e-7 second during g these 2 periods. This represents the total gain of time, compared to a clock on earth.

The exact same principle applies for loss of time during the same two periods. This means that the gain and loss of time dilation for these 2 periods will cancel out. Or shortly spoken all what is left is to conclude is that we will see no kinematic time dilation during these 2 periods the ISS moves from X to Z, and also not when ,moving from Z to Y (provided the orbit inclination is precise aligned with the dark flow axis). Therefore (since this only apply for the half orbit) in such case we will only measure 50% of the kinematic time dilation predicted by special relativity.

But the inclination of the ISS is not aligned with the dark flow axis, but between 20 and 25° inclined relative to that axis, therefore in reality we shall instead expect to measure nor only 50% but rather 75% of the kinematic time dilation predicted by special relativity. (Further calculations will follow to demonstrate this.)
Off course the same principle applies for all kind of orbit, and also the Galileo 5 and 6 satellites now dedicated for scientific test..

Galileo 5 & 6 Kinematic Time Dilation (orbits aligned with the dark flow inclination)
If we assume a Galileo 5 and 6 satellite would follows orbits aligned to the ecliptic south / north (dark flow) axis, - deviation from the time dilation during one Galileo (5 and 6) satellite orbit can be calculated as follows:

The orbital period = 46800 second. A quarter of that period (11700 second) the ISS will gain time due to gradually slower absolute dark flow speed. When starting at ‘X’ (see fig11) the satellite speed opposite dark flow, will be zero (seen from Earth), and from here increase until the dark flow speed is reduced with 3800 m/s at point ‘Z’.

The average Lorentz factor for this period (based on integral calculation) factor; 2,74e-11.
If multiplied with 11700 second, - we get; 3,21e-7 second. Because there are 2 periods the satellites will gain total 6,41 e-7 second per during g these 2 periods. This represents the gain of time, compared to a clock on earth.

The exact same principle applies for loss of time during the same two periods. This means that the gain and loss of time dilation for these 2 periods will cancel out. Or shortly spoken all what is left is to conclude is that we will see no kinematic time dilation during these 2 periods the satellites moves from X to Z, and also not when ,moving from Z to Y (provided the orbit inclination is precise aligned with the dark flow axis). Therefore in such case we will only measure 50% of the kinematic time dilation predicted by special relativity.

Galileo 5 & 6 Kinematic Time Dilation (orbit 45° inclination relative to the dark flow axis)
If we assume a Galileo 5 and 6 satellite would follows orbits 45° inclined relative to the ecliptic south / north axis, deviation from the time dilation during one Galileo satellite orbit can be calculated as follows:

The orbital period = 46800 second. A quarter of that period (11700 second) the ISS will gain time due to gradually slower absolute dark flow speed. When starting at ‘X’ (see fig11) the speed opposite dark flow, will be zero (seen from Earth), and from here increase until the dark flow speed is reduced with 3800 m/s at point ‘Z’.

Let’s assume the orbit altitude speed and time is the same as calculated above, again we have 2 period duration of 11700 s.
The max speed opposite dark flow is now only; 3800m/s/2 = 1900 m/s (because of the 45° inclination)
The average Lorentz factor can (based on integral calculation and based on the speed 1900 m/s) be calculated to =6, 32e-12, -per period, and thus; - 2 period *11700 second * factor 6, 32e-12 = 1,48e-7 s.

The require time dilation to cancel out the SR effect for these 2 periods was (above) calculated to 6,42 e-7 s.
But now we have only an average calculated to be 1,48e-7s. This is only 23% compared to before, and therefore this time we shall only expect the half of that (11,5%) deviation from the predicted SR effect, based on one complete satellite orbit. Which mean the kinematic time dilation predicted by SR is now; - 88, 5% correct.

Galileo 5 & 6 Kinematic Time Dilation (orbit 22,5° inclination relative to the dark flow axis)
In the same way we can calculate the effect when the inclination is 22,5° (and therefore the true speed opposite dark flow 2850 m/s) , - the average Lorentz factor is now 1,5e-11 = time gain of; 3,51e-7 s. for 2 periods. Compared to 6,42 e-7 s. - which mean that the SR prediction is now 27,5% off, or only; - 72,5% correct.

Galileo 5 & 6 – Calculation, loss of Altitude
When the ISS moves from the RR Starting point and forwards to the RR Culmination point, the ISS will due to the weakening influence of RRPKE , and hence gradually dominating influence of RR, - also lose altitude.
According to special relativity we shall expect loss of time on the ISS clock during both periods. This loss can be calculated to 2*1390 second multiplied with the Lorentz factor 3e-10s (=8,34e-7seconds).

Max speed lose per period = 1390 s. * factor 5,91e-11m/s = 0,00000008 m/s
Average speed lose per period = 1390 s. * factor 5,91e-11m/s /2 = 0,00000004 m/s

Orbit circumference lose per period = 1390 s. * 0,00000004 m/s = 0,00005560 meter
Radius lose per period = 1112 s.* 0,00000004 m/s /3,14/2 = 0,00000885 meter
2 periods = 2 * 0,00000885 = 0.00000177 meter

Estimated altitude loss - GPS satellite altitude 21800 m. - v= 3800 m/s - period 46800 seconds

Max speed lose per period = 11700 s. * factor 4e-12m/s = 0,000000047 m/s
Average speed lose per period = 11700 s. * factor 4e-12m/s/2 = 0,000000023 m/s

Orbit circumference lose per period = 11700 s. * 0,000000023 = 0,000273780 meter
Radius lose per period = 0,000273780m. /3,14/2 = 0,000044 meter

The calculation above shows the altitude loss, due to motion towards the dark flow direction. This is caused by weakening RRPKE influence, and therefore dominating RR influence. If the orbit at the same time is elliptical, the lost will increase further , see calculation here [7]

Figure 12. Galileo 5 & 6 (red cirle)

Galileo 5 & 6 Periods of Relativistic Resistance (RR) & Orbit Interaction.
Relativistic Resistance against motion applies against all direction except motion opposite the dark flow direction.

Period 1 & 3 – Elliptic orbit.
The magnitude of period 1 & 3 depend of the eccentricity (how elongated part of orbits is),
Object following elliptical orbits is periodical following elongated path, and therefore following paths periodical dominated by RR. This happens due to the loss of support from RRPKE..
Read more at; Calculation of Mercury’s precision anomaly [7].

Period 2
When moving straight towards the dark flow direction, there are no RRPKE at all. Therefore such object will be affected by maximum RR. The principle how to calculate the loss of altitude even in circular orbits is shown above.

The decelerating influence will interact with the existing deceleration and accelerating periods of the satellite orbit. When a satellite move against perihelion, - the period of (natural) acceleration, - will decrease, (due to interaction with a RR period). And when the satellite move towards aphelion, - the natural period of deceleration, - will increase (also due to interaction with a RR period).

Two RR periods can (more or less) take place in the same (natural) acceleration or deceleration periods. Extended RR periods will escalate the anomaly. A RR period can also split in 2, - first decrease the (natural) deceleration period of the satellite and then decrease the (natural) acceleration period. Such interaction will wakening the anomaly magnitude due to shorter escalation periods..

To calculate all this very precise, - computer software is very important.

Note..
It was not possible to find exact orbit details that apply for Galileo 5 & 6. All data is only theoretical.

The consequences of ISS measurements:
• That precise measurements on board the ISS (and Galileo 5 and 6) will contradict the theory of relativity – whereby the theory in its current form simply cannot survive.
• That the cause of the unexpected result can only be that an absolute relativistic movement direction frame exists.
• That the Special Theory of Relativity can only be properly understood in an absolute motion frame of reference.
• That the theory of relativity must be completely reconsidered.
• That we are forced to critically review the foundation of the theory of relativity and (on the one hand) consider which aspects of the foundation substantiate the existing knowledge we have of e.g. GPS and (on the other hand) which aspects of the theory must be based on wrong conclusions / interpretations.
• That the current interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment must be rejected.
• That the ISS measurement substantiates / proves that Dark Flow is real (which is also supported by WMAP).
• That the ISS measurement evidently confirms that there has been no reason to reject the ether theory.
• That we are back in the end of the 18th century where it was found that an ether must exist.
• That the only candidate able to explain the correct interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment is the gravitational fields of Earth which must consist of the same elastic "substance" as the ether. The ether therefore follows Earth and is therefore not an ether colliding with Earth.
• That a new theory of general relativity is necessary (a new ‘elastic space theory’ can easily replace the prevailing theory of what gravity really is and even reveal what so-called dark energy is, and much more).
• And finally, the loss of altitude that apply for ISS and Galileo that can be measured, and must be taken serious as well, - because this is the first little step to understand that RR too is an evidently fact, which is the last important brick necessary to be able really to understand the new paradigm we certainly will see.
Even though the theory of relativity begins to fall apart, a good part of the theory remains intact.
Time dilation in gravitational fields as well as consequences by space travel will remain almost intact, but we will be forced to realise that the relativistic effects only apply in a absolute reference of motion as well as the ruler (and everything else) always stretches proportionally to the ‘stretch’ of time - or in short: that be live in an elastic universe.

Figure 13.

Note.
Several facts support that our solar system is almost completely perpendicular to the DFA axis. As mentioned above, the cause of this is that RR and EDFA (periodically) maintain such a perpendicularly inclination of the solar system (relative to the DFA Axis). But a weak periodical deviation from the ecliptic is caused by Saros Cycles [9].

This means that the majority of galaxies and solar systems all should have exact angular inclinations relative to DFA, but since this not is the case, a periodically more dominating force must be considered such as this overlooked aspect of science [9].

5. Orbit Dynamics

In the wake of FGC1287 (Fig. 15) follows a tail of gas and stars which get lost [9].
The cause of such losses is periodic galaxy collapses (due to periods dominated by mainly linear inclination relative to DFA). During such periods, mass (stars etc.) is forced towards the centre of a galaxy whereby the central mass density increases significantly and therefore causes a very fast central orbit speed.

However, when either the orbit inclination of the galaxy is changing or when a part of the inner orbital mass is changing its inclinations whereby at least one of these factors becomes mainly perpendicular (relative to DFA), the centrifugal force and the already fast internal orbit speed can cause mass to be ejected from the centre (which has also been observed by Arp). Halton [12] (Fig 14 and Fig16), for example observed in NGC4319 and NGC 7603 (and many more galaxies).

Fig17. The cause of ring galaxies is that very dense galaxies that have changed direction predominantly move angular relative to DFA. This allows the centrifugal force to force stars away from the centre. The centrifugal force is the strongest near the centre, thus central stars are forced faster outwards than stars further out. Gravity is also stronger near the centre due to larger mass density, and therefore an inner core of stars is affected enough by the gravity pull to avoid the centrifugal force and to remain near the centre.

Fig18. A galaxy which mainly moves linear relative to DFAD will collapse. A long-term influence of such motion is the cause of quasars.

Fig19. The mass of the 2 galaxies is the same, but the size is very different. The cause of this is different angular motion relative to DFAD. Galaxies periodically collapse, and periodically they extend their size.

6. Conclusion.
Already in 2016 / 2017, we shall see that the theory of relativity will see its first crack. At first, it will be necessary to reconsider the interpretation of especially one of the foundations of the theory of relativity which has already been mentioned above, i.e. the misinterpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment.
Given that you will be forced to acknowledge that Dark Flow is a reality, our world view is literally in free fall. The universe therefore finds itself in a verifiably anisotropic motion (Dark Flow) whereby many questions which also require answers will arise.
One of the biggest and most pressing questions therefore is to find the answer to whether or not the Allais Effect may be the proof that a significant anisotropic acceleration is linked to Dark Flow.
Thus, you rather quickly (at least in theory) will be forced to relate to whether or not Earth’s acceleration in a Dark Flow is unhindered and therefore whether or not Earth sooner or later will reach (the unthinkable and impossible) speed, “C”.

Intuitively as well as logically, we know that this is impossible. ”Something” will have to stop Earth before it reaches “C”.
Were we close to finding that “something” (a mysterious, braking force) already when Pioneer space probes were sent into space several decades ago? Were we already back then on the threshold of acquiring new knowledge? A knowledge which, unfortunately, was swept under the carpet by NASA? See.. [15]...

The author has no doubt. ISS measurements in 2016 will not only mean that our world view will need adjustments, it will also be the beginning of an entirely new world view where not just the cause for so-called Dark Matter will become obviously evident, but where so-called Dark Energy will also be seen as a natural part of the elastic nature of the universe – where Big Crunch and Big Bang will replace each other.

The theory also shows that the theory of relativity is not the real theory for gravity.
As a replacement, it should be considered if the elastic space from the 1800s should be reintroduced in a version where the elastic feature of space is ‘woven’ with matter whereby gravity continues to be a force the way Sir Isaac Newton believed it to be.

Abbreviations
• CPF = The Centripetal Force
• CFF = The Centrifugal Force
• DFA = Dark Flow Acceleration
• DFD = Dark Flow Direction
• RR = Relativistic Resistance against Motion
• RRPKE = Release of Retracted Potential Kinetic Energy
• KE = Kinetic Energy

7 References.
[1] Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/...10/10-023.html
[2] Allais Effect Measurement http://www.science27.com/allais
[3] Allais Measurements http://www.science27.com/allais/more
[4] CORRELATED ANOMALOUS EFFECTS OBSERVED DURING A SOLAR ECLIPSE T.J. Goodey A.F. Pugach D. Olenici http://www.science27.com/allais/2008/2008.pdf
[5] Observations of Correlated Behavior of Two Light Torsion Balances and a Paraconical Pendulum in Separate Locations during the Solar Eclipse of January 26th, 2009 A. F. Pugach1 and D. Olenici2 http://www.science27.com/allais/2009...enici_1_en.pdf
[6] Anomalies and mysteries the theory solves. http://www.science27.com/orbit/
[7] The Precession of Mercury Perihelion (Bjarne Lorenzen) http://www.science27.com/mercury
[8] Atomic Clock Will Fly to Space Station in 2016 http://www.space.com/26897-pharao-at...e-station.html
[9] Saros (astronomy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saros_(astronomy)
[10] Magnetism http://www.science27.com/magnetism
[11] Mystery Galaxy with an 800,000 Light-Year Long Tail http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog...long-tail.html
[12] Wikipedia Halton Arp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halton_Arp
[13] Disk shaped orbits of dwarf galaxies are observed orbiting galaxies http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog...formation.html
[14] Mysterious orbits of dwarf galaxies found all over the nearby Universe http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/...arby-universe/
[15] The Pioneer Anomaly: an inconvenient reality or NASA's 12 year misconception? Paul G. ten Boom http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.0537

 psionl0 2nd February 2016 06:58 AM

That is a well presented post. It will take me some time (in my reference frame :D) to digest it.

I wonder if the substance will match the style.

 Tolls 2nd February 2016 07:14 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by psionl0 (Post 11105977) That is a well presented post. It will take me some time (in my reference frame :D) to digest it. I wonder if the substance will match the style.
Well, not to sound too much like a grumpy bottom, but I would argue that not many ground-breaking physics theories are presented to the world on fairly obscure, non-technical, internet discussion forums.

Call me a curmudgeon, but I would expect this to appear in some physics-based journal rather than here.

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 07:32 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Tolls (Post 11106005) Well, not to sound too much like a grumpy bottom, but I would argue that not many ground-breaking physics theories are presented to the world on fairly obscure, non-technical, internet discussion forums. Call me a curmudgeon, but I would expect this to appear in some physics-based journal rather than here.
The theory of relativity is a holy cow, it is forbidden not to fall on you knees

 AdamSK 2nd February 2016 07:41 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106041) The theory of relativity is a holy cow, it is forbidden not to fall on you knees
The theory of relativity is used every day in correlating space and ground clocks, not to mention doing high energy particle physics. It's not so well-regarded because it's a "sacred cow;" it's well-regarded because it works so consistently well.

 Gord_in_Toronto 2nd February 2016 07:42 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106041) The theory of relativity is a holy cow, it is forbidden not to fall on you knees
You don't have to convince us. Just pay a real physicist to verify your theory and calculations and both your names will replace Galileo, Newton and Einstein in every Physics text in the entire World.

Good luck.

Remember us when you are famous. :w2:

 Tolls 2nd February 2016 07:51 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106041) The theory of relativity is a holy cow, it is forbidden not to fall on you knees
But what, exactly, do you expect to happen here, in this forum? Even if someone here who understood physics enough to trawl through your post decided "hey, that looks interesting", what do you then expect to happen?

Or can we come back to this thread in 2 years and see if our prediction is correct?

If I were convinced by my own theory I'd pick a venue I could publicise it to people who matter. If nothing else I'd be more likely to encounter someone who might spot flaws in it.

 Crossbow 2nd February 2016 07:53 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11105954) The Elastic Universe ABSTRACT For decades, two aspects of nature have been overlooked and poorly / not understood. The one is Anisotropic Dark Flow Acceleration (DFA). The other is Relativistic Resistance against Motion (RR). The consequences for our picture of the Universe are tremendous. Prediction: The theory of relativity will begin to fall apart already this year (2016) and next year 2017, when the theory of relativity will be tested on board the ISS and galileo 5 & 6. ... stopped reading here ...
In the first place, one is not supposed to simply copy-n-paste large sections of data from other websites and post them here.

In the second place, I have seen several attempts to dispute the Theory of Relativity here at the Forum and none of them has ever been worth the paper that they were written on.

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 07:56 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AdamSK (Post 11106057) The theory of relativity is used every day in correlating space and ground clocks, not to mention doing high energy particle physics. It's not so well-regarded because it's a "sacred cow;" it's well-regarded because it works so consistently well.
1. The GPS System is not a Scientific test system
2. In the LHC RR and RRPKE cancel out

 sackett 2nd February 2016 08:14 AM

Why do you write that way? Do you have a native language?

 AdamSK 2nd February 2016 08:21 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106087) 1. The GPS System is not a Scientific test system
No, but the GPS system takes gravitational and relativistic time dilation into account when synchronizing orbital clocks and Earth clocks.

Quote:
 2. In the LHC RR and RRPKE cancel out
Which of these accounts for the time dilation effects observed with high-energy particles?

 Dancing David 2nd February 2016 09:03 AM

:popcorn1

Haven't we visited the Dark Flow before?

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 09:21 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by sackett (Post 11106117) Why do you write that way? Do you have a native language?
danish

 WhatRoughBeast 2nd February 2016 09:21 AM

Woo-hoo!

And I do mean woo.

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 09:26 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AdamSK (Post 11106134) No, but the GPS system takes gravitational and relativistic time dilation into account when synchronizing orbital clocks and Earth clocks.?
You shall only expect less than 5% of the GPS to reveal significant anomalies.
Clock synchronization happens automatically (controlled by computers) anomalies can easy be hidden.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AdamSK (Post 11106134) Which of these accounts for the time dilation effects observed with high-energy particles?
Question not understood

 Dave Rogers 2nd February 2016 09:27 AM

If the theory of relativity is able to predict the results obtained from the ISS and Galileo 5/6 up to the end of 2017, will you please come back and admit you were wrong?

Dave

 Ziggurat 2nd February 2016 09:37 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106257) Question not understood
Exactly. You don't even know what you don't know, and you don't know a lot.

 RussDill 2nd February 2016 09:41 AM

It's really easy. How about boiling it down. Just show us an experiment that can be consistently used to show results that are contrary to those predicted by general relativity.

 ponderingturtle 2nd February 2016 09:45 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106257) You shall only expect less than 5% of the GPS to reveal significant anomalies. Clock synchronization happens automatically (controlled by computers) anomalies can easy be hidden.
So we are moving into not just scientist being wrong but a conspiracy? To what end, I mean showing that the theory of relativity breaks down in ordinary situations like satellites would be an easy ticket to the Nobel Prize. Why do all these scientists hate fame and fortune so much?

 RussDill 2nd February 2016 09:46 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106257) Clock synchronization happens automatically (controlled by computers) anomalies can easy be hidden.
So there is a conspiracy by all those involved in GPS satellites and receivers to hide faults in relativity? What is the motivation? GPS is not some super secret thing. The workings of it can be understood by anyone who cares to take the time. If there were some kind of systematic clock drift, it'd be easily detectable.

You don't even need any chips or software that has been tainted by the massive GPS conspiracy. You can decode the signal directly with software defined radio:

http://sdrgps.blogspot.com/2015/12/f...ps-fix-in.html

 Roger Ramjets 2nd February 2016 10:04 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106041) The theory of relativity is a holy cow, it is forbidden not to fall on you knees
All praise the Holy Cow!

You are on your knees now, right? No? Expect a visit from the relativity police soon...

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 10:21 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 11106283) Exactly. You don't even know what you don't know, and you don't know a lot.
But I know what I know

 Ziggurat 2nd February 2016 10:22 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106375) But I know what I know
I begin to doubt even that.

 AdamSK 2nd February 2016 10:22 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106257) Question not understood
Particles have a characteristic half life. If you accelerate them to near light speed, they experience time dilation relative to our frame and they decay at a greatly reduced rate.

In my undergraduate physics coursework we actually did this experiment with muons; it is a known and predictable effect.

How do you explain this effect under your model?

 ferd burfle 2nd February 2016 10:24 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 11106302) So we are moving into not just scientist being wrong but a conspiracy? To what end, I mean showing that the theory of relativity breaks down in ordinary situations like satellites would be an easy ticket to the Nobel Prize. Why do all these scientists hate fame and fortune so much?

Dig deep enough into any, uh, innovative theory and I think you'll run into a conspiracy theory. It's the standard answer to the "how come you're not rich and famous?" question.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 10:25 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by RussDill (Post 11106293) It's really easy. How about boiling it down. Just show us an experiment that can be consistently used to show results that are contrary to those predicted by general relativity. /end thread.
1. The pioneer anomalies (not solved but swept under the Carpet)
2. Flyby anomalies
3. Galaxy dynamics
4. Cluster dynamics
5. Allais Effect

 AdamSK 2nd February 2016 10:27 AM

How are the Pioneer anomalies not solved by anisotropic radiation pressure?

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 10:28 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 11106302) So we are moving into not just scientist being wrong but a conspiracy? To what end, I mean showing that the theory of relativity breaks down in ordinary situations like satellites would be an easy ticket to the Nobel Prize. Why do all these scientists hate fame and fortune so much?
Rather ask why is this theory now tested in 3 different orbits ?

 AdamSK 2nd February 2016 10:29 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106396) Rather ask

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 10:36 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AdamSK (Post 11106382) Particles have a characteristic half life. If you accelerate them to near light speed, they experience time dilation relative to our frame and they decay at a greatly reduced rate. In my undergraduate physics coursework we actually did this experiment with muons; it is a known and predictable effect. How do you explain this effect under your model?
Try to shut some muons towards North, but be aware the dark flow speed is relative slow 600km/s

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 10:42 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AdamSK (Post 11106393) How are the Pioneer anomalies not solved by anisotropic radiation pressure?
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.0537.pdf

 Ziggurat 2nd February 2016 10:45 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106390) [*]The pioneer anomalies (not solved but swept under the Carpet)
It has been solved.

Quote:
 [*]Galaxy dynamics[*]Cluster dynamics
These only conflict with GR if you assume certain mass distributions. Can you independently prove those mass distributions? No, you cannot. Therefore, you cannot conclude from these that GR is wrong. Plus, these are observations, not experiments.

Quote:
 [*]Allais Effect
Check out the Wikipedia page. Basically, there's no reason to think that this is anything other than an artifact of the rapid and localized cooling that occurs during an eclipse, and experiments not being properly shielded from the influence of this cooling.

Now, can your alternative correctly calculate the precession of Mercury's orbit? Can it correctly calculate gravitational redshift? Can it correctly calculate Gravity Probe B's results? Can it correctly calculate gravitational lensing?

I'll save you the trouble: no, it cannot calculate any of these things.

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 10:46 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by RussDill (Post 11106293) It's really easy. How about boiling it down. Just show us an experiment that can be consistently used to show results that are contrary to those predicted by general relativity. /end thread.
If you don't pray to the same god, you will very easy be kicked out

 Bjarne 2nd February 2016 11:01 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 11106422) It has been solved.
Niet
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.0537.pdf

Quote:
 These only conflict with GR if you assume certain mass distributions. Can you independently prove those mass distributions? No, you cannot. Therefore, you cannot conclude from these that GR is wrong. Plus, these are observations, not experiments.
Problems with Einstein's General Theory of Relativity

LIGO another example

Quote:
 Check out the Wikipedia page. Basically, there's no reason to think that this is anything other than an artifact of the rapid and localized cooling that occurs during an eclipse, and experiments not being properly shielded from the influence of this cooling.
Its not so simple, the new theory will bring this aspect of science out of the darkness.

Quote:
 Now, can your alternative correctly calculate the precession of Mercury's orbit?
http://www.science27.com/mercury

Quote:
 Can it correctly calculate gravitational redshift?
The cause of this is misunderstood http://science27.com/abstract/

Quote:
 Can it correctly calculate gravitational lensing?
The cause of this is misunderstood http://science27.com/gravitational-lensing

 ponderingturtle 2nd February 2016 11:03 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106396) Rather ask why is this theory now tested in 3 different orbits ?
It has been tested in many ways and experiment corresponds to theory. So any newly proposed theory would need to reduce to relativity in ordinary situations. Time really does slow when things go fast and closer to massive objects. This is a simple fact.

 Ziggurat 2nd February 2016 11:08 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106446) Problems with Einstein's General Theory of Relativity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mQhZB5lmvk
You don't actually understand that video, or its implications, or you would know it's not relevant here.

 Jrrarglblarg 2nd February 2016 11:11 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106427) If you don't pray to the same god, you will very easy be kicked out
We pray to the gods of Replicable Results, so yeah, probably.

 RussDill 2nd February 2016 11:16 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106446) Niet http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.0537.pdf Problems with Einstein's General Theory of Relativity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mQhZB5lmvk LIGO another example Its not so simple, the new theory will bring this aspect of science out of the darkness. http://www.science27.com/mercury The cause of this is misunderstood http://science27.com/abstract/ The cause of this is misunderstood http://science27.com/gravitational-lensing
So in other words, you have zero experimental data that contradicts predictions of relativity.

ETA: Geez, I tried to spend some time and figure out what the hell they were trying to do on the mercury page. Just complete and utter gobbly gook.

 AdamSK 2nd February 2016 11:20 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106411) Try to shut some muons towards North, but be aware the dark flow speed is relative slow 600km/s
That doesn't come even close to answering my question.

We speed up particles and it makes their decay rates greatly decrease exactly as special relativity predicts. If you don't accept that time dilation is real, what is your explanation for this phenomenon?

 jaydeehess 2nd February 2016 11:43 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bjarne (Post 11106041) The theory of relativity is a holy cow, it is forbidden not to fall on you knees
I call B. S.
ToR is no more a sacred cow than was Newtonian physics. Relativity managed to fill in blanks not explained by Newton such as the orbit of Mercury.

Relativity is highly unlikely to fall apary. More likely is that a new refinement will come along in the same manner as relativity refined Newtonian physics.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:35 PM.