Latest revision 02-12-2022

An Open Letter to the Scientific Community

Fred Hoyle once said "anytime you point
a new telescope at the sky now you are only going to find what you already know is up there."
Has modern physics become complacent? New science is where the real opportunities lie, so we're focusing on
the holes in physics theory instead.

In Léon Brillouin's book
Relativity Reexamined we read on page 10 about the Theory of
General Relativity:
a splendid piece of mathematics built on quicksand and leading to more and more
mathematics about cosmology (a typical **science-fiction** process). And on page 31 it reads:
Einstein introduced a very heavy mathematical structure that goes much beyond any physical need.
A great deal of Big Bang cosmology is formulated in terms of this overly complicated (GR) mathematics.
One of our goals is to replace that overkill by mathematical machinery that is more easily understood
and maybe better balanced with empirical evidence as well.

However, quite in general it may be said that *any* theory of cosmology, whether standard or
non-standard, is close to fiction.
*Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away* (: Philip K. Dick).
And the simple fact is that *we don't really know where our believing stops*.
Example given: How to measure a distance of one thousandth of the proton diameter?
Really?

General Relativity is rejected; Special Relativity is retained, though.
The reason is that the latter, contrary to GR, is consistent with Quantum Mechanics and - even better - contributes to it.

Unified Alternative Cosmology (__UAC__) starts with the assumption that the universe is infinite
in space and time. Because of Russel's Paradox and *Infinitum Actu Non Datur* this effectively means that
**"There is no universe"** at all; in the sense that there would exist something that contains
everything. Our *infinite universe*, according to Gauss' dictum, is just
a way of speaking.

Our theory then proceeds with a **hypothesis by
Halton Arp**
: *the (rest) mass of atomic particles is increasing with (proper) time*. Abbreviation:
__VPM__ = __V__arying elementary __P__article rest __M__ass. Arp's hypothesis is shown to be
compatible with a static Euclidean universe, which is eternal in "atomic time" and has moments of creation
(i.e. one or more beginnings) in "orbital time". In this model, gravitation is completely separated from
all other forces in nature; it is e.g. distinct from quantum mechanics and electrodynamics, meaning that
Grand Unified Theories are beyond the scope of UAC. Our steady-state universe is equipped with intrinsic
"cosmological" redshift in the first place. Another consequence of Arp's hypothesis is that all devices
for measuring length are shrinking, which is the same as saying that empty space is continuously expanding.

It will be proved that __UAC__ and MOND
are in some sense equivalent. Therefore it's no such big surprise that we have a decent explanation
for the rotation curves of galaxies, without artificial assumptions such as dark matter. And there is
also an explanation for the Tully-Fisher relation.
Some fresh ideas for the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation are presented.
Despite of elegant mathematics, no satisfactory results have been obtained for the Flyby anomaly. Surprisingly, the same
mathematics allows us to estimate reasonably well the magnitude of *the secular retardation of the spin motion of the Earth*.
The analysis of *Seeliger's Paradox* produces an extremely simple explanation of the
Pioneer anomaly
as a side effect.

So far so good about the *Alternative*. For the *Unified*:
just take a look at the person's names in the table of contents below.

- Featuring UAC
- Olbers' Paradox
- Relativizing Newton
- Hypothesis by Arp
- Intrinsic Redshift
- Length Contraction
- Time Dilation
- Narlikar's Law
- Size, Mass and Age
- Milne's Formula
- Van Flandern
- Simplification
- Relativity Special
- Support by Hoyle
- Seeliger's Paradox
- Origin of Inertia
- Creation Time
- C-decay Theories
- C-decay data fit
- Barry's picture
- Hubble tension
- VPM debunked?

The Refutation - MOND = UAC
- Empty Hole Photo
- Flyby anomaly
- A Cosmology Group

ACG mailing list - Let there be light

What is the truth value of a theory? That may be fun, depending on your sense of humour.

Time to give a little lesson in what the *scientific method* is about, especially
meant for those who think that what they think must be true, because they wishfully think so.

Let $H =$ Hypotheses, $C =$ Conclusion and let "if $H$ then $C$" be our theory, then we have the
following possibilities$^{(*)}$:

H | C | if H then C |

true | true | true |

true | false | false |

false | true | true |

false | false | true |

This means that our theory can *only* be false if the Hypotheses are true while
any of the Conclusions is false. *So it is still true if the Hypotheses are false.*
Which is pretty good :-)

(*) Material conditional, Conditional Statements: if p then q, Propositional Logic and Redundancy.

Okay, no joking anymore. Is there any empirical evidence supporting the UAC theory? The answer may be surprising:

- Masses of certain young stars are observed to be persistently too low
- The Shrinking Kilogram may be related to the Age of the Earth
- The Leap Second may be related to the Age of the Earth as well
- The Moon is spiraling away from the Earth at a certain rate per year
- The secular retardation of the spin motion of the Earth is calculated
*A Paradox of Newtonian Gravitation*is resolved, with $\,\Gamma = H_i/c_0\,$- It's easy to
**fake**supposed evidence for a supermassive black hole **Rotation Curves of galaxies**can be calculated without dark matter- Related. There is an easy explanation for the Tully-Fisher relation
- It is possible that the Pioneer anomaly has a very easy explanation