# Romao Mota

Members

8

1. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

Criticisms are welcome and help a lot to correct errors and to increase the deployment of information that only others can see. This theory follows a line of thought where whenever the constant "c" appears in an equation, it is followed by the constant of variation (1+Z)-1/3. This is simple math. The next step is to rewrite the equation as a function of time. Constants “ε” and "c" have different variables because they appear with different exponentials in that equation, that's all. I just wanted to clarify information that might not have been noticed. No one is forced to like or approve of any theory. Every theory starts from the assumption of the possibility that the event can happen. If someone does not accept the premises, there is nothing to be done.
2. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

To measure changes in the properties of atoms along the time, no one can use a clock that also varies with time, since it is made atoms and also varies over time. Variation of ”ε” was explained in the answer of Sunday, may/08/22 9:54 PM. The equation c=1/√(ε0μ0) was rewritten in another form: The end result in that post was: ε(f)= ε(0)(1+Z)2/3 This rate is the same of the variation of the size of bodies and atoms “r”, then, in function of time, ε(f) also would be: ε(f)= ε(0) (t+K(A)) / K(A) Below, I have re-edited the two images posted in the previous post, including epsilon ε . The main formulas used in SMT-VSL, and a partial image of an excel plan with some numbers:
3. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

You were right, μ0 really is not dimensionless, μr is. In the research by Rosenband et al 2008they used atomic clocks to measure atomic properties of aluminum and mercury. Aluminum, Mercury and Cesium133 are made up of atoms that are made of the same stuff, protons, neutrons and electrons. Considering that both the three are increasing the frequency of their emissions at the same rate, the best expected result would be a null value, (zero) variation in α, which in this case is consistent with the result, since the tolerance is greater than the median variation. The work of Rosenband et al 2008 would makes sense to test the accuracy of the equipment used, because, for a predicted result of null variation, the result of (−1.6±2.3)×10−17 per year is very close to the expected null value. Atomic clocks are very accurate and important, but to measure variations in atomic behavior, it is necessary to calibrate the clock to an invariant frequency in the universe. In SMT-VSL, we have two frequencies that are immutable, which are the PEAK of the CMBs and the PEAK of the unresolved CXRBs. Below we have a table with the main formulas used in SMT-VSL, and a partial image of an excel plan with some “numbers” you asked for.
4. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

In the first post, I said “In the SMT-VSL, the universe is the reference frame, so there is not expansion to cause redshift (except in the systemic local movements like rotation, orbits, binary systems, turbulence, ejection, gravitational effect and gravitational falling), so, the longer wavelengths observed are actually longer emission lines due the bigger size of the atoms in the past.” They are not "stretched out". CMB is not a consensus in the scientific community. It is “almost” impossible for anyone to know its origin, which material emitted this energy. I don't know of any research indicating CMB emission in wavelenght "shorter than primal emissions" in our local frame.
5. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

The rate of change of α is described in the answer edited later. α(f) = α(o) (1+Z)-1/3. This rate is the same of the variation of “c”, then, in function of time, this rate also would be: If there are any errors, please let me know and I will correct them. The permeability of free space (a vacuum ) is a physical constant equal to approximately 1.257 x 10 -6 henry per meter . It is symbolized µ o . Permeability in general is symbolized µ, and is a constant of proportionality that exists between magnetic flux density and magnetic field strength in a given medium.[1] µ o is a dimensionless constant. μ0 = 4 π (10) -7 Vacuum permittivity, commonly denoted ε0 (pronounced as "epsilon nought" or "epsilon zero") is the value of the absolute dielectric permittivity of classical vacuum. Alternatively may be referred to as the permittivity of free space, the electric constant, or the distributed capacitance of the vacuum. It is an ideal (baseline) physical constant. Its CODATA value is: [2] ε0 = 8.8541878128(13)×10−12 F⋅m−1 So, ε(f) in a past frame would be: But, c(f)=c(0)(1+Z) -1/3 => ε(f)= ε(0)(1+Z)2/3 This rate is the same of the variation of the size of bodies and atoms “r”, then, in function of time, ε(f) also would be: ε(f)= ε(0) (t+K(A)) / K(A) The change in the vacuum permittivity is what allows “c” to vary along the time. This variation is actually the evolution of the universe. The redshift of the emissions in the past is the observational data of that. References: 1) https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/permeability-of-free-space-a-vacuum 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permittivity
6. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

As I said in the first post, "This is an alternative theory of the evolution of the universe, which considers the possibility of the evolution of matter over time, which allows the variation of parameters that we consider constant, but that can vary so slowly over time, which is difficult in our lifetime we notice any change." The definition of the meter length is an anthropological question. The search for a standard measure has always been a problem in human history. The meter has already gone through several definitions to fix its length. I won't talk about it so as not to be prolix. One mistake does not justify another. In this theory, the only thing constant in the Universe is the sizes of the electromagnetic waves emitted. In this context, the only standard measure is the peak of the CMB.
7. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

As I said in the first post, "This is an alternative theory of the evolution of the universe, which considers the possibility of the evolution of matter over time, which allows the variation of parameters that we consider constant, but that can vary so slowly over time, which is difficult in our lifetime we notice any change." The fine-structure constant “α” is a dimensionless value, but it reflects the relationship between the electromagnetic coupling constant ‘e” and ”Ԑₒ”, “h”, and “c”. e = (2 α Ԑₒ h c)1/2 or e² = 2 α Ԑₒ h c As c is variable, result Ԑₒ is also variable, then α should vary at the same rate of c. Rewriting the expression we have: But, And, μ0 = 4 π (10) -7 = constant So, Or, α(f) = α(o) (Kc) Or, α(f) = α(o) (1+Z)-1/3 α(o) = 0.007 297 352 5698(24) “However, if multiple coupling constants are allowed to vary simultaneously, not just α, then in fact almost all combinations of values support a form of stellar fusion."[1] “Specifically, the values of α, G, and/or c can change by more than two orders of magnitude in any direction (and by larger factors in some directions) and still allow for stars to function."[2] References: 1- Richard L. Amoroso https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7468/9eb67121a47ac6ebdb3d9940215d53b99b3c.pdf https://www.academia.edu/31433858/G%C3%B6delizng_Fine_Structure_Gateway_to_Comprehending_the_Penultimate_Nature_of_Reality 2- Fred C. Adams Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 arXiv:0807.3697v1 [astro-ph] 23 Jul 2008
8. ## SMT-VSL (split from GR and cosmology (split from …A Shrinking matter theory that might actually work.))

If matter shrinks, there must be a reason for that. Some constant would have to vary for this to happen. The “Shrinking Matter Theory with Variable Speed of Light” (SMT-VSL) presents all necessary behavior for that. This is an alternative theory of the evolution of the universe, which considers the possibility of the evolution of matter over time, which allows the variation of parameters that we consider constant, but that can vary so slowly over time, which is difficult in our lifetime we notice any change. The two main constants that govern the behavior of the universe are the speed of light and Planck's constant. In this Theory we are considering the possibility of the variation of the speed of light, because we know that it is very sensitive to variations in medium, which can be the key to solving the problems found in the theory of the expansion of the universe, thus explaining observed redshift emissions from deep space objects, without the need for its expansion. The SMT-VSL and the expanding universe theory are equivalent. If we make our world as the reference frame, the universe should expand. If we make the universe as the reference frame, matter should shrink. Laws of physics work to both theories. The main difference of the expanding universe and the SMT-VSL is what causes the longer wavelength emissions observed of the deep space objects. The Doppler shift (redshift) is well known in the expanding universe theory. In the SMT-VSL, the universe is the reference frame, so there is not expansion to cause redshift (except in the systemic local movements like rotation, orbits, binary systems, turbulence, ejection, gravitational effect and gravitational falling), so, the longer wavelengths observed are actually longer emission lines due the bigger size of the atoms in the past. If we assume the speed of the light varies along the time, and the Planck’s constant keeps the same value, light speed “c” decreases by the factor of (1+Z)^-(1/3) along the past time, i.e.: The light speed c(f) in the past frame is c(0) in our local frame, multiplied by the factor (1+Z)^(-1/3). Then, the notational formula is: c(f) = c(o) (1+Z)^(-1/3). (f) is the reference frame in the past. (0) is our local frame at present. Z is the redshift. The factor (1+Z)^(-1/3) is not a magic number. It is the factor that enables compatible results of the emission lines and others definitions in the Bohr model. The hypothesis A is the best in this new theory and it gave us these equations: c(f) = c(0) (1+Z)^(-1/3) or c(f )= c(0) [(t+ K(A))/ K(A)] ^(-1/2) t=K(A) [(1+Z)^(2/3)-1] Gyr D= 2K(A) [(1+Z)^(1/3)-1] Gly r(f) = r(0)(1+Z)^(2/3) or r(f) = r(0)(t+K(A))/K(A) c(f): Light speed in a past frame c(0): Light speed at local frame t: time (Gyr) K(A): Contant = 20.657 582 148 024 D: distance (Gly) r(f): Bohr radius or size of objects in the past (m). r(0): Bohr radius or size of objects at present (m). The shrinking speed in one meter is 4.84 nm/C (nanometers per century). Light speed, in this theory should grow 7.25 mm/s per year.
×