Copyright (C) 2003 by Lew Paxton Price
Completed on January 7, 2003.
Placed on website on January 8, 2003.
Updated February 17, 2003.

Understanding is better than thinking we understand.

Part One

Back to Photons and Red Shift - Main Menu

Is There a Dynamic Ether?

Part Two - Part Three

Quite a few years ago, my daughters were much younger (and so was I). Before the youngest was born, the older two suffered from the usual problems faced by siblings. The oldest was small-boned and not very tall and her one-year younger sister was large for her age. Each had her own way of viewing the world and of accomplishing any given task, and both were very stubborn (must have been something from their Mother's side of the family).

After listening to their incessant arguing for several years, my wife and I began to devise ways to help the girls to cooperate with one another. And since some of these ways offered a certain degree of entertainment for us adults, we were more than willing to provide such opportunities for them.

One warm, clear night the moon was showing half of itself overhead and the four of us were outside looking at the sky. On an inspiration, I asked the two girls to stand on the sidewalk, back-to-back and look at the moon. Then I asked them to walk in opposite directions while still looking occasionally at the moon. After they had gone about fifty yards each, I asked them to come back and tell me which one of them the moon had followed.

After the resulting argument was well in progress (each claimed that she was the lucky one that the moon had followed), I explained that the moon appeared to follow both of them and that each of them was correct. Then I explained why this was true.

This little exercise illustrated a number of things.
1.   Both could be right even though each went her own way.
2.   There are often considerations involved in any phenomenon of which we are unaware.
3.   It is best to accept the apparent results of an experiment at their face value rather than decide that the experiment did not agree with current preconceptions.
4.   It is better to discuss experimental results with an unbiased and objective view than to immediately begin to argue about them.


Another benefit of this exercise was to teach the girls about large distances and small angles. This is something that astronomers call "parallax", in which viewing a distant object from two different points allows one to correctly estimate the distance of the object. In the case of a far-away star, viewing the star from one side of the earth's orbit and then again at the other side (diametric opposites) with the star's direction perpendicular to the diameter will allow the astronomer to estimate the star's distance from us. This method of measuring distance became standardized as a "parallax-second" or "parsec", meaning the distance to a star when the star can be viewed from two points so that the two angles to the star vary by exactly one second of arc.


One parsec is supposed to be equal to about 3.084x1013 kilometers. This equates to about 3.260 light-years (the distance light travels in one year). One light-year is about 9.467x1012 kilometers long. Why are these large units of measurement necessary? Because our universe is big. Astronomers must think in large terms. If they are to be successful in discovering the secrets of the universe, they must also realize the four points mentioned above.

Size Considerations

The universe is so large that light requires many years to cross even a small portion of it. The distance from the earth to the sun is about 93 million miles or 150 million kilometers. The diameter of the solar system (using Pluto's orbit) is about 7,340 million miles or 11,810 million kilometers. The distance to the nearest star is about four light-years. Our Milky Way Galaxy is about 90 thousand light-years in diameter. The distances to other galaxies are much greater, but are not really known for sure due to some difficulties in present-day cosmology which is what this little article is all about.


Edwin Powell Hubble is credited with proving the existence of galaxies other than our own. He also discovered that the light from distant galaxies was "stretched" in the sense that its wavelengths were extended, causing the light to have a lower frequency upon its arrival here than what it had when it originated at its source. Furthermore, Hubble's observations indicated that light wavelengths from more distant galaxies were stretched to a greater degree than those from nearer galaxies. It was as if space itself were expanding during the time the light traveled from its source to us. This effect was called "red-shift" because the wavelengths of visible light are longer at the red end of the color spectrum.

Hubble's Law

From this beginning, Hubble's law was established, stating that the velocity of recession of a distant galaxy is directly proportional to its distance from us. The universe was thought to be expanding at a certain rate per distance per time interval. This rate was christened the "Hubble constant". Due to various differences in red-shift, what appears to be an accelerating rate of expansion, and some other factors, this so-called constant is not precisely known. However, it appeared to be about 80 kilometers per second per mega-parsec per second in 1994.

Types of Red-Shift

According to today's accepted authorities, there are two kinds of red-shift. One is due to the expansion of "space" (the expansion of the universe) and is called "cosmological red-shift". This type of red-shift is due only to the expansion of what we call space and has nothing to do with movement within space. The second is "Doppler red-shift" which is due to movement within space. If a distant galaxy is moving within space and we are also moving within space (which is usually the case), then there is both Doppler red-shift due to their relative velocities within space, and cosmological red-shift due to space expanding.

Usual Symbols

Usually wavelength in mathematical equations is given by the Greek letter lambda. Differences between two wavelengths are given as delta lambda. The Hubble constant is given as alpha, and so on. These and other common symbols in Greek will not be used here, but you will be given a "legend" showing what each letter represents.


A = point of light's source as we would have seen it
B = point where light source would appear when light arrives here
a = Hubble constant
C = our location
c = speed of light
r = distance between distant light source and earth
t = time light is traveling to arrive here
v = velocity of recession for Doppler red-shift
W = wavelength of light at source
W'= wavelength of light at receiver
w = W' - W
z = w/W = red-shift

Cosmological Theory and Math

When light begins its journey from a distant galaxy, the distance from that galaxy to us is r.
The additional distance that the distant galaxy seems to have moved away from us when the light arrives here is rat, so the total distance between that galaxy and us is then
r + rat.
Explained another way, the distance between A and C is r and the distance between B and C is rat.
Assuming that the universe is expanding at the same rate during the time the light is traveling toward us (actually it isn't, but maybe this assumption is better than nothing),
the average distance the light travels is [r + (r + rat)]/2,
which means that t = r/[c - r(a/2)]
You may have seen another version of this equation in which a is not divided by two. At least one physics text shows it in this way which is wrong. An explanation follows:
Since r/t = c, r = ct
So we can substitute and have:
ct = [r + (r + rat)]/2
ct = [2r + rat]/2
r = ct - r(a/2)t
r = t(c - ra/2)
t = r/(c - ra/2)

W'/W = (r + rat)/r
rW' = W(r + rat)
rW' = Wr + Wrat
W' = W + Wat

w = W' - W
w = (W + Wat) - W
w = W + Wat - W
w = Wat
w = Wa[r/(c - ra/2)]
w/W = ar/(c - ra/2) = z
Above is the red-shift for expansion which we can arrange to find the Hubble constant. Then we have:
a = 2cz/r(z + 2)

Due to the nature of the math for z, the cosmological red-shift, the complete expansion of for a wavelength is always z + 1.
For instance if z = 1.26
z = w/W = (W' - W)/W
W = 1, so for z to be 1.26, W' must be 2.26.
2.26 = z + 1

Doppler Math

w/W = v/c


Part Two

Main Menu - Is There a Dynamic Ether?
Part One - Part Three
The Challenge to Expansion

Hubble's discoveries and the idea of an expanding universe were challenged when it was found that many celestial objects apparently had red-shifts exceeding those due to expansion or actual velocity. Bright blue stars, super giant stars, and other stars with very high gravity had red-shifts exceeding those of other types of stars in the same neighborhood.

Radio sources are often without sufficient visible light for us to see them, so most had gone unnoticed until astronomers began to use radio telescopes, and with radio telescopes the number of known celestial objects began to increase rapidly. The average diameter of a radio source is about 30 seconds of arc, but "compact sources" were found which measured less than one second of arc.

Allan Rex Sandage used the 200 inch reflecting telescope on Mount Palomar to actually see the brightest source, 3C273 (3C is short for "Third Cambridge Catalog of Radio Stars"), and the precise position of this body was found by Cyril Hazard in Australia. This source of electromagnetic radiation has been studied as techniques and equipment have improved, and astronomers have verified that "quasi-stellar" sources (quasars) such as 3C273 are some of the most unusual objects in the sky.

3C273 was found to have a red-shift that indicated a recession of over 25,000 miles per second and other quasars also had huge red-shifts. If these red-shifts were cosmological, the quasars would have to be incredibly distant. If they were so distant, then how could they be so incredibly bright? On the other hand, they could be nearby but moving away at very high velocities due to some explosion at the center of our galaxy. But if this were the case, wouldn't some of them be moving toward us and thus be "blue-shifted"?

Eventually, 3C273 was found to be beyond a cluster of galaxies in Virgo and, therefore, outside our galaxy. This seems to indicate that the universe is expanding and that all of the quasars are distant remnants of the older universe. Then someone considered the possibility that quasars may be closer, the excessive red-shift being the result of a "K effect". Nothing was known that could create such an effect, but perhaps something would eventually be discovered to cause it.

If such an effect exists, could it be gravity itself which is known to affect light? But no, this could not be the case - because each of the masses required would have to be greater than the entire mass of our galaxy.

In 1965, Sandage announced the discovery of objects that could be aged quasars. They looked like ordinary bluish stars, but possessed the same huge red-shifts as quasars. They were apparently distant, as luminous, and as small as quasars, but lacked microwave (radio) emissions. Sandage called them "blue stellar objects" (BSOs).

The BSOs were apparently about 50 times more numerous than quasars. This implies that they endure for fifty times as long as quasars. Older quasars than these must dim to a point where detection is no longer possible or otherwise change so that we cannot recognize or detect them.

In the spring of 1966, there were reports that quasars might be associated with "peculiar galaxies". Halton Arp in particular, preferred to examine peculiar galaxies. He found that quasars are ejected from galactic nuclei and that Seyfert (named after Karl Seyfert) galaxies are "quasar factories". They appear to be ejected from the galaxy nucleus in pairs with one on each "end" of the minor axis. While rather dim at first, they brighten as they move farther outward. And as they move outward, their extremely strong red-shift diminishes somewhat. As time passes, a new pair is ejected in the apparently the same manner. As each quasar ages, it passes through various stages in its evolution and eventually becomes a new galaxy.

Arp has catalogued numerous examples of these phenomena. Yet, Arp's findings are a thorn in the side of those who prefer to believe that the universe is expanding, so his findings have not been accepted and his work has been seriously obstructed since 1983.

So is the universe expanding? There is much evidence now that it is not only expanding but expanding at an accelerating rate. Is Arp wrong in his assertions? Probably not. He is an acclaimed astronomer who was black-balled merely because some other astronomers believed that "the moon followed only them". So what about a "K effect"? Gravity would seem to be the key, but the effect of gravity as an attracting force cannot explain the large red-shift. Actually, the answer is simple enough and if one can follow the algebra, one can understand it.

As is explained in Is There a Dynamic Ether on this website, gravity is caused by the inflow of accelerating nether (dynamic ether) into a mass in much the same manner as air flows through a funnel. As explained in Time on this website, movement relative to nether or nether movement relative to us creates time dilation. In fact, if the existence of any kind of ether is accepted, then the existence of time dilation must also be accepted. There cannot be one without the other.

When nether moves through a gravity funnel, time dilation occurs for anyone who is not moving with the nether. In other words, time slows down for us because we are on the surface of a planet with nether rushing past us. On a small body such as earth or even bodies such as the majority of the stars, the amount of time dilation is negligible. But on a body with very strong gravity, time dilation becomes very obvious to those who are outside the gravity funnel.

Nether velocity at a point within a gravity funnel (mass) is equal to the escape velocity from that point. Time dilation for relative nether velocity has the same equation as that found in Einstein's relativity, but for a different reason, and both are derived from an application of the Pythagorean theorem.

Time Dilation

c = speed of light
v = relative nether (ether) velocity
T0 = time rate for body at rest relative to nether
T = time rate due to relative nether velocity

T = T0[1 - (v/c)2]1/2

Arranged for solving for v:
v = c[1 - (T / T0)2]1/2

How time dilation relates to wavelength and red-shift:

W' / W = z + 1 = T0 / T

This relationship is easily understood by thinking of a body with time that is slowed so that one second is the same as two seconds of our time. Then a wavelength from an electron on such a body would be twice as long as a corresponding wavelength of ours.

1/(z + 1) = T / T0

v = c{1 - [1/(z + 1)]2}1/2

Using the equation above, we can find the escape velocity which is also the nether inflow velocity for the following.

Inflow/Escape Velocity in Fractions of Lightspeed

--------------- Bright blue stars ------------- .00817 c
--------------- Super giant stars ------------- .01414 c
------- Quasars with red-shifts of 0.26 --- .60837 c
------- Quasars with red-shifts of 0.90 --- .85023 c
------- Quasars with red-shifts of 2.01 --- .88963 c
------- Quasars with red-shifts of 2.69 --- .96258 c

A few years ago, the highest known red-shift was 2.69. Larger values for v may be found as gravity approaches that of a black hole which occurs when v is equal to c. When v equals .99999c, z will be about 122, but values of z in excess of 2.69 will probably not be recognized because the wavelengths coming from them are so long.


Part Three

Main Menu - Is There a Dynamic Ether?
Part One - Part Two

The Confusion of Multiple Causes

The above is based upon the time dilation caused only by movement of nether (dynamic ether) relative to the light emitter. This is only a portion of of red-shift. Three causes of red-shift have been explained. There are two other causes which make a total of five. Because red-shift has five causes, a scientist cannot easily separate one cause from another and this creates confusion as to what is happening. Is a distant galaxy moving away rapidly because of either the universe expanding or its own actual velocity (two possibilities), is its red-shift due simply to gravity (two other possible causes), or is its red-shift due to the fifth cause? Actually, its red-shift is caused by a combination of from a minimum of three to a maximum of all five causes which are responsible to varying degrees.

Red-Shift from Simple Gravity

Gravity of any particular body is caused by nether acceleration toward the center of mass of that particular body. The velocity (instantaneous velocity) of the nether at the point where light is emitted (such as the surface of a body) detracts directly from the speed of light moving away from that point. The red-shift that we see due to this effect is equal to c/(c-v) or we can use the equation z=[c/(c-v)]-1 where v is the velocity of the incoming nether at that point. From a different presentation on this site, you may remember that v=(2rg)1/2 where r is the distance from the center of the mass and g is the gravity at that point.

When light moves at an angle to the incoming nether, the equation becomes z=c/{[c-(cos a)v]-1} where a is the angle. Of course, this is an oversimplification because the angle changes as light moves in a straight line outward through a series of theoretical spherical surfaces.

Red-Shift from Decompressed Nether

The peculiar galaxies that were studied by Halton Arp seem to eject quasars from the minor axis of each galaxy. These quasars initially have a very high red-shift which lessens as the quasars move outward. Each quasar increases in luminosity as it moves outward. Eventually, each quasar becomes a new galaxy. This phenomenon has the appearance of new matter being formed from a smaller version of the big bang.

Were this to be a "smaller bang" it would have compressed nether at its center which is the actual cause of the "explosion". The initial ejection of quasars appears to be at near-light-velocity which seems to decrease as the quasars move outward. This is in accord with what would happen when there is a sudden appearance of compressed nether within a volume of what is now accepted as empty space. This "empty space" is merely nether which is at very low compression as compared to what it was during the big bang. As the highly compressed nether at the ejecting galaxy nucleus expands, it initially expands at an accelerating rate of near-light-velocity. Then it slows as it begins to reach a degree of compression that is closer to that of the nether around it. Any matter within the compressed nether moves along with it because matter is merely vortices of the same fluid.

A severe red-shift would be present as the compressed nether decompresses
which would be equal to MC1/3 / MD1/3 where MC is the Mass of the compressed nether and MD is the Mass of the decompressed nether. Actually, light within the decompressing nether would red-shift a lesser amount as it begins to move away from the slowing front of nether compression. The 1/3 power is necessary because we are expressing a linear movement from a volume. Remember that M is the symbol for nether Mass and m is the symbol for what is actually vortices that we call "mass".

New Galaxies

As the quasars move outward they would be part of a volume of expanding nether and their red-shifts would decrease accordingly. Their component masses would be spreading outward with the compressed nether so that a galaxy would form of wide-spread matter.

Little Bang or Not?

The answer to this question depends upon one's definition of a little bang. If the little bang is defined as being caused from compressed nether suddenly appearing at a part of our universe, then the phenomenon of Seyfert galaxies is that of a little bang. On the other hand, if the little bang is defined as being caused by the sudden appearance of new Mass (nether) at a part of our universe, then this phenomenon is probably not a little bang.

Back to Confirmations

What is the Little Bang?

One of the possible consequences of compressed matter within a black hole, according to nether theory, is that sufficient compression may disrupt the vortices that comprise the matter.   The matter at the center of a black hole, would be under extreme pressure.   If the black hole is massive enough, the compression within its center could cause each of the vortices to cease to have enough centrifugal force to keep the hole at its center open.   This would cause the holes at the centers of the vortices to close and there would be no place for the incoming nether to go.   The nether near the center was already severely compressed due to the nature of a gravity funnel and the inertia due to its incoming movement would cause it to be compressed even more upon hole closure.   This, in turn, would cause a chain reaction of more hole closures and more compression of incoming nether.   The final result would be a sudden appearance of very highly compressed nether within a volume of our universe.   It would create something that would cause the black hole to explode, with its remnants moving outward at near-light-velocity.   The destruction of the electrons (and any temporary positrons) would cause gamma radiation to be emitted from the center where pressure would be greatest.

Added October 6, 2006 - More evidence of hole closure under extreme pressure.   Gamma Radiation

New Matter

Each vortex of matter, when its hole closed, would provide energy according to the formula e=mc2. This would be the energy of the compressed nether. As was the case with the big bang, some of this energy would create new matter. But the nether that composes our universe would not increase beyond what is already here - and that amount will continue to decrease with time.

Why the Minor Axis?

Quasars are ejected at the minor axis of a Seyfert Galaxy. This is the axis that is the shorter of the two axes of an ellipse. As the stars orbit a galaxy, their perigee, where their tidal effects are strongest, occur along the minor axis. This causes the black hole at the galactic center to distend outward along the minor axis so that more of its mass is located at the ends of the distension than would otherwise be the case. When the black hole explodes, the larger part of the mass moves outward as two quasars, on opposite sides of the black hole along the minor axis.

The Cycle of Seyfert Galaxies

Each time that ejection of quasars occurs in a Seyfert galaxy, the mass of two new quasars moves outward and new mass begins to build within the black hole at the galaxy nucleus. The mass builds until another super-dense compression occurs at the center of the black hole, and another explosion and consequent ejection occurs. This is the reason for the line of quasars that extends outward from the galaxy nucleus. It is like the black hole at the center of the galaxy is gobbling matter and cyclically "burping" from its gluttony. It would appear that whenever a black hole becomes massive enough, a Seyfert galaxy is the result.   Back to Confirmations

Dark Matter

The latest discovery of what appears to be an image of the universe at a time not long after the big bang, shows that 80% of the matter was "dark matter". This is consistent with the tremendous acceleration that would be present at that time (see the part of this website on dark matter).

Quasars Brighten with Age

In the Science News issue of February 15, 2003, there is an article called Cosmic Revelations which tells of what appears to be a view of the universe as it was shortly after the Big Bang. In the article is mentioned two occasions when light began to exist as polarized photons. The first being 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the last free electrons became bound to atomic nuclei. The second, 200 million years after the Big Bang when stars "first lit up the universe" and reionized atoms into nuclei and free electrons.

Halton Arp does not believe that the mechanism for the brightening is correct, however it appears that the time-table is in accord with the brightening of quasars if the galaxies from which they emerge are actually little bangs.

The Big Bang

The original big bang theory supposedly included a universe like a bubble's surface with matter interspersed uniformly throughout. I believe the big bang would not have been even remotely likely to do anything but scatter matter and energy in what we would conceive of as a random pattern. If it were originally supposed to create evenly spaced matter, then we should throw out that part as bathwater and keep the baby. Also, the big bang that I envision is from a point of highly compressed nether that would expand because it is filled - not something hollow like a bubble. The old big bang was theorized when matter was considered to be particulate and before the discovery of chaos theory/fractals in nature. In the physics to come, particles will go the way of phlogiston - quaint remnants of silly old theories.

In a nether (dynamic ether) universe, the expansion rate is accelerating at different rates relative to the "fixed-in-place" observer. This is typical of any explosion or phenomenon where relatively sudden high pressure is exerted within a volume of lesser pressure. The outer fringes will always accelerate more quickly than the inner parts. At the exact center, there is no acceleration at all - and there is inertia which causes celestial objects to move at different accelerations within the same local volume of nether. We move along with and within the expansion and, therefore, do not see the greatest differences in acceleration and velocity, but we will see various rates of velocity and acceleration when we view distant galaxies and stars. We will eventually discover that we live in a universe with an overall accelerating expansion and that the apparent chaos within it has an order of its own.

The universe is full of marvelous beauty,
waiting for our minds to grow more sensitive.

Simple Bibliography and Recommended Reading

Asimov's Guide to Science by Isaac Asimov (Book)
The Universe by Isaac Asimov (Book)
The Birth and Death of the Sun by George Gamow (Book)
Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology, and Academic Science by Halton Arp (Book)
Cosmology before and after the Quasars by Dennis Sciama in the September 1967 issue of Scientific American
The Evolution of Quasars by Maarten Schmidt and Francis Gamow in the May 1971 issue of Scientific American
The Top 30 Problems with the Big Bang by Tom Van Flandern,
The Big Bang Theory: A Retrospective by Arnold G. Gulko,
An Appreciation of Halton Arp by Robert A. Harman,
and a book review of Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology, and Academic Science by Halton Arp - all found in Volume 8, Issue 46, 2002, of Infinite Energy Magazine
Behind Light's Illusion (seven book series) by this author


Part One - Part Two - Part Three

Is There a Dynamic Ether?

Back - Main Menu - Next