**Subject:** Fwd: Plasma Universe

**Date:** Wed, 31 Jan 2007 02:30:30 EST

Many thanks, I will probably schedule this as paper 79 and will read up on this. There is a general negative opinion about Big Bang and dark matter, one relies on the other and both are entirely wrong. ECE is then a straightforward alternative based directly on Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Cartan inferred torsion in 1922 (Comptes Rendues de _l’ Academie_ (mailto:l] at [Academie) des Sciences in Paris) so torsion was not available to Einstein or Hilbert in 1915. Torsion is however well defined in Riemann geometry itself, being the difference of two Christoffel symbols. Cartan geometry is essentially an elegant re-statement of Riemann geometry. For a symmetric Chistoffel symbol the torsion tensor in Riemann geometry is zero, and this is the case in EH theory. This misses most of physics. In electrodynamics the inverse Faraday effect for example signals the existence of B(3) and the fact that the electromagnetic field is spinning sapcetime. In cosmology one can clearly see the spinning spacetime via a spiral galaxy such as M101 of, I think, Ursus Major (Great Bear) – paper 76. I agree wholeheartedly that data come first, these are two examples of a fundamental theory (ECE) explaining data in the simplest manner possible (Francis Bacon and William of Ockham). The archetypical analogue for EH were of course the Eddington experiments. NASA Cassini has confirmed those in the solar system to 1 : 100,000. In the solar system the gravitational torsion is therefore negligible. In a spiral galaxy’s starry arms however, it is entirely predominant. In the Austrian / ESA experiment it describes the gravitational analogue of Faraday’s Law of induction.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

This entry was posted on January 31, 2007 at 12:45 am and is filed under Daily Postings. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

## Leave a Reply