## FOOS SOLVES GRAVITY September 2020

**ANNOUNCING NEW BOOK:**

**The Big Bang Boozle - The Life And Crimes Of Albert Einstein****The general relativity equation for frequency change and time dilation are proved false. Foos derives the correct expression. Einstein's starlight deflection is proved false, corrected mathematically. Special Relativity forgery exposed in detail. Eddington expedition staged. 100% guaranteed secrets of the universe revealed for the first time in history. Detailed, color illustrations aid understanding. Time to take the red pill.**https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BRH737JJ.

**This website is NOT up to date. The book IS!**

**ALERT: The Pound-Rebka website used to prove the Einstein fraud was replaced. If you need the old site to match up with the book, talk to me if you don't find it here:**https://bit.ly/3ybTk8n

**SPECIAL ANNOUNCING FOOS'S THEOREM OF G: The root cause of the crisis in cosmology is the incomplete derivation of the laws of gravity. The Theorem of G recovers the lost laws of gravity and frames the correct model of the universe as a geometric theorem, not a theory or personal idea. This is the Holy Grail of physics and cosmology for the first time in history. This is geometric principle and fact, not theory. The theorem is also the last chapter in the Boozle book.**https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C12D3JTN

## Cause of Gravity Is Spatial Expansion

Foos Research

## Property of Matter is Cosmic Expansion

Most Important Scientific Discovery in World History

*"I don't understand it myself since the mathematicians got ahold of it." *

Einstein on his theory of relativity

*Borrowed from Flatland, 1884, by Edwin Abbott Abbott*

**"To the Inhabitants of SPACE IN GENERAL And H. C. IN PARTICULAR. This Work is Dedicated By a Humble Native of Flatland In the Hope that Even as he was Initiated into the Mysteries Of THREE Dimensions Having been previously conversant With ONLY TWO So the citizens of that Celestial Region May aspire yet higher and higher To the Secrets of FOUR FIVE OR EVEN SIX Dimensions Thereby contributing To the Enlargement of THE IMAGINATION And the possible Development Of that most rare and excellent Gift of MODESTY Among the Superior Races Of SOLID HUMANITY.”**What credentials qualify me to make such wild claims? None, except for eight years of university science in Montana ending with a master's in soils from MSU Bozeman in 1979. Having no resources except a GI Bill and natural talent for insight, I felt obligated to put in at least sixteen grueling hours a day. They were tough classes where I honed the ability to set up and efficiently solve the most difficult problems in science and mathematics. I wasn't able to continue in academics, but preserved my notes and continued to work on difficult problems.

One problem I grappled with was my perception of serious errors and omissions in Einstein's relativity. Prominent physicists saw the same in the early 1900’s, but were ignored, so having productive conversations with physicists is more unlikely today than ever. Those in the mainstream will muffle their ears and block further discussion.

Entertaining thoughts that question Einstein will cost them their jobs. Critics are written off as crackpots. Many have been, unfortunately. The few who weren’t had nobody to talk to. But if science is to ever emerge from this last age of darkness, Einstein’s complicated theories and the awkward balloons and rubber mats used to explain them must be chucked and replaced with a logically sound, consistent comprehension of the essential relation between clock speed and gravity. A new model of the universe is required based on a satisfactory explanation of redshift and other observations of the transmission of light. Crucial also is a correct understanding of the way space and time are affected by gravity. All we have are a handful of experiments that are touted as proof of Einstein’s relativity, but the field of physics fails to give a rational interpretation. This is no more difficult than any simple freshman mathematics problem, so the chapter on how dimensions change in gravity is provided so earnest readers have this critically important relationship firmly grasped. The chapter compares my simple derivations for length and clock speed with a typical article that invokes complex and needless formulas from Einstein’s relativity, but in the end uses the same simple, Newtonian equations I used to calculate the result. This was the Pound-Rebka experiment which demonstrated shorter wavelengths and clock speeds at lower gravitational potentials.

Not surprisingly, the proportional shrinkage in length is paid little attention unless painting a picture inside a black hole, but the fact that both length and clock speed shrink together presents the crucial point that local observers experience no change in dimension. You will hear about singularities in black holes that gravity contracts distance as well as clock speed, but never the fact that Alice could fall right into a singularity and to her no changes in her weight or body proportions would be noticed. If you know that, you know the physics establishment has backed itself into a black hole, but I struggled for decades to comprehend why they were such a dodgy bunch, and what the correct solution might be to understand the universe. Nothing, no matter how profound or true, would get any serious attention, but I needed to know for myself. No major discovery was within my puny reach, but university study had turned me into the guy who could never give up looking. It wasn't until September 2020 that the pieces of the puzzle suddenly fell into place after sloshing around in my noggin for fifty years. Nobody could be more amazed and also grateful for being the first to realize the cause of gravity, flow of time and source of universal energy. It was always a dream, but never thought possible. A good understanding of the Cosmic Expansion Model requires no complex mathematics. It's a simple concept for me but beyond the reach of those without a good university science background. Even then, serious study of this book is required to grasp subtle steps logical steps that form proof of crucial concepts. Particularly difficult can be imagining a separate dimension of reality besides the physical dimension of familiar experience and how and why both exist. That physical reality is a sphere or box inside an infinite outer dimension isn’t too difficult. Assuming everything inside is part of the box, technically a sphere, you can see how the “box” could expand or shrink without there being any hint to us who are inside as long as clock speeds were affected the same way so that a meter was still defined the same. This was the significance of the local observer who sees no change through gravitational potentials that had eluded me until 2020. The boundaries of the box have to be established by the limits of gravitational potential on the universal scale. Of course, this is where most everyone gets lost. I wrote this book to gently ease you through the same insights that came to me suddenly in 2020.

It amazes me that physicists have never focused on the existence of two dimensions, a necessary assumption for them having themselves conjured the notion of cosmic expansion. Some explain it as expanding space between galaxies, but not atoms, while others get it right. If the universe as a whole expands, so does everything inside. You can’t say there is such a thing unless a dimension outside the universe exists, but you’ll never hear a physicist mention it. This upper dimension I frequently refer to as the ethereal realm or upper land. I may not make a clear distinction between the infinite ethereal realm and the current volume annexed by the expansion of the physical universe for billions of years at the accelerated rate of c squared. Sometimes I think the failure of physicists to see the universe correctly is the inability of their minds to comprehend large numbers or outer boundaries. These concepts are going to be new to you then, too, so I’ve hopefully met the challenge of persuading you by carefully constructing a proof in the following pages so that you see it for yourself. I can’t believe I’m the first to see it, but the dogma of relativity and prospect of looking for another job keeps the light from penetrating.

**Eureka**

Since retirement there’s been more time to think and relax. On occasions I've written about the absurdity of Einstein's relativity like others who were ignored despite stellar credentials. This only underscores that unless a better model of the universe can be offered, there’s no path out of the Einstein trap to follow. By 2020 I’d given up on finding one, but sometimes the solution doesn’t come until the mind quits striving and relaxes long enough to let the answer sink in as so famously illustrated by Archimedes in the bathtub. And it did. I was watching a YouTUbe video about the “fractal” universe at the time. These popular ideas don’t have any serious merit, but the image of growing fractals creating a force like gravity put my thoughts in a place where the correct answer of cosmic expansion and gravity suddenly fell into place. Now I have a machine gun like Bruce Willis. I have the right answer, apparently the first in history, and a path to show others that I’m morally obligated to share with you. Just give me a chance. Set aside the arrogance and dogma of modern physics and give my new world view the benefit of doubt until you’ve carefully read this book. If you’re finally convinced, say so. If not, well, okay, say so.

Once you've got the fixed relation between time and distance from the paper fixed in your mind, you’re on your way to seeing how gravity also affects light velocity and frequency. The same famous experiments used to confirm relativity are recast to rebut Einstein's relativity and replace it with a model that makes sense. You're ready to shake the mainstream hogwash out of your head and understand what really happens to space and time in black holes and big bangs. The next big step is rejecting the idea of gravitational redshift on logical grounds. We easily accept how relative velocity causes wavelengths to shrink or expand to produce blue or red shifted light, but there is no concept that can explain why gravity would cause the same effects depending on whether it’s coming or going. You have to get past the government blockade and rightly conclude that there is no gravitational redshift.

But what then? All we have so far is Doppler shift without relative motion. There is no choice but to conclude that since light has no mass, it travels in an outer or upper dimension where there is relative motion, and that objects are on average receding from each other. This is the crux of the matter. It’s really that simple. If there’s no possibility you can accept that, then go for pizza and forget about the Cosmic Expansion Model; otherwise, the rest should be easy. Next, all redshift data known to astronomers tells you that all objects in our dimension are receding from each other in the upper dimension. The only reason that could be is that the universe is expanding into a fixed, upper dimension where the fact of expansion is visible there but not in our own dimension, just as would be the case if we were living in a box, a sphere or a yellow submarine. We can’t see the expansion, we are only fortunate that the red shift tells us about it. The boundary between these two dimensions is the path that light follows, and the red shifts in frequencies between objects can only be due to Doppler effect. Doppler formulas can be used to calculate the rates of recession of physical bodies that match the acceleration of gravity in our physical dimension.

That was a mouthful, but flawless rational inference holds it together. If you can understand and accept the last paragraph, then the truth of the Cosmic Expansion Model is fairly proved, and the rest comes easy. I still want you to read the book, because we’ll explore the many profound consequences that follow from the model. Also, the concept is new to you and as yet entirely unknown to those around you, so it can slip away all too easily and confusion set in. If you’re as bone headed as I am, you’ll need to do a lot of study and review before it sinks in. And there’s more to understanding this than two separate dimensions. It isn’t as simple as things expanding outside the box while we who are in the box just float around. Even the physicists know that the redshift resulting from gravitation matches a Doppler velocity equal to the acceleration due to gravity over the same distance. Why don’t they ask questions like that in university classes?

The only logical interpretation is that the velocity of light is assisted by expansion away from bodies of mass and resisted by expansion on the approach. Think carefully about this. Light has no mass and is not transmitted by anything that has mass. That was already established. But now we see it is assisted and resisted by the expansion of space; therefore... Only one possibility, that light is not transmitted but propagated by the expansion of space in a dimension outside our own. Are you with me? Therefore, the speed of light, c, can be no more or less than to the total rate of instantaneous expansion of the universe. Since the rate of expansion outside the box increases, the true rate of expansion C by now would probably fill the Library of Congress with exponents of ten. If space expands everywhere at once as it does in the physical universe, then no internal expansion could be seen. The visible redshift phenomenon is the rate of expansion due to relative rates of expansion between two points. It matches a gravitational potential difference, but it is also affected by the cumulative expansion from acceleration in the cosmic dimension. The true speed of light C has increased as much as much as the radius R of the universe. Nevertheless, in the fixed, physical dimension the velocity of c has always been and always will be the measured velocity of light. This is proportional to total mass M of the universe because expansion is the property of mass. Go back if you’re not clear to here.

One more very important thing, since we know we live in an isolated sphere, we are both expanding in one dimension and being pushed in another with the equal and opposite force, Newton’s third law, every action has an opposite and equal reaction. Expansion in the upper direction actually, literally causes the equal and opposite force of gravity in the physical dimension. This probably sounds too weird to be true, but you know to your bones it is true. We passed through a very narrow tunnel of logic to arrive here, and there’s no going back.

It’s very important that you understood everything thus far and that you’re still with me. There are no logical alternatives to the points made so far. I’m gambling that you agree fully at this point and deserve an honorary membership in the Mathematicians For Foos Club. You realize that you may be only the second person in history to know for certain that we live in a fixed physical dimension that is enclosed by an ethereal dimension through which light is propagated by expansion in a cosmic dimension that sends us feedback telling us how fast space is expanding between the two of us. Don’t think about anything but that until it’s fixed forever in your mind, then you can think about how badly you’ve been cheated by the physicists. After doing that for a while, send your name, degrees, job title and earnest testimony about your belief in the Cosmic Expansion Model by Alan Foos and don’t forget your free book.

Though able to recognize flaws in relativity back in the 70s, I was like everyone plagued by poor understanding of gravitation. Rational concepts and accurate results interest me, not theories. You can only grieve over more than a hundred years lost to science. All this talk of the CMB (cosmic microwave background), an expanding physical universe evidenced by recessional velocity, backwards interpolation to the Big Bang. What a joke indeed, Dr. Essen. If you just look at facts established to support Einstein’s relativity, you can see that there was no Big Bang. I was persuaded myself, but also realized that it would be impossible to have an expanding universe in the physical dimension, unless... Newton’s G gets smaller with real cosmic expansion measured from the outer dimension. That’s kind of contradictory, though, isn’t it, because the lower dimension is fixed according to the Cosmic Expansion Model. Then I finally got around to taking a hard look at the units of G. I see that there is zero, no possible way that G could be affected that way. G defines the ratio of physical dimension radius R of the universe to total mass M and the acceleration of light speed. In other words, there could not possibly have ever been or ever will be a Big Bang. It just isn’t possible by any means.

It would be a hard thing to believe that the physical universe could be infinitely old. I think it might be possible to calculate the age of the universe if you could extrapolate the outer size of the universe backwards until the size of it shrunk to the same size as the physical universe, which would mark an instantaneous birth. But then I began to think that the squared curve of expansion never should touch the x axis. It only gets closer and closer. The rate of cosmic expansion diminishes asymptotically such that there never was a beginning to the universe and never will be an end. Just shooting from the hip, that’s the way it looks to me. Back to the drawing board, physicists. In 1972 I was no better off than anyone understanding gravity. I couldn’t believe the universe was expanding. Even Hubbell rejected the idea for a long time before caving to the big bangers’ data correlating progressive red shift with standard candle distances. So, I went there, too.

But if the universe is eternal, what about entropy, the irreversible loss of ordered energy? It appears the universe must be winding down. I’m not sure I have an answer for that. But the energy of expansion is endless and disorder only the fate of things in the wake of cosmic expansion. Somehow, order must be restored by means of a natural cycle. That’s probably all I should say except that the ages rocks no matter how accurate cannot be taken as an indicator of how old the universe is. Think. The party line based on entirely misunderstood redshift data is a universe roughly 14 billion years old and a solar system a little over four billion years old. Our solar system is too insignificant to be that old in relation to a universe that evolved naturally. I expect the James Webb telescope will extend estimates of the universe’s age many times over based on cosmic redshift while we know physical dimensions are fixed in the universe as we can measure it.

Do not waiver once you’re convinced of the Cosmic Expansion Model. Clear your mind and ponder the cosmic implications of clock speed and gravitational density as described in other chapters. Forget about space-time, balloons, rubber mats, time dilation and all else Albert. Consider how length and time contract together with gravitational field strength and then consider what happens to the Earth in a universe expanding on the cosmic level. Incorporate this with the following facts. Shine a beam of light upwards from the ground. We all know that as the light travels towards outer space it undergoes a redshift as measured by any fixed observer. This is the gravitational redshift, not a Doppler redshift we are told. It is also a fact that the light beam accelerates as it shifts towards the red. This is counter to intuition, right, because objects slow when thrown upwards? Light does the opposite but ONLY as measured by a "remote" or a "fixed" observer. If you travel alongside the photon, your clock will run faster to the same degree that the beam accelerates and shifts towards the red, the result being that you do NOT experience any differences in wavelength. A remote observer will also see that your

yardstick lengthens at the same time your clock speeds up, but for you or any local observer all measurements of time, frequency and length remain the same. These interdependent facts are crucial to understanding what is really happening and a prerequisite to grasping the nature of gravity. So, think long and hard on this paragraph before proceeding. It's simple when you get the hang of it, but you will find no references besides this book to refresh your understanding.

It may help to visualize the famous black hole. We, the great unwashed, hear so often that space and time contract to almost nothing, even to a singularity, inside a black hole. This is what we're talking about. As you approach or enter a black hole, your measurements of distance and time remain the same. We know this from the clocks and yardsticks Einstein claimed credit for. The greater the gravitational force (or field density if you wish), the more yardsticks shrink and time contracts, but only as measured from a remote point of view. And not measured in place, either, but inferred from the delay in time and frequency shifts observed from afar. The Rocky Mountain point missed by the physicists is that distances, clock speeds, and wavelengths all remain fixed in the “frame of reference” they are in, whether floating in space or surfing in a black hole. The frequency of a laser light remains the same, the density of space and matter (in terms of mass, not weight) remain the same now as they did billions of years ago before, during and after any Big Bang, and so for us who is inside, there was no Big Bang unless you’re talking about temperature or weight, then you could call it something else. These concepts are crucial to the correct understanding of gravity, not a theory but the real deal. It is not a coincidence that this is what it's like inside a bubble when everything inside expands or contracts with the bubble.

The physics establishment seems to have a pathetically weak grasp of the implications of their own observations, but you can do better, believe me. So far, the world is fixed on conceptualizing gravity as mass attracting mass, but we're about to see that it is quite the opposite. The truth is, mass does not attract mass but instead pushes against it due to the force of expansion being restrained on the physical level. Newton's formulas accurately predict what appears to be a force of attraction, but Newton and Einstein both confessed to not having a clue as to what causes gravity. This all changes now. Why does it appear that mass attracts mass when it just ain't so? To answer that, we need to consider the consequences of an expanding universe in our own little corner of space where matter is expanding at more or less the same rate. You must be careful to understand that everywhere is the center of expansion, even the protons and electrons in our own bodies. Were the implications of such facts ever stressed to you in physics class?

Before exploring that issue, understand that the public is fed the proof of an expanding universe being the redshift of galaxies proportional to distances from us. They have standard candle data correlated with redshift to prove it. We see a Doppler shift from recessional velocity when celestial bodies move apart. We don’t see movement when observing “gravitational” redshift. I smell a rat. Since all galaxies are moving away, the wavelength of light is stretched toward the red. But galaxies are not moving away from each other in terms of linear distance. We now know that the outer cosmic space is expanding, not space as experienced in our physical dimension. What we are really seeing is Doppler red shift recorded by light traveling in the outer, rapidly expanding ethereal dimension, not the physical universe of fixed dimension. After long periods, the cosmic realm has expanded like wow. The physicists are seeing gravitational redshift that indicates the rate of cosmic, not internal, expansion that has continually increased at an accelerating rate over a great deal of time. How do we clue the physicists in? The universe we live in is static. Dimensions and the speed of light are fixed as long as mass M is constant. This is well established from time and distance experiments.

Pause and reflect. The physicists say that some galaxies are "receding" (meaning space is expanding everywhere) at a rate possibly even exceeding the speed of light. This surely is expected if they’re confusing cosmic redshift with recessional velocity on the physical plane, because the accumulated red shift over billions of years could be immense. The elapsed cosmic rate of expansion, C, would be many, many times our measured value for the speed of light, c. The velocity of recession they are measuring is taking place in the upper, ethereal dimension, not the physical universe.

Physicists stress that all points are the center of expansion, but do not go on to explain how we can measure the expansion of our own bodies or local solar system using instruments that have also expanded. If every point in the universe is the center of expansion as physicists have put forth to the public so often, then every proton in our body, every cell in our body, is also expanding. It must be. But we don't see that. Einstein and the big bangers want us to think we’re shirking raising embedded in dough and getting stretched like a balloon as we roll around the sun on a rubber mat, but I don’t see that. Do you see that? Nevertheless, in real cosmic expansion, space is thinning out rapidly and every point in our bodies is expanding away from every other point even though we measure the same distance yesterday and tomorrow. Recall how meter sticks and clocks stretch as gravity diminishes? This is because of cosmic expansion. Our bodies and atoms occupy space and expand as space expands.

We don't perceive the reality of our own expansion because meter sticks are growing and clocks running faster. Everything looks, feels and measures the same. It's only for observers who are not expanding (or expanding more slowly) that careful measurements of “gravitational” redshift might catch us in the act of blowing up. Protons are expanding and as they do they exert pressure on their neighbors. This we should be very much aware of. We don't measure any changes in distance, but we experience gravity because the expansion is contained and invisible to us. Or, you could also say that the action of expansion creates the equal and opposite reaction of gravity, Newton’s third law. Consider that the Earth, being the center of a far greater mass than our bodies, consists of a far greater mass than our own, and is expanding with the combined force of trillions of protons. That force of expanding space denied pushes against us even from a distance. Or it could be said by an outside observer that an expanding Earth overtakes us. Indeed, it might be more correct as Einstein put it to say that we are not being pulled towards the Earth, but it is the Earth expanding and pushing against us, though he failed to grasp the principle that the rate of expansion equals the rate of recession in the upper dimension. The more atoms, the faster objects are overtaken and the bigger the push (all else being equal). The more mass in a given space, the faster that space expands to capture objects whose expansion is less. The fundamental property of matter is expansion. Where have

you heard that before?

Is this blowing your mind? Yes, actually, it is blowing up with cosmic expansion. If your own volume as seen from outside the box is expanding at a rate proportional to your mass, then you can be sure the Earth is expanding a great deal faster. And so the Earth catches up and pushes with a force of one g. Gravity being as a downward force is more than just an illusion because the force of cosmic expansion exerts the equal and opposite force of gravity by fixing the relationship between distance and time on the physical level. Don’t make me say the space-time word. If we want an accurate conception of reality, we must realize that black holes expand faster even though they appear to be fixed in size or even shrinking. We know that they are expanding faster because of the degree of redshift relayed from the cosmic dimension. We don't observe expansion directly. We see accelerating expansion manifested as retrograde motion in our physical bubble. This is not whimsical theory or some idea of mine. This is the natural consequence of the fact that the universe is expanding into an infinite dimension and exerting an equal and opposite force on the physical level. Why can't the physicists correctly see that gravity and associated redshift is the result of all points in the universe expanding at different rates depending on the local density of matter? I don't have an answer for that. It’s institutional and bureaucratic madness, frail minds ensnared by Einstein.

What I really can't explain is why the universe should be expanding at an accelerating rate, but if it didn’t there would be no force of gravity. Will time end before physicists correctly realize the cause of gravity and abandon their dream of a Big Bang. Then they will no need to invent dark energy and dark matter. I don’t outright grasp the need for dark matter to explain the gravitational behavior of remote galaxies, but there can be little doubt it stems from the flawed standard model of the universe. Indeed, it is not the force of gravity that rules the movement of cosmic bodies, but the rate of expansion in an upper dimension. Cosmic expansion surely must be the famous dark energy. If distant galaxies seem to have too much gravity due to hidden mass, it’s probably the same mistake made as mistaking cosmic redshift for recessional velocity. I’m not sticking my neck out quite that far, but the accumulated cosmic rate of expansion C could cause great misperceptions of gravity in remote galaxies.

The question left hanging is what internal force pushes everything apart? It could be energy harnessed from the ethereal dimension. It could be the property of matter to expand into a physical void where resistance is manifested as the back pressure of gravity, or, simply put, the equal and opposite reaction of Newton’s third law. Of course, there is no empty space because light is propagated by expansion into the ethereal dimension, and back pressure from expansion is observed internally as retrograde motion. I didn't want to bust your bubble, but if you want a realistic and scientific conception of the universe and of gravity, you'll have to abandon the confusion modern physics presents. Gravity is the result of expansion, not a force of attraction. It is the unavoidable consequence of an expanding universe on the upper level and a fixed, static universe within it, at least static as experienced by those inside the box.

But what about the unified field? Can we now tie the corrected view of gravity to electromagnetism? A new and correct understanding of gravity will help, even if it requires different questions be asked. Recall that it isn't possible to define length except in terms of clock speed and wavelength. Indeed, electromagnetism is a fundamental part of any measurement. Local measurements at any given gravitational potential are inherently constant, while remote observers see redshift evidence that dimensions expand with distance from a gravitational source. Only in the same gravitational potential (frame of reference) is light speed constant because redshift with departure from a body of mass is matched by acceleration of the photon. If a beam of light travels away from a body of mass, it accelerates relative to the fixed, remote observer, a known fact. As it travels towards a body of mass, it shifts toward the blue as measured by a fixed observer. That may not explain what electromagnetism is, but without electromagnetism there can be no spatial definition or force of gravity. The values of electromagnetic waves are fixed in relation to the distances within atoms which in turn are propagated, not transmitted, by the rate of expansion of space. Don't give up because I'll keep working to make this clear. Whatever you do, don’t run to relativity for an answer, see it for yourself.

Let's reflect. If the universe were not expanding there would be no gravity, there would be no time, no mass and no light. Expansion is a fundamental property of matter that drives the cosmic machine. The velocity of light is the rate of cosmic expansion determined by the amount of mass M in the universe subject to blue or red shifts and acceleration or deceleration from local expansion due to local bodies of mass. “Gravitational” redshift is solid evidence of these facts. Gravity is strictly the result of the opposite and equal force of cosmic inflation that manifest as attractive forces as we experience them. Modern physicists armed with balloons and trampolines have failed to explain these age old mysteries, and yet here in the most unlikely place you have the right answers great minds have been seeking since history began.

Mass of the Universe Calculated From The Speed of Light

Imagine you really do see beyond to the ethereal dimension. You see that in your neck of the solar system the Earth is expanding outward at great velocity into the ethereal dimension and taking you along with it. Every point is rapidly receding away from every other at different rates proportional to mass except for a few rogues. You see how the Doppler stretching of wavelengths of light beams striking celestial bodies as they flying away from each other. Since rate of expansion depends on the concentration of mass, larger bodies like black holes are zooming away faster, many vanishing over the horizon. The red shift is seen crossing into the physical dimension letting physicists know the rate of expansion, but the expansion of space in the ethereal realm manifests as a squeeze on the physical level where the reaction to expansion manifests as retrograde motion and gravity within a dimension of fixed size. Being a remote observer in the upper dimension, you have no trouble seeing how the red Doppler shift is manifested as the acceleration of gravity and blue shift in the lower realm. The upper Doppler shifts is not the "gravitational" red shift physicists perceive. You can see clearly how the relative rates of expansion between celestial bodies or any other two points define the gravitational potential between them, whether the value of g over the distance of a meter on Earth or the variable red shifts between us and stars or the red shift from distant galaxies that physicists wrongly perceive as recessional velocity because they don’t understand cosmic expansion. These all tell us by easy calculations the rate at which objects are receding in the one dimension with a Doppler shift that is equivalent to the acceleration of gravity on the physical plane.

Relative expansion we can calculate from spectral shifts between bodies, but these are just minor gravitational potential differences standing out against the combined expansion of the entire universe into the ethereal dimension at the accumulated rate of light velocity C that we measure as the instantaneous value of c. We know "gravitational" red shift is the result of expansion, so the baseline rate of overall cosmic expansion must be proportional to the mass of the universe as a whole. This insight is the only possible inference from the Michelson-Morley experiment, not any theory of relativity. Every point is the center of expansion and light is not transmitted but propagated by expansion at a rate proportional to the total mass M of the universe.

Let's appeal to a few good mathematicians out there. We know from the cosmic expansion model that light travels only in the ether dimension where rates of expansion result in Doppler shifts we see as gravity on the physical plane, so the speed of light itself has to be the baseline expansion rate of the universe. The reason that the velocity of the beams in the Michelson-Morley experiment were the same in all directions is that space is expanding outwards from every point in the universe. This is the only possible reason such a result could be found.