written by Ramin Amir mardfar

Pumpatua: Increasing gravity is a non starter.

IF YOU UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN SEE BACK TO 300,000 YEARS AFTER THE BIG
BANG.
A change in the basic laws of gravity would change a lot of things
that are already observable back to billions of years ago.
SUCH AS THE DYNAMICS OF STARS AND THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE.
Since we have a good understanding of the universe from a fraction of
a second to the present, a substantial change in the gravitational
laws would be both observable and change what we see in the sky.
 
.................................

Richard: I already tried this on them. They are not claiming that G changed,
but the earth gains more mass by some mechanisms.

.................................

Ramin: I am believe to "steady_state theory" for world. It's been explained
the creation of matter from energy in this theory as well and how the
new galaxies come into existence.
We don't want to change the gravitational laws. I believe the
creation of matter from energy which causes to increase the mass of
the earth and it also causes to increase the gravity of earth.

..................................

Richard: Steady-state universe died with Fred Hoyle. There is more than
enough evidence from astronomy, cosmology and particle physics to
keep the big bang a viable theory.

Secondly, what evidence do you have that matter is being created in
the earth from energy? Do you realize how much energy is required to
create a kilogram of matter? LOTS!!! E=Mc^2, E = 1 x (2.8x10^8)^2
or 2.8x10^16 Joules!!! And where is this coming from?

..........................................

Ramin: "Big Bang model" says, universe had a high density of matter in the
time, but this isn't fit whit Einestein's gravitational law. But
steady- state model of universe fits with all existing and
Einestein's gravitational law. USSR's astronomists (such as
pf. Velyaminov, Hambarsomiyan, Fesenkov,...) believe that the matter
and energy in the universe are rotating (conversion of matter into
energy which comes out from stars as radiations and conversion of
energy into matter which causes to coming into existence of new
stars).
They've discover a collection of stars named "Stars' union"
or "Stars' collection" and believe these stars have come into
existence newly. And this is opposed to Big Bang model which says
whole of world has come into existence at the same time (by a Big
Bang process).
Here, there is a question: Although being these signs and evidences,
why most of people admire Big Bang model and support it?
People, based on their believes, like to have a starting point for
their world to appoint it as the world's creation day. Also they
like, world have a end point to appoint it as the latest day
(Futurity). It isn't so pleasurable for them hearing this, there is
no a start or end point for universe. Big Bang model answers these
wishes of people.

Dear Richard, theories doesn't been burial when die their founders
with them.

......................................................

Richard: Current research into particle physics and the unification of the
four forces of nature do not support a steady state universe, but one
which started from a small dence centre. What model exists showing
hoe energy forms matter in the current universe. Explain why the
universe is expanding (OK, why the galaxies are all moving away from
us, the further they are the faster they are moving).

I do not accept the big bang because of a religious desire to have a
beginning, in fact I resisted the notion completely (former steady
state) until I read the evidence more closely.