Tony Tyson

Greg Kochanski

Ian Dell’Antonio

Dear Sirs:

 You don’t know me yet, but I want to congratulate you on your relief map of matter peaks around a cluster of distant galaxies. I don’t know who got this idea, but I think it is brilliant and will someday be considered a turning point in our understanding of the cosmos. I have proposed a new model of cosmology and I believe your experiment offers further proof of the validity of my model. Current cosmology has assumed a finite cosmos with a single big bang and I am proposing an infinite cosmos with more than a single big bang. The current model projects a single universe, starting from nothing and expanding from a single big bang to fill all the space that we see today. My model projects many universes, all coming from black holes that have grown too large, and all sending material in different directions, and all owing their creation to different Big Bang Events. The question of dark matter has arisen only because of the assumption of a single big bang and has less significance in the light of an infinite cosmos model. The dark matter you have observed, can only be explained as representing that matter which has already been drawn into the black holes clearly shown by the peaks on your map. You have taken the first snap shots of the insides of a black hole. Congratulations. I have been imagining these structures for the last two years and to finally see a real world representation of them has given me great joy. Thank you.

 I believe your relief map shows the distribution of matter in the black holes of this galaxy cluster. Each peak represents a black hole and the tip of the peak would in some way represent the "bottom" of each black hole. My model of cosmology predicts that black holes will continue to merge until they become so large that they eventually result in another big bang. Your map shows the accumulation of black holes at the center, with additional black holes "orbiting" the central structure as they wait their turn to be drawn in. You see, once a black hole starts, nothing stops it from accumulating new material until it eventually accumulates more material than it can hold and then we have another big bang. More information on my model is available at my web site at www.micromike.com under the philosophy section and then under "Some Philosophical Observations on Cosmology."

 The basic assumption of a finite cosmos vs. an infinite cosmos has led mankind to view the cosmos as a static system instead of the dynamic system it actually is. To be more correct, your map should be placed in motion where we could see these gravitational points rotating around the accumulation of black holes at the center of the structure.

 A further improvement would be to map the visible galaxies on top of your model of black holes. One thing my model predicts is that sometimes in nature, a black hole becomes so large it consumes entire galaxies and eventually galaxy clusters. There should exist black holes with no galaxy around them because they have consumed all that material and are waiting, in an infinite cosmos, for more material to come along. It would be very interesting to see if any of these black hole peaks represent that situation; where we have black hole structures but no visible galaxy associated with it.

 Also, the volume of the peak of each black hole, would in some measure, show the age of each black hole. Since the volume would represent the amount of material accumulated, it seems to me that a very simple model could be constructed to tell us how long it took for these black holes to accumulate this much "stuff." Remember infinity. I think these structures alone, are far older than the12 or 15 billion years currently projected as the age of the everything. My "guess" is that these structures are 167 billion years old. I hope you see how the assumption of an infinite cosmos leads to different conclusions than assuming a finite one.

 I believe your map details the very structures I have been predicting and actually shows why big bangs are not uniform as current mathematical models predict. In all probability, the galaxy cluster you have mapped is way too small to lead to a big bang any time soon, but it very clearly represents the essence of the Event. One must remember that eventually all the material of this cluster will "enter" the black hole. Then this massive black hole will merge with other black holes from other clusters. So the scale of your map may not be large enough now, but it still represents the essence of what happens shortly before a BBE. If we imagine that the central system in your map has grown large enough to be "ready to blow" as a BBE, then we can clearly see why the cosmos is clustered. Material going into a black hole is not uniform and therefore material being ejected from a BBE would not be uniform either.

 My model shows that there would be an Event boundary. If we assume that the Event boundary is contained within the central structure, then we see that large structures around the outside would not be directly involved. No one yet knows all the things that happen at that moment, but one thing seems clear. From the viewpoint of these peripheral galaxies, once the Event occurs, they would still have their angular momentum. But with the central section gone, all that gravity would now be gone and their motion would now send them flying from the location of the Event. As I have modeled these systems in my mind, it occurs to me that the peripheral black holes would tend to group in two, three, or sometimes four groups. I think we can see this grouping occurring in your map. One thing this means to me, is these two or three or four groups would tend to leave the event as groups and gravity would tend to hold them together as they travel through space and time. If you look at your relief map, I think you will see that this grouping is already beginning, especially if you look at the clusters around the left side of the map. I wish I could see a similar map of the entire cosmos.

 If we look at the movement of the galaxies surrounding our own, science has had no explanation of our velocity and motion. But an understanding of the last paragraph could easily show a possible mechanism that explains where the energy came from that gave us our present direction and speed. You see, an infinite model allows our galaxy to be very old and I believe our galaxy is probably at least 50 billion years old and may be closer to 200 plus billion years old. The material which comprises our galaxy and those traveling with us (approximately 1 billion light years across), would therefore represent one half, or one third or one forth the material of the big bang which gave us our existence, since other parts of that material presumably went off in other directions and would be far away from us by now. This BBE was not the same BBE as the last one 12 billion years ago which has drawn so much attention lately. Also, as an overview of the situation, since the cluster you have photographed is outside of the galaxies traveling with us, you have mapped out a portion of another universe.

And finally, I have only had a few days to think about this situation since I first learned of it in Discover Magazine, so I might be wrong about the following situation, but it seems sound at first glance. My model predicts that gravity propagates at the speed of c², while energy traveling "through" such a system travels at c. Thus, as I analyze your experiment, it seems to me your experiment could have captured the speed difference between the energy we see as light and the energy we see as gravity. I would therefore predict that the light images we see would "lag" behind the gravitational "images" you have taken. I thought I was going to have to wait for the NASA gravity probe to prove that gravity propagates at c², but now I think your map could help prove this principle very quickly. If I am wrong, I won’t mind because then I will learn something new.

 In closing, I know that you don’t know me and therefore will tend to doubt what I say. But I think the evidence from the Hubble is overwhelmingly in my favor. All I ask is that you seek the truth, no matter which direction it comes from. The arguments for an infinite cosmos are far more persuasive than those for a finite cosmos. What we are seeing as we look into space is infinite in nature not finite. We saw the edge of our universe long ago, but there is no edge to the cosmos. Please give my ideas some of your attention and see if they don’t fit the facts better than the current models of cosmology. If I can help you in any way, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you,

502 S. Prospect

Amarillo, Texas 79106

e-mail mike@micromike.com

PS Can I use your map on my web site to help in my description of merging black holes?

Cc: Discovery Magazine

Texas Tech University