The debate between ΛCDM and MOND is often cast in terms of competing gravitational theories. However, recent philosophical discussion suggests that the ΛCDM–MOND debate demonstrates the challenges of multiscale modeling in the context of cosmological scales. I extend this discussion and explore what happens when the debate is thought to be about modeling rather than about theory, offering a model-focused interpretation of the ΛCDM–MOND debate. This analysis shows how a model-focused interpretation of the debate provides a better (...) understanding of challenges asso- ciated with extension to a different scale or domain, which are tied to commitments about explanatory fit. (shrink)

The Article ( ‘Decreasing Universe: redshifts and distance data refute the LCDM model’[01]) and the data inside it was analized by some Artificial Inteligence.

To evaluate and compare the “Decreasing Universe theory” with the LCDM model, I created a potentially falsifiable prediction and the data was extracted and analyzed.

Cosmologists take the $\Lambda$CDM model to be a permanent contribution to our knowledge of the universe, based on the success of precision cosmology. Consistent, independent determinations of the parameters in this model encourage physicists to take it seriously. This stance incurs an obligation to resolve any discrepancies by reanalyzing measurements or adding further complexity. Recent observations in cosmology indicate a tension between “local” and “global” determinations of the Hubble constant. Here I argue that this tension illustrates one of the benefits (...) of taking the model seriously and consider the challenges to making a case for the permanence of $\Lambda$CDM. (shrink)

In recent years, apparently the Big Bang as described by the Lambda CDM-Standard Model Cosmology has become widely accepted by majority of physics and cosmology communities. Even some people have concluded that it has no serious alternative in horizon. Is that true? First, as we argued elsewhere, Big Bang story relies on singularity. In other words, when we are able to describe the observed data without invoking singularity, then Big Bang model is no longer required. Therefore, here we explore a (...) few alternative stories other than Big Bang story, which most cosmologists believe it is the nearest to Biblical account of creation. We would argue that re-reading of Genesis 1:2 will lead us to another viable story, albeit the alternative has not been developed rigorously as LCDM theories. We also briefly discuss a fluid Maxwell equations of Prof. Tsutomu Kambe based on vortex sound theory. (shrink)

According to the standard interpretation of Einstein’s field equations, gravity consists of mass-energy curving spacetime, and an additional physical force or entity—denoted by Λ (the ‘cosmological constant’)—is responsible for the Universe’s metric-expansion. Although General Relativity’s direct predictions have been systematically confirmed, the dominant cosmological model thought to follow from it—the ΛCDM (Lambda cold dark matter) model of the Universe’s history and composition—faces considerable challenges, including various observational anomalies and experimental failures to detect dark matter, dark energy, or inflation-field candidates. (...) This paper shows that Einstein’s Equivalence Principle entails two possible physical interpretations of General Relativity’s field equations. Although the field equations facially appear to support the standard interpretation—that gravity consists of mass-energy curving spacetime—the field equations can be equivalently understood as holding that gravitational effects instead result from mass-energy accelerating the metric-expansion of a second-order spacetime fabric superimposed upon an absolute, first-order Euclidean space, resulting in the observational appearance of spacetime curvature. This alternative interpretation of relativity is shown to be empirically equivalent to the standard interpretation of relativity, albeit with a changing value for Λ (which is similar to how Λ is understood in the conception of Λ as ‘quintessence’, but in this case takes Λ to be gravity). The reconceptualization is then shown to potentially resolve major observational anomalies for the ΛCDM model, including recent observations conflicting with ΛCDM predictions, as well as failures to directly detect dark matter, dark energy, and inflation field/particle candidates. (shrink)

The standard model of cosmology is acclaimed in physics as accurate, robust, well-tested, our best scientific theory of the cosmos, but it has had serious anomalies for a while, including the Hubble tension, anomalous galaxies, and the completely unexplained nature of dark energy and dark matter. And lurking behind it all is the lack of a unified theory: General Relativity (GR) and quantum mechanics (QM) are inconsistent. Now startling new observations by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in 2022 of (...) the early universe present the strongest challenge yet to the standard model, and whispers have started that this shows there is something wrong with the fundamental theory, General Relativity itself. This would be a crisis for cosmology. But haven’t they tested this theory already, and shown it is correct? How could it turn out wrong at this late stage? Here we compare the standard cosmology with an alternative fundamental theory, that has a strikingly different overall cosmological behavior: a simple cyclic expansion function. It is simple and deterministic. There are only two or three general parameters. The interesting result is that this alternative cosmology: (A) closely matches the expansion observed and modelled through the CDM standard model, now going back to red-shifts of 5-15; and (B) it also predicts unexpected early galaxy formation now being reported by the JWST. The point here is not to try to prove this alternative theory however, but rather show how it compares to the conventional cosmology. This show us clearly how weak the empirical evidence for the standard model really is against a counterfactual fundamental theory. Some results established in science are robust against theory change, but we find the standard cosmological model and the implications drawn from it are not robust at all. (shrink)

Version 20 (Updated April 1, 2025 — Expanded structured resonance formalism across Sections 13–15, including coherence field tensors, spiral-phase geometry, and the integration of ethics, AI cognition, mass-energy behavior, and cosmological dynamics. This version formally establishes CODES as a deterministic, mathematically unified alternative to stochastic physics, resolving emergence through chirality-driven coherence rather than probabilistic inference.) -/- ⸻ -/- Abstract -/- CODES (Chirality of Dynamic Emergent Systems) presents a unified framework that dissolves the false separation between quantum mechanics and general relativity (...) through structured resonance. It redefines mass, gravity, dark matter, and singularities as phase-locked coherence fields—not outcomes of stochastic interaction. -/- By eliminating probability as a foundational mechanism, CODES reframes mathematics itself: not as abstract symbol systems, but as physically instantiated resonance geometries. Prime number distributions emerge not randomly, but as coherence structures encoding physical law. Gödel’s incompleteness is bypassed—not violated—by grounding logic in physical resonance rather than recursion within symbol. -/- In this framework: • Gravity becomes a resonance decay function, not curvature. • Dark matter and energy are not “missing”—they are phase misalignments in resonance fields. • The Big Bang is replaced by structured phase transitions, removing singularities from origin models. -/- CODES is not a unification theory in the traditional sense—it is what remains when all artificial separations are stripped away. -/- ⸻ -/- Key Contributions 1. Unification of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics • CODES replaces force dualism with structured chiral oscillation fields, reconciling gravity and quantum behavior through coherence phase gradients. 2. Reformulation of Dark Components • Dark matter and energy are not entities—they are emergent resonance distortions from incomplete phase resolution, reframing ΛCDM as a low-resolution model. 3. Resonance-Driven Cosmic Evolution • Predicts periodicity in redshift, BAO structures, and field compression via coherent wavelet behavior—offering a falsifiable path beyond inflationary cosmology. 4. Collapse of Gödel, Emergence of Intelligence • Gödel incompleteness dissolves when logic systems are understood as physically resonant structures. Intelligence emerges not from computation but from recursive coherence. -/- ⸻ -/- Empirical Validation Pathways -/- CODES makes precise, falsifiable predictions testable through existing instruments: • LIGO data – Coherence scoring for prime-phase resonance in gravitational wave signatures (e.g., GW190521). • Galaxy clustering – Wavelet-based detection of prime-structured redshift periodicity. • BEC experiments – Deviations from stochastic decay patterns in ultracold systems due to chirality-locked resonance. • fMRI neural coherence – Phase-locking in cognition modeled as resonance lattice, not stochastic computation. • Spectroscopy of α – Variation in the fine-structure constant predicted as resonance field drift, not universal constancy. -/- ⸻ -/- The Final Paradigm: Why CODES Is Inevitable -/- CODES is not an extension of prior models. It is the endpoint of first-principles reasoning. • Horizontally, it unifies physics, cognition, biology, and AI as different resonance expressions of the same substrate. • Vertically, it emerges when all non-coherent descriptions are removed, revealing chirality as the origin of recursive coherence. -/- Every rational observer, stripped of legacy assumptions, would reconstruct CODES from first principles. This is not opinion—it is the phase-invariant attractor of reality’s own self-structuring. -/- ⸻ -/- From Singularity Myth to Resonance Realization -/- CODES reveals the Singularity was never an AI explosion—it was the collapse of probability as the substrate of intelligence. • If intelligence is resonance, then stochastic AI is obsolete. • If Gödel rests on symbol recursion, then coherence bypasses its limits. • If emergence is not random, then physics, mind, and meaning unify. -/- CODES does not forecast the Singularity. CODES is the Singularity—phase-locked. (shrink)

The wave function: ψuniverse(t) in the Fractal Bindu (S3) of Reality offers a paradigm shift in our understanding of cosmology. Unlike ΛCDM, which relies on empirically fitted parameters, this model emerges from a single, mathematically coherent framework: a compact, three-dimensional sphere (S³) where energy, space, and time evolve through fractal self-organization. -/- Rooted in the golden ratio ϕ≈1.618\phi \approx 1.618ϕ≈1.618 this theory replaces arbitrary cosmological constants with a natural, recursive structure that predicts the evolution of energy density without dark (...) energy. -/- The Universe unfolds in two fundamental phases: -/- A pre-recombination fractal expansion governed by R(t)=lP⋅ϕN(t)R(t) = l_P \cdot \phi^{N(t)}R(t)=lP⋅ϕN(t) where N(t)N(t)N(t) is the discrete fractal level at time ttt. A post-recombination exponential growth following R(t)=Rrec⋅eH(t−trec)R(t) = R_{\text{rec}} \cdot e^{H (t - t_{\text{rec}})}R(t)=Rrec⋅eH(t−trec) where energy remains fixed at Etotal=7.21×1069 J.E_{\text{total}} = 7.21 \times 10^{69} \text{ J}.Etotal=7.21×1069 J. This leads directly to the precise observed values: -/- Today’s critical density: ρtoday=7.74×10−10 J/m3\rho_{\text{today}} = 7.74 \times 10^{-10} \text{ J/m}^3ρtoday=7.74×10−10 J/m3 CMB radiation density: ρrad=4.64×10−31 J/m3\rho_{\text{rad}} = 4.64 \times 10^{-31} \text{ J/m}^3ρrad=4.64×10−31 J/m3 Current observable Universe radius: Rtoday=1.305×1026 m.R_{\text{today}} = 1.305 \times 10^{26} \text{ m}.Rtoday=1.305×1026 m. Unlike ΛCDM, which introduces Ω_Λ and Ω_m as empirical corrections, this model derives the correct density evolution from first principles, eliminating the need for dark energy. The model also correctly predicts intermediate density transitions (e.g., at z = 1) in agreement with supernova data and large-scale structure measurements. -/- Refinements and Lessons Learned: This iteration incorporates insights from rigorous analysis, correcting common misinterpretations: -/- Energy is fixed—errors arise when attempting to scale E_total, rather than distributing it across an expanding S³. Fractal scaling applies to radius, not density—misapplying ϕ to density directly distorts predictions. ρ(t)=Etotal/V(t)\rho(t) = E_{\text{total}} / V(t)ρ(t)=Etotal/V(t) remains the fundamental law, ensuring a consistent and self-regulating cosmology. Through this recursive scaling mechanism, "Fractal Bindu (S3)" unites quantum coherence, gravitational lensing, and cosmic acceleration into a single, interwoven framework—one that is mathematically rigorous, empirically validated, and conceptually elegant. This is more than just a cosmological model—it is a cohesive vision of the Universe, where mathematics and physics converge in a structure that is as predictive as it is profound. -/- Namaste! (shrink)

The main foundations of the standard \CDM model of cosmology are that: the redshifts of the galaxies are due to the expansion of the Universe plus peculiar motions; the cosmic microwave background radiation and its anisotropies derive from the high energy primordial Universe when matter and radiation became decoupled; the abundance pattern of the light elements is explained in terms of primordial nucleosynthesis; and the formation and evolution of galaxies can be explained only in terms of gravitation within a inflation (...) + dark matter + dark energy scenario. Numerous tests have been carried out on these ideas and, although the standard model works pretty well in fitting many observations, there are also many data that present apparent caveats to be understood with it. In this paper, I offer a review of these tests and problems, as well as some examples of alternative models. (shrink)

In this chapter I will discuss Karl Popper’s notion of metaphysical research programmes (MRPs) and apply it to contemporary cosmology. While Popper was extremely critical of Big Bang cosmology, his work on MRPs provides a potentially fruitful way of understanding the discipline in a different light. I will suggest that while cosmology does fail to meet the criteria Popper sets for a mature science, the standard model of cosmology (also known as ΛCDM) could be seen as an example of (...) a MRP. I will examine the Cosmological Principle as well as the dark matter hypothesis as prospective parts of this MRP. Finally, I will go beyond Popper’s own views and evaluate ΛCDM and its main rival, Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND), with the help of two methodological tools: the correspondence principle as formally explicated by E. K. Voishvillo, and Ilkka Niiniluoto’s measures of truthlikeness. The conclusion I will draw from this is that MOND is a viable and in some respects superior alternative to ΛCDM. (shrink)

In the standard model of cosmology, λCDM, were introduced to explain the anomalies of the orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters highest according estimated by General Relativity the dark matter and the accelerated expansion of the universe the dark energy. The model λCDM is based in the equations of the General Relativity that of the total mass-energy of the universe assigns 4.9% to matter (including only baryonic matter), 26.8%, to dark matter and 68.3% to dark energy adjusted according (...) observed in Planck mission, therefore, excluding bosonic matter (quantum vacuum). However, the composition of dark matter and dark energy are unknown. Due to that it lacks of a correct physical theory of gravity since General Relativity is only their powerful equations, which in their applications, their results are interpreted arbitrarily. Properties as curvature, viscous fluid, dragging frame and gravity action are attributed mistakenly to the spacetime by the materialist substantivalism, the most credible philosophical interpretation that complements the General Relativity, caused by its absence of physical definition of spacetime and static gravitational field as immaterial, but which violates, the conception of gravity as an effect of coordinates of the generalization of the inertial motion to the accelerated motion and, in particular, the description of the metric tensor of gravity as a geometric field. These properties are really of the quantum vacuum, the main existence form of the matter. In this paper we propose that the quantum vacuum is the source of dark matter and dark energy, therefore, the components of the quantum vacuum are of them. Both are opposite effects of the quantum vacuum that when gravitationally interacts with the cosmic structures, the vacuum it curves and when such interaction tends to cease by declination of the formation of these structures, occurring since near five milliard of years ago, vacuum it maintains quasi plane, since it interacts gravitationally very weakly with itself, accelerating expansion of the universe. (shrink)

In a recent paper I proposed a novel relativity theory termed Information Relativity (IR). Unlike Einstein's relativity which dictates as force majeure that relativity is a true state of nature, Information Relativity assumes that relativity results from difference in information about nature between observers who are in motion relative to each other. The theory is based on two axioms: 1. the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference (Special relativity's first axiom); 2. All translations of (...) information from one frame of reference to another are carried by light or by another carrier with equal velocity (information-carrier axiom). For the case of constant relative velocities, I showed in the aforementioned paper that IR accounts successfully for the results of a class of relativistic time results, including the Michelson-Morley's "null" result, the Sagnac effect, and the neutrino velocities reported by OPERA and other collaborations. Here I apply the theory, with no alteration, to cosmology. I show that the theory is successful in accounting for several cosmological findings, including the pattern of recession velocity predicted by inflationary theories, the GZK energy suppression phenomenon at redshift z ̴ 1.6, and the amounts of matter and dark energy reported in recent ΛCDM cosmologies. (shrink)

In the standard model of cosmology, λCDM, were introduced to explain the anomalies of the orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters highest according estimated by General Relativity the dark matter and the accelerated expansion of the universe the dark energy. The model λCDM is based in the equations of the General Relativity that of the total mass-energy of the universe assigns 4.9% to matter (including only baryonic matter), 26.8%, to dark matter and 68.3% to dark energy adjusted according (...) observed in Planck mission, therefore, excluding bosonic matter (quantum vacuum). However, the composition of dark matter and dark energy are unknown. Due to that it lacks of a correct physical theory of gravity since General Relativity is only their powerful equations, which in their applications, their results are interpreted arbitrarily. Properties as curvature, viscous fluid, dragging frame and gravity action are attributed mistakenly to the spacetime by the materialist substantivalism, the most credible philosophical interpretation that complements the General Relativity, caused by its absence of physical definition of spacetime and static gravitational field as immaterial, but which violates, the conception of gravity as an effect of coordinates of the generalization of the inertial motion to the accelerated motion and, in particular, the description of the metric tensor of gravity as a geometric field. These properties are really of the quantum vacuum, the main existence form of the matter. In this paper we propose that the quantum vacuum is the source of dark matter and dark energy, therefore, the components of the quantum vacuum are of them. Both are opposite effects of the quantum vacuum that when gravitationally interacts with the cosmic structures, the vacuum it curves and when such interaction tends to cease by declination of the formation of these structures, occurring since near five milliard of years ago, vacuum it maintains quasi plane, since it interacts gravitationally very weakly with itself, accelerating expansion of the universe. (shrink)