Back in year 2000, Halton Arp held this lecture on his career as an astronomer, and his…
How the Meganeura and Quetzalcoatlus Indicate that Inertia has Increased over Time
The Meganeura, which existed on Earth some 300 million years ago, was a dragonfly the size of a seagull. Its shape indicates that it was able to hunt for food in much the same way that dragonflies do this today. It must have been able to jump about in the air, turn on a dime and perform loops and similar displays of aeronautics.
The Quetzalcoatlus, which existed on Earth some 60 million years ago, was a flying dinosaur the size of a giraffe. Its shape indicates that it must have been able to hunt for food much the same way that pelicans do so today.
These are conclusions we can draw from Darwin’s law which states that no animal will develop a shape that doesn’t fit with its habits. If something looks like a dragonfly, it will act like a dragonfly. If something looks like a pelican, it will act like a pelican.
The first things that strike us when it comes to these animals is the size of them and the fragility of their wings. The Meganeura was able to fly like a dragonfly despite being the size of a seagull. That’s remarkable, because a seagull is unable to perform dragonfly aeronautics despite having wings that are substantially stronger than what the Meganeura was equipped with.
As for the Quetzalcoatlus, no animal that size is able to fly, certainly not with bat-like wings. The biggest bat currently in existence weighs less than 1.5 kg, yet the Quetzalcoatlus was able to fly despite being the size of a giraffe.
The mismatch between the size of these animals and their ability to fly indicate that something dramatic must have happened. Gravity must have been lower. However, the mystery doesn’t stop at gravity. Inertia must have been different too. This becomes clear once we consider the type of manoeuvring that these animals must have been able to perform.
Getting off the ground is but one problem that they had to overcome. It can be explained by suggesting that gravity was less strong. But once the Meganeura was off the ground its thin wings would nevertheless have been a problem. If it tried to turn on a dime, or suddenly jump one way or the other, its wings would break due to the stress of the change in momentum. The animal must have had a body with less inertia than what an identical body would have today.
The same can be said about the Quetzalcoatlus. If its head had the sort of inertia that such a head would have today, its neck would snap the moment it tried to do a pelican like flip of its beak.
This suggests that matter has become heavier in terms of both gravity and inertia since the time when these animals existed. We can use the Meganeura and Quetzalcoatlus as evidence for an increase in gravity and inertia, and a ready explanation for this was suggested by Halton Arp in his time. He believed that matter starts off relatively light and becomes heavier over time. The mechanism alluded to by him, and made explicit in my book is what he called mass condensation:
Protons have become larger over time through the absorption of high energy photons. This has affected both gravity and inertia. Hence, the abstraction that we call mass has increased.
When discussing the fossil records, we tend to get stuck talking about size and gravity. We also tend to focus on the gravity of our planet. However, gravity has two parts to it. One is the planet, and the other is the objects attracted by the planet. If the material of both have increased in mass over time, it’s easier to see how the increase could have been as dramatic as it appears to have been.
Based on Newton’s universal law of gravity, a doubling in size of the proton will quadruple the gravitational attraction while only doubling inertia. There is probably more going on when it comes to gravity, but mass condensation goes a long way in explaining both the super-sized insects that existed on Earth some 300 million years ago and the enormous size of the dinosaurs that appeared some 200 million years later.
This Post Has 3 Comments
did I hear right the other day: Webb has found various redshift anomalies, the most interesting being that the redshift seems to be quantised. This would conform to atoms getting heavier, no?
My question: IF neutron stars exist, could they be infusing matter around them with neutrons, or are we talking subatomic particles, rather?
I can’t seem to find any data on spectra for specific isotopes, but I expect to see blue-shift for heavier isotopes. Old, far stars are not redshifted, closer stars will seem blueshifted, as we see them after becoming heavier. Am I barking up a plastic christmas tree?
Halton Arp too noted the quantised nature of redshifts, so this is not a new discovery. If Webb is mentioning this, it must be considered a confirmation of Arp’s earlier work. But it’s an interesting observation in any event. It indicates that mass condensation is something that happens in steps, and I don’t have a good explanation for why this is so.
As for heavy isotopes being blue-shifted relative to lighter isotopes, I found this science post on the subject: https://lexieslogofphysics.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/optical-spectroscopy-of-hydrogen-and-deuterium/
Deuterium is blue-shifted by 2 angstrom relative to hydrogen: https://www.universeofparticles.com/2018/06/23/two-angstrom-towards-the-blue-end/
When it comes to Neutron Stars and Black Holes, I share the opinion of the Electric Universe guys. Such bodies are electrical phenomena, and the gravitational interpretation of them are wrong: https://www.universeofparticles.com/2019/08/08/black-holes/
If red-shift is indicative of young age, then blue-shift should be expected to be seen in old objects. But I believe Earth to be a fairly old body, and we should therefore see more light red-shifted rather than blue-shifted relative to light spectres we see on Earth.
This doesn’t mean that conventional red and blue-shifts never happen. Halton Arp didn’t deny that speeds cause shifts in light spectres. He merely suggested that it wasn’t the only source of red-shifts.
The suggestion I have has been researched for 70 years now. It is very controversial for the Established Cosmologists of today. Several mytholgists have applied themselves to a analysing ancient relics an images. These fall into archetypal groups and are common to many civilisations. This indicates that what was being viewed was on a Cosmic scale, affecting the whole solar system.
Basically the evidence points to our planet originating in a dwarf star system! This was actually the ideal location for life to develop, being a very stable environment with constant temperature, moisture and very low gravity! Hence the fossilized lifeforms we find lived in entirely different surroundings to the present day.
Needless to say the transition to Sol was the most catastrophic period in Earth’s history. It accounts for much reshaping, mountain building, fossil forming and extermination of species. Humans only survived by living underground, in caves (or on arks??). We can see relics of our early days under Saturn’s purple light in the colour of leaves. Green is tuned to absorb purple light!