The Moland Theory

The Moland Theory is a lot less complicated than most theories, including the Big Bang Theory. One problem with the Big Bang Theory is that it leaves no room for a gravitational field. Astronomers say that there is a black hole at the center of the universe, this is not true, it is a giant star in contraction, with an intense gravitational field which controls all of the universe. I know this sounds bizarre, but our own solar system can prove this.

quote:

---

Astronomers say that there is a black hole at the center of the universe

---

which astronomers?PE

And what exactly do you mean by centre of the universe? All points in the universe are moving away from each other - it can be said that each point is the centre of the universe.Alan

quote:

---

The Moland Theory...

---

Some has asked, "which astronomers?" Someone else has asked, "what center of the universe?" I have to ask, "what Moland Theory????" I can't find anything on the subject.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Well, there's mo' land out here in Texas than there is in Delaware....

To add to list of questions:One problem with the Big Bang Theory is that it leaves no room for a gravitational field.Huh?

"Astronomers say that there is a black hole at the center of the universe, this is not true, it is a giant star in contraction, with an intense gravitational field which controls all of the universe. I know this sounds bizarre, but our own solar system can prove this."
--What astronomers have you heard of which say that there is a black hole at the center of the universe? Not to mention a 'giant star in contraction'? What do you mean by 'contract' and how is this unique to that star? Furthermore, how does our own solar system prove this, or even give an ioda of evidence in favour?------------------

"And what exactly do you mean by centre of the universe? All points in the universe are moving away from each other - it can be said that each point is the centre of the universe."
--True, though no there is a center and not every point in the universe can be thought of as a center. While everything is receeding away from everything else, an object one light year away [B] from a point [A], and an object 2 light years away [C], B will be moving away at half the speed of C. In a macroscopic view of the universe, there is an outward expansion according to inflationary theory. Correct me if I'm wrong.------------------

"One problem with the Big Bang Theory is that it leaves no room for a gravitational field."
--How so?------------------

quote:

---

Well, there's mo' land out here in Texas than there is in Delaware....

---

Maybe that's it, but it look like we may never know. The original poster hasn't responded to anything yet.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Carries all the hallmarks of drive-by gibberish....

The Big Bang Theory says that a single star exploded and from that explosion all things in the universe were created (stars, planets, galaxies, etc.). According to this theory, the star doesn't exist any longer, therefore there would be nothing to hold the universe together, it would just be lost. Look at the solar system, the planets are held by the sun's gravitational field, if the sun exploded it would be hard to keep the planets revolving around nothing. The Moland Theory states that the star still exists and therefore all things in the universe revolve around it.

quote:

---

The Big Bang Theory says that a single star exploded

---

No, it doesn't. It says that a singularity expanded or "unfolded" , if you will, quite rapidly. Stars only formed millions of years later.

quote:

---

therefore there would be nothing to hold the universe together, it would just be lost.

---

Binary stars hold together just fine with nothing "in the center." And in any case, it now appears that the universe will eventually dissipate into a larger and larger volume and so "be lost".Can you provide any references for this "Moland?"

I have read material which just say some astronmers. As for contraction, it simply means that a star will become smaller due to an increased speed. A primary source and its secondary masses must be equal in order to be a balanced system. A star will be at an increased speed when the system is not balanced. This increased speed causes the star to lose its fire. As the objects expand they gain weight,because the further away an oject is from its source, the heavier it is. And when the combined weight equals the weight of the weight its primary source, the star will slow its rotation and the fire on the star will be rekindled due to its extreme core temperature. There is nothing unique about the contraction. Any so-called black hole in the universe is really a star trying to balance its system.

In a binary system there is always a primary star and a secondary star. If the secondary star falters the energy in the primary star will contract, the speed of rotation will increase and its fire will go out. The seconday star will explode scatttering debris thousands of miles into space. The gravitational field of the primary star will catch this debris and swig it into orbit around it.