**Problems of fundamental physics and possible ways of their
solution**

S.G. Fedosin

E-mail: intelli@list.ru

In the development of any subject it is always possible to trace phases
of reorganization marked by the change of structure, the so-called revolutions,
and more or less quiet evolutionary phases taking place without any dramatic
moves. The development of separate sciences about nature, along with natural
science as a whole, is no exception. In the latter case there is a periodic
change not only of fundamental theories, but also of the paradigms, which in
separate sciences predetermine an opportunity of reorganization itself. At what
stage is the development of modern natural science now? Can it be described as
an evolutionary process or are we on the point of another scientific revolution
in the near future? Let’s try to answer these questions through the analysis of
the most fundamental theoretical developments in physics; pointing out
contradictions inherent in them we will be able to draw the appropriate
conclusions. The majority of new and alternative models represented here still
demand completion, but without them it is already impossible to imagine further
development of science.

Special Theory of Relativity (STR) is
aimed at the description of events in moving coordinate systems, predetermined
by the course of these events in motionless coordinate systems, in which we can
repeat the same experiments in laboratory conditions many times. As soon as the
observer starts moving about the objects of research, there is a deviation of a
seen picture of the phenomena from the static case – for example, there appears
non-simultaneity of previously simultaneous events. All effects of this kind
are very accurately described by the STR formulae, received on the basis of the
following postulates:

1. Low-mass bodies are under consideration, so the force of their
gravitation towards each other can be neglected. External influences and fields
should be either small or compensated.

2. The principle of relativity is as follows: if the observer and his
experimental system are in the condition of free gradual and rectilinear motion
as related to the previous condition, which can be conventionally described as
based, processes for the observer will proceed in the same manner as earlier in
the based system.

3. It is accepted that symmetries as to shifts in time, in space, and at
turn are valid; i.e. there are such properties as uniformity of time, space
uniformity and isotropy.

4. All base spatiotemporal parameters are
measured with the help of electromagnetic waves, i.e. the toolkit may include
electronic watch, light rulers etc. which are standards for usual mechanical
rulers and watches of any type. Synchronization of some watch with the others
is carried out with the help of circulation of electromagnetic signals while
allowing time for their delay at a certain distance. In other words, the signal
from the first watch should reach the second one and then return; in this case
the observer with the first watch can give the observer with the second watch
the instruction for fixing his watch with the time shift equal to half of time
of signal traveling forward and back. Direct measurement of length is possible
only in motionless coordinate system, and when an object is moving, its length
is identified indirectly through the light signals sent simultaneously from the
ends of object to a motionless ruler.

5. Speed of light (or an electromagnetic
wave) in vacuum is considered the same in all inertial coordinate systems.

Since in STR the principle of relativity is used, STR is valid for
inertial systems, which are defined as moving rectilinearly with constant
velocity in absence of external influences, and is the first approximation to
the results determined for no inertial systems.

The consequence of above-mentioned axioms is independence of speed of
light on direction and speed of motion of light sources. Other well-known
effects of STR are relativity of simultaneity, time slowdown, and longitudinal
reduction of sizes of moving bodies. And this description would seem perfect if
not for one thing – each STR formula contains speed of light, but we do not
know how light is distributed; nor do we know about the spread of
electromagnetic wave in general! And do we have to use the photon concept, i.e.
change from classical electrodynamics to quantum electrodynamics, only to
describe how the high-frequency electromagnetic field acquires a new property –
quantization? Just to say that electromagnetic field is a special kind of
matter, which enables interaction of charges, means to put the problem under
cover. Failure in explanation of the internal structure of electromagnetic wave
entails only formal and mathematical aspect of STR, not allowing us to find its
restrictions and to outreach its framework. And it is already written in many textbooks
that speed of light is limit of interactions transfer, and no carrying medium,
which is different from the electromagnetic wave itself, is necessary to
transfer electromagnetic interaction. But the last means absolute autonomy and
non-destructibility of electromagnetic radiation in the sense that one such
wave cannot be neutralized by the other counter and opposite wave. And if it
took place, where would the energy of both waves disappear, if the matter of
waves differs basically from the matter of substance? And then how can
interaction of electromagnetic radiation and the charges inducing it be
possible in general?

Thus, it is much more natural to have a
certain material medium (ether) as a carrier of electromagnetic interaction. It
allows us to look at the whole spectrum of possible structures of
electromagnetic oscillations at once – from ordinary periodic waves moving in
the environment and capturing substance in each point where there is active
short-term spatial movement of this substance, up to sole structures similar to
soliton. Besides, it is also possible to present the model of photon as that of
moving independent quanta containing a captured and organized medium or
substance inside [1].

Suppose we speak of ether as medium, without which electromagnetic
oscillations are inconceivable, might we combine this idea with conclusions of
STR or not? It turns out to be possible. In [2] it is shown, that it would be
sufficient for us to accept the existence of such an initial isotropic coordinate
system, in which the speed of electromagnetic waves is the same in all
directions, to make it possible further to deduce all formulae of STR according
to the principle of relativity. Thus consequently the constancy of the speed of
wave in all inertial systems and independence of the speed of light in relation
to the speed of light sources should be accepted. The initial postulate of the
classical STR appeared itself deduced from other assumptions! Simultaneously we
get rid of the restrictions imposed by the formal scheme of the classical STR.
First, it is now possible to examine seriously various models of ether as a
carrier of electromagnetic field, choosing from these models the ones that do
not contradict the essence of the new concept of STR. So it is easy to imagine
such an isotropic coordinate system in
ether, in which the speed of electromagnetic wave is the same in all
directions, or the other way round, to acknowledge that isotropy is provided by
ether as some medium, which is generally motionless. Second, we can now
understand the existence of quite accurately stated value of the speed of light
in vacuum as a necessary consequence arising from the properties of the
particles of ether. Third, the observed independence of the speed of wave from
the speed of the sources of electromagnetic radiation can be proved by the
action of two factors – the influence of the procedure of spatiotemporal
measurements used by us in different inertial coordinate systems, and the
action of ether as a carrying medium in an isotropic coordinate system. Fourth,
the existence of an isotropic coordinate system sets it apart from all the
other inertial coordinate systems. It means that we avoid ascribing relativity
completely absolute character, getting rid of metaphysics from the
philosophical point of view. And fifth, the new concept of STR completely
coincides with the classical variant in two limiting cases – in vacuum
experiments when ether is as though not picked up by moving bodies at all, on
the one hand, and in case of the conditional full capture of ether, on the
other hand. As in the classical STR ether is rejected as superfluous, it is not
supposed to be discovered. However, in STR with ether it may be theoretically
found out in an intermediate case with the incomplete capture of ether, since
the external ether wind should somehow influence the distribution of light
inside material bodies when these bodies are moving in relation to the
isotropic coordinate system. This conclusion might help us to assess the
properties of ether through experiments such as the well-known Fizeau
experiment with the passage of light in water. It should at least be correct
when material bodies or water in Fizeau experiment move with acceleration.

Let's turn now to the General Theory of Relativity (GTR). Its scheme was
aimed at the development of the

Logic of GTR looks as follows. The principle of proportionality of the
inertial masses, responsible for the resistance of bodies to acting forces, and
gravitational masses, affecting the bodies attraction (the principle of
Galileo), results in the identical acceleration of various bodies near massive
source under identical initial conditions. From this the principle of
equivalence follows – it is possible to replace a gravitational field, at least
locally, by an accelerated moving coordinate system; gravitational forces thus
are replaced by the forces of inertia, and the general view of the phenomena in
case of such replacement will be the same. The presence of acceleration means a
transition to no inertial systems that changes the components of metric tensor,
which is necessary for the description of an interval. The interval both in STR
and in GTR is described as the distance between indefinitely close to each
other events in four-dimensional space-time. The change of the metric tensor
components in GTR from the geometrical point of view is equivalent to the fact
that space-time in each point is distorted, becoming non-Euclidean. As presence
of field sources and energy sources of various kinds in general changes
geometry, the simplest recording of GTR equations is the linear dependence of
tensor space-time curvature and tensor density of matter energy-impulse. In
terms of geometry motion of free bodies in STR takes place along a straight line from
force of inertia (gravitations of bodies are absent), and in GTR the similar
line named the geodetic line, is bent under action of gravitation, differing
from a straight line. In both cases under identical conditions bodies travel
along the same geodetic lines, appropriate in either in STR or GTR. As a matter
of fact, in GTR the acceleration of bodies does not depend on mass (the
principle of equivalence), but depends on the choice of a geodetic line, i.e.
on geometry.

The well-known effects of GTR are the slowdown of time near massive
bodies and the reduction of the bodies’ sizes in direction of the gradient (the
greatest change) of gravitational field. All results of GTR proceed from the
assumption that the search for gravitational field is replaced by finding
metric tensor components, used further for the calculation of bodies’ motion on
geodetic lines. Moreover, metric tensor appears to be the basic characteristic
of the gravitational field. As a result, geometry absorbs physics – from a real
gravitational field remains just metrics, force of gravitation is reduced to
force of inertia and is explained in kinematical way. The most obvious weakness
of such an approach is that the energy of gravitation in GTR is just pseudo
tensor, and not a real one. It is quite natural – the energy of a physical field is
always tensor and may be transformed to any coordinate system whereas the
transformation of geometrical analogue of energy cannot be made from one
coordinate system to another directly, as it demands preliminary knowledge of
the geometry of a new coordinate system. The problem with energy means actually
the problem of its localizability – in different coordinate systems of GTR the
energy is focused in space in various ways.

Are there ways for restoration the status of gravitational field as that
of real physical and not geometrical field? One of attempts is made in works
[3–4] on the basis of changing the tensor equations of gravitational field,
used for space-time in STR. Another approach is offered in [1–2], proceeding
from the following reasoning. Gravitational field is considered similar to
electromagnetic one, so for it the equations like Maxwell equations are formed
and there are appropriate scalar and vector potentials. If we apply standard Einstein
equations in order to find metrics inside a homogeneous massive sphere,
containing incompressible liquid moving arbitrarily, we will see that all
non-diagonal components of metrics in approximation of the weak field are
veritably proportional to vector gravitational potential, and diagonal
components are functions of scalar potential! Thus approach when gravitational
field is described directly in terms of STR, and not only GTR as it used to be
previously, proves to be correct. Moreover, in STR gravitational field receives
not only the energy formula, but also the impulse formula, and becomes
Lorentz-invariant field indeed. In particular, rotation of a charge derivates
magnetic field, just as rotation of a mass creates torsion in space as an independent
component of gravitational field. Torsion appears to be necessary because
otherwise it would be impossible completely to describe the force of
gravitational interaction acting between two masses. In fact, in the state of
rest force of Newtonian attraction operates between masses, but if we try to
record precisely the transformation of this force in moving coordinate system,
it will hardly be possible without taking into account vector potential. It is
Lorentz-invariance that gives an opportunity to transform forces and potentials
of a field from one coordinate system into another with the help of standard
Lorentzian transformations. Fruitful results of consideration of gravitation in
STR are shown in article [5] when calculating angular momentum and radius of
proton, and also proving the analogue of the virial theorem for angular
momentum of gravitational and electromagnetic fields. If by virtue of the
virial theorem gravitational the energy of a big space body has twice the
module the kinetic energy of motion of substance particles of this body has, it
turns out that angular momentum of gravitational field outside a space body is
also twice as big as angular momentum of gravitational field inside this body.

What should be done now about Einstein tensor equations in GTR, if we
consider gravitational field real in STR as well? How will the contents of
these equations change? Here it is necessary to take into account the same way,
which is widely used to include electromagnetic field in GTR. Namely, all tensor
quantities should be written down in necessary covariant form, and only after
that tensor equations should be substituted in for the calculation of metrics.
Having done this for gravitational field as well, we can find the metrics
varied under joint action of electromagnetic and gravitational fields. It is
already impossible to count energy-impulse equal to zero outside a lone massive
body as it is done in traditional GTR, because around a body there is always
its own gravitational field and field from other sources. Gravitation can be
treated as joint effect from the action of real physical fields –
electromagnetic and gravitational. The validity of the offered approach is
proved in a different way in [2] when the inertial observer in infinity having
used the principle of equivalence finds in STR precisely the same slowdown of
time that in the framework of GTR real gravitational field brings after its
covariant has been included in equations in the framework of GTR. In result not
metric, but the real gravitational field obtains the property of gravitational
radiation, the source of which are moving masses. If in classical GTR only
quadrupole gravitational radiation, considered as the consequence of
fluctuations of the metrics, is possible, in the new version of GTR radiation
may have dipole character, and it is similar to dipole electromagnetic
radiation. Due to the division of metrics and gravitational field their changes
may be non synchronous as the metrics may be influenced by other sources of
energy-impulse. It should also be noted about the speeds of distribution of
these changes, that they do not necessarily have the same values, though under
the order of value they are close to the speed of light. Recent experiments
with the measurement of the delay of the deviation of light from quasar in
moving gravitational field of the Jove show that [6].

If classical STR refuses the decision of the problem of internal
structure of electromagnetic field, the theory of long-range interaction of
Newtonian gravitation as well as classical GTR with its concept of short-range
interaction of gravitation are not capable either to throw light on the nature
of the gravitational field. The formalism of these theories is adapted only to
the description of consequences – the arising forces, prospective trajectories
of motion etc., but cannot explain to us the real reasons. We should restore a
true picture of the profound phenomena according to the light ripples on the
surface of events. One of the clues to the mystery of gravitational field is
the concept of gravitons, represented in [1]. Any two bodies will be as though
drawn to each other owing to the effect of mutual shielding if they are in the
cloud of penetrating them in all directions uncountable small-sized particles –
gravitons. Calculations show, that in this case the gravitational force looks
like the law of Newtonian gravitation, i.e. gravitons push bodies to each other
proportionally to their masses and in inverse proportion to the square of
distance.

Let's assume now, that the densest objects, which gravitation may
create, are neutron stars, and so the maximal pressure in them creates the same
density of energy that gravitation has. Then it becomes possible to estimate
the factor of gravitons absorption in substance and to connect it with the
gravitational constant to find the length of free running of gravitons
according to the density of substance, and the stream of their energy through a
single-unit area per unit of time. The section of gravitons interaction with
substance appears to be so small, that only particles of neutrino type with
energy about 1 keV can be gravitons. Supposing, that it is really the case, for
the concentration of gravitons we find the value 10^{49} m^{-3}.
At last, we have an opportunity to understand the law of inertia, i.e. the
absence of braking in bodies moving with uniform velocity in the gravitons
flow. The matter is that on the one hand by virtue of Doppler effect, the
movement of a body quadratically changes the total impulse received in a unit
of time from the gravitons, coming from the opposite direction, – due to the
increased frequency of impacts with gravitons, and due to the increase of their
energy. But on the other hand, the more the energy of gravitons is, the less is
the section of their interaction with substance and the less is the braking
force. As a result at any uniform velocity of motion the force of braking does
not arise and the law of inertia is carried out. Each transition from one
uniform velocity to another and from one steady state to another demands energy
expenses, so during such transition we feel resistance proportional to the mass
of the body. As gravitons are responsible for the attraction of bodies,
together with the effect of bodies’ inertia, it accounts for the
proportionality of gravitational and inertial masses, observed in the
experiment. In the concept of gravitons kinetic energy of a moving body may be
calculated as the work necessary to change the speed of motion of this body
concerning an equilibrium state of gravitons flows. Besides kinetic energy,
each body and particles making it are characterized by the so-called energy of
rest, the value of which is equal to the energy liberated at hypothetical full
disintegration of particles of this body in the given coordinate system. The
total energy of a body consists of the energy of rest and kinetic energy, and
in practice it is calculated with the help of the body’s mass and momentum.

We may go further and connect more closely gravitational and electromagnetic
fields. First, the equations of gravitational field constructed in [1], are
similar to Maxwell equations for electromagnetic field. Second, calculations
show that for a wide range of objects the ratio of their binding energy
(gravitational energy) to their own electromagnetic energy is approximately
equal to the same value, which is the ratio of the mass of proton to the mass
of electron. It applies to degenerated objects such as nucleons and neutron
stars, and to the energy of nuclear gravitation in relation to the energy of
zero fluctuations of electromagnetic field in a black cavity with the envelope
of nucleons, to the energy of rest of substance of the Metagalaxy in relation
to the energy of background radiation, and to the relation of capacities of
dipole gravitational nuclear radiation of proton to its appropriate
electromagnetic radiation as a charge. All this helps us to arrive at the
notion that electromagnetic radiation is the same as peculiar fluctuations of
carrying them gravitons flows. In this case the role of ether is played by the
medium consisting of quickly moving and all-penetrating gravitons. Besides
electromagnetic radiation, there are also stationary electromagnetic fields,
which need to be explained as well. It is obvious, that stationary
gravitational field around a massive body depends on the invariance of
interaction of the particles, making this body, with gravitons. Similarly,
stationary electromagnetic field arises under the condition of the invariance
of movement of the charged particles creating the field, and due to the special
interaction of the charged particles with gravitons. In particular, we easily
discover the influence of one charge on another, changing its type according to
the type of charges. The possible explanation is that the charge of a body not
only essentially increases or reduces the general factor of gravitons
absorption, but also changes the configuration of their distribution in
environmental space, which in case of large density of gravitons energy results
in additional and significant in size electromagnetic force. The direction of
force in this case may depend both on the direction of gravitons polarization
in the field of cooperating charges, and on the spatial distribution of
gravitons near charges of different types, on their concentration or, on the
contrary, on divergence arising from the properties of charges.

Under such an approach the concept of fundamental force means its
symmetry to cooperating bodies as consequence of the way of interaction. If a
sole body is in isotropic coordinate system where streams of gravitons are
counterbalanced in all directions, such a body will necessarily be at rest or
travel without acceleration by the force of inertia. Due to the high
penetrating ability of gravitons the fact of absence of acceleration is
established inside the coordinate system connected with the body, with no
reference to other coordinate systems. If the acceleration of the body in
relation to isotropic coordinate systems exists, the coordinate system of the
body is not inertial and in it necessarily there are forces of inertia. During
the accelerated rectilinear movement the body under the action of compelling
force and the force of inertia changes the form, gets flattened, and may even
remain in this state after the removal of constraining force. When the
acceleration is rotary, under the action of the moment of forces and the
opposing inertial moment the body also changes the form (the sphere turns to
the ellipsoid). In both cases after the removal of either force or moment of
forces the body moves by the force of inertia –either rectilinearly, or rotates
with constant angular velocity. However, even rotation with constant angular
velocity still implies the presence of centripetal acceleration, so the system
remains no inertial. No inertia of coordinate systems with gravitational fields
proceeds from the fact that in them there is always the gravitational
acceleration playing the role of acceleration for the similar force of inertia
(for example, at rest of a body as related to the Earth its weight is
discovered). Exactly in the same way, a coordinate system is in fact not
inertial if it is connected with charges as between charges even at rest there
are acceleration and force. Nevertheless, electrodynamics in the framework of
STR describes perfectly all phenomena with charges. This fact convinces us that
gravitational forces as well can be described by the appropriate equations
directly in STR. In that case the basic role of GTR is limited to taking into
account the dependence of the process and the speed of distribution of an
electromagnetic wave on the presence of the sources of energy-impulse of any
kind, specifying the results of spatiotemporal measurements, and by doing so
describing the phenomena in a more correct way.

Consideration of the gravitational field as real physical field proved
to be very fruitful in thermodynamics traditionally using the power approach.
Here it was possible to deduce from the first principles the expression for heat
and entropy increment, and also the analytical expression for returning the
system to the balance of force in Le Chatelier-Braun principle [1]. Let us
remind, that according to Le Chatelier-Braun principle of displacement of
balance the system under external influence shows resistance to transition into
a new equilibrium state, in which the system as though returns to its previous
state. Entropy as the function of state turns out to be not merely the measure
of irreversible dispersion of energy or the measure of probability of the
realization of the certain macroscopic state, but may be expressed through
energy gradients of electromagnetic and gravitational fields and the energy of
substance, thus characterizing the structure of the system from the point of
view of volumetric distribution of energy, and being the measure of linkage and
interaction of the system’s particles. If we assume for the sake of simplicity
that heat enters the system as electromagnetic quanta, the effective
temperature of which under Wien law is proportional to the frequency of
radiation, the entropy decrement will be proportional to quantity of the
absorbed quanta bringing into the system certain order – directed movement of
excited particles. In the isolated from external streams of substance systems
it is still possible to consider the increment of internal entropy, arising due
to transition of system from non equilibrium position in the state of rest, in
which there is an equilibration of all forces.

In the monograph [11] the following law was formulated: "The change
of the system organization is proportional to the change of internal and
external streams of energy, movement and ordering, which together constitute
the stream of system’s existence ". From the given law it is obvious that
besides the laws of conservation of energy, momentum and angular momentum, it
is also necessary to take into account the law of conservation of entropy. It
is true that the increase of entropy in one system means the same its reduction
in the other system, which is equivalent to the transfer of orderliness to
space-time. A characteristic example here is the process of planets receiving
sunlight and emitting thermal radiation from their surface. In the given
process there is equality, balance of coming and leaving energies, but as
temperatures of radiations are different, there is a difference in entropy. It
means that planets receive negative entropy or negentropy, due to which the
increase of internal entropy during the processes of relaxation and various
movements on the planets with internal work being exercised on bodies are
possible. It is necessary to include in the full balance of the stream of
entropy the influence of gravitational field and the structural entropy of the
planet’s substance besides electromagnetic radiation. In the stationary
condition there are chemical transformations, circulation of substance in
nature is taking place and life is supported, and the internal work on the
planet under the action of the stream of solar energy is constantly compensated
by the work of gravitational forces. The law of conservation of entropy as
measure of orderliness for a full system can look as follows:

*S* = *S _{m}*
+

where *S _{m}* is
entropy of substance in view of the contribution brought by motion,

*S _{f}* –
entropy of fields, including static and stationary components, and also
components of entropy of fields traveling in space (for example, entropy of the
stream of radiation).

The discovery of the law of conservation of entropy became possible just
because gravitational field was then perceived as a real physical field, which
together with electromagnetic field contributes to the systems’s ordering.

Let's move on to cosmology, the picture of the universe’ origin,
presented to us now by the prevailing theory of Big Bang and its versions as
models of the inflated or chaotic universe. The fundamental idea here is the
existence in the very "beginning" of super dense and hot not so much
substance as the mass-energy of the whole universe in very small volume as a
field clot of particles such as photons, quarks, gluons, neutrinos. Further
under the action of any instability the singular state collapses and explosive
expansion slowing down in time begins, so there is a cooling of elementary
particles and their subsequent linking in nucleons, and then in atoms of
substance. After that the time comes for the formation by self-gravitation of
gas clouds, the first stars, their congestions, and galaxies... Let’s not linger
over the philosophical analysis of the problem (and the matter here is that the
substitution of one mystery – singularity derived from nowhere, for another one
– the origin of the universe is a fruitless tautology, and even periodic
recurrence of process from singularity up to the maximal expansion with the
subsequent opposite contraction in singularity is nothing but metaphysics). Our
basic purpose will be criticism of the physical preconditions of the theory of
Big Bang and presentation of the alternative theory.

Let's start with the theoretical basis of modern cosmology,
traditionally including the transfer of non-Euclidean geometry of GTR
space-time to the whole universe. It is supposed that it is possible to apply
without restrictions the action of the laws established on the Earth and its
vicinities to much more extensive areas. It is obvious that such statement is
relative and should be checked in each particular case. If we accept the
validity of GTR for smaller distances, from its equations non-stationarity of
the universe, which should be either compressed or extended, will follow. The
theory predicts the connection of space-time curvature with the density of
mass-energy and describes the time evolution of the universe in several
allowable models. At the same time hardly anyone pays attention to the fact
that in all calculations the invariance of the gravitational constant is
implicitly present. It is no wonder, as the classical GTR places the greatest
emphasis not on physics, but on geometry, not interaction, but kinematics. But
if we speak about the evolution of the universe from the point of its
formation, we are obliged to take into account also the evolution of its
gravitation force, since now it is not same as it was in the very beginning. As
soon as we pass from the idealized "geometrical" gravitation to its
real mechanism of graviton type, new questions immediately arise: How the
evolution of the gravitational constant develops in time? If for gravitation
gravitons are responsible, when and by what process did they generate? Similar
questions are extremely important, because estimated density of gravitons
energy stream is about 1,5·10^{33} J/m^{3}, whereas the average
density of substance in the universe is now only about 10^{-10} J/m^{3}.
But it is the latter density of energy that theorists in cosmological models
operate, considering its evolution and not paying attention to a much more
possible quantity. It is very debatable if we can trust cosmological
conclusions of GTR in such conditions.

It is supposed, that the theory of Big Bang proves to be true since the
discovery of redshift – the further from us galaxies are located, the greater
shift their spectra have in relation to the spectra of laboratory light
sources. It would seem that it is the direct proof of the galaxies’ running up,
as the direct explanation of redshift may be derived from Doppler effect for
the radiation of leaving sources. Then we should believe that close galaxies
are going away from us at a small speed, and the farthest galaxies have the
speeds close to the speed of light. And again we should try to penetrate into
the essence of things before we apply the results of laboratory experiments to
great objects. It is easy to notice that the explanation of redshift through
galaxies’ running up from the point of view of classical STR stipulates rather
a surprising phenomenon – the eternal, immutable photons flying in boundless
open spaces of cosmos and carrying us the information on the far past of
galaxies and stars, which had caused these photons. But are objects, which with
movement do not lose energy, possible in reality? Most unlikely, and photons
here can be no exception. Otherwise we should consider cosmological spaces as
active medium, all time fueling with energy photons of various wavelengths that
is equivalent to the new hypothesis demanding proof. If photons permanently
lose energy at motion, the exponential law for the reduction of their energy
and the increase of the length of wave is quite natural: . The distance, at which the energy of a photon will decrease
in *e* = 2,718 times (*e* – the base of the natural logarithm),
will be equal *s = c/H* = (3 – 6) Gpc, here *с*
– speed of light, *H* = (50 – 100)
km / (c·Mpc) – Hubble constant [1]. Apparently, the distance *s*
is already close to the size of Metagalaxy that is the object, which we
only may observe now as the representative of the whole universe. The ideas
about the losses of energy of photons at their traveling in cosmological space
cause doubts as to the reality of galaxies’ running up. This is also confirmed
by the periodicity of redshift in different congestions, which may be explained
by the periodicity of spatial arrangement of galaxies in these congestions, the
observed exponential increase of redshift at large distances, and also the fact
of small value of own velocities of the remote congestions of galaxies
concerning background radiation [7].

One more discovery – of isotropic background microwave radiation – is
used in the theory of the Big Bang for the substantiation of the hot past of
the universe. If the universe is expanding, the average temperature of its
radiation is falling. Background radiation is then a relict kept from the
moment when radiation separated from the substance, heated up to the
temperature about 4000 K. Careful measurements of heterogeneity of background
radiation in this case might throw light on many large-scale processes in the
universe. In any case high degree of isotropy of background radiation and the
great density of its energy speak about spatial universality of the given kind
of radiation and its important role in cosmogony.

In [1] an alternative cosmological theory is presented, which in
contrast to the Big Bang does not demand initial singular state. It is supposed
that Metagalaxy is not quickly expanding together with the galaxies, but is
rather in a state close to the stationary one or to the slow change of its
volume. It may even happen that it is simply getting compressed under the
action of self-gravitation, as well as many other objects known to us. Still
Metagalaxy is only a small part of the universe. We are of the opinion that
both photons and gravitons lose energy at large distances, so stretching GTR
and its conclusions to the whole universe becomes wrong.

As it was shown above, redshift cannot any longer serve as an
unequivocal proof of the remote galaxies’ running up and the expansion of
Metagalaxy. And what can be said then about relic background radiation? Here it
is necessary to consider the global evolution of objects of the universe.
Characteristic and mutually supplementing processes are: 1) Formation of
particles and material bodies in opposite processes of flocking and crushing. 2)
Formation of the static fields attached to substance, and traveling fields as
radiation from particles and bodies. The substance and the field are
inseparably connected with each other as all forces, including forces of
inertia, arise under the action of fields. For flocking of substance in bodies
fields are necessary, and the stability of bodies is exercised at balance of
gravitational and electromagnetic forces when gradients of fields have equal
values. In turn, field particles – photons, gravitons, neutrinos – not only
cooperate with substance and lose thus mass-energy, but also are actively
produced in multiple explosive processes and disintegrations of excited states
of particles.

So, evolution of the universe is a continuous circuit of formation of objects
ranging from weightless gas clouds up to super dense bodies with degenerated
structure and quantum characteristics, and simultaneously a similar conveyor
for the particles of fields reproduced at all spatial levels. At the same time
the fields create conditions for the occurrence of particles of substance and
bodies and on the contrary, plural interactions of particles derivate fields.
Hence, to each level of substance structure its own set of particles’ sizes and
masses and effectively acting fields correspond. On the scale ladder of objects
it is possible to allocate such levels where quantities of fields reach maximum
values. An example can be the level of elementary particles with very stable,
almost eternal proton. Another example – the level of stars where there are
neutron stars as the most dense and consequently indestructable space bodies.
In both examples degenerated objects with quantum properties exist when the
extremeness of states of substance is accompanied by the extremeness of appropriate
fields, which allows drawing the comparison of objects with different
dimensions on the base of the theory of similarity.

It would be quite logical to assume that gravitons in great numbers
formed in processes at a lower spatial level than the level of elementary
particles, but in spite of that they actively influence our much more scaled-up
world. At the time when everywhere in Metagalaxy under the action of
gravitation nucleons were formed background radiation appropriate to this
process might arise. Here it is possible to give at least two possible
mechanisms described in [1]. According to first of them, each nucleon at least
once was subject to the initial beta-decay from neutron to proton with
radiation of antineutrino, having approximately blackbody spectrum of energy
(the same spectrum is characteristic for relic background radiation). If we
consider that from these very antineutrinos relic radiation has arisen, the
following formula for the average density of substance of the Metagalaxy turns
out: *ρ
= E·M _{u }/ ε =* 9·10

In the theory of Big Bang there are plenty of yet unsettled problems,
which are absent or can be easily explained in our model of evolution. For
example, why even at great distances the distribution of substance is
approximately homogeneous and isotropic? Actually very remote areas of space
all through prospective evolution might not be causally connected with each
other because of the limited speed of interaction transfer. Another question
concerns the "plane" character of space. Why is the average density
of substance in Metagalaxy so close to the so-called critical density that in
accordance with GTR space in its properties differs little from flat Euclidean
space? To make this possible, their unbelievably exact concurrence even at the
very beginning of expansion from singularity is required. If the expansion
really is taking place, initial fluctuations and the rotation of the substance
of future galaxies should decrease in its course. Return extrapolation in time
results in the problem of unusually great fluctuations and huge initial
whirlwinds of vague nature. At last, if once the universe was heated up to very
high temperatures, and then during the expansion was cooled with the formation
of the first elementary particles, where have antiparticles been since? In case
of annihilation of particles and antiparticles substance could not have been
formed at all. Therefore, again there is a problem, the offered solutions of
which are as exotic as the theory of Big Bang itself.

There are many observant facts already, which obviously are not in line
with the predictions of the theory of Big Bang or contradict it. For example,
the angular size of the most extended anagalactic radiation sources decreases
with the growth of redshift precisely how it should be expected in case of
Euclidean universe [8]. The age of the oldest stars, spherical congestions and
galaxies is approximately identical and ranges 17 – 26 billion years that
exceeds the time until now usually given in the theory of Big Bang for
evolution– up to 13 billion years. On the other hand, if Metagalaxy simply
collapsed under the action of self-gravitation, the time of free fall would be
equal to 85 billion years (here
*γ* – the gravitational
constant, *ρ* – average density of
substance of Metagalaxy). Apparently, this time quite will be quite sufficient
for the formation of elementary particles from the environment (because of the
increased speed of nuclear processes time in microcosm, understood as the
stream of equivalent events, flows quickly), and also for the formation of
stars and galaxies from the emerging hydrogen gas.

The high degree isotropy of background radiation testifies that in the
past Metagalaxy was much more homogeneous, than now, so earlier it might have
the increased sizes and reduced heterogeneity and congestion of substance. Thus
the problem of the initial fluctuations required for galaxies creation is
automatically solved. In contrast to expansion, at collapse the initial
rotation of substance is always less by virtue of the law of conservation of
the angular momentum that is physically clear and does not demand special
explanations.

The problem of the observed ratio of hydrogen, helium and heavy elements
in space finds its decision too. Helium and nuclei of heavier chemical elements
might appear without any participation of Big Bang. They as well may be the
result of substance processing in initial neutron stars of the galaxies formed
from stars with the mass equal to about 10 – 16 solar masses [9]. In the recent
article [10] through the analysis of super new star distribution with the large
redshift not only the formula for the loss of energy by photons, but also the
picture of the flat universe proves to be true.

By virtue of
all stated we have every possible right to say that the theory of Big Bang
claims the status of the biggest myth in the history of physics. This theory
inspired so many problems and blind alleys of theoretical thought, that the
only cardinal way to overcome them is to get rid of the theory altogether.

Let's consider now quantum mechanics. As studying the microcosm
phenomena we always deal with the set of particles and similar corresponding
interactions, in quantum mechanics it is accepted to describe not the real
motion of a concrete particle, but probabilities for this or that particle to
be in the certain state of motion or to have given energy. Amplitudes of
probability are called in quantum mechanics wave functions by analogy with
complex wave amplitudes in usual mechanics, and if the square of wave function
is proportional to probability of event, the square of complex amplitude gives
the intensity of a resulting wave. As well as complex amplitudes, wave
functions meet the principle of superposition. The probabilistic approach in
quantum mechanics was exhibited in the ratio of Heisenberg uncertainty for
uncertainties of measurable physical variables, canonically connected with each
other, and in Schrödinger equation for wave function. In particular, it is
believed that the particle may be found in any place of space where its wave
function is different from nil.

Due to the universal probabilistic-wave approach quantum mechanics has
achieved remarkable success – many properties and structure of gases and firm
bodies were explained (thermal capacity, ferromagnetism, superfluidity,
superconductivity, some features of metals, dielectrics and semiconductors,
laws of radiation), the structure of atoms and nuclides, the properties of
nuclear particles, and nuclear reactions. At the same time quantum mechanics
appeared unable to bring us to understanding its basic concepts, for example,
the origin of the quantum of action as Planck constant, or the essence of spin
and the charge of particles. Owing to the vague internal structure of electron
the stability of atoms remains not clear until now; in fact it is simply
postulated on the basis of Pauli principle of ban for electrons, indeterminancy
principle and energy discreteness of nuclear levels. The essence of light
dualism – simultaneous overlapping of its wave and corpuscular properties,
quantization of light not only at the point of its absorption or emission by
micro particles, but also at its distribution in space – demands further
studying. The weak point of quantum mechanics is also its principal refusal to
solve the problems connected with the description of particular movements
inside a separate quantized action – its competence is limited only to
operations with the variables describing the initial and final states of
system. A characteristic consequence of it is the principle of indistinguishability
of identical particles before and after their interaction.

In quantum mechanics it is accepted that to each particle with the
certain state the wave of de Broglie may be compared as an appropriate wave
function. Experiments with photons, electrons, nucleons, atoms and molecules
diffraction confirm the presence of wave properties in particles, however this
leaves the mechanism of the phenomenon in the shadow. One of the possible
solutions of the problem of wave-corpuscle dualism of particles is given in
[1]. If we consider that in each micro particle the internal electromagnetic
fluctuations caused by the action of external excitation are possible, their
simple recalculation with the help of Lorentzian transformation into a
laboratory system results in the length of de Broglie wave becoming the spatial
division between the peaks of maximum amplitude of these fluctuations. The
length of wave appears to be proportional to Planck constant and inversely
proportional to the speed of motion of particles and the energy of excitation.
At diffraction on crystals, liquids and gases the energy of excitation of
falling particles reaches maximum due to electromagnetic interaction with the
molecules of substance, and the length of de Broglie wave becomes inversely
proportional to the momentum of particles.

The description of phenomena in terms of probabilities has allowed to
estimate in quantum mechanics the possible levels of energy in atom, to find
their discreteness as the consequence of spatial quantization of electrons
manifestation (orbital quantum number *l*,
connected to the modulus of angular momentum; magnetic quantum number *m*, reflecting possible projections of the
angular momentum to the allocated direction; the main quantum number *n *as the basic number specifying the
levels of energy), and also as the consequence of internal properties of
particles manifestation (the quantum number *J*
, connected to the spin of particles). The formalism of the theory is entirely
directed towards the quantitative description of experiments and does not
provide any opportunity for deep penetration into the live essence of the
nuclear phenomena – practically no attempts of modeling such processes as
historical development of the components of atom – its nucleus and electrons,
and their actual interaction are ever made. An effort to attribute this problem
to the competence of the model of Big Bang now looks as fruitless as the model
of Big Bang itself.

Narrowing the
problem of stability of atom to electromagnetic and centrifugal forces does not
thoroughly clear up the situation, as not clear is the self-occurrence of
electric charges. The same can be said about mechanisms of chemical bond
between atoms. The listed questions are raised in [1] where the formula for the
origin of micro particles’ electric charge due to rotation of their own
magnetic field is deduced. In the assumption, that the evolution of micro
particles is similar to the evolution of planet-star systems, there is an
analogy for proton and electron. The proton here is compared to the last stage
of evolution of a massive star – a neutron star, whereas the rest of its
planetary system which are eventually losing the orbital moment and breaking up
in the powerful gravitational field of the star, are the analogue of the
electron. Not all substance of the rest of planets falls on the neutron star as
electromagnetic forces and orbital rotation prevent the fall of iron ferromagnetic
particles from the nuclei of planets. So the model of the formation of the
neutron star and the development of the rest of the nuclei of planets into a
magnetized cloud around of the star help to explain with the help of analogy
observed substance electro neutrality when there is a proton for every
electron. It is interesting that if we measure the distance where planets
should break up in the gravitational field of a neutron star (known as Roche
limit) with the help of the theory of similarity for a hydrogen atom, it will
appear that this distance precisely corresponds to an orbit with the first Bohr
radius where electron is in the ground state! It is easy to check having
compared the relation of Roche limit to the radius of a neutron star, and the relation
of Bohr radius to the radius of proton.

Besides proton and electron, there are still a great number of
elementary, so-called subnuclear particles and antiparticles. All of them may
be placed in the appropriate classes: hadrons (mesons and baryons), leptons
(electron, muon, tau-lepton and corresponding to them neutrino), photons,
intermediate vector bosons, and gravitons. It is supposed that hadrons
participate in all kinds of interactions – strong, electromagnetic, weak and
gravitational, whereas leptons do not participate in strong interaction.
Hadrons have the greatest variety of particles and may be as stable as proton,
quasi stable because of rather long disintegration from
electromagnetic and weak interactions, and also unstable with a small lifetime
and disintegration from strong interaction.

Quantization
of properties and discreteness of the states of particles due to the change of
their spin, charge, mass, and internal structure allows to use the principles
of symmetry and to unite particles in isotopic and unitary multiplets, and also
in families along Regge trajectories. In view of it for the explanation of the
whole variety of hadrons quark model is applied, according to which mesons
consist of two quarks, and baryons – of three quarks. Characteristic of quarks
as special sort of particles in the given model is that they can exist only
inside hadrons, cannot be found beyond their limits in free state, and have
fractional electric and baryon charges. Besides, they have color charges of
three types and cooperate with each other with the help of gluons of eight
types. Though quark model appeared to be convenient for the classification of
hadrons, it cannot answer a number of important questions. If we cannot
discover free quarks and gluons, how did they appear inside hadrons at the
point of their formation as particles? The point is that each particle must
have appeared some time and theoretically may some time be destroyed. The
universal property of elementary particles to be born and destroyed when
interacting with other particles does not help in this situation – we cannot
consider quarks and existing on their basis hadronic substance eternal and only
passing from one particle to another as separate complexes. The assumption that
leptons cannot participate in strong interaction is also strange and it
contradicts the experiments, in which high-energy leptons collided, and both
hadrons and the strong interaction appropriate to them somehow arose. All
things considered, the quark model seems to be as artificial construction, as
the theory of Big Bang.

Let's say again that strong interaction is responsible for the stability
of nuclei and the course of nuclear reactions, and also for the integrity and
interaction of hadrons, and is short-term with a characteristic distance of 10^{-15}
– 10^{-14} m. It is possible to notice that strong interaction for the
same particle, for example, a proton, in usual treatment has rather an exotic
form – inside the proton there should be quarks and gluons interaction, having the
property of confinement, and outside, when the given proton is included in the
structure of a nucleus – interaction with other nucleons, but already with the
help of the exchange of mesons, basically pions. Such an abrupt change of the
type of strong interaction at transition through the border of the surface of a
proton seems extremely surprising and implausible. And why then in nuclei
steady cluster structures and the pair correlations of nucleons resulting in
the spectra of collective excitations are quite explicit?

Weak interaction, as is known, is responsible for any reactions with
leptons participation, and is considered having even smaller radius of action
than strong interaction. Such intensities of weak interactions as the speed of
the course of reaction and the section of interaction increase quickly with the
growth of the energy of reaction. In a standard model of electroweak
interaction weak interaction is carried out with the help of intermediate
vector bosons, which should have certain mass of rest, so that interaction had
short-term character. It is supposed that bosons gaining mass is the
consequence of the "spontaneous infringement of symmetry", whereas
photons remain massless. The source of the infringement of symmetry can be discovered
in specially designed by theorists hypothetical isodoublet scalar field with
self-action and nonzero vacuum value. The measurement of the quark structures
of hadrons in weak interaction is carried out by inclusion in weak currents of
interaction members responsible for the transitions of quarks into each other.

Practically all modern theories, trying to explain the internal
structure of the field and elementary particles, are worded in terms of quantum
theory and are essentially quantum. Thus they almost do not pay attention to
what the borders of Planck constant applicability as the quantum of action are,
and do not care whether essentially probabilistic and quantum approaches can
give a full picture of the phenomena. At the same time from the theory of similarity
it follows that at each level of matter there is its own constant – a quantum
of action of the basic carriers of mass, so taking a closer look into
elementary particles we should find there qualitatively different substance in
degenerated state with the reduced constant of action. The problem of quark and
electroweak models includes the description of elementary particles
distinctions from each other and the prediction of results of their
interactions; however these models cannot give true presentation of particles’
structure and real interaction, and the interrelation between various types of
interactions (we shall recollect how strongly formal theories of Newtonian
gravitation and GTR differ from the intrinsic concept of gravitons). The
probabilistic approach of the quantum theory of field and quantum chromo
dynamics appears incomplete – justified in quantum electrodynamics, this method
encountered an insoluble problem of divergence in the practiced perturbation
theory in the analysis of strong interaction.

Are there
other ways of penetration into the structure of the subnuclear particles,
different from quantum approach, and not giving so formal results? As shown in
[1], we have the right to apply even to such degenerated and having quantum
properties objects as elementary particles, the methods of macroscopical
physics. Resulting from the analogy with a neutron star, the gravitational
energy of which is calculated precisely enough with the help of GTR, the
concept of the nuclear gravitation for proton and other elementary particles is
introduced, responsible for their integrity. The difference of nuclear
gravitation from the usual one consists only in the replacement of the
gravitational constant value. In result it becomes possible to find relation between
the radius of proton and its gravitational energy (when binding energy is equal
to the energy of rest). The force of nuclear gravitation also appears to be
equal to the force of Coulomb attractions between a proton and an electron in
hydrogen atom. A new result is the model of deuteron, in which the stability of
two cooperating nucleons is provided by the action of two opposite directed
forces – the force of nuclear gravitation, pulling nucleons together, and the
force of magnetic pushing away, arising because of the presence of magnetic
moments in nucleons, their rotation and prospective presence of superconducting
state of the substance of nucleons, similar to that of neutron stars. When
nucleons get closer to each other, the magnetic forces of pushing away in
deuteron quickly grow, as it follows from the experiments with dispersion of
particles on nucleons. In the given model strong interaction between elementary
particles is not a special kind of interaction, but a result of the action
between the particles of nuclear-gravitational and electromagnetic forces and
forces of inertia from rotation. At the same distance total force depends both
on the mass of particles, and on mutual orientation and quantities of the
magnetic moments, orbital moments and spins of particles. Nucleons association
in a nucleus results both in pair correlations, and in observable collective
excitation of the most closely linked with each other nucleons.

We see that
the use of the concept of nuclear gravitation enables us to describe several
phenomena at once – not only the integrity of elementary particles, but also
the stability of atoms, and bonds between cooperating elementary particles. In
the given model annihilation of particles and antiparticles can be presented as
follows: owing to the opposite direction of the magnetic moment at particles
and antiparticles the magnetic force obviously cannot compensate the force of
nuclear gravitation. It results in the collision of interacting particles and
their subsequent destruction, thus energy of rotation of particles and part of
binding energy transforms into electromagnetic quanta. For example, a proton’
and an antiproton’ annihilation may cause a gamma-ray quantum, and the rest of
the substance usually transforms into pions.

If electromagnetic field is the first historical example of the physical
Lorentz-invariant field, gravitational field should be considered (as we have
shown above in the description of GTR) the second physical field of this kind.
In the concept of nuclear gravitation strong interaction turns out to be a
result of the action of electromagnetism and nuclear gravitation. And what can
be said about weak interaction? The theory of similarity establishes the
following analogies between the objects: hadrons correspond to neutron stars of
different masses having respective spins and magnetic moments, and the stars
are in various energy states; muons in mass correspond to white dwarfs, and
electrons – to degenerated magnetized objects such as planets, breaking into clouds
near neutron stars. Photons and neutrinos in this picture may correspond to
flash-explosive emanation of the large portions of electromagnetic energy and
to the directed streams of accelerated substance from space objects. Well known
in nuclear physics process of disintegration of pion to muon and muonic
neutrino, and further disintegration of muon to electron and neutrino
(electronic and muonic) have parallels in the world of stars: a neutron star of
0,2 solar mass (analogue of pion) is unstable and first breaks into a white
dwarf of 0,16 solar mass, and then into even less massive and dense object. The
heaviest hadrons – resonances of *Υ-type* – correspond to very hot massive neutron
stars of 14 – 15 solar mass with a very short time of life and their subsequent
disintegration. They might be formed at catastrophic collisions of neutron
stars. Proceeding from the analogy with space objects, weak interaction at
disintegrations of elementary particles is equivalent to the occurrence of
instability of substance, which elementary particles contain, and to the
objective transition to a new equilibrium state. In particular, processing of
substance inside stars of the main sequence at thermonuclear reactions
naturally results in the formation of white dwarfs, so similar process in the
world of elementary particles would relate to the reactions of weak
interaction. Another example is the increase of mass of the white dwarf over
the limiting value and its transformation into a neutron star. Processes of
transformation of substance may last long, which provides small speed of
processes at weak interaction. It appears then that reactions of weak
interaction take place not thanks to some special force, but result from the
same electromagnetic and gravitational forces acting simultaneously – at the
scale level of elementary particles, and at a deeper scale level of the
substance making these particles. We see that such approach suggests the way to
solve the problem of connecting together all four known types of "fundamental"
interactions, and the given decision cardinally differs from other programs of
"great unification", using as a rule gauge symmetry. Also the
principle of energy-impulse equivalence of any type of interaction and origin,
as potential sources of the change of metrics of space-time in GTR, becomes
clearer and gets its theoretical basis.

Summarizing all above-stated, it is possible to draw the following
conclusion:

**The existing paradigm of physical knowledge is obsolete
and is subject to inevitable replacement on the basis of transition to
substantive theoretical models of a deeper level.**

Irreplaceable in such process of understanding is the theory of
similarity based on succession and the philosophical law of double denying. The
theory of similarity allows comparing the phenomena and the laws of micro and
macrocosms with the help of transformation of *SPФ-*symmetry,
where operation *S* designates the
transformation of speeds, *P*
corresponds to the transformation of the sizes, and *Ф* – to the transformation of masses [1]. As it turns out,
with the transition from one scale level of matter to another the appropriate
transformation of *SPФ-*symmetry
leaves the equations of movement of bodies constant.

As a whole it
is possible to notice that quite a lot of modern theories only describe the
phenomena without touching upon the problem of modeling working mechanisms of
these phenomena; moreover, they do not consider the genesis of the given
mechanisms in their development. Thus we cannot proceed to the enrichment of our
knowledge explaining the essence and the content, not just the form and the
phenomenon. Advanced fractions of fundamental science should be oriented in
this direction. Instead of it obviously insufficient and isolated attempts of
separate scientists are observed. Moreover, many of them are not given due
respect, they are considered odd fellows, who do not want to be satisfied with
the existing state of affairs. Editions of scientific magazines frequently are
not ready for rather difficult work with the authors of problematic articles on
deep fundamental questions and consequently prefer to duplicate already
approved works by well-known authorities, which do not present any special
novelty. As a result separate out-of-date theories and no critically used principles
of science constantly continue to reproduce new adherents, deliberately or not
causing them to be going in the same circles. So what is waiting for us
tomorrow – repetition of the past or a break-through in the unknown?

**References**

1. Fedosin S.G. FIZIKA I FILOSOFIYA PODOBIYA OT PREONOV DO METAGALAKTIK.
(Physics and Philosophy of Similarity from Preons up to Metagalaxies). //

2. Fedosin
S.G. SOVREMENNYE PROBLEMY FIZIKI. V POISKAKH NOVYKH PRINTSIPOV. (Contemporary
Issues of Physics. In Search for the New Principles). // M.: Editorial URSS,
2002. 192 p. (In Russian).

3. Logunov
A.A., Mestvirishvili M.A. Bases of the Relativistic Theory of Gravitation. –
M.:

4. Logunov A.A. Lectures on the Theory of Relativity and Gravitation:
Contemporary Analysis of Problems. – M.: Nauka, 1987. (In Russian).

5. Fedosin S.G. and Kim A.S. THE MOMENT OF MOMENTUM AND THE PROTON
RADIUS // Russ. Phys. J. (Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Fizika), Т.
45, 2002, P. 534 – 538.

6. Kopeikin S.M. and Fomalont E.B. Aberration and the Speed of
Gravity in the Jovian Deflection Experiment. – arXiv: astro-ph/gr-qc /
0311063 v1, 4 Nov. 2003.

7. Zel'dovich J.B., Sjunjaev R.A. Metagalactic Gas in Congestions of
Galaxies, Microwave Background Radiation and Cosmology. – In “Astrophysics and
Space Physics”. – M.: Nauka, 1982. (In Russian).

8. Miley G.K. // Monthly Notices of the Royal Astron. Society, 1971, V.
152, P. 477.

9. Rivs G. – in “Protostars and Planets”. Part 2. – M.: Mir, 1982. (In
Russian).

10. Khaidarov K. VECHNAYA
VSELENNAYA. (The Eternal Universe). // On the site www.n-t.org . (In Russian).

11. Fedosin S.G. OSNOVY SINKRETIKI. FILOSOFIYA NOSITELEJ. (Fundamentals
of Syncretics. Philosophy of Carriers). M.: Editorial URSS, 2003. 464 p. (In
Russian).

Source:
http://sergf.ru/psfen.htm