The Universe posseses a fractal structure. Our Milky Way is one of the galaxies in the Universe --- a fragment of the fractal “The Universe”. All galaxies are also fragments of the fractal “Universe”, which is a fragment of a more great structure... Motion of cosmic bodies in the Galaxy is due to two factors --- the gravitational field and rotation of various fragments of the fractal “Universe”. Time is the main manager of all objects of the Universe. The pace of the observed time T for a real observer depends on the gravitational potential w and velocity of his reference frame's rotation. Our rotating and gravitating planet Earth is a fragment of the Sun fractal, which is a fragment of the Milky Way, the Universe... Because the Milky Way is a fragment of the Fractal “Infinity”, we can study the structure of the Universe, applying the method of analogies. It means that a real observer is a fragment of the Fractal “Infinity”, whose manager is Time. Using the theory of physically observable quantities of Zelmanov, we obtain: any real observer can exist in the region where the condition dT = w + v_i u^i < c^2 is fulled, where w = c^2[1 –(g_00)^1/2] is the gravitational potential, T is the observed time. The quntity w is the gravitational potential, v_i is the velocity of the 3-dimensional observed space rotation, u^i is the 3-dimensional velocity, c is the light velocity. If w + v_i u^i = c^2, then the observed time is stopped for a real observer. If v_i= 0 also, then w = c^2. This means that the gravitational energy is maximum. For example, this case is realized for Schwarzschild metric, where the component g_00 = 0 by the condition r = r_g, where r_g = 2GM/c^2is the gravitational radius. This means that collapse is the state of maximum value of the gravitational energy. Thus just rotation does not allow the state of collapse. We can therefore consider the rotation of cosmic bodies as the necessary condition of their existence in the Universe.

The expansion of the universe is sometimes assigned a radial distance value, a, which is the radius of the hypersphere, and is also the idealised worldline for a particle at a given location on the hypersphere (radial time).

Time flows more slowly where the g-field is denser (gravitational time dilation), and more quickly where the field is less dense.

By extrapolation, regions between galaxies should age more quickly. If expansion is also measure of timeflow (a-coordinate), then space expands faster in the intergalactic voids. We then have a positive-feedback mechanism whereby the more rarefied the region of void, the faster it expands, and the even more rarefied it becomes.

We already know that expansion has to be slower in more populated areas, because if the entire universe expanded at exactly the same rate, we wouldn't be able to detect it: atom-sizes would enlarge by exactly the same amount as Hubble-redshifted wavelengths, our reference-rulers would expand at the same rate as the universe they were measuring, and the universe would appear to us to be a constant size. So Hubble expansion is a measure of differential expansion.

This non-linear behaviour then leads us to expect to see a bubble-like structure at large scales, and we actually see something like this in deep space surveys, with galaxies concentrated into "walls" between pairs of neighbouring voids, and "strands" where three voids (and three walls) meet.

https://classic.sdss.org/legacy/

In other words, the shape of the universe is less like an orange (spheroidal with little pits) and more like a raspberry (lots of expanding empty lobes).

One of the side-effects of non-linearity is that we lose the gravitational "floor", and the field-density between galaxies can be more rarefied than we'd calculate just by averaging a background distribution of matter over a spherical volume. `This means that a galaxy should lens more strongly ... not because there is more massenergy inside the galaxy, but because there is less outside. With reduced coupling between galaxies' matter, a rotating galaxy becomes a more self-contained unit, (perhaps explaining the galaxy rotation curve problem), so nonlinearity seems like a good suggestion for explaining things that we currently blame on dark matter.

Preprint Dark matter without dark matter

In other words, the enhanced lensing and increased cohesiveness of galaxies can either be explained by assigning more massenergy to the galaxies (dark matter) so that the field density inside the galaxies is stronger ... or by assigning non-linearity to expansion, so that the field density outside and between the galaxies is weaker.

Another side-effect of nonlinear expansion is that the elapsed time since the start of the universe in an empty fast-expanding lobe (worldline length) can be longer than the elapsed time and hyperspehere radius in one of the slower-expanding regions between the lobes. So different parts of the universe have different ages.

This allows an isolated star without a parent galaxy, or one that has spent time in a void before being ejected, to be older than the "official" current age of the universe, as calculated by someone living inside a galaxy. This may explain the properties of HD 140283 :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_140283

lots to unpack here - Here are the obvious;

( extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence)

1. Scientific Misconceptions

• “Raw Space”: The concept of “raw space” as a region with no temperature, atoms, or waves misrepresents intergalactic space. Intergalactic space does contain particles, cosmic microwave background radiation, and gravitational waves.

• Speed of Sunlight Varies: This claim contradicts well-established physics. The speed of light in a vacuum is constant (299,792,458 m/s) and does not vary.

• Gravity as an Internal Component of Atoms: Gravity is not an atomic property but an emergent force due to mass and energy curvature of spacetime, as described by Einstein’s General Relativity.

2. Unsupported Speculations:

• The idea that galaxies “collide because the universe wants them to” anthropomorphizes natural processes. Galaxy collisions are well-understood to result from gravitational interactions, not a “grand design.”

• The claim that the universe has a “center where all commands are issued” is at odds with the widely accepted cosmological principle that the universe has no center and is isotropic on large scales.

• Assertions about dual rotational directions and “torque” enabling upright positioning lack empirical or theoretical support.

3. Inconsistent or Misleading Language:

• Terms like “raw galaxies,” “sunlight speed varies,” and “rotational force of the universe” are not standard in scientific discourse and confuse rather than clarify.

• The suggestion that astronauts’ experiences in zero gravity support the rotation of a hollow spherical universe is a misunderstanding of microgravity and orbital mechanics.

4. Contradictions and Logical Errors:

• The text states that gravitational waves don’t exist outside galaxies, contradicting direct observations by LIGO.

• It conflates the absence of temperature with the absence of waves, overlooking phenomena like electromagnetic waves, which do not require a medium or temperature to propagate.

5. Misinterpretation of Cosmic Expansion:

• The text assumes that galaxies being “separated at moderate distances” is a deliberate act, whereas the observed expansion is a consequence of the universe’s dynamics governed by dark energy.

Recommendations….

1. Consult Established Science

• Refer to foundational works in cosmology and astrophysics (e.g., by Stephen Hawking, Kip Thorne, or Sean Carroll) to better understand concepts like the Big Bang, cosmic expansion, and General Relativity.

• Study observational evidence from instruments like Hubble, JWST, and LIGO to ground claims in verifiable data.

2. Clarify Concepts

• Define terms like “raw space,” “raw galaxies,” and “universal laws” more rigorously, ensuring consistency with existing physical theories.

3. Separate Philosophy from Science

• While it’s fine to include philosophical musings, distinguish them clearly from scientific claims to avoid confusing readers about what is speculative and what is evidence-based.

4. Focus on Testable Claims

• If proposing new ideas (e.g., dual rotation or torque effects), outline specific observational or experimental methods to validate them.

5. Avoid Anthropomorphism

• Refrain from ascribing intent or purpose to natural processes (e.g., “the universe wants” or “commands are issued”). Stick to mechanisms and physical principles.

6. Refine Language

• Use precise terminology and avoid conflating unrelated concepts (e.g., “temperature” and “waves”).