The official length of a one meter stick is declared to be such and such a number of wavelengths of a specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation. We know that when this wavelength leaves the gravitational field of the earth, it red-shifts, which means that the wavelength is now longer. The conventional explanation would be that light red-shifts because it ‘loses energy’. The speed of light is maintained as a fixed constant (it is not relative) and therefore spatial dilation is excluded. If we permit the speed of light to be relative then spatial dilation occurs, and the light red-shifts because it is rising into a lower density region of the energy field. The density of energy field is described by the Inverse Square Law (greater density near the source of the field, less density the further away from the source one moves). If we allow for spatial dilation then we can see that a stick is shorter the deeper one goes into the gravitational field and the fact that light red-shifts as it moves into areas of lower density in the energy field is then accepted as evidence that space dilates as the density of the energy field decreases, which means that a meter stick gets longer the further away you move from the center of a gravitational source.

We would then picture space as being dilated in conformance to the density gradient of an energy field.

In the image above we see both a meter stick being measured and the light being used to measure the ruler and we can then see that as the size of the ruler decreases the relative speed of light also decreases.

Such spatial dilation allows us to define abstract terms, such as ‘momentum’. If spatial dilation is excluded for the sole purpose of keeping the speed of light a fixed constant then we have no definition of the term ‘momentum’ and it once again becomes a meaningless abstraction, and it becomes the task of those who reject the idea of spatial dilation to then provide the definition of such terms as ‘momentum’ or ‘velocity’ as well as providing a reasonable explanation of why it is that objects accelerate when they fall down in a gravitational field or why they decelerate when they fall up in a gravitational field.

Such spatial dilation is visibly apparent in the universe. The shape of the Smith Hydrogen cloud can be explained as the result of plainly visible spatial dilation effects. The cloud is conforming to the space in our galaxy as it enters our space.

The argument that I am going to make here is that the evidence for ‘dark matter’ in the universe can just as easily be interpreted as just one more piece of evidence that supports the existence of spatial dilation and spatial contraction in a gravitational field as being a real phenomenon. It really is a matter of how one interprets the evidence.


<->

The image on the left shows the expected rotational velocity of two objects in orbit, with the object closer to the center of the field orbiting faster than the slower orbital speed of an object farther away. The image on the right is intended as simulation of the observed orbital speeds of a spiral galaxy. It is this puzzling anomaly in the orbital speed of such galaxies which is employed as evidence for the presence of ‘dark matter’ in the universe.

The graph above shows the plot of the flat rotational curve observed in a spiral galaxy as compared to the expected curve (the dashed line below).

A spiral galaxy appears denser and denser the closer to the center of the galaxy one looks. It would be my argument that what we are seeing here is an ‘optical illusion’ caused by spatial distortions. The galaxy appears more dense at the center than it really is because of the visually observable effects of spatial dilation and spatial contraction. We can actually see these distortion effects in a galaxy in much the same way as we can see the distortion effects in the Smith Hydrogen cloud. Spatial dilation is visibly apparent.

Now if we assume that our view of such a galaxy is distorted, and if we also keep in mind that time dilation is occurring at the same time that spatial dilation occurs, then would it not be possible that our measurements of the apparent rotational speed of such galaxies is distorted. To find the correct rotational speed we would need to consider both the effects of visibly apparent spatial distortion as well as the effects of time dilation and then make a mathematical correction to find the correct rotational speed. If we look at the evidence in this way we can then interpret the flat rotational curve of such galaxies as being one more convincing piece of evidence to support the existence of spatial dilation in a gravitational fields.