Dark Energy and Dark Matter are some of the biggest challenges to physics and cosmologists today. Even bigger is the question of where all this stuff came from.


I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.

Helvetica Light is an easy to read font, with tall and narrow letters, that works well on almost every site.

Heading 4



A wannabe scientist. Always wanted to be a scientist from 7 years old.


I did get a BSc Hons degree in Chemistry from Glasgow University in 1972. I went to university to do maths as that was my best subject at school, but gave up after 2 years when we got to ‘imaginary numbers’. I like things to be real. Gave up physics too after 2 years. It was boring then. If we had been studying black holes it might have been different.

So I did chemistry. My paper on the photo-degradation of polymethyl methacrylate is gathering dust somewhere but I like to think that the world sees more clearly as a result.

I was offered the chance to do a PhD in silicon chemistry sponsored by the US Airforce. I had to turn it down as I needed to get a job.

So I joined Cadbury as a management trainee and made chocolate bars.



One day I saw a video on Dark Energy produced by PBS Spacetime. There was Matt O'Dowd talking about a mysterious influence that physicists have come to call Dark Energy.

I didn’t even know that the universe was expanding.

What really caught my attention was that pie chart.

95% of the energy of the universe was a complete mystery.

70% was Dark Energy.

"We have no idea what Dark Energy is. Your guess is as good as mine".


But to me it was obvious. Dark Energy, the mysterious force causing the accelerating expansion of our universe was just gravity. The gravitational pull from a very large cosmos. Every day I expected to find a simple reason why I was wrong. Instead, I kept finding stuff that supported my idea and even some ways in which it could be tested. The more I researched, the simpler it became:-

Here is a very simple idea that may explain the biggest problems in cosmology, not just Dark Energy. It is so simple that it must be wrong, but give it a chance.


Imagine for a moment that our universe is only a part of a much bigger cosmos. Not just empty space stretching to infinity, but a cosmos full of stuff,  much bigger, much heavier, and much older.


Now just apply the laws of physics to this model. No new physics required.

Change the initial conditions of the model and it becomes so much simpler.


The universe has always been much bigger than we thought.

The universe created in the Big Bang, is only a part of a much bigger and older cosmos. No need to devise new particles, mysterious new forces, or creative mathematics. No need to challenge the Big Bang. It does a pretty good job of explaining how our universe developed, but it is only part of the story of the cosmos.

In my blogs are various developments of this idea including my original paper on Dark Energy.  http://viXra.org/abs/1901.0451

Some like the Dark Energy paper are straightforward. Some are speculative.

Some are rants. It is a frustrating pastime being an amateur cosmologist.

All good theories should not only explain all the data but make predictions.

Here are some of mine:-


1.    The Hubble Parameter increases with time as galaxies move out towards the pull of cosmic gravity.

2.    Our universe is not isotropic. There is a direction to the flow from the gravitational pull of the cosmos.


The biggest question in cosmology is - where did all this stuff come from?

If predictions 1 and 2 are true then the answer is simple.

See my blog '2 out 3 ain't bad'


The universe has always been bigger and older than we thought.

We won't find it if we don't look for it.

My Dad

My Dad had to leave school at 14 in 1932 to go out to work.

Here he is at my graduation 40 years later.

His pride and pleasure is written all over his face.

Notebook & Pad


Lambda Cold Dark Matter (LCDM) explains a great deal about the structure of the universe. But how much does it tell us about the big questions of cosmology?


 “the scientific study of the origin, evolution, and eventual fate of the universe Wikipedia.

  1. It tells us nothing about where all the stuff of the universe came from. 

  2. It tells us little about how the universe will end. 

  3. Even worse, it leaves 95% of our universe unexplained. Even the placeholders for this 95%, Dark Matter and Dark Energy, are being questioned more and more.


How did it all start? Where did all this stuff come from? The matter/antimatter problem? To quote Dan Hooper “it's the most perplexing problem for more than 50 years” 

Dark Matter? Not only can we not detect it, but we also have no idea what it is.

Dark Energy? “An unknown form of energy that affects the universe on the largest scales. ... Without introducing a new form of energy, there was no way to explain how an accelerating universe could be measured”. Wikipedia.

The usual explanations of Dark Energy are totally unsatisfactory - “the energy of the vacuum which doesn’t dilute as space expands”.


The field of cosmology is a natural for the amateur scientist; a pastime that was once honourable, but is too often today scorned by the professionals. Any enquiring mind wants to know how it all started and how it will end.

When those answers are not forthcoming, one is obliged to search for an explanation. 


Cosmology has some serious problems. 

To those trying to defend LCDM, I turn to Stacy McGaugh’s blog on January 29, 2019:-

“We should remember that we once endowed SCDM with the same absolute certainty we now attribute to LCDM. I was there, 3,000 internet years ago, when SCDM failed. There is nothing so sacred in LCDM that it can’t suffer the same fate, as has every single cosmology ever devised by humanity.”




0044 7854360835

Thanks for submitting!


Thanks for submitting!