Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: iin this paper , we consider a uniform , infinite universe with a spherical hole . ultimately , we intend to develop a new cosmological model for an expanding universe in which holes are the dominant feature . geller and huchra @xcite also indicate the importance of holes in the universe by writing  ... it probably makes more physical sense to regard the individual voids as the fundamental structures . " thus motivated , we consider the behavior of a hole in an otherwise infinite and uniform universe . we show first in section 2 , using newtonian theory , that there exists an outward - directed gravitational force acting away from the center of the spherical hole , and we develop a formula for this force . this force is referred to as negative gravity . then , in section 3 , we solve the newtonian differential equations to discover the expansionary behavior of the hole and develop certain formul to be used later . we show the same conclusion using the methods of einstein s general relativity in section 4 . the derivation of the standard schwarzschild solution for an attracting point particle of mass @xmath0 is well known . the results are summarized in section 4.1 , and several consequences are mentioned which will be important later when the techniques used in the solution of the schwarzschild problem are applied to a nonstatic distribution of mass . it is well known that particles and photons are attracted toward the mass . in the geodesic equations describing the motion of particles and photons , if the mass were negative , we would conclude that particles and photons would deflect away from the mass . although negative mass may not have any physical significance , it serves as an introduction to the main results of later sections . the concept of negative mass will be used in terms of superimposing on a uniform universe this schwarzschild solution for negative mass in order to simulate a mass deficiency ( hole ) in an otherwise uniform universe . section 4.2 gives a new interpretation of the solution of einstein s field equations for a uniform distribution of mass . this solution represents a flat geometry and reduces to the flat geometry of special relativity for mass density decreasing to zero . section 4.3 describes the effect of a spherical hole in a uniform universe . in these sections also , the physical significance of the cosmological constant is determined . if this were a linear universe , the two solutions from sections 4.2 and 4.3 could be superimposed . in a physically imaginable universe which is initially uniformly filled with mass except for a spherical hole , particles and photons are deflected away from the hole . this follows since the geometry of the uniform distribution is flat and does not affect the uniform motion of particles and photons , while the negative schwarzschild mass of section 4.2 would repel matter and photons . loosely speaking , the hole repels matter and energy . also in section 4.3 , a remarkably close connection is made between the schwarzschild solution and the newly discovered newtonian potential for holes , which includes the contribution of negative gravity . the purpose of section 4.4 is to show this using the fully nonlinear einstein field equations . finally , the geodesic equations are considered , and it is shown that particles and photons are deflected away from the hole . section 4.5 summarizes the results . section 5 gives a development of a new cosmology , based upon expanding holes in an infinite , uniform universe . this is based upon a paper by r. n. lewis @xcite , in which it is shown how structure could form from the interactions of nearby holes , resulting in the universe we observe today . the microwave background radiation , caused by gravitational redshift , and hubble s law are shown to be natural consequences of the model . we also discuss the relative abundances of elements throughout the universe , olbers paradox , and other observed phenomena .    finally , in section 6 , we use some of the ideas and equations previously derived in order to calculate hubble s constant , the average mass density in the universe , and the cosmological constant . certain accurate astronomical data are used in the calculations . the value derived for hubble s constant is shown to lie within the experimentally - determined range for that constant , providing confidence that the underlying theory is correct . iin this section , we consider a newtonian approach to the gravitational force field in an infinite universe filled with a uniform distribution of mass with the exception of a spherical hole . physicists usually consider the potential and the force acting on a particle anywhere in such an infinite universe to be infinite , since a formal integration over space produces this result . however , we apply symmetry in our calculations to produce cancellations , which leads to a finite force at any point . this application of symmetry is mathematically equivalent to a cauchy - type integration , without which the integral would be infinite . whether this approach is valid depends on its agreement with the results of general relativity . using results in later sections of this paper , we show this to be the case . iwe consider an infinite , uniform distribution of matter with mass from a spherical region removed and evaluate the force field at any point . the three main hypotheses we use are :    1 . gravity obeys the ( newtonian ) inverse - square force law , and it acts over arbitrarily large distances and time intervals . the general relativistic aspects of this problem are taken up later in this paper . when necessary , matter will be considered to be distributed continuously rather than discretely throughout space . with this assumption , the calculations become tractable . on the other hand , the difference in effect on a point mass of a continuous distribution of matter versus a discretely distributed ( atomic ) set of matter is negligible . indeed , the only essential aspect of the distribution of matter which is used in the computations leading to the results in section 2.3 is spherical symmetry . also , when convenient , we will assume that the mass density is constant . the universe is spatially infinite . this , along with the constant mass density of hypothesis ( 2 ) , implies that the universe contains an infinite amount of mass . ihere , we present some results which depend only upon the inverse - square law of newtonian theory . see kittel , knight , and rudderman @xcite for appropriate computations involving gravitational forces . the following is a list of the necessary facts and formul :    1 . the gravitational force due to a spherical shell of mass of radius @xmath1 , ( infinitesimal ) thickness @xmath2 , and mass density @xmath3 ( mass per unit volume ) acting on a mass @xmath0 outside the shell ( @xmath4 ) is the same as if all of the mass of the shell were concentrated at the center of the sphere . mathematically , this is expressed as + @xmath5 + where @xmath6 is newton s gravitational constant ( @xmath7 x @xmath8 m@xmath9/kg s@xmath10 ) , @xmath11 is the distance from the center of the sphere to the mass , and @xmath12 is a unit vector from the center of the sphere toward the mass . in the case @xmath13 , a slight modification of the calculations leading to the above result yields @xmath14 2 . if we have the same situation as in ( 1 ) above , but the mass @xmath0 is inside the shell ( @xmath15 ) , then there is no gravitational force acting on the mass . therefore + @xmath16 + this result generalizes to the case of a spherical shell ( not infinitesimally thin ) of inner radius @xmath17 and outer radius @xmath18 . the gravitational force acting on @xmath0 inside @xmath17 is still @xmath19 . furthermore , the above results generalize by integration to a sphere of mass acting on a mass @xmath0 . the force due to a sphere of mass of radius @xmath1 and mass density @xmath3 acting on a mass @xmath0 outside the sphere ( @xmath20 ) is the same as if all the mass were concentrated at the center . thus + @xmath21{{gm}\o{r^2}}\v{e}.\ ] ] 4 .   if we have the same situation as in ( 3 ) but the mass @xmath0 is inside the sphere ( @xmath15 ) , then all of the mass outside of @xmath11 contributes nothing to the force , and the mass inside of @xmath11 acts on @xmath0 as if it were concentrated at the center . therefore + @xmath22{{gm}\o{r^2}}\v{e } = -\left({4\o 3}\right)\pi r\rho gm\v{e}.\ ] ]    finally , we mention that , for a finite , spherically symmetric ( not necessarily uniform ) mass distribution , the gravitational force of it on a point mass does not depend on the mass farther away from the center than the point mass , and is the same as if all of the mass closer to the center than the point mass were concentrated at the center . we will see in the next section how this result generalizes to infinite mass distributions , with unexpected results . ithe next question we ask is : what is the gravitational force on a point mass @xmath0 situated at a positive distance @xmath11 from the origin due to a uniformly distributed ( infinite ) mass external to a spherical hole with center at the origin and radius @xmath1 ( @xmath15 ) ? that is , what is the gravitational effect on a test particle in a spherical hole in an otherwise uniform universe ? if we consider the situation specified in the generalization of formula ( 2 ) in section 2.2 , and navely let @xmath23 , then we would conclude that the total force acting on @xmath0 is @xmath19 . however , this conclusion is not accurate , since the total mass which lies outside the sphere of radius @xmath18 is not spherically symmetric about @xmath0 ( although it is spherically symmetric about the center of the sphere ) , and does have an effect on @xmath0 .    in order to analyze this case , consider the situation depicted in figure 1 . we take the origin of our coordinate system at @xmath0 , with the center of the sphere @xmath24 , of radius @xmath1 , at a point @xmath11 units to the right of @xmath0 . then we draw a sphere , @xmath25 , with center at @xmath0 and radius @xmath26 . we also add a sphere , @xmath27 , concentric with @xmath24 , and with radius @xmath11 . since the mass external to @xmath25 is spherically symmetric with respect to @xmath0 , its total gravitational force on @xmath0 is @xmath19 . thus , the only effective force which will act on @xmath0 will be that due to the mass in the three - dimensional crescent - shaped region ( crescentoid ) , @xmath28 , which lies inside @xmath25 and outside @xmath24 ( see fig . 1 ) .    in order to handle this situation , consider a totally uniform distribution of matter ( no hole ) with a test mass @xmath0 at the origin . by symmetry , there will be no force acting on @xmath0 . also by symmetry , the net force on @xmath0 due to all mass inside @xmath25 is @xmath19 . the force on @xmath0 due to all the mass in the spherical shell between @xmath27 and @xmath24 is @xmath19 , from the results of formula ( 2 ) and its generalization in section 2.2 . therefore , the mass in the region @xmath28 will have a force on @xmath0 which will exactly counterbalance the force on @xmath0 due to the mass inside @xmath27 . from section 2.2 , formula ( 4 ) , we find the force on @xmath0 due to the mass inside @xmath27 to be @xmath29 , where @xmath12 is a unit vector from the center of @xmath27 toward @xmath0 . thus , the force on @xmath0 due to the mass in the shaded region ( crescentoid ) is    @xmath30    this will also be equal to the force acting on @xmath0 in a uniform universe with a hole ( either @xmath27 or @xmath24 ) , since the counterbalancing mass inside @xmath27 is not present . we note the interesting result that this force does not depend on @xmath1 . because of this , in some applications , we can think of @xmath1 as being arbitrarily large , and the crescentoid region in the figure as being arbitrarily far away from @xmath0 . the matter ( or absence of it ) in the spherical shell between @xmath27 and @xmath24 provides no contribution to the force on @xmath0 . we can therefore say that the force @xmath31 on @xmath0 given by the above formula is due to mass arbitrarily far away from @xmath0 . we also note that , as time passes , matter moves outward from the hole , destroying the constancy of matter but preserving spherical symmetry about the center of the hole . the above comments hold in this case as well , since the crescentoid region referred to above can be considered to be arbitrarily far from the motion and unaffected by it . the formula for force given above still applies , with @xmath11 a function of time .    at this point , we mention that a formal mathematical integration over all space , after applying symmetry considerations , yields the same result . we note that the force can be written as    @xmath32    where @xmath33 is the mass deficiency of the hole ( out to @xmath11 ) . this shows that newton s inverse - square force law holds for negative masses ( holes ) acting on positive masses . this formula gives the force @xmath31 at any point inside the hole ( @xmath15 ) . however , spherical shells of matter of any radius greater than @xmath11 have no gravitational effect on a mass @xmath0 at @xmath11 , so we can think of @xmath1 as being arbitrarily large . thus , the above formula yields the outward force at any point inside r outside the hole . for a point outside ( @xmath20 ) the hole , however , there will be an additional inward - directed force due to all mass closer to the origin than @xmath11 . this inward force is    @xmath34gm}\o{r^2}}\v{e}. \eqno ( 2)\ ] ]    the sum of the above two forces yields the force due to a hole of radius @xmath1 in an otherwise infinite and uniform distribution of mass on a mass @xmath0 at distance @xmath11 ( @xmath35 ) from the origin ( that is , the force of a hole acting on a mass outside the hole ) . this force is    @xmath36    where @xmath37 is the mass deficiency of the hole . this again shows the applicability of newton s inverse - square force law with one negative and one positive mass . it is tempting to say that newton s inverse - square force law holds for two negative masses as well . however , we would need to define what we mean by a force on a hole . we simply mention that two holes would have an effect on each other due to the above - mentioned force acting on the particles surrounding the holes . the net effect would be that the two holes would move toward each other and become slightly distorted . we conclude that positive masses attract each other , as do negative masses ( holes ) , but positive and negative masses repel each other . the implication of the above result is the following . the infinite amount of matter outside of a hole in an otherwise infinite and uniform distribution of matter will gravitationally draw matter out of the hole . we can loosely say that the hole repels matter , just as a concentration of matter would attract matter ( section 2.2 ) . we refer to this phenomenon as _ negative gravity_. it must be remembered that this term refers to the apparent repulsion of matter by holes . in fact , the actual mechanism causing negative gravity is the positive gravitational attraction of  mass at infinity " , that is , the mass in a crescentoid region arbitrarily far from the hole . the term negative gravity should not be taken to imply that the gravitational force between two particles is repulsive ; gravity is always attractive . as we shall see in section 4 , however , the energy - momentum tensor in the neighborhood of a hole can be negative because of the above - described effect . ian obvious generalization to make to the above calculations is the following . in a spherically symmetric ( about the origin ) universe , the net force acting on a particle of mass @xmath0 at a distance @xmath11 from the origin is    @xmath38    where @xmath39 , is the difference in the average densities of matter outside and inside @xmath11 , respectively . the density @xmath40 is the mass divided by the volume of the region inside @xmath11 . the density @xmath41 is the average mass density over the region external to the sphere of radius @xmath11 . we note that if @xmath42 , then this formula reduces to the formula in section 2.3 . if @xmath43 , ( i.e. if there is negligible mass outside a sphere of large radius , or if the mass density decreases to 0 as @xmath11 increases ) , then the net force is inward , the force being given by formula ( 3 ) in section 2.2 . thus , the basic underlying idea for negative gravity to exist is that @xmath44 . furthermore , if @xmath44 , we speculate that , even in the absence of total spherical symmetry , there will be a net outward force ( from centers of holes ) tending to pull things apart . inow let us investigate the behavior of a spherical hole in an otherwise infinite and uniform universe and form some conclusions about the rate of expansion . as we point out later , a slow expansion caused by negative gravity does occur . we model the problem mathematically and solve two specific problems ( sections 3.1 and 3.2 ) which assume that the age of the universe under consideration is infinite . the conclusions show the relatively large time intervals that are required for particles to move an appreciable distance .    under the assumptions given above , the outwardly - directed negative gravitational force acts at each point of space . for a particle of mass @xmath0 , the force was given above by equation ( 1 ) . this formula holds no matter what @xmath11 is . in other words , it holds both inside ( @xmath15 ) and outside ( @xmath20 ) the hole , although when the point is outside the hole , there is also an inward - directed force @xmath45 [ equ . ( 2 ) ] due to all mass inside @xmath11 . in fact , this formula holds even in a nonuniform universe as long as the universe is spherically symmetric about the origin and @xmath3 represents the average mass density . ilet us suppose that we have a universe of discrete hydrogen atoms . such a universe can not be uniform ( continuous ) except in a statistical sense , but it can be spherically symmetric about the origin . let us suppose that this is the case and that an atom , @xmath46 , lies at the origin . we also assume that the average mass density , @xmath3 , is one atom per cubic meter ( @xmath47 x @xmath48 kg / m@xmath9 ) . this is roughly on the same order of the value that current observations of luminous matter lead us to believe . the presence of unobserved matter would increase this value . the actual value of @xmath3 is immaterial to the conclusion we wish to draw . because of the density assumption , we assume that the nearest other atoms are one meter ( 1 m ) from the origin . to @xmath46 , the other atoms appear to be distributed spherically - symmetrically over all space outside of a hole of radius one meter . now , let @xmath46 be displaced a distance @xmath49 m in any direction . let @xmath50 represent this configuration , with @xmath51 representing the original spherically - symmetric universe . the hypotheses ( a test particle in a hole in a spherically - symmetric universe ) of section 1 are satisfied . the outward force given in that section acts on the atom @xmath46 . newton s second law of motion implies that    @xmath52    where @xmath53 is a position vector of the particle . the initial value problem for @xmath11 , therefore , is    @xmath54    @xmath55    @xmath56    let @xmath57^{1/2 } = 6.84 $ ] x @xmath58 s@xmath59 . then the solution of the initial value problem is    @xmath60    according to this differential equation model , the time , @xmath61 , it takes for the mass @xmath0 ( hydrogen atom ) to reach the edge of the hole ( @xmath62 m ) and its corresponding velocity depend on @xmath63 . for example , if @xmath64 m , @xmath65 x @xmath66 years . if @xmath67 m , @xmath68 x @xmath66 years . in both cases , since @xmath69 , and since @xmath62 m , then @xmath70 x @xmath58 m / s . note that @xmath71/\a \}\bigl)/\beta \approx [ ln(2/\a ) ] /\beta \r   \infty$ ] as @xmath72 . the conclusion we arrive at is that it takes infinitely long to transform the universe from configuration @xmath51 to configuration @xmath73 for @xmath74 m.    there are two aspects of this model that need clarification . the first is that , as the hydrogen atom @xmath46 moves , it also gravitationally affects all the other atoms in the universe , displacing them slightly and destroying the spherical symmetry of the universe outside the hole . to counter this problem , we argue that the conclusion we reached at the end of the previous paragraph is still valid . the reason to believe this is that the smaller the value of @xmath63    is , the better the initial value problem @xmath75 models the physical situation . in the next section , we present a model in which spherical symmetry is preserved , so that this problem does not arise . the other remark to make is a positive one . this model allows us to start with a uniform universe , @xmath51 , at time @xmath76 ( let @xmath72 ) instead of starting at a particular time , @xmath77 (  big bang " ) , with a particular mass density and having to worry about what happened before that time or about what caused things to happen . inow let us consider a uniform ( rather than a discrete ) distribution of mass [ @xmath78 x @xmath48 kg / m@xmath9 ] and suppose that , at time @xmath80 , a spherical hole of radius @xmath1 is introduced , centered at the origin @xmath81 . @xmath82note : @xmath83^{1/3}$ ] m if we consider the problem of taking away the equivalent mass of one atom at the origin.@xmath84 consider the force acting at point @xmath85 where @xmath86 .    at time @xmath87 , we have the situation depicted in figure 2 . there is an outward force ( relative to @xmath81 ) acting on each particle ( see below ) , so at a later time we will have the situation depicted in figure 3 . at time @xmath87 , the force acting on a particle at a distance @xmath88 from @xmath81 is    @xmath89    where [ equ . ( 1 ) ]    @xmath90    is the outward force due to negative gravity of all mass outside @xmath88 , and [ equ . ( 2 ) ]    @xmath91\rho gm}\o{r_1 ^ 2}}\v{e}\ ] ]    is the inward force due to mass inside @xmath88 , where @xmath92\rho$ ] is the mass inside the sphere of radius @xmath93 centered at @xmath81 . at time @xmath87 ,    @xmath94    which is outward - directed . the magnitude of @xmath95 decreases with increasing distance ( @xmath93 ) from @xmath81 . at time @xmath96 , the force acting on a particle at distance @xmath11 from @xmath81 is    @xmath89    where    @xmath97    is the force due to negative gravity ( it changes with @xmath11 ) , and @xmath45 is the inward force due to positive gravity of all matter closer to the origin than @xmath11 . because of the initial outward - directed force , all particles will be accelerated outward . we will see later that this outward motion will continue forever .    at this point , let us make a further assumption about the motion . we will assume that atoms do not pass each other on their outward journey as time progresses . to justify this assumption , consider what would happen if one particle were to pass another . the force @xmath98 on each would not change , but the inward - directed force @xmath45 would . the magnitude of @xmath45 on the overtakng particle would increase , due to the increased mass inside the sphere of radius @xmath11 , thus decreasing the magnitude of the outward force @xmath31 . the magnitude of the force @xmath45 on the overtakn particle would similarly decrease . the net effect of one particle passing another would be a decrease in acceleration on the passing particle and an increase in acceleration on the passed particle . other particles farther away would see no effect of this passing , so we just assume it does not occur . with this assumption , we can write    @xmath99\rho gm}\o{r^2}}\v{e}.\ ] ]    because of the above assumption , the total amount of matter closer to @xmath81 than @xmath11 remains unchanged ( the term in brackets in the numerator ) , but @xmath45 has changed since @xmath11 in the denominator has increased from its initial value @xmath93 . therefore    @xmath100    this is always an outward - directed force since the last parenthesized term is always positive . at time @xmath87 , it equals @xmath101 since @xmath88 . when @xmath102 , then @xmath103 , so the term in parentheses is greater than @xmath104 . since position is given by @xmath53 , then newton s second law gives    @xmath105    or , with @xmath106 ,    @xmath107    but @xmath108 , so    @xmath109    therefore    @xmath110    the solution satisfying @xmath111 and @xmath88 at @xmath87 is    @xmath112\right\ } ^{1/2},\ ] ]    or    @xmath113    this is difficult to integrate except when @xmath114 ( a point at the edge of the hole ) . in that case ,    @xmath115    the solution satisfying @xmath116 , found by trigonometric substitution in the integral of the above expression or by direct solution of the second order differential equation [ with @xmath117 , is    @xmath118    @xmath119    note that , for @xmath120 ( the same formula was derived in section 3.1 for a discrete distribution of matter ) , which shows that hubble s law holds in this ( accelerating ) expanding universe , with no need for introducing a singularity (  big bang " ) at some finite time in the past . in addition , the value of @xmath121 given here as the proportionality constant is surprisingly close to the estimated value of the hubble constant @xmath122 . i propose that this value for @xmath121 is the one that should be used for the hubble constant , not necessarily the numerical value which is dependent upon a more accurate estimate of the average density in the universe , but the formula given before equation ( 4 ) . see section 6 for a more accurate calculation of @xmath3 and hence of @xmath121 . now we consider equation ( 5 ) when @xmath123 . in equation ( 5 ) , we let @xmath124 and @xmath125 and integrate , using @xmath126 , to obtain    @xmath127^{1/2}}}ds.\ ] ]    this can be written in terms of elliptic integrals of the first and third kinds ( see @xcite ) . we will not pursue this integral solution further since we are able to derive the desired results directly from the differential equation . now we consider the velocity of the particles . we have already shown that the magnitude of @xmath95 ( and therefore of acceleration ) is a decreasing function of initial position . thus , for a certain time interval after @xmath87 , the speed of particles will be a decreasing function of position also . we will assume that this situation holds for all @xmath128 . since particles that start farther out always move slower , the particles which began closer to the origin will begin to catch up to , but never overtake , the more distant particles . thus , an outward moving spherical wave of matter starts to build up at the edge of the hole . now let us find out how long the above process takes . using values for the constants given above , the time @xmath61 required for the spherical wave of matter to reach one light year in radius is given by    @xmath129    if @xmath93 is the radius of a hole which holds the mass of one atom , then    @xmath130    and    @xmath131    it will take @xmath132 trillion years to evacuate a hole of radius @xmath133 light year . at that time , the velocity of the outwardly expanding wave would be @xmath134 x @xmath135 m / s . further calculations show that the mass of a typical galaxy ( our own , for instance ) is about @xmath136 x @xmath137 kg / sun x @xmath66 suns / galaxy @xmath138 x @xmath139 kg . in the original one - atom - per - cubic - meter universe , a sphere would need to have a radius of @xmath140 x @xmath141 m @xmath142 x @xmath143 light years to contain that much mass . solving @xmath144 for @xmath61 shows that it would take    @xmath145    in order to evacuate a hole of size large enough to have initially contained the mass of a typical galaxy . the velocity of the outward - expanding wave at that time would be @xmath146 x @xmath147 m / s , still less than @xmath148 of the speed of light . in analogy with section 3.1 , we remark that the equation @xmath149 can be solved for @xmath61 as a function of @xmath11 and @xmath93 . for a given value of @xmath11 , we see that @xmath150 as @xmath151 . this reconfirms the conclusion we made in section 3.1 of the infinite age of the universe we are considering here . later , we show how this model can be applied to develop a cosmological model for our universe . inow we turn to an investigation of the problem of the behavior of a spherical hole in an infinite , uniform universe from the point of view of general relativity . we will have occasion to use some of the previously - derived results and will show that the newtonian results are compatible with general relativity . ithe standard line element of riemannian geometry is given as @xmath152 , where the einstein summation convention is used , and @xmath63 and @xmath153 take on values 1 through 4 . the @xmath154 are the elements of the metric tensor . because the problem we are considering exhibits spherical symmetry , the coordinates @xmath155 will be identified with the standard spherical coordinates of special relativity :    @xmath156    where @xmath157 is the speed of light in a vacuum . depending on context , the origin will be taken to be either the center of an attracting mass or , when dealing with a hole in a uniform universe , the center of the hole . a standard solution of einstein s equations , which is now well known , was first found by schwarzschild in 1916 . for a particle of mass @xmath0 in an otherwise empty space , the static line element can be reduced to @xcite    @xmath158    where @xmath159 and @xmath160 are functions of @xmath11 only . the relativistic field equations are ( * ? ? ? ( 9.79 ) )    @xmath161    @xmath162 is the contracted riemann - christoffel tensor , @xmath28 is a scalar contracted from @xmath162 , @xmath163 is the energy - momentum tensor , @xmath164 is the cosmological constant introduced by einstein , and @xmath165 is a constant which is related to the constant of gravitation in newton s theory . @xmath165 is usually evaluated when poisson s equation for the potential is used as a first approximation . this is not done here for two reasons : ( 1 ) a different potential [ that for holes ; see equ . ( 8b ) ] is used , and ( 2 ) the value of @xmath165 is later derived independently .    later , the gravitational force acting on a particle of mass @xmath0 in a uniform universe with a spherical hole whose center is at the origin will be considered . the results of the newtonian theory are presented here for purposes of comparison with the results of general relativity . earlier , we found the outward newtonian force at any point to be [ see equs . ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) ]    @xmath166    this represents a conservative force field with corresponding potential    @xmath167    while this may not be the standard way of defining @xmath168 , the ultimate use to which this is put is as a guide to solve the field equations . the conclusion of that venture in no way depends upon this newtonian potential . moreover , the similarity below between this newtonian potential for holes and the schwarzschild solution is certainly more than coincidental . from equation ( 8b ) , we finally note that , either inside or outside the hole , direct differentiation yields    @xmath169    this is the negative of the value found for the potential of an attracting mass ( * ? ? ? * equ . ( 9.3 ) ) .    now consider an isolated mass at the origin . the equations ( 7 ) become @xcite    @xmath170    @xmath171 + \l , \eqno ( 9b)\ ] ]    @xmath172    where @xmath173 are the only possible nonzero elements of the energy - momentum tensor . only perfect fluids of density @xmath174 and pressure @xmath175 will be considered , so that the energy - momentum tensor reduces to    @xmath176    as will be shown later , the cosmological constant , @xmath164 , enters into the equations through the influence of distant matter . in the schwarzschild model , special relativity boundary conditions at infinity are usually applied to obtain the value zero for @xmath164 . a nonzero value for @xmath164 is included in these calculations only for consideration in later models where distant matter can not be ignored . in the empty space surrounding the mass , the pressure and density are zero , and so @xmath177 . at this point , standard calculations on equations ( 9 ) yield the solution for the metric    @xmath178    where @xmath0 is the mass of the attracting object . thus , the schwarzschild line element ( 6 ) becomes    @xmath179    following tolman ( * ? ? ? * sec 83 ) , we can write the geodesic equations for a moving particle as    @xmath180    where the term in braces is the christoffel symbol of the second kind . again , standard calculations yield the geodesics for a particle or for a photon . for a particle , we find that ( @xmath181 is a constant , @xmath182 )    @xmath183    or , for a radially - traveling particle ,    @xmath184    the acceleration in ( 14b ) is negative for positive @xmath0 and @xmath185 . thus , a particle is accelerated inward for an attracting body .    for a photon , we can also calculate the geodesics . standard asymptotic analysis shows that the photon is deflected as it passes the attracting mass . to first order in @xmath186 , where @xmath28 is the distance of closest approach to the origin , the angle @xmath187 satisfies    @xmath188    for an incoming photon , and    @xmath189    for an outgoing photon . the photon has been deflected from the straight line path a total of    @xmath190    toward the source @xmath0 , which agrees well with observations made during solar eclipses . the conclusion to be drawn from equations ( 14b ) and ( 15c ) is that , for negative @xmath0 and @xmath191 , particles are accelerated away from the mass ( @xmath192 , see @xcite ) , and photons are deflected away from the mass ( @xmath193 ) . particles and photons are deflected away from the origin due to an outward directed newtonian force or due to an outward - curving geometry . in other words , mass deficiency repels matter and energy . iconsider a spatially infinite universe with matter uniformly distributed with density @xmath194 . by spherical symmetry and homogeneity , the line element has the form [ equ . ( 6 ) ]    @xmath195    where @xmath159 and @xmath160 are constants independent of @xmath11 and @xmath61 . einstein s field equations for a perfect fluid at constant pressure @xmath196 and constant density @xmath194 reduce to [ see equs.(9 ) and ( 10 ) ]    @xmath197    @xmath198    @xmath199    so that ( see ( * ? ? ? after ( 4.206 ) ) )    @xmath200    @xmath201    @xmath202    @xmath203    equation ( 18c ) shows that the cosmological constant @xmath164 is nonzero . this shows the importance of the boundary conditions at infinity . a zero value for the cosmological constant is derived using special relativity ( no mass ) boundary conditions at infinity . a nonzero value is found by assuming uniformly distributed mass at infinity . @xmath164 must be positive in order that @xmath194 be positive . the pressure @xmath204 will then be negative . this is extremely counterintuitive . however , as we pointed out earlier , the introduction of a hole into an infinite , homogeneous , newtonian universe causes matter to move away from the hole . this explains the negative value of the pressure , since pressure measures the tendency of matter to fill a hole . this concept represents a significant change in cosmological thought . an infinite , uniform , static universe is now allowed , along with negative pressure , although such a universe is unstable ( see secs . 4.4 and 5 ) . see @xcite , for example , for a contrasting view . hawking @xcite states the contrasting case even more strongly :  we now know that the universal attractive nature of gravity is inconsistent with a static infinite universe . " all three of @xmath204 , @xmath194 , and @xmath164 are extremely small in magnitude . later , the value of @xmath205 is found . using the values @xmath206 x @xmath8 m@xmath207 kg s@xmath208 x @xmath48 kg / m@xmath9 , and @xmath209 x @xmath210 m / s , then @xmath211 x @xmath212 m@xmath213 . the value of density is an estimate based upon observations of luminous matter and should provide a lower bound for @xmath164 . the presence of even vast amounts of unobserved matter would increase its value but not change the conclusions drawn . see section 6 for a more accurate determination of @xmath164 .    in order to determine @xmath160 from ( 16 ) , consider a radially - traveling photon ( @xmath214 ) such that    @xmath215    represents the speed of light in a medium of density @xmath194 , and @xmath216 is the index of refraction . @xmath217 is a reduction factor for the speed of light traveling through the medium , and @xmath218 . for a fixed medium , this will be constant . thus the speed of light in the medium is @xmath219 . as @xmath194 decreases to zero , @xmath217 increases to one . for the low density problem we envision here , @xmath220 . therefore , we will assume @xmath221 and not concern ourselves with the difference . it should also be recognized from the above equations that the cosmological constant @xmath164 is proportional to the density . this interpretation will provide a justification for the appearance of that constant in the field equations for cosmological purposes . it also gives a cosmological meaning to that constant and will show the effect of distant matter on the behavior of particles . finally , in a sparse universe of discrete atoms , there will be no kinetic interactions between atoms , and it is permissible to take @xmath222 , with @xmath223 . inow consider the same homogeneous universe with a spherical hole of radius @xmath1 . take the origin at the center of the hole . the line element will now have the form @xcite @xmath224    where @xmath159 and @xmath160 are functions of @xmath11 and @xmath61 . the universe is no longer static , but it can still be considered to be spherically symmetric . physically , think of arriving at this state by superimposing on a homogeneous universe a negative mass @xmath0 spread out over a sphere of radius @xmath1 , or , equivalently , deleting a sphere of radius @xmath1 and mass @xmath0 from the uniform universe . mathematically , think of linearizing the field equations and superimposing the schwarzschild exterior solution with negative mass , @xmath225 , onto the flat geometry of a uniform universe given in section 4.2 , @xmath226 . the field equations are ( see @xcite ; compare with equ . ( 9 ) ; note that dots and primes represent partial derivatives with respect to @xmath61 and @xmath11 , respectively )    @xmath227 = e^{-\l}\left({{\l ' } \o r } - { 1\o{r^2}}\right ) + { 1\o{r^2 } } - \l , \eqno ( 21a)\ ] ]    @xmath228 = -e^{-\l}\left({{\nu ' } \o r } + { 1\o{r^2}}\right ) + { 1\o{r^2 } } - \l , \eqno ( 21b)\ ] ]    @xmath229 = c\left[\left(\rho   + { p\o{c^2}}\right)r^2sin^2\t \left({{d\phi}\o{ds}}\right)^2 + { p\o{c^2}}\right ] = \ ] ] @xmath230 + { { e^{-\nu}}\o{c^2}}\left({{\ddot{\l}}\o 2 } + { { \dot{\l}^2}\o 4 } - { { \dot{\l } \dot{\nu}}\o 4}\right ) - \l , \eqno ( 21c)\ ] ]    @xmath231 = e^{-\l}{{\dot{\l}}\o { rc } } , \eqno ( 21d)\ ] ]    where @xmath3 and @xmath175 represent density and pressure . these equations can be solved exactly in the interior of the hole where the energy - momentum tensor is zero . equations ( 21a ) and ( 21b ) imply @xmath232 . choose @xmath233 . also , equation ( 21d ) implies @xmath234 . theorem @xcite then requires    @xmath235    since the equations ( 21 ) reduce to the same form as equations ( 9 ) [ see equ . ( 11 ) ] . regularity at @xmath236 requires @xmath237 . therefore ,    @xmath238    in light of equation ( 15c ) , with @xmath237 , the @xmath164 term has no influence on photons which pass through the hole in a straight euclidean line . however , with @xmath237 and @xmath239 , equation ( 14b ) implies that particles are accelerated outward . by continuity , this outward acceleration must extend at least part way into the matter - filled region outside the hole . we wonder whether the singularity at @xmath240 in equation ( 22b ) provides an upper limit to the expansion of holes in a uniform universe .    in the newtonian theory , inside the hole , we have [ equs . ( 8) ] @xmath241 , and    @xmath242    , indicating that @xmath243 , and @xmath244 . this is @xmath245 times the value usually used for c , which is derived for the potential of an attracting point mass . the equation @xmath246 is derived in @xcite or @xcite for a time independent metric , which exists in the interior of the hole . see @xcite where it is suggested how to calculate @xmath164 experimentally , thus yielding a reliable value for @xmath194 .    before trying to solve the field equations ( 21 ) outside of the hole , where matter is in motion and the metric is not static , let us make a connection between this and the newtonian theory . there is the approximation given above    @xmath247    where @xmath187 is the newtonian potential . we assume that this is approximately valid in the region exterior to the hole even though the metric is not static there . the force acting on a particle of mass @xmath0 at any point outside the hole is [ see equ . ( 4a ) ]    @xmath248 . \eqno ( 24a)\ ] ]    since the bracketed term is positive ( @xmath249 ) , the force is outward - directed . thus , as time increases , the hole expands outward and individual particles move away from the origin . the corresponding potential is    @xmath250 . \eqno ( 24b)\ ] ]    note that @xmath187 decreases toward @xmath251 as @xmath11 increases ( @xmath252 points in the same direction as @xmath253 ) , so that large @xmath11 values correspond to large negative potentials . using this value for @xmath187 , we see that @xmath254 from equation ( 23 ) should be of the form    @xmath255}\o{c^2 } } \eqno ( 25a)\ ] ]    @xmath256\left({g\o{c^2r}}\right ) - 2\left[\left({4\o 3}\right)\pi \rho _ 0r_1 ^ 3\right]\left({g\o{c^2r}}\right ) . \eqno ( 25b)\ ] ]    earlier , we showed that , for a particle which started at @xmath114 , the position in the newtonian theory at any later time @xmath61 is @xmath257 . in addition , if @xmath123 then @xmath258 , but @xmath259 as @xmath260 . it is reasonable to conclude that @xmath261 where @xmath262 , so that the last term in equation ( 25b ) can be replaced with a general function @xmath263 which would be expected to lie asymptotically between @xmath264 and @xmath265 as @xmath266 . we identify in the first coefficient of @xmath264 in equation ( 25b ) the term @xmath267 which is the mass @xmath268 which was initially removed from an infinite homogeneous universe of constant density @xmath194 to make a hole of radius @xmath1 centered at the origin . letting @xmath269 ( * ? ? ? ( 8.28 ) , ( 8.33 ) ) or ( * ? ? ? ( 5.118 ) ) , this term is exactly @xmath270 which corresponds to the term in the schwarzschild exterior solution with negative mass [ see equ . ( 11 ) ] . the coefficient of @xmath271 is exactly the @xmath164 value calculated above . thus ,    @xmath272    which differs from the schwarzschild solution only in the @xmath273 term . it should also be noticed that the schwarzschild solution , except for the @xmath273 term , corresponds exactly with the newtonian potential for holes . in particular , the @xmath270 term corresponds to the mass which was initially removed to form the hole of radius @xmath1 ( negative schwarzschild mass ) , and the @xmath274 term corresponds to the effect of negative gravity , that is , to mass at infinity . the geodesic equations ( 13 ) now become more complicated , so the analysis of the motion of photons and particles is made more complex . thus , at this point , only an educated guess as to the motion of photons and particles outside the hole can be made . because of the outward newtonian force , we claim that particles move outward in the relativistic theory as well . this conclusion also follows from equation ( 14b ) if we neglect the @xmath273 term . in fact , as was remarked earlier , this conclusion follows from continuity at least near the edge of the hole . also , in comparison with equation ( 15c ) , we claim that the trajectories of photons are bent outward in the matter - filled region exterior to the hole because of the negative @xmath0 [ negative schwarzschild mass  see discussion after equ . ( 15c ) ] referred to after equation ( 25b ) ( again neglecting @xmath273 ) . thus , the linear theory ( superposition of solutions from section 4.2 and from this section , neglecting @xmath273 ) gives the conclusion that a hole repels matter and energy . in the newtonian theory , we showed that the outward acceleration was due to the effect of  mass at infinity " , that is , only that mass outside of a sphere of arbitrarily large radius . from equation ( 14b ) with @xmath237 , it can be seen that the outward acceleration acting on particles is due to the @xmath164 term . thus the cosmological constant @xmath164 is associated with the distant mass , which shows that mach s principle @xcite , at least insofar as it deals with radial forces , is apparently incorporated into einstein s theory through the cosmological constant . this conclusion contrasts with conventional thinking @xcite . inow , consider the equations ( 21 ) outside of the hole , where matter is present . first , it seems likely that zero is a lower bound for the sum @xmath275 [ see equ . ( 18d ) ] . as matter moves away from the hole , the hole ( where @xmath276 ) will expand . in addition , as matter builds up at the edge of the hole and beyond , @xmath3 will increase there , but @xmath175 will also increase due to the increased kinetic activity of the matter there . we will take this to be an additional requirement :    @xmath277    next , notice that subtraction of equation ( 21b ) from equation ( 21a ) results in    @xmath278 = e^{-\l}\le({{\l ' + \nu ' } \o r}\ri ) . \eqno ( 26)\ ] ]    since @xmath279 ( sec . 4.3 ) and @xmath280 , then @xmath281 . compare with ( * ? ? ? ( 9.121 ) ) . let us require further that @xmath282 and @xmath283 . also note from equation ( 21d ) that @xmath284 . now the geodesic equations ( 13 ) will be considered . these reduce to ( for @xmath285 )    @xmath286    @xmath287    @xmath288    @xmath289    @xmath290    one solution of equation ( 27b ) is @xmath291 ( that is , motion takes place entirely in that plane ) , and the corresponding solution of equation ( 27c ) is @xmath292 , where @xmath181 is a constant . using these , equations ( 27a ) and ( 27d ) are simplified to    @xmath293 = 0 , \eqno ( 28a)\ ] ]    @xmath294 = 0 . \eqno ( 28b)\ ] ]    one interesting observation about equation ( 28a ) is that it is a completely general description of the motion of particles or photons in a non - static universe . as such , it also describes motion in a different model where we have a concentration of matter ( rather than a hole ) at the origin in an otherwise uniform universe . physical considerations , as well as superposition of the regular schwarzschild solution for an attracting mass onto the flat geometry of section 4.2 , indicate that matter is accelerated inward and the trajectories of photons are curved inward toward the excess concentration of matter . in that model , @xmath295 and @xmath296 . the conclusion for that model is that @xmath297 for particles and photons . in our model , @xmath298 and @xmath299 , and we expect on exactly the same physical grounds that @xmath300 that is , particles and photons are repelled away from the hole , or are attracted toward the mass in the spherical region s ( see fig . 4 ; note that coordinates in the figure are spherical ) which is symmetrically - placed on the opposite side of the particle or photon from the hole . first , consider motion of a particle . assume that it starts from rest ( @xmath301 ) and travels radially ( @xmath302 ) . equation ( 28a ) can then be written as    @xmath303 . \eqno ( 29)\ ] ]    by previous assumptions that @xmath304 and @xmath305 , this represents a positive initial acceleration . therefore , @xmath306 initially increases from zero . we conclude that @xmath306 and @xmath307 are both positive on some initial interval @xmath308 . that is , particles are initially accelerated outward away from the hole . physical considerations indicate that this situation will continue forever . on the other hand , if @xmath307 ever turned negative , then @xmath306 would start to decrease , and the troublesome term ( the first one on the right ) in equation ( 29 ) would decrease in significance . in fact , @xmath306 could never become zero with @xmath297 , since that would contradict equation ( 29 ) , so we conclude that @xmath306 is always positive . we infer that @xmath307 is also always positive . now consider the trajectory of a photon , with @xmath309 but @xmath310 . let @xmath311 be a parameter to replace @xmath312 , increasing along the geodesic in the direction of motion . the geodesic equation ( 28a ) has the same form as that for the motion of a particle , with the presence of the @xmath313 term . at the point where @xmath314 ( the point of closest approach to the origin ) , @xmath315 by equation ( 28a ) . by the same reasoning as before , we deduce that @xmath316 from that time forward and infer that @xmath317 for all time . perhaps it is not possible to actually prove mathematically that @xmath307 is positive for particles and photons without a more detailed description of the metric functions @xmath159 and @xmath160 . the main conclusion we wish to draw is that particles and photons are accelerated outward , away from the hole . this result is independent of the actual structure of the metric ( within the restrictions placed on it above ) . it only depends on @xmath281 which , in turn , depends on @xmath279 , a result derived in section 4.3 when dealing with the potential of a hole . we thus see that holes and gravitating bodies have exactly the opposite effect on matter and energy . iwe have shown , on the basis of the newtonian theory , that a spherical hole in an otherwise infinite and uniform universe tends to repel matter . using einstein s theory of general relativity above , we have come to the same conclusion for both matter and photons , the quantum packets of radiation . along the way , we have developed some interesting formul and concepts and have considered einstein s equations for a nonstatic line element and the corresponding geodesics . in addition , we have given a physical explanation of the cosmological constant and have shown the possibility of an infinite , but unstable , universe in the general theory of relativity . the consequences of these new discoveries in the field of cosmology are staggering . below , we develop an entirely new cosmology based upon holes and their repulsive characteristics in an infinite universe . the mathematical results given here form the basis for that development . inow , we consider the implications of this theory to cosmology . we assume that our universe started out in an infinite , uniform configuration infinitely long ago . then we develop some of the logical consequences of such an assumption and show that the resulting universe is surprisingly like our own universe today . in particular , the expansion of the universe can be explained in terms of an accelerating expansion due to negative gravity rather that an explosive but decelerating expansion due to the big bang . of course , any cosmology , especially one which reportedly refutes the big bang theory , must be able to explain several astronomical observations such as the microwave background radiation , the hubble expansion , and the relative abundance of hydrogen , helium , and other elements in the universe , among others . this is done also .    in section 5.1 , the history of the universe is developed , starting with an infinite , uniform state , and it is shown how structure could evolve in the universe to its present state . in section 5.2 , the gravitational redshift and some of its consequences for the evolution of the universe are discussed . section 5.3 gives a comparison between this new cosmology and the big bang . iwe showed mathematically , using newtonian mechanics , that there exists an outward gravitational force acting at each point in an infinite universe with a spherical hole whose center is at the origin . at any point at a distance @xmath11 from the center of the hole , the outward force on a mass @xmath0 is given by equation ( 1 ) . then , we came to a similar conclusion using einstein s theory of general relativity . using this idea that an outward force would cause holes to expand , r. n. lewis @xcite showed how structure could form in a universe which started out in a uniform state . the idea is that two spherical holes in an otherwise infinite and uniform universe would migrate toward one another , they would eventually touch and form a three - dimensional figure - eight , and they would eventually merge into one larger sphere . the mass in between the two holes would be pushed aside . if three holes were in close proximity , they too would approach each other and eventually merge , pushing aside the mass between them . four holes in close proximity to each other , however , retain the possibility that they trap some of the mass in between them as they move toward one another , thus forming a larger concentration of matter which would then pull together under its own positive gravitational attraction . we assume the existence of many holes throughout the universe , without specifying how they came into being . perhaps there were always slight imperfections in the uniformity which , as we earlier pointed out , would gradually grow in size . another possibility for the introduction of holes is some quantum effect which would destroy the total uniformity of the universe . whatever the cause , we assume that it repeated itself throughout the universe to form enough holes so that the ensuing evolution described below could occur . these holes , or any regions of lower than average mass density , would expand outward , just as lumps , or regions of higher than average mass density , would attract other mass toward itself . in other words , the infinite , uniform universe is unstable . we can imagine many expanding holes existing throughout the universe . r. n. lewis @xcite referred to this configuration as the swiss - cheese universe . later , as two holes came together , a sheet of matter would form between them , and the sheets of matter , looking at the entire conglomeration , would look like a foamy mixture , named the foam universe . still later , as the holes continue to expand and encroach upon each other s territory , the matter in the sheets would migrate toward the edge of the sheet , forming filaments connecting matter concentrations . this network configuration is referred to as the network universe . even later still , the filaments would split and be drawn gravitationally toward a concentration of matter . this arrangement is referred to as the caltrop universe because the appearance of one of these concentrations of matter is similar to a medieval caltrop . when astronomers peer outward toward other galaxies , they notice just this type of structure . galactic clusters seem to be connected to each other by filaments of galaxies , and , in turn , they appear clustered , not randomly , but in sheets , just the structure predicted above . galaxies and clusters are , in turn , separated from each other by gigantic voids which occur naturally in the above - described theory . it therefore appears that this view of the universe is better able to explain the observed structure of the universe than is the big bang theory , whose proponents are still arguing about how the universe could have differentiated into stars , galaxies , and galactic clusters in the relatively short time since the big bang . what is necessary for the above evolution to have occurred as stated ? the only requirements are an infinite universe , matter distributed somewhat uniformly throughout it , and the existence of randomly - scattered holes . the matter that was once distributed uniformly has been pushed or pulled together into galaxies , surrounded by emptyness , that we observe when looking out into the universe today . assuming that these galaxies are distributed somewhat uniformly throughout our universe , as most cosmologists believe today , then the outward force of negative gravity must also exist at this time , tending to push the universe apart . we can imagine that the universe we observe ( perhaps 10 billion light years or more in radius ) has an average mass density slightly less that that at infinity . one possible mechanism for this to happen is the following . assuming that there were events that occurred to form each of the holes initially all over the universe , it is conceivable that the effect of those events sufficiently far away from us havent been felt yet on earth , so that we on earth observe the average mass density in our neighborhood to be less than that farther out . our neighborhood ( radius unspecified ) of the universe and the galaxies in it , therefore , effectively reside in a large hole , with the force of negative gravity pushing outward of course , under this scenario of locality , this same comment would apply to any observer situated at any point of the universe . therefore , the same lower - than - average mass density and the same expansion must be observed everywhere . ithe outward force due to negative gravity at any point was given above in equation ( 1 ) . in addition to that outward force , there is an additional inward force due to the positive gravitational force of all mass closer to the center of the hole than the mass [ equ.(2 ) ] . the total force was given earlier as equation ( 8a ) . we also gave the corresponding potential as equation ( 8b ) . it is well known that light escaping from a gravitating body undergoes a shift in frequency due to the gravitational field @xcite . the shift is given by    @xmath318    where @xmath319 is the frequency of the emitted wave , @xmath320 is its change in frequency , and @xmath321 is the change in potential .    in calculating @xmath321 , there is a contribution from the emitting galaxy and one from the observing galaxy ( our own ) , each dependent on the gravitational mass of the respective galaxies . for a galaxy of roughly the same size as our own , these contributions will cancel . on the other hand , a much more massive galaxy may exhibit a relatively large gravitational redshift . there is also a doppler - type effect due to relative velocity , which is currently believed to be the primary cause of observed frequency shift . assuming that the visible universe resides in an expanding hole ( see section 5.1 ) , there will also be a contribution from the potential of the hole due to negative gravity . this newtonian potential [ see equ . ( 8b ) ] is proportional to @xmath265 for large @xmath11 , and could overwhelm the contributions from the other gravitational effects . it could do the same relative to doppler effects as well . it is apparent that whatever frequency shift is observed , at least four causes must be taken into account in the analysis : frequency shift caused by ( 1 ) gravitational effect of emitting galaxy , ( 2 ) gravitational effect of absorbing galaxy , ( 3 ) gravitational effect of negative gravity , and ( 4 ) doppler effect due to relative motion . however , we can conclude that the effects of ( 3 ) and ( 4 ) above reinforce each other , so that the observed redshift is not entirely due to relative motion . in other words , the estimated velocity of recession from observations of redshifted light is exaggerated , especially for galaxies which are relatively far away . in the past , an observed redshift value has been interpreted as indicating a certain distance and velocity of recession ( hubble s law ) . however , if ( negative ) gravitational effects as well as relative motion are taken into account , the observed redshift would indicate a slower ( less doppler redshift ) galaxy which is closer to us . the observed redshift should not be attributed entirely to doppler effects , nor entirely to gravitational effects . the negative gravitational redshift becomes increasingly important the larger that @xmath11 becomes . we note that , for @xmath322 light years , equation ( 30 ) yields a gravitational redshift given by @xmath323 x @xmath324 , which is significant when dealing with galaxies at that distance . in observing distant galaxies , this must be taken into account . for example , the great wall @xcite , distances to which are predicted on the basis of observed redshift values , is at a distance where negative gravitational effects are significant . more importantly , however , these negative gravitational effects will affect the microwave background radiation ( see below ) .    because of the above comments , the entire big bang theory needs to be reevaluated in light of negative gravity . an entirely new cosmology based upon expansion due to negative gravity has been developed . r. n. lewis @xcite shows one approach to this . in fact , his explanation gives a simple account for the present structure of the universe which the big bang theory can not explain adequately without internal contradictions . a new cosmology was developed in which large velocities ( see section 3.2 ) are achieved due entirely to the effects of negative gravity over much larger time intervals ( many orders of magnitude ) than are currently believed to be required for expansion to our present state . we also showed that hubble s law holds in this case . for this cosmology , all that is required is that the visible universe , as well as possibly much more , resides in a region of slightly smaller mass density than that at infinity . this would allow negative gravity , as well as all of its consequences , to function . the observed abundances of helium , deuterium , and other heavier elements in the universe can be explained by supernova activity during the longer time intervals . it is currently believed that supernova activity since the big bang was not sufficient to produce anywhere near the amount of heavier elements that are observed in the universe . the amount of helium present is estimated to be from @xmath325 to @xmath326 of the mass of the universe , with a preference for a figure of @xmath327 . it is thought that perhaps one - tenth of that amount could have been produced in supernovas in the @xmath325 billion years since the big bang . in a universe which has been around forever and which may have been nuclearly active for @xmath328 billion years , the observed abundances of helium and other heavier elements could easily have been produced . the uniform microwave background radiation could be accounted for by the radiation of all galaxies . our sun radiates at close to blackbody levels . we expect the same of other stars and galaxies . averaged out over regions of the sky , we expect the radiation coming from other galaxies to be uniform and of blackbody type . indeed , data from the cosmic background explorer @xcite support this conclusion . it is generally agreed that the main nonuniformity in the background radiation is due to the fact that we are in motion relative to the source of that radiation . most cosmologists believe that the motion is due to the big bang . the motion could be due to a general expansion caused by negative gravity . we also expect the radiation from other galaxies to be redshifted because of relative motion . from the discussion above , it is apparent that radiation is also redshifted because of the negative gravitational potential . this redshifted radiation is observed in the microwave region . it is interesting to note that the singularity implicit in equation ( 22b ) ( which gives the metric tensor : @xmath329 ) ,    @xmath330    yields a redshift from equation ( 30 ) of    @xmath331    this value being independent of @xmath332 or @xmath3 . if the microwave background radiation is actually due to an integration of the radiation of all galaxies , it would indicate a redshift of @xmath333 , corresponding to a temperature of 2.73 k and stellar surface temperatures on the order of 5000 k ( possibly less in the cooler , earlier universe ) . thus , it seems likely that the origin of the microwave background radiation must be @xmath334 to @xmath335 times more distant than @xmath336 , if we are to attribute the redshift to gravitational , rather than doppler , effects . more likely , it is due to a combination of the two effects . the singularity needs to be investigated further . however , it must be remembered that our universe is not exactly as modeled , so that the singularity shown above for a uniform universe with a spherical hole may not be a singularity for an uneven universe such as our own . the value @xmath337 found above is larger than most observed galactic redshifts . however , some recent observations of quasar redshifts are on the order of @xmath338 . these can be explained by doppler effects or positive gravitational effects due to incredibly high concentrations of mass , possibly in combination with the negative gravitational redshift . our sun s gravitational redshift is about @xmath323 x @xmath339 . a redshift of @xmath340 could result from a star or quasar with mass - to - radius radio of @xmath323 x @xmath143 times that of our sun . weinberg ( * ? ? ? ( 11.6.20 ) ) gives an upper bound of @xmath341 for gravitational redshift in a universe with zero cosmological constant . as can be seen from the equation before weinberg s equation ( 11.6.20 ) , using our equation ( 11 ) for his @xmath342 , a positive @xmath343 mediates a higher value of @xmath344 . of course this view of cosmology denies the great cosmological principle of isotropy and homogeneity and the principle of covariance by giving preference to centers of holes , at least at the present time . if we travel backward in time , the universe as has been presented here should appear more homogeneous and colder , so that these principles would have been more valid at earlier times . but , of course , as we look outward toward the heavens , we see that the universe is not isotropic nor homogeneous , so this should not be of concern . olbers paradox has an interesting explanation in this new theory of cosmology . wesson @xcite gives an explanation based upon the finite age of the universe and on inflation of the universe . this new theory does not require inflation or the big bang , but we can still invoke wesson s argument of the finite age of the universe by stating that , at earlier times , the universe was less radiant ( less hot ) . furthermore , another interesting explanation lies in the interpretation of the light ray geodesics . these bend outward , so that radiation from far enough away never reaches us !    one final comment deals with whether the universe is open or closed . this and the structure of the universe seem to be two of the most important open questions in the study of cosmology . in any cosmology based upon negative gravity , the universe is not only open , but its expansion is accelerating outward . there is not any great mass pulling it inward . in fact , the  mass at infinity " is pulling it apart . iwhy should we believe in a cosmology based upon negative gravity rather than one based upon the big bang ? the big bang theory was developed to explain the observed redshift of light coming from distant galaxies . this redshift , in turn , was explained by attributing it to recessional motion , mainly because no other explanation for the observed redshift was known . this motion was then attributed to a general expansion of the universe . it was argued that this expansion could only be explained by extrapolating back to a time when an explosion ( big bang ) caused the motion we apparently observe today . no other mechanism for expansion was known . the subsequent discovery of the microwave background radiation fit in with this theory very nicely . this radiation was thought to be the remnant radiation left over from the big bang . it was further deduced that the expansion must be decelerating due to the inward pull of the finite mass distribution . the theory was further refined to include other recent observations , including the presence and concentration of heavy elements . the theory still has trouble explaining the observed structure of the universe , including the presence of large voids and the clustering of galaxies . recent observations from the cosmic background explorer @xcite show the  early universe " to be almost perfectly uniform and homogeneous , not leaving enough time for matter to have differentiated and formed into the universe that we observe today . the theory of the development of the universe presented here , which is based on negative gravity in an infinite universe , does not have this shortcoming . it predicts the gross structure of the universe on the basis of mass being pushed or pulled together by the combined negative gravitational effects of adjacent holes @xcite . in addition , it presents a viable alternate explanation of the observed redshift of galactic radiation and of the microwave background radiation . the observed redshift of galactic light can be explained as due partly to recessional motion of expansion and partly to gravitational redshift , both ( expansion and gravitational redshift ) caused by the negative gravitational potential of  mass at infinity " . it is possible to separate out the contribution to the redshift @xmath344 due to negative gravity and that due to recessional motion , assuming that some form of hubble s law is still valid . in fact , earlier , we showed that @xmath345 ( velocity proportional to distance ) for such a universe , which shows that hubble s law ( with constant @xmath121 ) is valid , without the necessity of extrapolating back in time to a singularity . in addition , the microwave background radiation can also be associated with a redshift of radiation due to the negative gravitational potential . finally , the abundances of elements other than hydrogen can be explained by supernova activity over the incredibly long life of the luminous universe ( at least an order of magnitude larger than is currently believed ) . this new theory predicts an expansion which originated rather benignly in a cold , ( relatively ) motionless , infinite universe and which has accelerated outward and will continue to accelerate outward forever . the purpose of this section is to use some of the equations derived in previous sections to deduce accurate values for the average mass density of the universe , @xmath194 , hubble s constant , @xmath46 , and the cosmological constant , @xmath164 . these calculations are based upon fairly accurate data , including redshift and distance data to specific galaxies . the computations can be done for any such galaxies , but we concentrate on one , m87 , for a variety of reasons . section 6.1 details these reasons and the specific data we use . section 6.2 includes the calculations of the different constants . finally , in section 6.3 , a summary and conclusions as well as justification of the methods developed here are presented . iin order to perform the calculations of the values of the particular constants , specific astronomical data are needed . there are several very good reasons why the galaxy m87 would yield reliable data on which the conclusions we reach are based . second , it is close enough to us that its distance from us can be fairly accurately measured by standard ( not redshift ) means . this measured distance is @xmath347 million light years @xcite . we will use both figures in our calculations . any error in measuring this distance will show up later in our calculation of the values of the constants . m87 is also close enough that small @xmath344 approximations should be valid . third , it lies near the center of the virgo cluster of galaxies , and is relatively motionless with respect to that cluster . therefore , such motions caused by local gravitational effects ( such as rotation about the center ) are not an added complication . we assume that the entire redshift , @xmath344 , is due to universal expansion ( see above for more details ; this expansion is not due to the big bang ) , and that local gravitationally - induced motions are insignificant . m87 is far enough away that this seems to be a reasonable assumption . fourth , m87 lies in the general direction toward which our galaxy and galactic cluster are moving . the observation of our direction of motion is based upon relative microwave background radiation measurements . for this reason , the calculations based upon negative gravity should be relatively accurate on the assumption that the virgo cluster is farther out than we are along a radial direction from the center of expansion . one drawback of using m87 is that it is a huge galaxy relative to our own , roughly @xmath348 times as massive @xcite . as such , it may have associated with it a significant gravitational redshift compared with ours , which may have to be accounted for in the calculations . ignoring this possible gravitational redshift , as we do here , means that the results for @xmath349 and @xmath350 later in this paper are upper bounds and may need to be reduced , thus changing the other calculated values . one problem associated with the use of data from only one galaxy is that the galaxy we choose may not be typical . a more comprehensive study could be done using a statistical analysis of data from many different galaxies , with proper precautions being taken to account for , in particular , the phenomenon referred to in the fourth category above . however , the fact that our calculation below gives a value of the hubble constant in the middle of the experimentally - determined range should convince the reader that m87 is a reasonable choice and that this approach is a sound one . ifirst , using the notation @xmath344 for redshift , we identify three causes of redshift : ( 1 ) redshift due to recessional motion , @xmath349 , ( 2 ) redshift due to negative gravity , @xmath350 , and ( 3 ) gravitational redshift , @xmath351 . for a given value of @xmath344 , the wavelength of the radiation has been shifted by a factor of @xmath352 . therefore , @xmath353 . we assume that @xmath351 is negligible , so that the above equation can be replaced by @xmath354 or              in these equations , @xmath157 is the speed of light in a vacuum , @xmath359 is the velocity of recession , @xmath11 is distance , @xmath194 is mass density , and @xmath6 is the gravitational constant . therefore ,                          since the @xmath11 values are line - of - sight distances and are probably greater than the difference in distance from the center of the main expansion , the @xmath11 values should be reduced by an indeterminant amount , thus resulting in a larger value for @xmath194 . the approximate value of @xmath194 used earlier was @xmath47 x @xmath48 kg / m@xmath9 , roughly one - tenth the value calculated above . rubin @xcite finds that the average value of @xmath194 , at least in our visible universe , is @xmath369 x @xmath48 kg / m@xmath9 . this figure is based upon gravitational calculations and is about @xmath370 times larger than observations of luminous matter lead us to believe . thus , rubin s calculations indicate that a large percentage of the matter in the universe is nonluminous . if these are accurate figures , they indicate that the average mass density at infinity is roughly @xmath371 times what it is in our neighborhood , which is in line with the assumption made above and referred to in section 5 . we note that the range of values we derive by this method for hubble s constant is right in the middle of the range of values currently used for that value . it corresponds to the value @xmath373 km / s / mpc . this correlation of values must lend credence to this line of reasoning . it is extremely unlikely that we would end up with this degree of accuracy , compared with experimentally - determined values , if the underlying theory were not correct . iin this section , we have used certain astronomical data , certain well - established formul , and several new formul for calculating the values of the average mass density of the universe , @xmath194 , the hubble constant , @xmath46 , and the cosmological constant , @xmath164 . these values are found to be in the ranges :          the fact that @xmath46 lies exactly in the middle of the experimentally - determined range of values for that constant must mean several things . first and most importantly , it signifies that the underlying theory of negative gravity must be correct . otherwise , it would be exceedingly improbable that the calculated value would be anywhere near the experimental value . in fact , we use formula ( 37 ) above which is based upon a gravitational potential which is on the order of @xmath378 times larger than the one normally used in astronomical calculations . with the values of @xmath11 used here , the difference is about @xmath379 orders of magnitude . if the underlying theory were not correct , the calculated values should be different to a corresponding degree . second , it shows that our use of the galaxy m87 was a reasonable choice . third , it serves to pin down the value of the hubble constant even closer . fourth , the values given for the cosmological constant and for the average mass density of the universe should be relatively accurate . it should be pointed out that this is the first attempt to actually assign a nonzero value to the cosmological constant and to calculate the average mass density in an infinite universe . finally , let us observe that , in the above calculations , there were several places where it was indicated that certain values might need to be reduced for various reasons , while , in other places , just the opposite was indicated . again , since the calculated value of the hubble constant falls in the experimentally - determined range , it is reasonable to conclude that the above mentioned changes approximately balance each other .
Abstract:

Answer: in this paper , the behavior of a spherical hole in an otherwise infinite and uniform universe is investigated . first , the newtonian theory is developed . the concept of negative gravity , an outward gravitational force acting away from the center of the spherical hole , is presented , and the resulting expansion of the hole is investigated . then , the same result is derived using the techniques of einstein s theory of general relativity . the field equations are solved for an infinite uniform universe and then for an infinite universe in which matter is uniformly distributed except for a spherical hole . negative pressure caused by negative gravity is utilized . the physical significance of the cosmological constant is explained , and a new physical concept , that of the gravitational potential of a hole , is discussed . the relationship between the newtonian potential for a hole and the schwarzschild solution of the field equations is explored . finally , the geodesic equations are considered . it is shown that photons and particles are deflected away from the hole . an application of this idea is pursued , in which a new cosmology based upon expanding holes in a uniform universe is developed . the microwave background radiation and hubble s law , among others , are explained . finally , current astronomical data are used to compute a remarkably accurate value of hubble s constant , as well as estimates of the average mass density of the universe and the cosmological constant . i v u    = 1