Origin of the Universe An Improved, Logical Theory which Complies with All Science Laws A Continuous "Dribbling" Little Bang sort of Effect Nearly everyone today seems to consider Physics to be a form of Philosophy, where each person can then feel free to make personal assumptions, speculations, opinions and judgments, to then be able to arrive at pretty much any conclusion he or she wishes. I was taught much of my Physics Education at the University of Chicago, a long time ago. The technology of nuclear bombs (which many of those Professors had participated in inventing) was still brand new in the 1960s. Physics of that era was considered a zero-errors field. If mistakes were to be made then no one wanted to have to deal with the extreme destruction which might occur as the consequences. We Physics students were taught to never make "assumptions" or "speculations" and to be very cautious about "expressing opinions" or "making judgments". It was an immensely cautious world. Instead, we were taught to entirely do our Physics thinking based on "known facts" and "strict logic". The very popular Big Bang Theory would never have become so popular if some dreadful logical flaws in it were considered (and somehow explained). The original Big Bang proponents in the 1940s even admitted that they neglected the actual creation of everything, that their theory only begins a moment later, after all of the actual creation had already (somehow) occurred. Those Big Bang people even gave a name to that material that (allegedly) existed before their Big Bang. They called it Ylem. That is when they claimed that their famous "Big Bang" allegedly began, around 10 -35 second later, after the Ylem already existed. They then claimed that their actual "Bang" lasted another 10 -35 second. They even admitted that it is a serious logical problem that they cannot explain
Transcript
Origin of the UniverseAn Improved, Logical Theory which Complies with All Science Laws
A Continuous "Dribbling" Little Bang sort of Effect
Nearly everyone today seems to consider Physics to be a form of Philosophy, where each person can then feel free to make personal assumptions, speculations, opinions and judgments, to then be able to arrive at pretty much any conclusion he orshe wishes. I was taught much of my Physics Education at the University of Chicago, a long time ago. The technology of nuclear bombs (which many of those Professors had participated in inventing) was still brand new in the 1960s. Physics of that era was considered a zero-errors field. If mistakes were to be made then no one wanted to have to deal with the extreme destruction which might occur as the consequences. We Physics students were taught to never make "assumptions" or "speculations" and to be very cautious about"expressing opinions" or "making judgments". It was an immensely cautious world. Instead, we were taught to entirelydo our Physics thinking based on "known facts" and "strict logic".
The very popular Big Bang Theory would never have become so popular if some dreadful logical flaws in it were considered (and somehow explained). The original Big Bang proponents in the 1940s even admitted that they neglected the actual creation of everything, that their theory only begins a moment later, after all of the actual creation had already (somehow) occurred. Those Big Bang people even gave a name tothat material that (allegedly) existed before their Big Bang.They called it Ylem. That is when they claimed that their famous "Big Bang" allegedly began, around 10-35 second later, after the Ylem already existed. They then claimed that their actual "Bang" lasted another 10-35 second. They even admitted that it is a serious logical problem that they cannot explain
about how everything had earlier actually come into existence. The Big Bang proponents thereby (allegedly) claim that the entire Universe then had already existed, before their famous Big Bang, as a really, really tiny object, smaller than even a single proton in a single atom.
After their Big Bang, they then claim that an even more implausible event took place, which they call Inflation Theory. In another 10-32 second, this Inflationary Theory claims that the tiny speck which was the entire Universe verysuddenly expanded (Inflated), in all directions at once by a factor of 10+50 to become the size of the huge existing Universe we know today, all in another 10-32 second.
There is NO logical basis and no scientific evidence for any of these precise numbers that that handful of men attributed to their Big Bang Theory. They were then arguing with a different group of Physicists who were promoting a competing idea, which was called the Steady State Theory. Physicists tend to be a very arrogant, self-centered society, and neither group could even imagine the possibility that they might be wrong. In all of their minds, there was not even anychance of any third explanation that this all came down to the egos of two small groups of men trying to intimidate and overwhelm their perceived opponents.
There never was the slightest actual logical or factual basisfor any of those ridiculously brief time interviews they cameup with. They may easily have had a dartboard to come up withthe numbers which have forever after been universally accepted as valid. As a Physicist who was taught to always use strict logic, I spent much of my early Physics career searching for the basis for even one of those numbers, but itreally appears that there is no actual basis, whatever, of any of those numbers. They certainly appear to have simply been "made up" by those ego-driven Physicists in the 1940s. And the entire world seems to have simply accepted them all as rock solid true, based on nothing at all except for the egos of that half dozen men.
We Physicists are supposed to rely absolutely on logic, and that Big Bang and Inflationary Theory violate many of the scientific Laws that we base all of science on. The proponents of the Big Bang even admitted to much of this during the 1940s. They admitted that the Euclidean math and logic upon which all of modern science has been based, is incompetible with their Big Bang, so they simply declared that none of modern science applied during their Big Bang. Instead, they simply announced that elliptical-curved-space-thinking was required, that is, that Tensor Riemannian Calculus applied. It appears that they may have adopted that since Albert Einstein had announced in 1915 that a set of tenTensor Riemannian Calculus equations were the basis for his famous General Relativity Theory. (as of yet, 2018, more thana hundred years later, no one has yet completely solved Einstein's set of Field Equations [EFE]). The elliptic curved-space math of Riemannian Calculus is SOOO esoteric that at one point, the brilliant Sir Arthur Eddington thoughtthat he was one of only three people on Earth who understood that math. So the small group that first promoted the Big Bang, very likely had no one in that group who could solve the immensely difficult elliptic curved-space math of Tensor Riemannian Calculus.
In any case, I personally spent ten years studying elliptic curved-space Tensor Riemannian Calculus, and I have spent many years after that trying to find any actual mathematical elliptic curved-space basis for any of those very specific time intervals that people cite regarding the Big Bang Theory. I have never found any Tensor Riemannian Calculus basis for any of it. I tend to lean more toward the "dartboard explanation".
Separate from needing to explain where the 10+54 kilograms of the material of the entire Universe actually came from beforetheir Big Bang, or how all of that material could have fit inside a truly tiny particle smaller than a single proton in a single atom, the associated Inflation Theory then has the
requirement for all those trillions of trillions of tons of mass (all inside that sub-microscopic speck) to accelerate upto velocities quadrillions of times faster than the speed of light (which is impossible) for that Inflation expansion to have all occurred in 10-32 second. There is yet another serious problem that all of that amazing mass of material then had to decelerate and stop, still within that 10-32 second, to become the Universe that we now know.
You can do that math yourself to confirm this problem. You have up to 13 billion light years distance for enormous masses of material to have to travel, each of about 6 trillion miles. Every particle in the Universe allegedly accelerated, traveled, and then decelerated, all in 10-32 second. (If you do the math well, you should get necessary velocities for most of the mass of the Universe to be about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles/second.) These are some of the many things that Big Bang proponents are not able to explain, and they don't even try!
And we traditional Physicists used to think that the fastest velocity is the speed of light or 186,000 miles/second was the fastest anything could ever go!
How gullible are people to accept that such logical sillinessmakes sense? But few people ever actually "do the math" (as aTheoretical Physicist is supposed to always do) and they simply accept that somebody's smiling face seems to make it all really believable.
The Big Bang Theory is immensely popular, but only because virtually no one understands the exotic elliptic curved-spaceTensor Riemannian Geometry Calculus on which it is based. Also, because of problems like those acceleration and speed of light issues with their Inflationary Theory, they have somehow convinced all Physicists to choose to be willing to abandon all the known and accepted Laws of science in deference to this very sexy but very illogical Big Bang
claim. All of those universally accepted Laws of science werebased on hundreds of years of smart people doing familiar Euclidean [or Plane] math and Geometry.
In Contrast
Much better than the very illogical Big Bang Theory, this concept is a solidly logical explanationfor the beginning of the Universe. Instead of being based on wild speculation, this is entirely based onactual experiments that many Physicists (including me) have performed, which we Physicists call "Pair Production" experiments. In these unique experiments that Physicist actually creates brand new particles or photons in a laboratory (out of NOTHING). There is no having to abandon all of the Laws of Science and Euclidean logic they were all derived through. This Pair Production experiments approach even provides an actual explanation for the actual creation of all objects and photons, where the Big Bang proponents have to neglect trying to explain such things.
Early on, only electrons and protons came into existence in our Universe, possibly one at a time! Over time, the protons and electrons bound together to form hydrogen atoms (which are still believed to be the most numerous objects in the Universe). Eventually, stars formed and certain kinds of stars can Fuse hydrogen atoms together to form helium and carbon and oxygen and many of the other elements. Rather thanthis all occurring in a tiny fraction of a second, this sequence of events takes time. And it may not have stopped even today. During THIS second, there might be Pair Production processes occcurring all over the Universe, where the later joining of protons and electrons to form atoms and various elements, might be still occurring while we live today.
Give me a few billion Physics students (and lots of
equipment) and a few billion years for them to work at doingPair Production experiments and I could make you a modest-sized Universe, one photon and one particle at a time! Wherethe Big Bang Theory alleges that all that occurred in a single location, at a single instant, this concept is quite different. I sometimes refer to it as "the Big Dribble", as I suspect that it occurred in many, many locations and repeatedly, one pair of particles or photons at a time, for billions of years. Perfectly logically.
The Big Bang idea claims an impossibly rapid explosion of everything in the entire Universe in an impossibly brief 10-35
second. No one seems to realize how ridiculous that claim is.They are claiming that all the countless trillions of tons ofmatter which exists in the entire Universe “popped” into existence in that tiny10-35 second. The smallest objects thatwe can detect are inside nuclei of atoms, around 10-24 meters across, and the fastest velocity we can know is the speed of light or 3 * 10+8 meters per second. So the smallest intervalof time which seems to make any sense is the time for light to cross that part of a tiny nucleus, or around 10-32 second. The Big Bang proponents claim that all the incredible contents of the entire Universe arose in only one one-thousandth of that much time?
The traditional Big Bang then continues the total neglect forlogic and reality by claiming that there was then an Inflation. The entire Universe, which was then smaller thanthe size of the nucleus of a single atom (10-24 meter) then suddenly expanded by a factor of 10+50 simultaneously in all directions at once, up to its current size of around 13 billion light years in another 10-32 second. Those proponents overlook the impossibility that they are claiming that all those countless trillions of tons of mass would have to accelerate up to velocities billions of times faster than theSpeed of Light, and then suddenly stop, for such a ridiculousinstant expansion to actually happen!
The Creation of the Universe may actually be a very logical process (which Physicists call "Pair Production") which Physics Students regularly perform in lab experiments. It maybe a methodical and gradual process, taking more than 13 billion years so far. It may be occurring one photon and one nuclear particle at a time and it might still be ongoing! (This theory was originally created in 1960.) (It was first Published on the Internet in 1998.)
Following strict logical scientific reasoning, at every moment of the past, present and future, the total material and energy in existence has always been exactly the same, zero. There is no need to try to justify where material or energy came from or where it will go. Most of the "particles"(protons, electrons, etc) are now in what we call "our" Universe while most of the (matching) "anti-particles" (anti-protons, anti-electrons or positrons, etc) are now in a different Universe which we could not ever detect or visit.
Everything has always perfectly complied with the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass. Every time any new photon orparticle is formed moving in one direction, an identical new anti-photon or anti-particle is formed which goes away in exactly the opposite direction, where the sum of the two always adds to exactly zero. It is pretty intense to perform a Pair Production experiment where you have actually just CREATED a brand new electron and also a brand-new anti-electron (which is commonly called a positron). NOTHING had been there a moment earlier and now you have just added to the population of everything! By the way, a photon is its ownanti-photon, just exactly out of phase, but I sometimes referto that as an anti-photon.
This new perspective is actually very standard strict thinking for Physics Students. It is entirely based on four standard types of Physics experiments.
When I was such a Physics student at the University of Chicago during the 1960s, like many other Physics students, I
did a variety of such experiments.
(1) (called Destructive Interference of radiation). One common experiment was to make two identical photons and carefully aim their energy directly at each other. Physics knows that it is possible to take two identical photons of energy (light, sound, radiation) and aim them exactly at eachother. If the two photons are at exactly the same frequency (and therefore wavelength and energy), and if the two photonshave exactly opposite phase, the energy in the colliding photons will cancel each other and the result is that they will suddenly both cease to exist and NOTHING is left. In Physics, this is called Destructive Interference. You have seen (and heard) examples of this many times. In a smooth pond where you throw two small rocks in, they each cause waves to form in the water, which travel (propagate) outward.When those waves encounter each other, you may have noticed that sometimes they add and create even taller waves (called Constructive Interference) and at other times they seem to cancel each other out (Destructive Interference) and the water momentarily seems calm (at that specific location). In fact, you may have seen exhibits in Science Museums where a long water wave tank has wave generators at both ends, and when the timing is adjusted right, in the middle of the tank,there are no waves at all, because they have Destructively Interfered with each other.
A very famous and often done experiment in Physics is called the Double-Slit Experiment. A source of monochromatic radiation is aimed at a barrier, which has two parallel narrow slits close to each other. The (monochromatic) radiation is blocked by the barrier and it can only pass through the two narrow slits. On a target wall behind the barrier, an amazing pattern is seen, an impressive set of black and illuminated stripes. We do not see the uniformly lit up target we might expect. We Physics students then measured the width of the slits and their spacing and the wavelength of the monochromatic light and everything else. It
is really just a simple geometry and trigonometry problem. Wecalculated the path length of each of the two geometrical paths from each of the slits to a dark stripe, and when they were exactly half a wavelength different, there was a black stripe. That was because there were two identical photons which had Destructively Interfered with each other and therefore disappeared from existence. We also then calculatedhow far apart the black stripes were, again from simple geometry. This proved the point I am making here. Whenever the two light paths were half-a-wavelength different, then the two waves (or photons) arrived at that location where they were exactly 180-degrees out of phase. The addition of these two identical out-of-phase waves or photons, then resulted in perfect Destructive Interference, and no radiation then remained in those black stripes. At a different location on the target screen, the two arriving photons are "in-phase" and therefore we see a brightly (doubly) illuminated stripe. Most of us Physics students are confused or spooked by seeing this "total vanishing of radiation" so most of us would then block off one of the two Slits and we would see that all the black stripes disappearedfrom the entire target screen and the whole target screen lit up. That experimentally proved that the black stripes were caused by Destructive Interference of the radiation.
If you play a guitar, you know that at the exact center of a string, it is possible to see that the string is not vibrating there, which is called a node. That is due to identical waves traveling in both directions in the string, due to the waves bouncing back off the fixed ends of the string, and that Destructive Interference can occur at the Node. In fact, another simple Physics experiment is to take two identical audio loudspeakers and aim them directly at each other. Like with the photons, if they are spaced apart correctly, for a pure sine-wave tone, the two (loud) sounds absolutely Destructively Interfere with each other and it becomes quiet! (The Bose noise-deadening earmuffs work on
this principle.) Another common example of this effect in Physics is when a very thin oil film on a calm pond reflects sunlight. If the thickness of the oil film happens to be 1/4 wavelength of some color light, then that color of sunlight vanishes in Destructive Interference, where only remaining colors of sunlight are visible, as pretty colored bands of reflected light on the pond. If you are curious as to why the color bands (and your inquisitive mind should make you curious about this), the different colors are primarily caused by the exact angle that you are observing from, which changes for different locations on the pond and so the total (angled) path length within the oil-film changes. This is actually pretty simple, where sunlight gets reflected off thetop of the oil film and also inverted and reflected off the bottom of the oil film, which is why the 1/4 wavelength thickoil layer causes this Destructive Interference.
So Destructive Interference of Radiation is a reliable fact of Physics.
(2) Destructive Interference of Matter. Another very common (nuclear) Physics experiment is similar, but with objects instead of energy photons. A negatively-charged electron is carefully aimed in a specific direction, and another object, a positively-charged anti-electron is carefully aimed so thatthe two do a head-on collision. This popular experiment, if done correctly, results in both objects being mutually annihilated. The objects cease to exist, but in Conserving Energy, a new energy photon comes into existence, which has exactly the same total amount of energy as the two objects had had. This experiment proves Conservation of Mass, but nowresults in a new bundle of energy, a photon which actually isjust Einstein's E = mc2, so it actually also Conserves Energyas well. The Double-Slit Experiment works for a beam of electrons, too, and that amazing pattern of Destructive Interference stripes is again seen.
As a young Physics student, who had been taught in High
School science that "matter cannot be created or destroyed" (by the Conservation of Mass Law) it was a little troubling to find that I had just done an experiment that proved that the High School science appeared to have exceptions! The moreadvanced Physics showed there was no logical problem, that our experiments merely confirmed Einstein's E = mc2 was also true.
So Destructive Interference of Matter is a reliable fact of Physics.
A brilliant man (Richard Feynman), who occasionally sat in asa Professor of mine at the University of Chicago, developed the Feynman Diagrams, which established the following truth. A basic accepted Fact of Physics is that "any process which can proceed Forward in time can also occur Backward in time".
The Third and Fourth experiments are intimately related to (1) and (2). (3) (called Constructive Interference of radiation.) and (4) (called Constructive Interference of particles.) These two are harder to grasp! But Physics is loaded with thousands of nuclear and atomic processes which Physics students experimentally prove can occur in either (opposite) time direction. Usually, the first such experiments that Physics students do is to just wait about 15minutes to get a Neutron to beta-decay to come apart into an Electron and a Proton, (in what might be considered forward time) and also to get an Electron and a Proton to fuse together into becoming a Neutron (in what might be consideredbackward time). The actual Process is exactly the same, but just sort of "backwards" of each other. Every other nuclear process, if it is experimentally witnessed in one time direction is known to also be able to occur in the opposite time direction. I still remember one evening (fifty years ago!) when Professor Feynman asked a dozen of us Physics students to explain to him what might happen if he started at
a Black stripe location in a Double-Slit Experiment, and he wanted to know what might happen "in backward time." We were "sort of slow" but one of us (not me!) eventually suggested that a brand new pair of photons might suddenly appear, headed toward the two slits, where they were identical but exactly out of phase with each other. Professor Feynman was pleased with that student!
Physics sometimes calls (3) and (4) either of two processes both called "Pair Production". When powerful X-rays (photons)bombard the electron shell near the nucleus of a heavy atom, sometimes a pair of actual brand-new objects, often an Electron and an Anti-Electron, are suddenly created (and as aresult of this (4) Pair Production process, the X-Ray photon totally disappears from existence). The photon needs to have at least 1.2 MeV of energy to create the mass of the pair of the objects. Each of the new Electron and Anti-Electron has amaterial Rest-Mass of 0.511 MeV and some extra energy is required to give them a minimal amount of Kinetic Energy so they can move apart. In some cases, excess energy of the photon gets converted into Kinetic Energy of the Electron andthe Anti-Electron, where all the initial energy of the photontotally vanishes in this process. Some times, a less powerfulPhoton is also released (as radiation) as well, still accounting for all the energy which had been in the X-Ray photon which had disappeared. If the X-Ray began as a Cosmic Ray with around 2,000 times more energy, around 3 GeV, the photon can vanish in creating a Proton and an Anti-Proton. Particle detectors, such as Cloud Chambers and Bubble Chambers, are used to detect curved paths of charged particles passing through a magnetic field. The oppositely charged Electron and Anti-Electron curve with the same radiusbut in opposite directions after the Pair Production.
I am amused that so many people think they are geniuses. I have actually done these Pair Production experiments, and I know what is involved. Yet many of these "geniuses" have ripped into me for claiming experiments that were (allegedly)
designed to only involve a single photon. No, that is not remotely the case! If they actually had ever done any Pair Production experiments, they would have known that an experimenter, such as me, actually starts the experiment withmillions of photons. An amazing lot of photographs are made, on microfilm, of most of those attempts. I still remember my first trip to Argonne National Laboratory, where I returned with a lot of microfilm photographs. Then, the Department sends all those microfilm photographs to some interesting projection machines which allow hired housewives to look for certain specific curved lines in the photographs. The ladies commonly find maybe a hundred photos which have curved lines as they were instructed. At this point is the first time thatthe actual experimenter (me, in this case) actually looked atany of the photos. So with my little calipers and rulers, I then threw out most of them. As long as each experimenter winds up with at least one photo which showed the unique pattern of the Pair Production process, life is good. (By theway, MY Supervisor had decided how many photons I would be given to play with, [actually, how many microfilm photographsI would be allowed to make], and his intention was to make sure that each student would wind up with at least one good photograph). That was long ago but I think I wound up with three good photographs from that first adventure. The mathematical analysis of each curved line (in the strength ofthe magnetic field where the experiments were done) gave me aconfirmation that my brand-new particles each had a Rest Massof 0.511 MeV, (the correct number for an Electron or an Anti-Electron) and my Supervisor was pleased! If it is not already obvious, I could tell my tiny brand new particles apart because their paths curved in opposite directions. In the magnetic field of the experiment, the intention was to get one new electron, which has an electrical charge of minusone, and to also get one new anti-electron, which has an electrical charge of plus one. So they curve in opposite directions in the magnetic field. By using my calipers to measure the radius of each one's curvature, I could calculate
each of their Rest Masses.
As a Researcher, I can say that doing any experiment to generate "Pair Production" of two Photons (3) is immensely harder to do. There is really nothing the experimenter can doto initiate this process, except to take millions of photographs, to try to see any situations where two new photons appear. Universities hire lots of housewives to look at terrifying numbers of photographs, with the only purpose being that a Lab Assistant (such as me!) only has to look at a very few photographs which might contain something of interest. The two new Photons must propagate away in exactly opposite directions, with exactly identical amounts of energyin each, and where that energy has to be exactly out of phasewith each other. In a successful experiment, the two brand-new photons did form from "absolutely nothing" and if and when they ever might encounter each other, they would have tomutually annihilate to again become nothing (by 1 above). In the process of this second type of Pair Production experiments, the researcher does not have the advantage of being able to do the experiment in a magnetic field, and somevariation of a Geiger Counter is often used to try to detect the new Photons. When this process occurs, the amount of energy created is really tiny, and trying to identify a specific pair of new Photons is quite difficult. (IMHO)
So Constructive Interference of Radiation is a reliable fact of Physics.
So Constructive Interference of Matter is a reliable fact of Physics.
These four common types of student Physics experiments seem to fully explain the Origin of the Universe [by 3and 4] (and also the eventual
Destruction of the Universe [by 1 and 2]), while precisely complying with all Physics Conservation Laws. Instead of happening all in a single instant in an enormous Bang, individual photons and particles might get created, in millionsof different locations and at millions of different moments.
You might notice that this is a "complete" theory, in that itclearly and logically explains both the creation of the Universe and the eventual total destruction of it. Also, where the Big Bang proponents have to necessarily ignore a tiny amount of time before their Big Bang, This theory does not have that problem, in starting from absolutely NOTHING and eventually ending with absolutely NOTHING. There are no "uncomfortable details" to have to try to ignore, as it is all wonderfully logical.
First, (process 3 above) occurs, Pair Production, where a single (brand new) Photon of energy comes into existence, headed in a specific direction, and coming into existence from a single specific location in the Universe. Per process (3), an identical (also brand new) (exactly out of phase) Anti-Photon simultaneously comes into existence, at the same instant and from the same source location but headed out in exactly the opposite direction. Notice that the sum of these two energy photons is still exactly zero total energy. Also notice that nothing tricky occurs, any different from the sorts of experiments that Physics students do. But it could occur again, even trillions and quadrillions of times, gradually populating all of Creation with unimaginable
numbers of Photons and Anti-Photons.
Random luck would have it that a (slight) majority of photonswere headed in generally one direction, toward where our Universe would later be. A (slight) majority of the anti-photons were headed in exactly the opposite direction, towardwhere an entirely different "anti-Universe" would later be. Initially, both of these Universes would have contained a mixof photons and anti-photons, with only a slight excess of oneor the other in each of those Universes. Massive Destructive Interference (process 1 above) would occur in each, which thinned out the populations, which would eventually result ina nearly complete remaining photon population in our Universeand a nearly complete remaining anti-photon population in that other "anti-Universe".
Next, (process 4 above) occurs, where a single Photon does a standard process which we Physicists also call Pair Production, where the photon now ceases to exist but where the energy from it is now a brand-new Electron and a brand-new Positron which come into existence (dependent on the amount of energy that started out in that Photon, just like in the student Physics experiments. In fact, if the Photon happened to contain a lot more energy, the process might create a brand-new Proton and a brand-new Anti-Proton instead).
Virtually all of the "natural" Pair Production (process 4) seem to create either Electron and Anti-Electron pairs or Proton and Anti-Proton pairs. That may be due to electrons and protons having Half-lives of many billions of years. This reasoning then gradually populated our Universe with matter which was essentially all Protons and Electrons. In Laboratories, some Physicists have done Pair Production experiments which have created Muon and Anti-Muon pairs, but the Half-life of a Muon is around a millionth of a second. Even in such artificial experiments, the Muons do not last long enough to be usable in any other experiments, but it is
not known if they might ever occur naturally.
This implies a logical reasoning of why the entire Universe seemed to arise as exclusively Protons and Electrons. Other possible origins of the Universe do not seem to provide a logical reason why astronomers see this experimentally in space.
Each of these generically standard "micro-creation" Physics student processes, then happen a "zillion" more times, and so, rather calmly and without any phenomenal Big Bang explosion, our entire Universe has come to be populated, possibly even taking more than thirteen billion years (so far). At no point did anything happen which would have needed science to discard our universal Laws. There are someadditional implications which seem rather interesting (discussed below). But this explanation does not require anyof the bizarre assumptions which have been necessary in trying to accept the Big Bang Theory.
Cosmogony - Cosmology
Several terrible logical errors were made by the people who dreamed up the "Big Bang Theory" about the start of the Universe. They had decided that they could totally abandon all Euclidean Geometry, and by then using exotic Non-Euclidean Riemannian (curved spaced) Geometry, they decided that they could also abandon all basic math and physics, so they could also abandon all basic Laws of Physics such as Energy, Mass, Momentum. They even decided that "universal gravitation" did not apply!
A different and far more logical explanation for the beginning of the Universe is presented here which may apparently still be ongoing! Instead of an instantaneous burst of all creation in less than a billionth of a billionth
of a billionth of a second, this Theory has a CONSTANT DRIBBLING DUAL CREATION which may still be continuing over billions of years.
Big Bang
The most popular theory regarding the origin of the Universe is commonly called the "Big Bang." It was developed with essentially total disrespect for all accepted laws of science! Specifically, it ignores an earlier instant and then speculates that at one instant, there was NOTHING, no energy and no material objects anywhere, and then an instant later, ALL of the energy in the entire Universe suddenly existed and then an instant later, all the matter in the entire Universe came into existence! Further, most Big Bang claims generally say that the entirety of the Universe then wildly "exploded" (Inflationary Theory) to much of its current size before the next tiny fraction of a second had passed! However, there are basic laws of science such as theConservation of Energy and the Conservation of Angular Momentum and Newton's Laws of Motion, that would have to be wildly violated if such a story of the Big Bang had actually occurred. Nearly everything in the Universe would have to have accelerated at ridiculous rates and then traveled at billions of times faster than the speed of light (which is impossible).
The entire basis for the Big Bang theory has always been entirely mathematical, with absolutely no consideration of any physical reality! Worse, it is not even any logical mathematics, but exotic math based on Non-Euclidean (curved space) Riemannian Geometry. Many very speculative assumptions were made in order to do that math! Around 1915,Einstein developed a set of ten immensely complex Riemannian Integral Tensor (curved space) equations as the Field Equations of his General Relativity. The set of those ten
tensor calculus equations are so complex that, as of yet, 2018, one hundred years later, no one has yet completely mathematically solved them! However, beginning about 1960, mathematicians began making speculative assumptions that thenenabled them to arrive at possible solutions to the Field Equations. The math is all so esoteric that mathematicians cannot even agree with each other whether the assumptions were valid or not, but that "little detail" is always overlooked and all the various "solutions", which are different from each other, are generally just accepted as each being true!
Note that all basis in actual physical reality was abandoned,and even the mathematics has been potentially damaged by a variety of weak assumptions. Critics of the Big Bang Theory,including me, find this to be logical "sloppiness" which is unacceptable.
There are so many wild speculations that have been built on top of other wild assumptions that many modern Physicists no longer even believe in actual logic or facts! Even as a kid,in 1960, I saw this as "selling out" almost everything in thereal Universe and in real science! The new argument presented here does not require such speculative assumptions.No 26 dimensions or even 11 or 10, only the four dimensions that science has long been comfortable with, three space dimensions (x, y and z) and time. There is no need for believing in Dark Matter or Dark Energy in order to try to justify exotic assumptions. No believing that there are billions of Universes, although this argument does seem to require four "Universes" in order to ensure that the Conservation of Mass and Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Angular Momentum are always true. There is no need to speculate that the Laws of Nature for large environments such as galaxies are totally different than those for small environments such as in atomic nuclei. This new argument seems to indicate that the Laws of Nature are the same, absolutely everywhere! There are no billions of
Universes which each have their own Laws of Nature!
It is hilarious that since modern Physicists cannot find justification for all the dimensions they feel they have to claim exist, they decide to claim that many of their speculative dimensions are "curled up" into dimensions that are so tiny that no one could deny exist! There is no need for sub-sub-microscopic "strings" or "super strings" or "branes" which are all conceded to be so impossibly small that they could never be experimentally detected. What is the point of claiming some exotic theory which can never be confirmed or denied?
There have been many speculations regarding the origin of theUniverse, with the most popular one today being a Big Bang. A respected scientist, Fred Hoyle, created that name in the 1940s as an insult. Hoyle saw that most of all actual logic had been entirely discarded to come up with that concept. All of such creation ideas seem to stretch logic and credulity beyond limits! Concepts that had been considered absolute in Physics, such as the Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Angular Momentum and the Conservation of Mass, were claimed to no longer apply, when the authors of such creative ideas could not figure out how they could address the idea that such basic Laws could still apply! Much of the basis of what Physics was built on was thrown away, in trying to find an explanation for how and why the Universe exists.
In addition, the actual beginning of the Universe is still always neglected in speculations such as the Big Bang. The mathematicians who promote such ideas all start their descriptions a tiny fraction of a second after the actual creation, often 10-35 second later! They admit that they cannot address what might have happened in that first tiny fraction of a second, so they simply ignore the issue! Again, they totally abandon any actual physical reality, and
generally assume that the entire contents of the entire Universe came into existence within a single microscopically tiny spot. They then claim a spectacular expansion (such as the Inflation Theory) (of an outrageous factor of 1050) occurred in an astoundingly brief time (such as 10-32 second).They simply then claim that the known laws of Physics could not apply during such (silly) wild expansion, which is their basis for discarding all of physical reality!
No physical reality is even considered in trying to claim that the entirety of the Universe could have expanded by a factor of 10+50 in such an astoundingly brief time of 10-32 second. They totally neglect reality concepts such as acceleration in such speculations!
By the way, no one has ever presented any actual evidence forany of the many "very precise" numbers they cite, and everyone else simply trusts that they are right!
Even Einstein himself made a huge mathematical blunder in trying to deal with the complexity of the math, when he proposed a "cosmological constant" which Einstein later called the biggest mistake of his life! Many assumptions made by other mathematicians have been equally questionable.
There seems little doubt that an entirely different explanation is far more logical, and it does not require any bizarre abandonment of trusted scientific laws! It actually involves an essentially continuous Big Bang sort of effect! It is not a spectacular disruptive effect, but a constant dribbling of new energy and matter in our Universe. Not all in some speculated micro-fraction of a second but continuously over potentially billions of years! In addition, it always totally complies with all known laws of physical reality!
I am convinced that these two basic and accepted Laws of Physics occurred as the first step in the creation of the Universe.
First Stages of this ProcessAbsolutely NOTHING, ANYWHERE.
At some moment, a single photon came into existence, which propagated in some specific random direction from some specific location, along with a single anti-photon which propagated in exactly the opposite direction.
This event would have been the first event which ever occurred.
This is a standard process known in nuclear physics, which isperfectly compatible with Conservation of Energy, since thesetwo new objects would completely annihilate each other if andwhen they ever encountered each other, again then resulting in exactly zero total energy.
This same dual mutual creation event recurred, millions or billions or trillions of times, each with random direction ofpropagation of the new pair of energy objects. A clutter of inter-mixed photons and anti-photons therefore developed, over an unknown interval of time. IF they all arose from a single source location, then all would have propagated radially outward. However, it seems equally possible that such tiny creation events may have occurred at various locations, which would then imply that photons would sometimes interact with anti-photons, where Destructive Interference might occur and a pair of those energy bundles might cease to exist.
Irregularities in the patterns of such propagation would theneventually result in an energy stream (of primarily photons)
propagating outward in one general direction while an identical (but upside down and backwards) anti-energy stream (of primarily anti-photons) propagating outward in exactly the opposite direction. Remember that an anti-photon is exactly identical to a photon except for its energy being exactly 180° out-of phase with it. And since each new pair of energy bundles had exactly identical quantities and frequencies and wavelengths of energy, every such new pair ofbundles would and will mutually annihilate in Destructive Interference if and when they ever encounter each other, again always resulting in a net total of exactly zero resultant energy.
Specifically, beginning with absolutely nothing, there were two photons of energy which came into existence, which were propagated in exactly opposite directions and necessarily exactly out of phase, and necessarily having exactly identical frequency and wavelength and energy. The two photons of energy are absolutely identical but they are also exactly out of phase with each other. At all instants, if all the energy in those two photons is added together, they always total exactly zero energy, due to Conservation of Energy. One of these two photons of energy headed away from where our Universe would eventually arise, so it can never bedetected from within our Universe! The other of these two photons of energy came toward where our Universe would arise.In fact, some of these many photons could later do a Second Stage to separate into particles and anti-particles which created all of the material objects of our Universe, including stars, planets, and us.
As a future consequence of this, if and when these two initial energy collections will ever encounter each other again, they will simply Destructively Interfere with each other and Disappear! (and in that event, a portion of our
entire Universe would cease to exist!) This confirms that the Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Matter will always apply.
These are countless instantaneous trillions of photons of energy. The comment just made, of our Universe "ceasing to exist" would only occur incrementally, possibly over an interval of billions of years, where our Universe might gradually disappear from existence, a speck at a time!
There is no reason to believe that "our" energy collection has yet ceased to be persistently and continuously be created! In other words, instead of an instantaneous Big Bang, we are describing here a persistent formation, which may still be occurring after 13.8 billion years of previous formation! A photon at a time! Has it already stopped? No one knows. Will such persistent formation continue for another billion years or a hundred billion years? No one knows.
If the persistent formation had only occurred for, say, one billion years, and then stopped being created, then the available energy within our Universe might now be constant, in other words, a Conservation of Energy. (We must remember that there would necessarily have to be another Universe thatwe could never detect or see or visit, which contains the exact same amount of anti-energy in it! Conservation of Energy always applies there, too.) However, if such a persistent formation is still continuing today, then the Gross amount of Energy in our Universe might be still be increasing, today. (Note that this again would require the exact same amount of new anti-energy to still be appearing insome other Universe somewhere, but out-of-phase with our energy, so that Conservation of Energy always applies. Also,if the persistent formation had ceased some time back, and wehappened to have proceeded to a much later time when the two initial energy collections have already begun to collide, (and the Universe is therefore already gradually disappearingaway!) then the Gross amount of energy in our Universe might
now be decreasing.
It is not clear if there could be any way to discern between these three possibilities regarding our situation in our entire Universe(s). All three situations are technically thesame, with the only difference being just when we are in the process. Energy might be still increasing in our Universe (1) creation of energy (or technically, Constructive Interference with a forever unseen other Universe); (2) there might be stability of Gross energy; or (3) DestructiveInterference of the energy canceling out of existence [alwaysexactly matching the total quantities of out-of-phase energy in some other Universe(s)]. We tend to assume that we exist during (2). In principle, the three main stages might even sort of "overlap" where "new energy" might still be appearingin our Universe while at some other location, "old energy" might be being destructively cancelled out with out-of-phase anti-energy from outside of our Universe! No one knows and it is hard to see how anyone in our Universe can or will everknow!
The two initial collections of energy might be described in an unusual way, for the following portions of this argument, which we might call Energy and Anti-Energy. This is not describing anything goofy such as Dark Energy, but simply referring to a different energy collection which just happensto be exactly out-of-phase with our energy.
There is nothing peculiar about this process, and Research scientists do experiments every day where this sort of annihilation is seen to occur. There is a famous experiment called a Double Slit experiment, where monochromatic light iscreated and sent through two separate tiny slits in a wall, and then a screen behind the slits is examined. Very obviousinterference patterns are seen, where in some places, the screen is absolutely dark. If either slit is blocked, the entire screen is then illuminated, which proves that the dark
areas are caused by Destructive Interference of the two identical light beams.
An important aspect of the Energy and Anti-Energy collectionsis that they necessarily must be absolutely and perfectly identical to each other, but where they are headed outward inexactly opposite directions such that they can never encounter each other, but where imperfections in the two collections are also identical, except for being upside-down and backwards from each other. This is required to Conserve Energy, in all three dimensions. A portion of the Energy collection which has a frequency that is 3% lower and is directed in a direction which is one degree to the left, is necessarily therefore matched by a portion of the Anti-Energycollection which has that identical frequency but which is headed outward in a direction which is one degree to the right of the main collection.
This is standard radiation analysis logic.
The Energy collection (that we care about!) is therefore a very complex collection of Energy collections that are generally headed out to what we might say is to the West. The Anti-Energy collection is therefore a complex collection of outgoing radiation that is generally headed toward the East. This indicates that the two collections will not encounter each other, possibly forever but certainly for a very long time! We shall now ignore the Anti-Energy collection for a while.
Second Stage of the ProcessPhysics has long known that it is possible to allow an electron and something which is called an anti-electron (or positron) to collide, and when they do, they cease to exist as particles, having mutually annihilated each other (but
they create a very precise amount of energy in the process, anew photon of energy). Similar experiments are done every day in Physics Labs where protons and anti-protons mutually annihilate, and neutrons and anti-neutrons mutually annihilate. In each case, the particles vanish but a very precise amount of energy now exists, as photons as radiation.
Again, many Physics experiments show that a photon of radiation that happens to have a specific amount of energy available can and does spontaneously create an electron-positron pair, or if more energy is available, a proton-anti-proton pair can form. This has been confirmed experimentallyfor every nuclear particle. These are mundane experiments for Graduate Physics students!
Considering our Original collection of photons of Energy, it seems likely that countless particle pairs would be created from available energy photons of very specific amounts of energy, just as we do in Physics Labs every day. Again, the two created particles necessarily have exactly the same mass and velocity (Kinetic Energy) and they must leave in exactly opposite directions. The point here is that we now have particles that have come into existence, after this two-step process. At the same instant, anti-particles were created which headed out in exactly opposite directions (which later had the capability to form an entirely separate Anti-ParticleUniverse.) Early on, all the protons and electrons that got (or get) created and sent into our Universe began to rapidly orbit each other to form hydrogen atoms. Nothing else existed, just hydrogen atoms. Gravitation then caused formation of stars and later, everything else!
In general, when an environment has both particles and anti-particles in it, such particles tend to collide and again mutually annihilate, converting back to pure energy (in compliance with the standard Laws of Physics and with all experimental evidence).
However, with these Second Stage mutual creation processes
occurring continuously and in immense numbers, there will likely eventually be some Statistical accumulation of particles heading away in one specific direction, and an identical, but upside-down and backwards of each other, accumulation of anti-particles, headed away in the exact opposite direction, precisely.
Within each of those accumulations of particles, there will be mutual annihilations which occur when any remaining anti-particles encounter their opposites.
This then would eventually result in our Universe which is essentially filled with particles, and which also has impressive amounts of energy in it.
We call this our Universe!
Note an interesting required consequence of this reasoning. Because the geometry of the way every particle and photon wascreated with a precise Vector velocity (direction and speed),it was necessarily matched by an anti-particle or anti-protonwith exactly the opposite velocity Vector (direction and speed). This seems to imply that when something complex likeour Sun came into existence in our Universe, of countless individual atoms, the precisely identical set of anti-particles must have also caused an Anti-Sun to come into existence in an Anti-Matter Universe. In order to strictly comply with all the known Laws of Physics, this is necessary!Continuing that reasoning further, when you were born in our Universe, there necessarily must have simultaneously been born an Anti-You in that Anti-Matter Universe, and he or she has lived a life which is absolutely identical to the life which you have lived in our Universe. (There is a difference, of being upside-down and backwards, which would never be detectable!) An Anti-You might therefore be left-handed if you are right-handed, but in every other way, to the tiniest detail, you are absolutely identical.
Again, this consequence is required in order that every
particle and every energy photon in existence maintains compliance with Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum and Conservation of Mass. If even a single atom in a single one of your brain cells ever became different, then the Conservation Laws would no longer precisely apply, which should not be possible. Therefore, it seems an unavoidable logical consequence that there are two of You!
Since we could not possibly ever enter an Anti-Matter Universe without being immediately mutually incrementally annihilated with individual anti-particles, we could not possibly ever meet our Doppelganger, or even be aware of the existence of such an Anti-Universe where we might even ever be able to communicate. In fact, communication with anyone or anything in that anti-Universe is probably forever impossible. In practical terms, you are alone in being you!
Let us now remember that we also started out with an Anti-Energy collection of photons, which clearly would have exactly the identical consequences regarding creating two other Universes, which we might refer to as Anti-Energy Universes. The Conservation Laws still apply (everywhere) and so this means that there must be exactly four Universes that exist, which are necessarily absolutely identical to thetiniest detail. The single exception is the fact that the geometry of these processes necessarily creates mirror Universes, where some might be considered upside-down and backwards. However, note that we residents of the United States might describe the people of Australia as constantly being upside-down, while there is no actual sensation of thatfor the Australian people. So as the Anti-Energy, Anti-Matter, Anti-Me is typing these words on his Anti-Computer, he might consider me to be upside-down and backwards! There are apparently exactly four of me, each in totally separate Universes. This is necessary to ensure that the Conservationof Energy and Conservation of Mass laws of science are absolutely true and reliable! In fact, the four of me are
each typing away on absolutely identical computer keyboards, which is also necessary to always maintain the two main Conservation Laws! Of course, each of us four mes claims to be the "Matter-Energy" version, and we each refer to the others as being "anti-mes" in the other three Universes that none of us could possibly ever confirm or detect in any way. Each of us thinks that the others are "left-handed" or "upside-down", but since we cannot ever actually know that the others exist, we are each free to believe such things, and even in the uniqueness of me!
In 1961, as part of a High School Science Fair Project, I came up with (most of) this reasoning which seems to be a strictly logical description of how the Universe might have come into existence. Even after getting my College Degree inPhysics from the University of Chicago, I still believe that this explanation for the creation of the Universe is far morelogical than any others that I am aware of.
It is based on standard Laws of science, without having to discard them for exotic events that do not comply with what we understand of as science.
Specifically, we live in a Universe that is essentially all Matter. We know that there are Anti-Matter particles which are identical to all our matter protons, electrons, and neutrons. Equally importantly, we know that if any matter particle encounters its matching anti-matter particle, they immediately annihilate and disappear (becoming pure energy and not actual objects any more). Physics also often analyzes experimental results like this where the passage of time might seem to pass in either direction, forward or backwards. So, it is well known in Physics that if energy ispresent in a large enough quantity, that energy can cause thespontaneous creation of an electron and anti-electron (also called a positron) or cause the spontaneous creation of a proton and anti-proton. That has been experimentally confirmed countless times, as has the annihilation which occurs when an electron and positron mutually self-destruct
and cease to exist.
Based on these known facts, I thought it possible and even likely that the Matter in our Universe might have come into existence as an extended spray of matter particles from some location. To still comply with the Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum, there would necessarily have been a mirror-identical spray of anti-particles into what would become a separate (anti-) Universe.
This could have occurred in a single instantaneous burst as per a Big Bang, but it also could be at a "seam" between the two resulting Universes and it might still be continuing!
Therefore, instead of a cataclysmic explosion of the popular Big Bang, my reasoning suggests that additional matter might be dribbling into our Universe, even to this day. This mightpossibly be occurring at a fairly consistent rate (as long asthe exact same amount of anti-matter was dribbling into the Anti-Universe to comply with all the mechanical and Conservation Laws of science.
I felt that this explanation provided a logical explanation for where all the Matter in our Universe had come from. However, it still would then require massive amounts of energy (per E = mc2 of Einstein). Therefore, I also proposedan even earlier First Stage of this creation, regarding wherethe energy could have come from. It is well known in Physicsthat two photons of radiation (energy) can annihilate if theyare at exactly the same frequency and energy and are also exactly out-of-phase with each other. Then the only real assumption in my concept is: If two energy photons can totally annihilate to totally cease to exist, then it should also be possible, by Feynman, that "nothing" should be able to spontaneously create two photons of radiation. The resulting radiations must be exactly out-of-phase with each other, and where the Vectors describing the paths of those two radiation photons are exactly opposite in direction and exactly identical in amplitude.
The combination of these two Stages seemed to suggest a wonderfully logical explanation of the beginning of both energy and matter in our Universe. It also has the somewhat creepy implication that there would also have to be three other mirror-Universes that exist (but which we would never be able to encounter or even prove their existence!)
An interesting implication of this which I did not know when I was in High School is that if our Universe has had a "variable total mass and energy" that seems to imply (by General Relativity) that the rate of passage of time may havesignificantly varied during the existence of our Universe!
We do now know (again by General Relativity) that the rate ofpassage of time on the surface of the Moon is not the same asthe rate of the passage of time here on Earth. The difference is very miniscule. It appears that, as an old mannow, I am now a few seconds older, having lived my life on Earth, as I would have been had I lived my life on the surface of the Moon. No one but a Physicist even cares aboutsuch tiny differences!
I admit that it seems somewhat “creepy” that there may be four different Universes. This does not involve the speculations of some physicists that claim to imagine 26-dimensions, or where others speculate that there are 11-dimensions or 10-dimensions. In fact, everything here is entirely a 4-dimensional space-time, partly to ensure that all the Laws of Physics could and do exist in our familiar Euclidean space. A "claim" suggested here is that every Law of Physics is Conserved, in every sense and at every scale. As a Theoretical Physicist, I am rather uncomfortable with the idea that on an atomic or nuclear scale, that Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle may be true. If that is somehow true differently in each of the four Universes, that seems to force a conclusion that at least one of the Conservation Laws of Physics may not be valid (on an atomic scale). I recognize that most Physicists today already do not accept the strict validity of the Laws of Physics on an
atomic scale, so they may not see additional issues between the (alleged) four of me that is described above, mostly because they already accept Quantum Dynamics which already conflicts with traditional Laws of Physics. For me, I reallywant to believe that the Laws of Physics are valid everywhereand at every scale of existence, which then seems to force meto believe that "the other three mes" must be absolutely identical with "me" because of the Conservation Laws. This all leaves me really up a creek when I consider that I probably have been struck by a Cosmic Ray which changed the DNA in one of my trillions of biological cells. Am I really prepared to be so invested in the Conservation Laws to think that an identical Cosmic Ray acted in each of the other threeUniverses? Ugh!
This concept was first created in 1961 as part of a High School Science Fair project. This presentation was first placed on the Internet in 1998.
The origin of the Universe has been speculated about for centuries. A new approach suggests that it might be that there are four identical Universes! This is based on some very well known facts in Nuclear Physics. (1) Energy, in theform of a photon, can transform into Matter and Anti-Matter, in the forms of an electron and positron; that is, the electron and positron simply appear where nothing had existeda moment earlier except energy; a photon can similarly transform into a Proton Anti-Proton pair. (2) "Nothing" can transform into two packets of energy which are exactly opposite or out-of-phase; this is easier to follow in the opposite direction, where a sound wave or light wave can "destructively interfere" with an identical wave to entirely cease to exist. These processes can be both done in a
laboratory in both directions, either forming the two products or in annihilating the two sources. This premise hasgeometric constraints, where the two products necessarily have to leave in exactly opposite directions with exactly identical velocities. This is due to the Conservation of Mass, Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum Laws. This would seem to have implications that resulting Universes would have to have great similarities.
In a laboratory environment, we might say that "nothing" might transform into a photon and anti-photon (two packets ofenergy) which then each could transform into a proton anti-proton pair. Such experiments are regularly done in Nuclear Physics. The result of this sequence of experiments is that you started with "nothing" and ended up with four solid objects! In the lab experiments, two of those resultant particles, the two anti-protons (the anti-Matter particles), quickly annihilate when they encounter any Matter particles (protons) and therefore immediately transform back into energy. The premise presented here is that the four differenttypes of particles were each sent in selectively different directions where they might there only (mostly) encounter particles of their own types. The anti-Matter anti-protons would not encounter natural protons and would then be quite stable for long periods of time. Ditto, all other anti-matter particles would be stable because there were no natural Matter particles in that Universe to encounter and mutually annihilate with. As long as the four resultant types of particles did not interact with any of the other three types, there could very logically be four very stable Universes!
This premise suggests that this would not necessarily have tohave occurred in a single explosive moment of a Big Bang. Indeed, it might easily be an ongoing process where the totalmass and total energy of our Universe might therefore be changing at this moment.
This premise does not need Physicists to entirely discard all
the known laws of science, as they find it necessary to do regarding the Big Bang theory. It seems very troublesome to insist that the Conservation Laws exist everywhere, universally, but then claim that they do not apply at all related to Big Bang issues. It does not seem acceptable thatyou get to change your set of Laws just on a whim!
In the middle of the Twentieth Century, radio astronomy discovered that there is a very faint Background Radiation that seems to come from all directions in the Universe. This is a very faint and weak radiation, generally described as three-degrees-K radiation, which is a reference to the apparent temperature of the source of that radiation. The presence of the 3°K radiation is the only bit of evidence that has seemed to be available regarding the early stages ofour Universe. It has been interpreted as indicating that some event of immense heat and power occurred around 13.8 billion years ago, and the heat from that event has been dissipating ever since, and is now at a remaining temperatureof 3°K, just slightly above Absolute zero.
This reasoning, based on that single bit of evidence of 3°K radiation from all directions, has resulted in the fact that most scientists now believe that the Universe, as we know it,began with a Big Bang. The idea is that, if we could somehow"run the movie of time backwards," we would see that the Universe was physically smaller, and hotter, in the very distant past. If this assumption is true, then at some specific moment even before that, all of the material of the Universe must have existed at a single point in space.
Therefore, in forward time, everything of the Universe would have seemed to have burst out of that single point in space, and has since been cooling, and that's why it is called a BigBang.
Physicists have speculated about the details about how this could actually happen. They suggest that there were momentarystages where only energy could have existed. Then, as this
incredibly hot environment cooled down a little, actual material (protons, electrons, neutrons) came into existence, then the outward momentum of all the original contents continued to carry everything outward to eventually be distributed throughout the Universe as we now see everything.
Keep in mind that this sort of subject only involves very little actual fact and a lot of speculation on the part of the scientists! No one does or even can ever know the details of what would have actually happened in those first fractions of a second.
To a great extent, the Big Bang Theory is essentially entirely a speculation.
All of the currently supported theories about the very beginning of the Universe require completely ignoring a number of the basic principles of Physics. The field of Physics was built on ideas like the Conservation of Energy and the Conservation of Momentum. It seems really troublesome to just dismiss such concepts, and instead claim that the circumstances were so unusual that different rules applied, but that no one can ever even know just what those rules were! The premise described here does not seem to havethese problems. It seems to comply with both Conservation ofEnergy and Conservation of Momentum, at all moments. In that, I believe it has potential value.
To suggest how incomplete the current logic necessarily is inthese matters, I will now suggest an additional feature that does not seem to be included in such speculations, even though it must certainly have been true, if a Big Bang event occurred.
How Big Did the Universe Seem to Be?
First, let's consider today. We believe that the Universe hasa physical size on the scale of 13.8 billion light-years, really huge! We also know, from consequences of some things that Albert Einstein discovered, that the path of a light
beam is affected by the mass of stars and other objects it passes. Such a light beam would actually appear to be perfectly straight to any instrument we could ever build, butit would actually be a very slightly curved path. Now, say we sent out a really powerful laser beam in some direction inspace. After a long time (13.8 billion years), that light beam might be apparently passing the very outermost objects in the Universe. In other words, all of the mass of the Universe would be behind it. Actually, well before this moment, the great bulk of that mass would have caused it to slightly curve in one direction or another (to the side). The logic can get a little confusing here, but the final effect would be that the light's path would eventually get socurved that it would be turned, first, sideways, around the mass of the Universe, and then, back inward, back toward the inner areas of the Universe and back near us!
A similar logical situation exists for us on Earth. Say you decided to go on a long trip, and you decided to go exactly west. No matter what you encounter, oceans, mountains or whatever, you continue to go exactly west. Well, after traveling about 25,000 miles, exactly west, (in a direction that you believe to be an exactly straight line) you will likely come upon very familiar territory, the town where you had started from! You would arrive home from the east! If you hadn't known that the Earth was a giant ball, which you had gone around, you would certainly be really confused at how you could have arrived back home after going absolutely and perfectly straight west continuously.
More than that, if your home town had significantly modernized during your long journey, you might not even recognize it and keep going. After going around the earth fifty times, you might conclude that "the Earth is certainly larger than 50 x 25,000 or 1,250,000 miles!" Of course, you would have been wrong!
Obviously, we can see that you had not been precisely going perfectly west after all! All along, without knowing it, you
had been very slightly going downward as well. In a mile of walking exactly west (on a perfectly round, perfectly smooth earth), it turns out that you actually also curved downward around 16 inches without knowing it.
This is essentially the same kind of effect on that light or laser beam that seems to be going absolutely straight throughthe Universe. The actual curvature of its path would not even be noticeable to us at all, but even if we could sense it, the curvature would be so small as to be virtually unnoticeable.
OK. The preparation is now in place! Now imagine that really early Universe, where everything that exists could still fit in an imaginary "box" a mile on a side. Inside that Universe, gravitation would be incredibly strong, because all the mass that will ever exist is all so close together in there. All that stuff we just considered about a(straight) light beam must be true in that Universe. If a light beam was aimed in any direction, it would forever be continuously bent back by that huge gravitational effect to permanently loop back and forth through that Universe (until it eventually ran into some object and got absorbed). Since everything is much closer together, gravitation effects are especially strong, so the curvature would be very severe. So, how long would the light beam seem to be, from the thing that created it? If that beam never ran into anything, the light beam would appear to travel forever in a straight line!Even though the entire Universe could fit inside an imaginarybox a mile on a side!
Again, this is just like the trip on the Earth's surface. What is the longest trip you could ever make on Earth? Well,it could be infinitely long. Even though the Earth could fitin a really big box, you would be able to travel exactly westforever on its surface. The reality would be that you would wind up going around and around the Earth, but the path couldbe infinitely long.
All this is just to suggest how hard it is for us humans to really understand and comprehend these kinds of subjects. And how a person's speculation of what might be can easily get mixed together with the few actual facts that we know about.
Summary
I actually came up with (most of) this concept while I was still a Sophomore in High School, as part of a Science Project. It bothered me that no one seemed to be concerned with suddenly popping the incredible amount of material of the Universe out of nothing, in the alleged Big Bang! Even by then, I was aware of Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Mass! It really bothered me that Physicists made clear that they were willing to dismiss all ConservationLaws!
This is my logic about the Cosmogony concept. It is also speculation, but it seems at least as valid as the speculations of others in the field.
Our known Universe seems to be virtually entirely Matter, with only the tiniest occasional amounts of Anti-Matter in it. But, the two are essentially identical. In principle, if enough anti-matter had accumulated somewhere in the Universe,it could have gravitationally collapsed and formed a star, just like all other stars (and the Sun) began. Such an anti-matter star would appear exactly like any other star we couldever see, and there would be no way that we could ever know that it was anti-matter rather than matter, by its light or its motion.
But, if such an anti-matter star actually existed, within ourUniverse, it could not exist very long in our matter Universe. The "empty" Universe is actually filled with all kinds of loose atoms and simple molecules, and gases and meteoroids and asteroids and comets and probably planets.
There are therefore a lot of loose things just wandering around space, and most of these things must certainly be Matter. When such an object would get pulled into an anti-matter star by its gravity, the matter of the object would combine with some of the anti-matter of the star to instantlyannihilate each other, both instantly disappearing and creating a lot of new energy. Might it be possible that these matter annihilation events in an anti-matter star mightresult in ferociously bright sudden flashes of energy? Couldthis possibly explain various odd "flashing objects" we see in the sky, Pulsars, Quasars, and such? It seems certain that an anti-matter star or planet would soon be entirely annihilated in this way in our matter Universe.
That implies that virtually everything in our Universe is Matter. So, what about considering an initial raw energy source that spontaneously divided itself into a lot of matter, which went in one direction, and an exact same amountof Anti-Matter, which went in exactly the opposite direction?On a nuclear scale, physicists regularly see such energy (photons) spontaneously divide into electron-positron pairs (electrons and anti-electrons) exactly in this way. I am just proposing that it had occurred (somehow) on a grand scale.
This concept could then explain why all the material of the Universe seemed to appear at the same moment at the same place, if a Big Bang type of event actually occurred. Actually, it could also represent an ongoing process, where new material continues to enter our Universe! It just seems to me to present a more logical explanation of how it might have happened.
There is a really interesting consequence of this premise! Precisely the same number of protons and electrons and anti-protons and anti-electrons would have to have been formed. The physical law of conservation of momentum would insist that each such pair of object must necessarily move off in precisely opposite directions. From standard symmetry
arguments of Physics, I don't see how it could be avoided that our Matter Universe and the proposed Anti-Matter Universe must be precise "inverted mirror images" of each other! They would even have precisely the same initial conditions in each of them. Therefore, all of the later gravitational interactions would have to have proceeded identically in each of them. That would imply that both of these mirror image Universes must progress absolutely identically. The materials that gravitationally came together five billion years ago to form the Sun must have been matched in the anti-Universe in the forming of an anti-Sun! And then, an anti-Earth, and anti-oceans, and anti-dinosaurs, and anti-people, and anti-computers, and anti-you!It seems to me that the initial symmetry of the beginning of the two Universes must necessarily have set the conditions for absolutely identical progression in both of them. This is essentially implying that an anti-me is now typing these letters on the keyboard of his anti-computer on the anti-Earth in that anti-Universe!
More than that, I have no way of even establishing that I am the original! He certainly thinks of himself as the originaland so he considers me as the anti-him!
Fortunately, the two hypothetical Universes could never meet each other, or even be in any contact with each other, because any such contact would necessarily involve mutual annihilation of the message (energy) or the person or the Universe! If they should ever meet, every particle in our Universe would exactly meet its anti-particle, and the existence of the entire Universe(s) would end, still conserving Energy and Momentum. So, there's absolutely no way to ever confirm or deny my speculation about the anti-me!
I find that part interesting to think about, but essentially irrelevant. More important to me is that a matter/anti-matter pair of Universes allows a logical description to be possible as to where everything originally came from!
OK! This accounts for two mirror-image Universes. But the beginning of this said there might be four. What gives?
Well, the premise as presented still required the pre-existence of a lot of energy that somehow spontaneously splitapart into the matter and anti-matter Universes. Could that original energy that is necessary also be explained?
Another characteristic of nuclear physics is that it is possible for two (identical) photons to meet each other and just disappear! Essentially, this like two identical waves in water or in a vibrating guitar string or anywhere else, which are exactly out-of-phase with each other. If two such identical waves are traveling in exactly the same direction and they are exactly out-of-phase (by 180°) then they completely "cancel" each other and disappear.
One of the central understandings of nuclear physics is that any event that occurs could occur as seen is real time or it could also occur as if time was running backwards. This seems to imply that, if two photons can completely annihilateeach other, leaving nothing, then a beginning "nothing" must also be able to split into two photons. Again, things like the various conservation laws of physics would insist that the two photons thus created are (1) absolutely identical, but have opposite phase; and (2) traveling away from the point of creation in precisely opposite directions.
Therefore, my speculation on the beginning of everything addsone more step prior to the division of initial energy into matter and anti-matter Universes. The new step is an earlierdivision of nothing into mirror-image, identical energy streams traveling in precisely opposite directions from the original point of origin.
This actually provides, not only the energy stream necessary to later create our matter Universe and my hypothetical anti-matter Universe, but a second identical (mirror image) energystream going in the opposite direction. It seems to me that,
due to the standard symmetry arguments, whatever caused our original energy stream to divide itself into matter and anti-matter, would also have occurred under the identical conditions of the other original energy stream. That seems to imply to me that two more identical Universes must have come about. Since the symmetry arguments must still be precisely true for both of these division stages, the four resultant Universes must necessarily have progressed precisely identically. Wow! That means there are probably four mes typing away! (The me here, the energy-anti-matter me, the anti-energy-matter me, and the anti-energy-anti-matter me!) The four of us would all experience the exact same sensations, in precisely the same ways. Even though I (this me!) refer to anti-matter and anti-matter Universes, the me that is in any of the other Universes also thinks of himself as being in the matter Universe, so they would refer to me as being an anti-me!
As I keep repeating, anyone's opinion on such things is sheerspeculation, because there is so little actual evidence that exists about these matters. But I have always liked the elegance of this approach because it begins with absolutely nothing, and accounts for all the mass and energy that we know exists in our Universe. Other theories, like most Big Bang theories all just see all that mass and energy just popping up without explanation. Their theories always say that the laws of physics just didn't apply at that time, to allow their speculation to be possible. I have always been uncomfortable with subjectively claiming that the laws of physics either apply or don't apply based on things some scientist might want to have happen. At least, my theory here does not require weird or different laws of physics to have ever existed. That single reason is why I see potentialvalue in this theory!
