"Catastrophic" to "Unknown" --New Global Climate-Change Scenarios Not Experienced in Past 20 Million Years
"Aging is an Evolutionary Oversight" --Institute of Molecular Biology

New Quantum Gravity Theory of the Big Bang --"We Need Another Picture of the Early Infant Universe"

 

Original

 

The beginning of our universe – if there is one – is one of the big open questions in theoretical physics. The big bang is one of science’s great mysteries, and it seems the plot has thickened thanks to new research that refutes prevailing theories about the birth of the universe. A classical description of the big bang implies a singularity: a point of infinite smallness, at which Einstein’s theory of gravity – general relativity – breaks down.

To tackle this problem, two proposals were put forward in the 1980s: the “no-boundary proposal” by Stephen Hawking and James Hartle, and Alexander Vilenkin’s theory known as “tunnelling from nothing.” Each proposal attempted to describe a smoother beginning to spacetime, using quantum theory. Rather than the infinitely pointy needle of the classical big bang, the proposals described something closer to the rounded tip of a well-used pencil – curved, without an edge or tip.

 

While this view has spawned much research, new mathematical work suggests such a smooth beginning could not have given birth to the ordered universe we see today.

 

 

 

A new paper, co-authored by Perimeter Institute researchers Neil Turok and Job Feldbrugge, with Jean-Luc Lehners of the Albert Einstein Institute in Germany, points out mathematical inconsistencies in the “no boundary” and “tunnelling” proposals.

“The no-boundary proposal by Hartle and Hawking and others is an elegant proposal to model the big bang using quantum gravity," says physicist Job Feldbrugge at Perimeter. Using a new mathematical technique, we can now rigorously investigate this proposal and see what kind of universe it predicts.”

Turok says the previous models were “beautiful proposals seeking to describe a complete picture of the origin of spacetime,” but they don’t hold up to this new mathematical assessment. “Unfortunately, at the time those models were proposed, there was no adequately precise formulation of quantum gravity available to determine whether these proposals were mathematically meaningful.”

The new research, outlined in a paper called “No smooth beginning for spacetime,” demonstrates that a universe emerging smoothly from nothing would be “wild and fluctuating,” strongly contradicting observations, which show the universe to be extremely uniform across space.

“Hence the no-boundary proposal does not imply a large universe like the one we live in, but rather tiny curved universes that would collapse immediately,” said Lehners, a former Perimeter postdoc who leads the theoretical cosmology group at the Albert Einstein Institute.

Turok, Lehners, and Feldbrugge reached this result by revisiting the foundations of the field. They found a new way to use powerful mathematics developed over the past century to tackle one of physics’ most basic problems: how to connect quantum physics to gravity. The work builds on previous research Turok conducted with Steffen Gielen, a postdoc at the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics and at Perimeter, in which they replaced the concept of the “classical big bang” with a “quantum big bounce.”

Turok, Lehners, and Feldbrugge are now trying to determine what mechanism could have kept large quantum fluctuations in check while allowing our large universe to unfold.

The new research implies that “we either should look for another picture to understand the very early universe, or that we have to rethink the most elementary models of quantum gravity,” said Feldbrugge.

Added Turok: “Uncovering this problem gives us a powerful hint. It is leading us closer to a new picture of the big bang.”

The Daily Galaxy via The Perimeter Institute

Image credit: LIGO/Caltech/MIT/Sonoma State (Aurore Simonnet)

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Now here's a wild thought... The universe is of course made of matter that has to originate from somewhere. The only way to create that much matter is to use antimatter. You can in essence create an infinite amount of matter as long as a corresponding amount of antimatter is created. This is of course all very obvious.

But now for the wild part. What if gravity is caused by antimatter drawing the matter towards itself? As with everything in the universe, matter and antimatter try to reach a minimum energy state and this is of course the state in which they annihilate each other. So instead of matter pulling matter it is actually the antimatter that is doing the pulling and vise versa. But since it is in another dimension it can't annihilate the matter.

There's obviously no tag for what antimatter particle belongs to which matter particle so it pulls pretty much everything that is in its vicinity. We observe this phenomenon as gravity! And since the big bang was inflating outwards this big crunch is imploding inwards (read: antimatter is pulling matter into another dimension). That's why gravity seems to focus on the central point of mass.

Given enough energy (i.e. matter) the dimensions could be broken and the matter and antimatter would annihilate each other once again. This would mean the end of the Universe.

Now how on earth did antimatter and the matter ever get separated from each other? Dunno, don't ask me! I'm no Einstein!

Model the universe as another kind of pair creation, a mass-energy pair creation, equal opposite mass and spin. The opposing masses would be repulsive within the neutral time-space of a 1D wormhole. Emergence would be vortex flow highly uniform at first with min entropy.

See the figurative and conceptual model published here:
https://www.academia.edu/26188494/Yin_Yang_Universe

About dark matter and its essence: Dark matter is the time changing (as age) galaxy from the subspace appears like proto particle. Why time changing? You can see on the final of this article.
Remind again this: What is the essence of the energy in the universe itself and from where it comes from and what is its value? From page 96, 97, 98 USM www.kanevuniverse.com follows that in the beginning of springing up of Our space the full energy is equal to zero for us. Then with thickening of the micro cosmos and expanding of macro cosmos due to the asymmetry of these coefficients, which depends by our position of observation in this case our living position, we have the illusion that the energy for us is increases, because we are close to the nuclei of the atoms rather than the stars and galaxy. But the macro cosmos expands more rapidly by the same reason, so full energy in our space is again equal to zero. So it is seen that the energy is “one reality in the illusion”, as well as the world itself! See USM www.kanevuniverse.com So by this very elegant way (haw has liking to said Einstein himself) is determinates one of the most mysterious physical phenomenon in the universe!
On the center of our galaxy (actually in each galaxy) there aren’t “black hole” but exact copy of our galaxy (each galaxy), differently with much younger matter than in our position of observation (orbital radius-position of our Sun) how it is shown in Q&A and USM www.kanevuniverse.com pages: 95 to 98. This young matter is contains from the so called proto particles which have mass (2,63.〖10〗^4 )^3 times smaller compare to the proton mass, which means it is equal to k=18,2.〖10〗^12 times smaller compare to proton measured in our position of observation (orbital radius position of our Sun in our galaxy), which is approximately the same until to the periphery of our galaxy where the mass of proton has to be a little heavier. So what is the density of the matter in the center of our galaxy which defines the centripetal acceleration there (see USM part II)? Let see pages: 80 to 82 USM where were established the radius of birth of the Sun, which is: 0,726.〖10〗^12 times smaller compare to the present orbital radius of the Sun, so approximately: (3,1.〖10〗^22)/(0,726.〖10〗^12 )=4,27.〖10〗^10 [cm], i.e. around three light seconds. So if our galaxy has for example 100 billion stars like our Sun this means mass 100 billion suns, where the mass of proton is measured here. But in the central area the mass of proton is (k)-times smaller, at the same time radius-sphere of this area is decreases 0,726.〖10〗^12 times, so the density of this area containing “suns” from proto particles is equal to: ρ_pr=(〖0,726.10〗^12 )^3.1/(18,2.〖10〗^12 )=2,1.〖10〗^22 times bigger compare to the density of our galaxy enclosed by the present orbital radius of the Sun which is approximately 3,5.〖10〗^(-24) [g/〖cm〗^3 ]. So the searched density is equal to:
ρ_pr=2,1.〖10〗^22.3,5.〖10〗^(-24)=7,35.〖10〗^(-2) [g/〖cm〗^3 ] . If we accept that the density of the Sun is approximately equal to the density of hydrogen atoms: 1,4[g/〖cm〗^3 ], then we see that on the periphery of this nucleus of our galaxy, which is exactly copy of our galaxy but with proto young matter, the centripetal acceleration is: 1,4/(7,35.〖10〗^(-2) )=19 times smaller compare to the same acceleration on the surface of the Sun (see part II USM). To compare the two accelerations we have to compare the sphere radius of the Sun with the radius of the nucleus of the galaxy, as to take into account g=G.M/r^2 follow: ((6,96.〖10〗^10)/(4,27.〖10〗^10 ))^2.19=50,5 times smaller acceleration about the galaxy nucleus surface. Because the number of the proto suns are the same as it is in the galaxy, namely 100 billions, then follows that the number of the equivalent Sun masses in the center of our galaxy is approximate 2 billion sun masses acceleration, which represent the acceleration of hypothetical “black hole” but in the explanation of the USM theory and only about our position of observation. I repeat only about our position of observation, because if we sink towards the central zone where the density gradually decreases then the equivalent acceleration will decrease as well. So what withstand all stellar masses in our galaxy?....the gravity of the galaxy nucleus?......of course not because of decreasing centripetal accelerations……then what is the mechanism? The answer lies in the time interpretation of galaxy expansion. It becomes very slowly about our observation 13 bln years or so and do imagine this simple picture: Stars from the galaxy nucleus simply scamper away in radial direction, then their tangential velocity will remain the same as it was on the periphery of the nucleus of the galaxy and by this way forms the belts of the galaxy. But that become very slowly for us some billions of years. So obviously we don’t need of dark matter to explain why the tangential velocity remain mainly constant depending by the radius increasing of the galaxy and how these so much stars are withstand together, because they actually disperse themselves and their places are taken by the new stars coming from inside of the nucleus. But so called dark matter exist because increasingly mass of proto particle towards the mass of proton in our position of observation requires swallowing of new mass from the surrounding area which are very young looking (only for our position of observation) sub galaxy from the subspace. But more for that some another day!
Now is the another day: About proto particles:
So as I said the beginning particle in the center of our galaxy – proto particle it is a very young galaxy from the subspace, which because of the thickening of the micro cosmos and expansion of the macro cosmos of our space where is situated our galaxy, gradually form the three stable particles in our space: proton, electron and neutrino. During the movement of the Sun towards the periphery of our galaxy the proton and electron become heavier and the neutrino becomes lighter. If we sink in the space of this proto particle and become part of it we can see galaxy with very many stars from the subspace, similar to ours, so the temperature there will be significant, but because in the very beginning of this proto particle appearance in our space, when this particle haven’t yet orbital system, for us the energy don’t exist. When on the center of our galaxy there is created, because of the gravitational field of our galaxy, enough quantity of these proto particles again thanks to the same field there begin to form the stars, which creates exactly copy of our galaxy but with very young matter-all this in our space. The light ray radiated from these sub stars becomes older together with the movement of the Sun towards the periphery of our galaxy (i.e. together with the aging of the Sun).
But how the centripetal acceleration remains constant in different physical conditions: temperature, pressure and so on, because we assert in USM www.kanevuniverse.com that through inter movement between the atoms (galaxies on the over space respectively) they create their own field (centripetal accelerations). Well first you need to read again part I and II USM www.kanevuniverse.com After that you need to read pages 85 to 98 (USM and the quantum mechanics) USM and especially pages 90 to 93 where is explained why the between atom’s distances (the length of Plank about atom’s quantum action) and why the between nuclear distances ( the length of Plank about nuclear quantum action pages 161 to 174 USM), why they aren’t change by the physical conditions temperature and pressure and remain constant and what happen in border case close to the absolute zero temperature, which explains the essence of the superconductivity and super liquidity, see part VI superconductivity USM www.kanevuniverse.com So the center of our galaxy continues to give more and more proto particles in around this center. Then where come from the “stars” from the subspace and whether they come like separately stars or like very young galaxy from the subspace? To answer this question we need to return towards this:
So let continue from here: As I said in the part I on the theory USM www.kanevuniverse.com when the Sun passes through the galaxy belts of centripetal accelerations, then were borne the three groups of planets on the solar system due the disturbance of these belts field over the Sun own centripetal acceleration – inertial balance and the planets at these moments are around 4-5 billion years so far (the comets, asteroids and cosmic gas have nothing to do with the planets formation, on contrary these objects were borne together with the planets and therefore with the same age) At this moment of planets birth the Sun already contains atoms from protons and electrons but a lot lighter than their present masses and continuously become heavier. So obviously quantum stimulation of such atoms will produce light-“lighter” which is different from this one which we observe here on the present position of the Sun, but when this light passes through the centripetal accelerations belts towards galaxy radius increasing, then this light gradually becomes” heavier” until reaching known here frequencies. So that is why we don’t observe the center of the any galaxy because there the “hydrogen-atoms” for example are contain from two proto particles with almost indistinguishable masses between the “electron” and “proton” see superconductivity USM www.kanevuniverse.com
So the Earth atmosphere comes to existence in present atom’s form much latter than Brian’s assertion. More interestingly from here follows that the organisms cannot exist if we begin to move by some device towards the center of our galaxy ( how I said in the page 2 of the theory) firstly will appears some vital illnesses and if we continue, then these organisms simply will disintegrated themselves. So to survive we must to chose stars with a little smaller orbital radius than the Sun one, which is means more younger, so there to live some millions of years to hand over our genetic code to the present atoms there, i.e. until our atom’s from at now Sun radius-position exchange with these ones on the new younger sun….in this way continuously (step by step) we can ignore the expansion of the surrounding space and radial shifting of our Sun towards the periphery of our galaxy where wait for us the aging and death together with our Sun.
On the periphery of our galaxy where the Sun will die and from our solar system will remain only old protons and neutrons and because of shown above about how centripetal acceleration remain constant we can conclude that these old protons and neutrons (which are old galaxies from the subspace) also will come to disintegration into sub stars from the subspace. But how this process will run? Firstly on the periphery of our galaxy because of expansion of distances between them these particles disintegrating themselves com to the periphery of another galaxy similar to ours and approaching towards the center of this galaxy our old protons and neutrons gradually become younger and when they reach the center of the galaxy they will become proto particle of this host galaxy. So our old protons and neutrons will return back at the time 10 or 20 billion years!
It is become clear that each coming in towards the center of the some galaxy proto particle from another near galaxy does collision with the meet proto particle coming from inside towards the periphery of the galaxy. So what is the age of these two proto particles? They are in equal age, for example if this meeting happen in our point of observation (the Sun) then these tow proto particles are protons in mass and features because this is the place where the two particles have resonance radius of proton. If this meeting happens for example near to the center of the galaxy then the two particles again have equal resonance radius but for far more light particle than these ones of the mass of proton. So one of the coming in proto particle gradually become younger and lighter and another coming from inside gradually become older and heavier where they are meeting as a equal particles and the merger between the two become possible.
There we can add one additional stuff answering of this question: Whether the coming towards the center of the host galaxy proto particle from another galaxy can to be merged only with equal coming from inside proto particle? The answer is no because far away galaxies dispatch proto particles greatly disintegrated (fare lighter and younger galaxy from the subspace) and coming to the periphery of the host galaxy they are swallowing with far more heavier host proto particle (older galaxy from the subspace) but only such as a orbiting around the heavier particle (imagine the resonance radius of neutron in our position of observation the Sun spot). That is dark matter. G.Kanev

Re: Mr Kanev comments. It would be best to learn how to actually write in English before posting complex thoughts which may have relevance, but which cannot be deciphered due to your inability to express them cogently. I could not wade through your rhetoric in spite of multiple attempts.
JS HARDY, MD

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)