info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Tests of the Big Bang
11 views
Skip to first unread message
Marco Pereira
Feb 27, 2022, 12:02:13 PM2/27/22
to
The attempt at posting an answer at https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/_feBfFLssWQ/m/nlSFiIl1-FIJ
Many years ago, a conversation between Sam Wormley, Monitek, Bjoern Feuerbach, and others, took place here. The conversation happened in 2003 and when I tried to place a comment (restart the discussion, the site froze), so I am restarting the conversation here with my comment below:
Bjoern directed us to this site to find out what are the tests (support) for the Big Bang Model:
https://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_tests.html
The support comes from three items:
a) Expansion of the Universe (Hubble Observations)
b) Abundance of Li, He, H
c) Cosmic Microwave Background
###########################################
Let's take one item at a time:
a) Expansion of the Universe (Hubble Observations)
I derived from the first principle laws of nature where G is epoch-dependent. G is inversely proportional to the 4D radius of the Universe. A similar model (G is inversely proportional to the age of the Universe) was postulated by Sommerfeld. The Universe is modeled as a Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Hypersurface. That was also proposed by Richard Feynman and appeared again as an expanding 4D m-brane here:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30636156/
The expansion was made at an arbitrary velocity such that the CURRENT distances to SN1a were preserved. This requires the m-brane to expand faster than the speed of light during the inflation period. The only contribution of that article was to replace Dark Energy, Inflaton Field with brane negative surface tension.
So, there is nothing abnormal or speculative about proposing the universe to be embedded as a hypersurface and the G being inversely proportional to the Universe 4D radius.
The reason Sommerfeld postulated epoch-dependent G didn't succeed is that there is no Physical model of time. Feynman's universe as a hypersurface didn't succeed because of General Relativity which requires the Universe to be inside a non-embedded 4D spacetime and certainly never to expand at relativistic speeds.
To overcome those obstacles, one needed to derive Laws of Nature that would replace General Relativity. I derived them and they reproduce all observations of Velocity Time Dilation, GravitationalTime Dilation, Mercury Perihelion Precession Rate, Frame-Dragging, Gravitational Lensing
The epoch-dependent G affects the Calibration of the Cosmic Distance Ladder. Dr. Adam Riess calibrated using the Stellar Candles Hypothesis. This hypothesis is equivalent to constant G since SN1a detonates when they reach the Chandrasekhar Mass Limit and that is G-dependent.
I debunked an article that is used to constrain the variability of G and I also derived the Absolute Luminosity G-dependence to be G^{3.33}
I also showed the G being inverse to the 4D radius is compatible with Lunar Ranging measurements.
Then I corrected the SN1a distances calculated under the Stellar Candles Hypothesis and predicted them using Absolute Luminosity having a G^{3.33} dependence, the lightspeed expanding hyperspherical Universe topology, and that all galaxies are only moving radially (perpendicularly to the 3D hypersurface).
This means that under HU, all galaxies are just coasting (sitting still on average) and moving inertially along the radial direction -as dots on the surface of the expanding balloon.
SO, SN1a (The Supernova Cosmology Project) and the Hubble Galaxy Receding observations support HU.
###############################
b) Abundance of Li, He, H
In my theory, I proposed a new model for Matter where Matter is made from shapeshifting, deformations of space that spin in 4D as they travel with the Universe at the speed of light.
You might want to say that this is speculative. I would reply that this is not more speculative than Mass deforms Spacetime, which melds space and time (multiplied by an arbitrary velocity c). In other words, Spacetime never made any sense since one cannot even justify the use of c in the metric. What is moving at that speed? One cannot move through time or define a speed for doing so.
The model for Matter is called Fundamental Dilator.
Since in HU, Matter is made directly and simply from deformed space, HU Universe is the simplest possible having only Space, Deformed Space and Time.
This allows me to easily create the Universe using just the Heisenberg Principle.
You can read it here:
https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202201.0106/v1
Since in a lightspeed expanding Hyperspherical Universe all our 3D forces cannot have any influence in the Universe expansion, one expects the expansion to be inertial and at the natural velocity.
HU calculates the maximum density of the Universe, which corresponds to the maximum possible acceleration. So, HU has maximum velocity (lightspeed or the natural velocity of space deformations) and maximum acceleration (corresponding to the density inside a Black Hole).
So, it is natural that the Universe would have an initial 4D radius and expand at the speed of light.
The initial process that created the Universe motion is called The Big Pop and that corresponds to the partial recombination of the Initial Metric Fluctuation. The partial recombination leaves the Inner Dilation Layer (IDL) and the Outermost Contraction Layer (OCL).
The motion is the result of HU’s description of the reason for things to move. They move to relax stress on SPACE. This means that IDL would necessarily expand to relax the stress on where it is located.
The process has an analogy in Prince Rupert Drop:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe-f4gokRBs
HU calculates the total mass of the Hyperspherical Universe and the total mass of the Observable Universe.
Now that you know that HU has the total mass of the initial Blackholium (I coined the words Blackholium and Neutronium to emphasize that they are hyperspherical hypersuperficial and not spherical), and that it is expanding at the speed of light, it is easy to understand that HU can calculate its dynamics and the time when the Blackholium will become a Neutronium.
HU also calculates the time when the Neutronium will decay into Neutrons and release the 0.78 MeV per neutron of energy. That energy heats up the Universe and is responsible for the CMB.
If you follow this link:
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-6ab4d6a62187b3b0e088758cf7dbe6c9
you will see the product of Temperature time Density in comparison with that quantity at the core of the Sun. That will allow you to calculate the relative yields for Hydrogen, Lithium, and Lithium.
The current modeling of Nucleosynthesis is based just on a Boltzmann Distribution of states (mapping the energy level to the energy contained in the mass of each isotope). That results in a Lithium anomaly since the fraction of lithium is smaller than expected).
My result allows for a better model since it provides both density and temperature as a function of time. The finite nature of the profile means that the synthesis of Lithium would be curtailed by the falling temperatures and density.
####################################
c) Cosmic Microwave Background
HU modeled the Neutronium Acoustic Oscillations created at the Phase-Transition between Blackholium and Neutronium, as Hyperspherical Harmonics.
Hyperspherical Harmonics applied to a Hypersphere is not a complete basis to represent the CMB which occurred in a 2D spherical surface embedded inside the 3D hyperspherical hypersurface. SO, HU had to find Earth’s location within the hyperspherical universe and optimize the Hyperspherical Harmonic Spectrum.
HU replicated both the CMB observation (low-frequency components) and the high-frequency components of the spherical harmonic spectrum.
Hence HU is supported by the Cosmic Microwave Background.
Anyone claiming the modeling the CMB was a great feat is either delusional or trying to delude people.
There is a 10% error bar on the value of the Hubble Constant (a.k.a. Hubble Tension) AND the fitting doesn’t show the fitting function which includes an arbitrary background (mapped to “perturbed” FLRW metric, which is already ad hoc).
Give me the opportunity to add an arbitrary background and I can fit anything.
IN SUMMARY
The Big Bang is a horrendous model that hinges on unsupported constructs (False Vacuum, AntiMatter, Inflaton Field, Inflaton Particle, Higgs Field, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Singularity Math, etc).
Cosmological Inflation was created to solve the Horizon Problem. That is solved trivially just by having the initial universe start as a homogeneous Blackholium (the surface of a hyperspherical metric fluctuation). That is dictated just by symmetry.
The epoch-dependent G and proper calibration of the Cosmic Distance Ladder eliminate the need for Dark Energy.
The Surfer Paradigm for Motion (all particles in the Universe are surfing the Inner Dilation Layer) replaces Dark Energy pushing galaxies apart with Galaxies just coasting inertially in 4D.
The Fundamental Dilator makes the Universe simple and containing just space and time, and nothing else.
HU also provided the particle taxonomy without the need for “fields, Flavors, Colors”
All particles are described as excited states of the Fundamental Dilator, which contains only a proton and an electron.
Occam’s Razor supports HU.
Many years ago, a conversation between Sam Wormley, Monitek, Bjoern Feuerbach, and others, took place here. The conversation happened in 2003 and when I tried to place a comment (restart the discussion, the site froze), so I am restarting the conversation here with my comment below:
Bjoern directed us to this site to find out what are the tests (support) for the Big Bang Model:
https://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_tests.html
The support comes from three items:
a) Expansion of the Universe (Hubble Observations)
b) Abundance of Li, He, H
c) Cosmic Microwave Background
###########################################
Let's take one item at a time:
a) Expansion of the Universe (Hubble Observations)
I derived from the first principle laws of nature where G is epoch-dependent. G is inversely proportional to the 4D radius of the Universe. A similar model (G is inversely proportional to the age of the Universe) was postulated by Sommerfeld. The Universe is modeled as a Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Hypersurface. That was also proposed by Richard Feynman and appeared again as an expanding 4D m-brane here:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30636156/
The expansion was made at an arbitrary velocity such that the CURRENT distances to SN1a were preserved. This requires the m-brane to expand faster than the speed of light during the inflation period. The only contribution of that article was to replace Dark Energy, Inflaton Field with brane negative surface tension.
So, there is nothing abnormal or speculative about proposing the universe to be embedded as a hypersurface and the G being inversely proportional to the Universe 4D radius.
The reason Sommerfeld postulated epoch-dependent G didn't succeed is that there is no Physical model of time. Feynman's universe as a hypersurface didn't succeed because of General Relativity which requires the Universe to be inside a non-embedded 4D spacetime and certainly never to expand at relativistic speeds.
To overcome those obstacles, one needed to derive Laws of Nature that would replace General Relativity. I derived them and they reproduce all observations of Velocity Time Dilation, GravitationalTime Dilation, Mercury Perihelion Precession Rate, Frame-Dragging, Gravitational Lensing
The epoch-dependent G affects the Calibration of the Cosmic Distance Ladder. Dr. Adam Riess calibrated using the Stellar Candles Hypothesis. This hypothesis is equivalent to constant G since SN1a detonates when they reach the Chandrasekhar Mass Limit and that is G-dependent.
I debunked an article that is used to constrain the variability of G and I also derived the Absolute Luminosity G-dependence to be G^{3.33}
I also showed the G being inverse to the 4D radius is compatible with Lunar Ranging measurements.
Then I corrected the SN1a distances calculated under the Stellar Candles Hypothesis and predicted them using Absolute Luminosity having a G^{3.33} dependence, the lightspeed expanding hyperspherical Universe topology, and that all galaxies are only moving radially (perpendicularly to the 3D hypersurface).
This means that under HU, all galaxies are just coasting (sitting still on average) and moving inertially along the radial direction -as dots on the surface of the expanding balloon.
SO, SN1a (The Supernova Cosmology Project) and the Hubble Galaxy Receding observations support HU.
###############################
b) Abundance of Li, He, H
In my theory, I proposed a new model for Matter where Matter is made from shapeshifting, deformations of space that spin in 4D as they travel with the Universe at the speed of light.
You might want to say that this is speculative. I would reply that this is not more speculative than Mass deforms Spacetime, which melds space and time (multiplied by an arbitrary velocity c). In other words, Spacetime never made any sense since one cannot even justify the use of c in the metric. What is moving at that speed? One cannot move through time or define a speed for doing so.
The model for Matter is called Fundamental Dilator.
Since in HU, Matter is made directly and simply from deformed space, HU Universe is the simplest possible having only Space, Deformed Space and Time.
This allows me to easily create the Universe using just the Heisenberg Principle.
You can read it here:
https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202201.0106/v1
Since in a lightspeed expanding Hyperspherical Universe all our 3D forces cannot have any influence in the Universe expansion, one expects the expansion to be inertial and at the natural velocity.
HU calculates the maximum density of the Universe, which corresponds to the maximum possible acceleration. So, HU has maximum velocity (lightspeed or the natural velocity of space deformations) and maximum acceleration (corresponding to the density inside a Black Hole).
So, it is natural that the Universe would have an initial 4D radius and expand at the speed of light.
The initial process that created the Universe motion is called The Big Pop and that corresponds to the partial recombination of the Initial Metric Fluctuation. The partial recombination leaves the Inner Dilation Layer (IDL) and the Outermost Contraction Layer (OCL).
The motion is the result of HU’s description of the reason for things to move. They move to relax stress on SPACE. This means that IDL would necessarily expand to relax the stress on where it is located.
The process has an analogy in Prince Rupert Drop:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe-f4gokRBs
HU calculates the total mass of the Hyperspherical Universe and the total mass of the Observable Universe.
Now that you know that HU has the total mass of the initial Blackholium (I coined the words Blackholium and Neutronium to emphasize that they are hyperspherical hypersuperficial and not spherical), and that it is expanding at the speed of light, it is easy to understand that HU can calculate its dynamics and the time when the Blackholium will become a Neutronium.
HU also calculates the time when the Neutronium will decay into Neutrons and release the 0.78 MeV per neutron of energy. That energy heats up the Universe and is responsible for the CMB.
If you follow this link:
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-6ab4d6a62187b3b0e088758cf7dbe6c9
you will see the product of Temperature time Density in comparison with that quantity at the core of the Sun. That will allow you to calculate the relative yields for Hydrogen, Lithium, and Lithium.
The current modeling of Nucleosynthesis is based just on a Boltzmann Distribution of states (mapping the energy level to the energy contained in the mass of each isotope). That results in a Lithium anomaly since the fraction of lithium is smaller than expected).
My result allows for a better model since it provides both density and temperature as a function of time. The finite nature of the profile means that the synthesis of Lithium would be curtailed by the falling temperatures and density.
####################################
c) Cosmic Microwave Background
HU modeled the Neutronium Acoustic Oscillations created at the Phase-Transition between Blackholium and Neutronium, as Hyperspherical Harmonics.
Hyperspherical Harmonics applied to a Hypersphere is not a complete basis to represent the CMB which occurred in a 2D spherical surface embedded inside the 3D hyperspherical hypersurface. SO, HU had to find Earth’s location within the hyperspherical universe and optimize the Hyperspherical Harmonic Spectrum.
HU replicated both the CMB observation (low-frequency components) and the high-frequency components of the spherical harmonic spectrum.
Hence HU is supported by the Cosmic Microwave Background.
Anyone claiming the modeling the CMB was a great feat is either delusional or trying to delude people.
There is a 10% error bar on the value of the Hubble Constant (a.k.a. Hubble Tension) AND the fitting doesn’t show the fitting function which includes an arbitrary background (mapped to “perturbed” FLRW metric, which is already ad hoc).
Give me the opportunity to add an arbitrary background and I can fit anything.
IN SUMMARY
The Big Bang is a horrendous model that hinges on unsupported constructs (False Vacuum, AntiMatter, Inflaton Field, Inflaton Particle, Higgs Field, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Singularity Math, etc).
Cosmological Inflation was created to solve the Horizon Problem. That is solved trivially just by having the initial universe start as a homogeneous Blackholium (the surface of a hyperspherical metric fluctuation). That is dictated just by symmetry.
The epoch-dependent G and proper calibration of the Cosmic Distance Ladder eliminate the need for Dark Energy.
The Surfer Paradigm for Motion (all particles in the Universe are surfing the Inner Dilation Layer) replaces Dark Energy pushing galaxies apart with Galaxies just coasting inertially in 4D.
The Fundamental Dilator makes the Universe simple and containing just space and time, and nothing else.
HU also provided the particle taxonomy without the need for “fields, Flavors, Colors”
All particles are described as excited states of the Fundamental Dilator, which contains only a proton and an electron.
Occam’s Razor supports HU.
Jim Pennino
Feb 27, 2022, 12:46:10 PM2/27/22
to
Marco Pereira <ny22...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The attempt at posting an answer at https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/_feBfFLssWQ/m/nlSFiIl1-FIJ
>
> Many years ago, a conversation between Sam Wormley, Monitek, Bjoern Feuerbach, and others, took place here.
All long gone from here.
> The attempt at posting an answer at https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/_feBfFLssWQ/m/nlSFiIl1-FIJ
>
> Many years ago, a conversation between Sam Wormley, Monitek, Bjoern Feuerbach, and others, took place here.
Marco Pereira
Feb 27, 2022, 2:27:50 PM2/27/22
to
Arindam Banerjee
Feb 27, 2022, 5:17:33 PM2/27/22
to
Idiot.
0 new messages