Universal Motion Theory

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.

Catastrophe

"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
Classical motion,

There is only one thing that does not have motion.

Did you mean "There is not one thing which does not have motion?"
This seems more in line with the rest of your post?

I do not understand your use of the word"choice" in this context, especially:

Choice appears to be a singular entity in this cosmos

Would you explain please?

Cat :)
 
In my model, my discernment, space can not move. Everything else does. Space is an empty area for motion to occur un-impeaded.

I believe in 3 forces. The EM force, gravity force and life force. The life force, whatever it is and for lack of another term, can modulate and reconfigure cosmic(dead matter). This bio-matter can make choices and replicate. And other growth functions. Living molecules. It uses information. And the function of error. A Choice force.

We live within a sea of these bio-physics. And of course believe much of these physics are the same as the cosmos physics.

But they are two separate physics. Information and choice only occur here.

Just a personal supposition.
 
Apr 11, 2025
16
1
15
In my model, my discernment, space can not move. Everything else does. Space is an empty area for motion to occur un-impeaded.

I believe in 3 forces. The EM force, gravity force and life force. The life force, whatever it is and for lack of another term, can modulate and reconfigure cosmic(dead matter). This bio-matter can make choices and replicate. And other growth functions. Living molecules. It uses information. And the function of error. A Choice force.

We live within a sea of these bio-physics. And of course believe much of these physics are the same as the cosmos physics.

But they are two separate physics. Information and choice only occur here.

Just a personal supposition.
This is a fascinating meditation on motion — and I appreciate how you grounded the idea as a fundamental condition of physical existence. Your line, “The dynamic of motion is the dynamic of physical existence,” captures a principle I’m also exploring through the UMT framework.

Like you, UMT posits that all things that exist are in motion — even what appears still is still moving, just within different reference scales. It also frames mass as a form of confined motion, and energy as unconfined or directional motion, much like your distinction.

I was intrigued by your mention of “molecular choice” and the suggestion that only Earth-bound biophysics exhibits this quality. I wonder if this framing could be reinterpreted not as an exception to universal physics, but as an emergent configuration within the universal motion system — not separate from cosmic dynamics, but a patterned concentration of motion-complexity capable of internal referencing. In UMT, that internal referencing — motion reacting to motion within a structure — is a precursor to what we call awareness or “choice.”

That would mean that what we experience as choice may not be foreign to the cosmos, but rather latent in its structure, only realized under rare configurations of complexity and constraint. Bio-physics, in that light, doesn’t divide us from the cosmos — it reflects it inward.

Thank you for your post. Your thoughts echo much of what inspired the UMT model, and I’d be curious to know how this view might align or diverge from your concept of “perpetual motion within a sea of motion."
 
Apr 11, 2025
16
1
15
Big Bang as a Startup Sequence

Additional Insights from the CMB Using Modified Recombination Models
Extended or Delayed Recombination and a Thicker Last-Scattering Surface

Impact on the Visibility Function:
In the UMT scenario, if the cyclic energy (E_cyc) is below the threshold (E_threshold) needed for rapid atomic binding, the effective recombination rate is reduced. This means the free electron fraction, x_e, decreases more slowly, leading to a broader (thicker) surface of last scattering.

Visibility function:
g(z) = [dτ/dz] · exp[-τ(z)]

Here, an extended recombination period (a larger τ or a broader g(z)) would smear out or slightly damp the sharpness of the acoustic peaks in the CMB temperature power spectrum.
Modifications in Acoustic Peak Structures
Peak Positions and Damping Tail:
The acoustic peaks in the CMB are due to oscillations in the photon-baryon plasma. A modified recombination history shifts the "freeze-out" of these oscillations.

Observable effect:
- The positions of the acoustic peaks could shift. - The amplitude of the damping tail (the falloff at smaller angular scales) may be altered.
By comparing these details with high-resolution measurements (e.g., from Planck), one could check for consistency with UMT predictions.
Polarization Signatures
Enhanced Thomson Scattering:
A delayed recombination phase means free electrons persist for a longer time, increasing the amount of Thomson scattering. This modifies the polarization (E-mode) pattern of the CMB.

Observable effect:
- The amplitude and possibly the angular distribution of polarization anisotropies would be affected, offering another signature that can be cross-checked against the temperature data.
Potential Spectral Distortions
Departure from a Perfect Blackbody:
In the standard model, recombination happens quickly enough that the CMB spectrum remains almost a perfect blackbody. However, an extended recombination phase might allow residual free electrons to introduce minor distortions.

Possible distortions include:
- µ-distortions or y-distortions, which are small deviations from the blackbody spectrum.
Detecting even slight spectral distortions would support the idea that the recombination process was modified by insufficient cyclic energy.

Constraining UMT Parameters
The modified recombination model introduces parameters (such as the ratio E_cyc/E_threshold and a sensitivity exponent n in the modulation factor f_cyc) that affect the recombination rate:

R'_rec = f_cyc · R_rec

where f_cyc = min[1, (E_cyc/E_threshold)^n]

By measuring the optical depth τ(z), the width of the last-scattering surface g(z), and the detailed shapes of the temperature and polarization power spectra, these parameters can be statistically constrained.

Summary
In this UMT-based scenario, while sequence and time exist as usual, the early universe did not have sufficient cyclic (rotational) kinetic energy to trigger rapid atomic binding.
This leads to a prolonged or delayed recombination phase, which manifests in the CMB as:
A broader surface of last scattering.
Altered positions and amplitudes of the acoustic peaks.
Modified polarization signals from enhanced Thomson scattering.
Potential small spectral distortions.
Together, these features provide additional channels to test and constrain UMT’s predictions using precise CMB observations.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modified Recombination Models in Universal Motion Theory (UMT

This section outlines a preliminary model of how UMT modifies the standard recombination process of the early universe. In conventional cosmology, recombination occurs as free electrons combine with protons to form neutral hydrogen when the universe cools sufficiently. Under UMT, the cyclic, closed motion—central to the framework—is insufficiently vigorous during the "startup" phase, delaying or modifying the onset of stable atomic formation.

Standard Recombination Background
The standard recombination process is commonly modeled using the Saha equation for equilibrium (or the Peebles equation for non-equilibrium effects). The evolution of the free electron fraction, \( x_e \), with time is approximately given by:

dx_e/dt = -R_{rec} \, x_e^2 + I_{ion} \, (1 - x_e)

where \( R_{rec} \) is the recombination rate and \( I_{ion} \) is the ionization rate.

The UMT Modification Concept
In the UMT “startup” scenario, the cyclic (or rotational) kinetic energy that is critical for robust atomic binding is below the necessary threshold. To incorporate this effect, we introduce a modulating factor, \( f_{cyc} \), which scales the effective recombination rate. We define a modified recombination rate as:

R'_{rec} = f_{cyc} \cdot R_{rec}

Here, \( f_{cyc} \) depends on the ratio of the cyclic energy intensity \( E_{cyc} \) to a threshold value \( E_{threshold} \) required for stable atomic binding. A simple functional form is proposed as:

f_{cyc} = \min\Biggl( 1, \Bigl(\frac{E_{cyc}}{E_{threshold}}\Bigr)^n \Biggr)

where \( n \) is a sensitivity parameter controlling how quickly \( f_{cyc} \) approaches unity as \( E_{cyc} \) increases. When \( E_{cyc} < E_{threshold} \), \( f_{cyc} < 1 \), thus reducing the effective recombination rate and delaying the formation of neutral atoms.

Modified Ionization History
With this modification, the evolution of the free electron fraction becomes:

dx_e/dt = -f_{cyc} \, R_{rec} \, x_e^2 + I_{ion} \, (1 - x_e)

This altered ionization history impacts the optical depth \( \tau(z) \) for Thomson scattering and, consequently, the visibility function \( g(z) \) defined as:

g(z) = \frac{d\tau}{dz} \, \exp\bigl(-\tau(z)\bigr)

A delayed or extended recombination period results in a broader \( g(z) \), which may dampen the acoustic peaks in the CMB power spectrum and alter the observed polarization patterns.

Implications for Observations
Under this UMT modification:
- The recombination epoch may shift to a lower redshift and be drawn out over a longer interval, creating a “thick” surface of last scattering.
- The damping of the acoustic oscillations in the CMB may be enhanced, leading to modifications in the heights and positions of the temperature anisotropy peaks.
- Enhanced Thomson scattering during the prolonged ionized phase could imprint subtle differences on the CMB polarization (specifically in the E-modes).

Next Steps
To test this modified recombination scenario, the following steps are proposed:
- Refine the functional form of \( f_{cyc} \) based on theoretical estimates of \( E_{cyc} \) derived from UMT dynamics.
- Implement the modified recombination equations in a numerical cosmological code to simulate the evolution of \( x_e \), \( \tau(z) \), and \( g(z) \).
- Compare the simulated CMB power spectra (both temperature and polarization) with observational data (e.g., from Planck) to constrain the parameters \( E_{threshold} \) and \( n \).
This approach would help determine whether the UMT “startup” scenario—where insufficient cyclic energy delays atomic binding—provides a viable alternative to the standard recombination model in explaining observed features of the CMB.
 

Latest posts