Universe evolution - my view based on all the data I have gathered so far

Aug 31, 2021
26
14
35
I have been contemplating Universe origins for a past few years. Even when we are not conscious our mind, filled with all the knowledge we have collected, works in the background. Yesterday, I received the answer which I will reveal to the general audience here and now.

First I want to thank all those scientists who in any significant way contributed to the Universe origins subject. Without them I couldn`t found the solution this fast.

The most prominent theory, based on all of the available evidence, is the Big Bang theory which includes Lambda Cold Dark Matter model. That was my starting point.

I noticed that everyone is concerned with question "how" Universe began. For me, the logical question and much easier was "when" Universe began.

Before The Big Bang there was no time and no space. People have trouble imagining this two, no wonder since we are surrounded by clocks, objects and atmosphere. Not me. In my thoughts I went to the intergalactic space where there is only 1 particle in the cubic meter of the vacuum. Now all you have to do is to remove that one particle in your mind and you get nothing. Experiments in the ISS with precisely tuned lasers that cool down particle(s) to the absolute zero temperature state help us to froze that single atom. With the announced new ultra strong Chinese lasers, 10 and then 100 petawatt, that focus beam at the 3 pikometer surface it will be possible to blast off that single atom and we will practically have 1 cubic meter of nothing. Conditional nothing: nothing with quantum fluctuations where particles and anti-particles appear and cancel each other. But at least it is easier to imagine nothing. What about time? Is there time in that cubic meter of nothing? Yes. Certainly. Overall time does not stop because we have one cubic meter of nothing. Hence, Time and nothing need no prior conditions or circumstances to exist. Time and nothing simply are.

God is eternal. What is eternity if not time? Infinite amount of the time. Time can be static and dynamic. It is static where there is nothing happening. It ticks when we have action going on. Nothing existed for an eternity before turned into the initial singularity. Everything in the Universe is a logical consequence of the prior circumstances. There is no effect without the cause. Reverse the sequence! Go backwards in the time step by step until you reach initial singularity. What can exist prior to initial singularity? What is before 1 on any mathematical vector not just on the time line? 0. Can you imagine anything else except zilch?

This concept I am proposing does not necessarily eliminate the idea of the God. I am talking about the creation - not the creator Itself. There will always be possible for supreme transcendent entity to exist before the Universe began or outside of our comprehension (reality). Or layers of divinity. Or higher specie that made this Universe. Let us forget about the metaphysics briefly and focus on the Big Bang. The most important reason is that we have enough evidence to contemplate the Universe yet any attempt to contemplate God is strictly fantastic.

CMBR is same in every direction and cosmic trigonometry shows that the Universe is flat. That does not mean it has shape of a disc as suggested by many scientists. It is flat in every direction! Then it must be spherical. Hubble discovered that Universe is expanding. The speed of the expansion is proportional to the distance. This expansion faster than the speed of the light is not susceptible to the laws of the physics because expansion is related to the underlying quantum field not to the manifested, observable spacetime continuum.

After the initial singularity there is a phase of inflation during which cosmic principles were developed like DNA in humans. Particles, properties and laws of physics were introduced during this period. We can call it divine algorithm. Inflation was the programming and structuring of the Universe. Then we have dark ages: look at the electromagnetic spectrum. Before light there were shorter, primordial frequencies or pure energy evolution - Gamma, X-Ray and UV. All three can not be seen using visual spectrum, nor have mass but exert power and penetrate objects. Then we have emergence of the light which enabled energy to transform into the mass and backwards, described by Einstein`s formula E = m x c2. Next in line we have particles that surpassed light part of the EM spectrum preserving heat emissions or IR radiation: we can not see them but they preserved mass property exerting gravitation effect. Electromagnetic spectrum perfectly explains the dark energy, visible matter and dark matter. At the end of the spectrum we find radio waves of shorter and longer frequencies. What is the sound? It is the vibration. Can the transition between light and mass, on the one side, and sound or vibration, on the other side of the EM spectrum, be achieved? Can we translate particles through the EM spectrum just like Universe did along the creation process?

The fact that the Universe is expanding and phenomenom of the quantum entanglement raise the idea of how intergalactic voyages could be achieved: by exploiting the underlying quantum field like riding a wave. Interstellar trips can be made with the mere electromagnetic propulsion.
 
Aug 14, 2020
562
108
1,060
The origin of the Universe is always "now" (t=0), The Planck Big Bang Horizon is a horizon and therefore we are here distant from it in space and time, and there, too, within that horizon always (t=0).

Were we a planet of beings 13.8 billion x 6 trillion milles from the Earth, in space we would be quantum entangled with the Earth in time, though unobservably so. Earth would be 13.8 billion light years from us, meaning 13.8 billion years in the future from us. Were we to have a space ship that could reach across the distance, via warp or wormhole, we would observe during the space and time travel a frame of future (+) from where we started (-) across 13.8 billion years -- traveled in no time flat, of course. That would be a travel from past (-) to now (t=0) via future (+).

In other words, if you unaware of how infinity works, you are unaware that timelessness begins and ends "now".... and that Relativity's [[past(-) / future (+)]] state is always relative, and nothing but relative.

There are those who simply can't get past "origin". The "origin" (the beginning, and thus the end) of Universe. The "origin" of the Universe is always in horizon, we are always in that horizon, so the origin of the Universe is always "now", the [Planck] Big Bang Horizon. It "was" and "will always be". Some can't get minds away from centralism. They can't decentralize past-future from just one centrality to many, an infinity of, spaces and times. To have it ultimately centralized (space-time) in one dimension.... and at the same time ultimately decentralized (spaces and times) in another co-existing, paralleling, dimension (a dual dimensionality: a binary dimensionality (infinitely many in one: one in infinitely many)). A Multiverse Universe! "Origin" always being relative rather than absolute: Past(-)-future(+) always being relative rather than absolute. A timeless "now" (t=0) being the only quantumly entangled universality.
 
Aug 31, 2021
26
14
35
You are right. If far away galaxies move at the C then their T equals 0 at the horizon. It is a paradox. How can time be 0 if the Universe is 13.82 billion years old? Because Time actually ticks backwards? No it doesn't. It just appears so because we are looking at the Universe standing on our hands. It is 13.82 billion years in the middle not on the edge. The edge of the observable Universe was created before Earth so we can not attribute later amount of Time to it. Instead of saying how old it is - we must say how young it is. Why? Because it has no sense measuring from the opposite point. Properly stated: Time at the edge is zero and the Universe is 13.82 years old in the middle. Beyond the observable Universe Time is also zero stretching to the infinity of nothing because without light there is no speed of the light. Since s = v x t without speed and without time there is no distance. s = 0. Nothing is indefinite. Beyond the observable Universe there is nothing all the way to the infinity.
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
I do not understand this weird idea that, if expansion is widely variable, vide inflation:

Accelerating expansion of the universe - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Accelerating_expansio...


According to the theory of cosmic inflation, the very early universe underwent a period of very rapid, quasi-exponential expansion. While the time-scale for ...
Background · ‎Evidence for acceleration · ‎Age of the universe · ‎Explanatory models

then why is it assumed that extending the expansion backwards in a straight line is a valid extrapolation? Why is not tangential approach better than a straight line intersection?

Cat :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG2007
Aug 31, 2021
26
14
35
I do not understand this weird idea that, if expansion is widely variable, vide inflation:

Accelerating expansion of the universe - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Accelerating_expansio...


According to the theory of cosmic inflation, the very early universe underwent a period of very rapid, quasi-exponential expansion. While the time-scale for ...
Background · ‎Evidence for acceleration · ‎Age of the universe · ‎Explanatory models

then why is it assumed that extending the expansion backwards in a straight line is a valid extrapolation? Why is not tangential approach better than a straight line intersection?

Cat :)
Cosmic trigonometry using CMBR shows that the Universe is flat. Two straight lines drawn from the Earth are going parallel all the way to the edge of the observable Universe without getting any closer. Tangent is a line that just touches the curve. Since the Universe is flat there is no curve to touch.

Nevertheless, your idea of extrapolation by tangential approach may be accurate beyond the cosmic horizon simply because - we do not know what is out there. I presume infinity of nothing, and no calculations possible (everything is 0), but I could easily be wrong. The fundamental problem in the cosmology, to which I always point, is that we are in the box (Universe) and from inside the box we can not see what is exterior. What if observable Universe is just a segment on a larger cosmic scale? Then perhapse curvature manifests beyond the edge?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
What if observable Universe is just a segment on a larger cosmic scale? Then perhaps curvature manifests beyond the edge?"

I like the idea of a cyclic Universe. Take it from the other side. The Universe contracts, eventually approaching the time axis almost tangentially, and then expands on the other side almost tangentially to begin with. Also these vast changes over milliseconds are stretched out.

Cat :)
 
Aug 31, 2021
26
14
35
What if observable Universe is just a segment on a larger cosmic scale? Then perhaps curvature manifests beyond the edge?"

I like the idea of a cyclic Universe. Take it from the other side. The Universe contracts, eventually approaching the time axis almost tangentially, and then expands on the other side almost tangentially to begin with. Also these vast changes over milliseconds are stretched out.

Cat :)
Cyclic theory assumes no external cause needed for the creation. Instead, it proposes eternal rhythm. That idea is mind blowing: to have continual translation without the initial source. Like pendulum driven by mere existence. No wonder why people choose easier explanations, including religious. It is so much easier to attribute creation to a certain aspect then to the complex integrity.
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
***Etymology
The Modern English word devil derives from the Middle English devel, from the Old English dēofol, that in turn represents an early Germanic borrowing of the Latin diabolus. This in turn was borrowed from the Greek διάβολος diábolos, "slanderer",[8] from διαβάλλειν diabállein, "to slander" from διά diá, "across, through" and βάλλειν bállein, "to hurl", probably akin to the Sanskrit gurate, "he lifts up".***
My emphasis.

Cat :)
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
Devil is a very general word now, no longer (if ever) restricted to certain types of philosophy,

for example, "what the d**** is going on?" and how would monkeys know anyway?

Cat :)

P.S. I find this very acceptable:

"Cyclic theory assumes no external cause needed for the creation. Instead, it proposes eternal rhythm. That idea is mind blowing: to have continual translation without the initial source. "
 
What if this universe has no origin.
No start point or end point.
Expansion simply nada being filled in by quantum fluctuation as a natural process of energy balance of nada as it goes.
Quantum fluctuation the creator of matter/energy until it balances it's energy then conservation of energy on time scales that make 1 second look like a very long time.
Gravity sources like galactic black holes that are far reaching don't allow nada to exist so the perception of expansion will be different in mass areas vs low mass areas.
We get the red shift results of distant objects and ability for galaxies to merge on a local scale.

Nada the start point in a natural process to create everything.
Can nada have a start point or end point? And if a natural process can create this universe from nada it probably can create countless other ones.
Nothing lasts forever not even nothing.
JMO
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
Aug 14, 2020
562
108
1,060
"Nexus" is binary, linear (in line) and/or non-linear. An all-at-once, quantumly entangled or in-parallel, (Multiverse Universe) naked singularity of Cosmopolis -- cosmopolis of infinitely many singularities (all-in-one / one-in-all) -- is non-linear "nexus." 3-d) Radial lines foreground local, or center, point to any of countless points -- countless wormhole-like points -- of the background horizon shell of any universe sphere (any Einsteinian four-dimensional box) .... And/or: 2-d) A flat universe plane of countless planes (an infinitely flat plane infinitely broad in plane and infinitely deep in infinitely flat-broad planes).

What does an infinitely dense mass Universe (U) (aka 'Naked Singularity' or the 'Big Crunch') look like? Answer.... an infinite vacuum of space. And the point "singularity" of any of any infinity of blackholes anywhere / any when....

It's all in the 'Mirror' (it's all in the mirrors). Template self-similarity to infinity. Instantaneous reach, to infinity. Simultaneous reach, to infinity. Quantum entanglement, to infinity. A non-linear "nexus".
--------------------------------

By the way, while I'm at it..... A neutron star is essentially a neutron particle become up and out of the relative reaches of micro-verse into the relative reaches of macro-verse. Another form of developed, or developing, 'singularity'.... as well as a type of reach from far to near. You can't get much more titanically hard -- in the macro-verse -- than a star crushed to nakedly singular neutron in the macro-verse.
 
Last edited:
VPE, will your quantum fluctuations fill my cyclic Universe, doing away with the singularity, and substituting a nexus?

Cat :)
If quantum fluctuation is just an energy balance of filling in nada as it goes then an origin for the universe doesn't exist.
It might have started when everything was nothing but setting a date on a natural process of nothing becomes something is impossible, could be forever ago or the first time it started is this one.
Cyclic ugly i think will be the true nature of this universe with no real reason or start date just ever changing interactions with other universes.
 
Aug 14, 2020
562
108
1,060
I will follow in the footsteps of Stephen Hawking and say "t=0" is nothing for physicists and mathematicians, or anyone else, to worry about since it is always the present state of the Universe (U). [Past (-) ---> Future (+)] ---> Present (t=0)

0.
1, 0.
2, 1, 0.
3, 2, 1, 0.
4, 3, 2, 1, 0.
5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0.
6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0.
7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0.
8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0.
9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0.

't = 0' (now).

The Multiverse Universe is never insane (past (-) ---> ?).
 
Last edited:
Cyclic models overcome the mammoth objection of division by zero (singularity), which is the reason that physics breaks down at t = 0.

Cat :)
Nada has no 0 to break down or divide by :)
Also can't have a singularity of nada since it's division is nada, less than 0.

An odd idea for sure that 0 might be the reason for bad math and calculations.
A fun calculation is Nada/potential energy >0 =?
It can be a very tiny potential and still create everything because nada can have infinite potential energy even with grossly small potential energy properties.
JMO
 
Last edited:
Aug 14, 2020
562
108
1,060
Past (-) ---> Future (+) ---> Present (t=0).

Now (t=0).

0.
-1, 0.
-2, -1, 0.
-3, -2, -1, 0.
-4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-7, -6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-8, -7, -6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-9, -8, -7, -6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.

Now (t=0).

Even concerning any foreground local, relative, universe (of an infinity of paralleling universes), there is the unobservable universe, then there is the observable universe. The unobservable universe quantum entangles. The observable universe doesn't and can't possibly.

As a living cell maximized in energy conserves energy by dividing into two or more cells, so an infinite Universe (U) conserves energy by division into an infinity of paralleling finite universes (u).... aka an infinity of infinitesimal points.... in another dimensionality, a plane of countless planes. Seeing as all of the above altogether entangle as boundarylessness, there is no place for, and never was any place for, and never will be any place for, "nothingness" before, after, inside or outside, regarding the Multiverse part of the dual nature of the Multiverse Universe. The binary dual nature of the infinitely dense mass of the Multiverse Universe's Big Crunch dimensionality (being the infinite vacuum of space) is another story.

I'm not the only person who can step up from 1- and 2-dimensional thinking into more dimensional realizations. But there are those who simply can't escape being boxed in.

As the noted historian Will Durant said about the difference between civilization and savagery, civilization has fewer rules, but they are stronger among the civilized for being fewer. Savagery has far more rules in place than civilization, and they rule (they make) savages. Of course Will Durant was not the first to observe this nature of rules. The Roman, Cicero, beat him to this observation of mass physics (seen operating on / in humanity) by 2,000 years. The Multiverse Universe has its rules.... and they are not, and never were or will be, "nothing" (sic). "Nothingness" is simply dual dimensional with "Everythingness". In other words, the one is the other, indivisible. It won't be separated from the Big Crunch / Big Vacuum (Void) (Hole), or the other side of the same coin, its other dimensionality, the Planck Big Bang Horizon. No less Multiverse (open systemic). No less Universe (closed systemic).

It's a Multiverse Universe: It has few rules, but what awesome rules!
 
Past (-) ---> Future (+) ---> Present (t=0).

Now (t=0).

0.
-1, 0.
-2, -1, 0.
-3, -2, -1, 0.
-4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-7, -6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-8, -7, -6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.
-9, -8, -7, -6, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0.

Now (t=0).

Even concerning any foreground local, relative, universe (of an infinity of paralleling universes), there is the unobservable universe, then there is the observable universe. The unobservable universe quantum entangles. The observable universe doesn't and can't possibly.

As a living cell maximized in energy conserves energy by dividing into two or more cells, so an infinite Universe (U) conserves energy by division into an infinity of paralleling finite universes (u).... aka an infinity of infinitesimal points.... in another dimensionality, a plane of countless planes. Seeing as all of the above altogether entangle as boundarylessness, there is no place for, and never was any place for, and never will be any place for, "nothingness" before, after, inside or outside, regarding the Multiverse part of the dual nature of the Multiverse Universe. The binary dual nature of the infinitely dense mass of the Multiverse Universe's Big Crunch dimensionality (being the infinite vacuum of space) is another story.

I'm not the only person who can step up from 1- and 2-dimensional thinking into more dimensional realizations. But there are those who simply can't escape being boxed in.

As the noted historian Will Durant said about the difference between civilization and savagery, civilization has fewer rules, but they are stronger among the civilized for being fewer. Savagery has far more rules in place than civilization, and they rule (they make) savages. Of course Will Durant was not the first to observe this nature of rules. The Roman, Cicero, beat him to this observation of mass physics (seen operating on / in humanity) by 2,000 years. The Multiverse Universe has its rules.... and they are not, and never were or will be, "nothing" (sic). "Nothingness" is simply dual dimensional with "Everythingness". In other words, the one is the other, indivisible. It won't be separated from the Big Crunch / Big Vacuum (Void) (Hole), or the other side of the same coin, its other dimensionality, the Planck Big Bang Horizon. No less Multiverse (open systemic). No less Universe (closed systemic).

It's a Multiverse Universe: It has few rules, but what awesome rules!
I agree time=0
Concept of movement or gravity well IMO
Time as a substance i have my doubt exists.

Just as simple for nothing to be the cause for everything.
The tiniest potential energy of instability of nothing is enough to start quantum fluctuation.
It does the rest in balancing it's energy then merging with other partial universes until E is to high, BB.
Cyclic ugly from that point on.

A natural process from nada to the energy that is this universe and the infinite others that formed under the exact same rules.
All different because of location in infinity and interference of all the others.
Makes each one similar but unique.
JMO
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts