The traditional Big Bang then continues the total neglect for logic and reality by claiming that there was an Inflation where the entire Universe, which was then smaller than the size of the nucleus of an atom (10-24 meter) then suddenly expanded by a factor of 10+50 from a sub-nucleus-sized invisibly tiny (10-24 meter) speck to its current huge 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 the Speed of Light, and then suddenly stop, for such a ridiculous instant expansion to actually happen!
Much better than that very illogical Big Bang Theory, this is a solidly logical explanation for the beginning of the Universe. Instead of being based on wild speculation, this is entirely based on experiments that many Physicists and many Physics students have done. There is no having to abandon all of the Laws of Science and Euclidean logic they were all derived through.
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 may be 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, and Published on the Internet 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 or particle 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 own anti-photon, just exactly out of phase, but I sometimes refer to 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
When I was such a Physics student at the University of Chicago during the 1960s, like 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 each other. If the two
photons are at exactly the same frequency (and therefore wavelength and energy), and if
the two photons have 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 absolutely 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. We calculated 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 calculated how 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 illuminated stripe. Most of us Physics students are confused or spooked by seeing this "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 disappeared from 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 the top of the oil film and also inverted and reflected off the bottom of the oil film, which is why the 1/4 wavelength thick oil 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 that the 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 now results in a new bundle of energy, a photon which actually is just Einstein's E = mc2, so it actually also Conserves Energy as 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 more advanced 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 as a 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 15 minutes 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 considered backward 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) a process 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 a result 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 a material rest-mass of 0.511 MeV and some extra energy is required to give them a minimal amount of Kinetic Energy so they can separate. In some cases, excess energy of the photon gets converted into Kinetic Energy of the Electron and the Anti-Electron, where all the initial energy of the photon totally vanishes in this process. Some times, a less powerful Photon 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 radius but 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 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 with MILLIONS 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 that the actual experimenter (me, in this case) actually looked at any 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 the way, my Supervisor decided how many photons I would be given to play with, [actually, how many microfilm photographs I 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 adventure. The mathematical analysis of each curved line (in the strength of the magnetic field where the experiments were done) gave me a confirmation that my brand-new particles each had a Rest Mass of 0.511 MeV, (the correct number for an electron or a anti-electron) and my Supervisor was pleased!
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 do to 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 energy in each, and where that energy has to be exactly out of phase with each other. They did form from "absolutely nothing" and if and when they ever encounter each other, they would have to mutually annihilate to again become nothing (by 1 above). In the process of such experiments, the researcher does not have the advantage of being able to do the experiment in a magnetic field, so no looking for curved lines, and so some variation of a Geiger Counter is often used to try to detect the straight lines of 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.
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 3 and 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 billions of different locations and at billions of different moments.
You might notice that this is a "complete" theory, in that it clearly 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) 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 photons were 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, toward where an entirely different "anti-Universe" would later be. Initially, both of these Universes would have contained a mix of photons and anti-photons, with only a slight excess of one or 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 in a nearly complete remaining photon population in our Universe and 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 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 Anti-Electron 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).
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 some additional implications which seem rather interesting (discussed below). But this explanation does not require any of the bizarre assumptions which have been necessary in trying to accept the Big Bang Theory.
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.
The entire basis for the Big Bang theory has always been entirely
mathematical, with absolutely no consideration of any physical reality!
Worse, 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 (Elliptic 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! In late 1919, the genius Arthur Eddington was asked about the
THREE humans on Earth who truly understood Riemannian Tensor Calculus and
Einstein's set of ten Riemannian Field Equations. Eddington hesitated in
responding, as he said he was thinking about who the 'third' was. It was
generally accepted that Einstein and Eddington were two of them. This
anecdote says something about how difficult Elliptic, Curved-Space Riemannian
Tensor Calculus is. As a young Theoretical Physicist, I was cocky enough to
think that I might be able to fully solve Einstein's Riemannian
Field Equations, and I spent ten years studying Riemannian Calculus in
trying to learn. Even so, I have never been able to fully solve those
mind-bending Field Equations.
However, beginning around 1960, various mathematicians began making speculative assumptions that then enabled 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 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 the real 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 the 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 can ever detect them and so no one could ever deny that they 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 the
Universe, with the most popular one today being a Big Bang Theory. That name
was created around 1947 by a respected scientist, Fred Hoyle, as an insult.
Hoyle saw that most of all actual logic had been
entirely discarded to come up with that concept. All of those Big Bang
creation ideas seem to stretch logic and credulity beyond limits.
Concepts which 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 creation ideas could not figure out how they could still apply.
Much of the basis of what Physics had been 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. Again, they totally abandon any actual physical reality, and generally assume that the entire contents of the emtire Universe came into existence within a single microscopically tiny spot, where they then claim a spectacular expansion (such as the Inflation Theory) (of an outrageous factor of 10+50) 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. And the need for everything to accelerate up to speeds billions of times faster than the speed of light!
By the way, no one has ever presented any actual evidence for any 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.
It might be noted that this current presentation is NOT compatible with either the "Big Bang Theory" OR with the "Steady State Theory". Whether all the existing particles ever gravitationally "find" their original source anti-particles and then mutually self-destruct by conventional Destructive Interference of Physics, seems likely to determine whether our Universe persists forever or "blinks out" some day.
In Nuclear Physics, nearly all processes are recognized to be able to occur in opposite time directions. Professor Richard Feynman created many Feynman Diagrams which show this peculiar fact of how TIME interacts with our THREE SPACE DIMENSIONS. For example, a Neutron CAN break apart into a Proton and an Electron, but also a Proton and an Electron can fuse together to form a Neutron.
I am convinced that these two basic and accepted Laws of Physics occurred as the first steps in the creation of the Universe.
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 is perfectly compatible with Conservation of Energy, since these two new objects would completely annihilate each other if and when they ever encountered each other, again then resulting in EXACTLY ZERO TOTAL ENERGY.
This same dual mutual microscopic creation event recurred, millions or billions or trillions of times, each with random direction of propagation 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 Destrictive Interference might occur and a pair of those energy bundles might cease to exist (due to Destructive Interference).
Irregularities in the patterns of such propagation would then eventually 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 of bundles 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 are 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 be detected 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 create the particles and anti-particles which created all 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 tiny portion of our entire Universe would cease to exist.)
These are countless instantaneous trillions 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 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 which we could never detect or see, which contains the exact same amount of anti-energy in it! Conservation of Energy again.) 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 be appearing in some other Universe somewhere, but out-of-phase with our energy, so that Conservation of Energy always applies. Also, If the persistent formation ceased some time back, and we happened to have proceeded to a much later time when the two initial energy assemblies have begun to collide, (and the Universe is therefore gradually disappearing away.) then the Gross amount of energy in our Universe might now be decreasing (but the total sum of energy in the two universes is still always exactly zero.
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 the same, with the only difference being just when we are in the process. Energy might be still increasing (1) creation of energy (or technically, Constructive Interference); (2) there might be stability of Gross energy; or (3) Destructive Interference of the energy canceling out of existence [always exactly matching the 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 appearing in our Universe while at some other location, "old energy" might be being destructively cancelled out with out-of-phase energy from outside of our Universe. No one knows and it is hard to see how anyone in our Universe can or will ever know.
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 is created and sent through two separate slits, and then a screen behind the slits is examined. Very obvious interference patterns are seen, where in some places, the screen is absolutely dark. If either slit is blocked, the entire screen is 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 collections is that they necessarily must be absolutely and perfectly identical to each other, but where they are headed outward in exactly 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-Energy collection 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 which 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 which 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.
Again, many Physics experiments show that a photon of radiation which 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 experimentally for 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. Again, the two created particles necessarily have exactly the same mass and velocity (kinetic energy) and they must leave in exactly opposite directions. But the point here is that we now have particles which have come into existence, after this two-step process. At the same time, anti-particles headed out in exactly opposite directions (which formed an entirely separate Anti-Particle Universe.) Initially, all the protons and electrons that got (or get) created into our Universe began to rapidly orbit each other to form hydrogen atoms. Nothing else, 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 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 that accumulation of particles, there will be mutual annihilations which occur when any remaining anti-particles encounter their opposites.
This then would result in our Universe which was 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 was created with a precise velocity (direction and speed), was necessarily matched by an anti-particle with exactly the opposite velocity vector (direction and speed) this seems to imply that when something like our Sun came into existence in our Universe, the precise identical 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 (with the exception 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 identical.
Again, this consequence is required in order that everry 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. So there are two of You!
Since we could not possibly ever enter an Anti-matter Universe without being immediately mutually 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. So, in practical terms, you are alone in being you!
Let us now remember that we had an Anti-Energy collection, 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 four Universes which exist, which are necessarily absolutely identical to the tiniest 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 that for 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 Conservation of 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!
This concept was first created in 1961 as part of a High School Science Fair project. It was later enhanced as my knowledge of Physics expanded later on. 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 either two or four identical Universes! This is based on two very well known facts in Nuclear Physics: (1) Energy, in the form of a photon, can transform into Matter and Anti-Matter, in the forms of an electron and anti-electron; that is, the electron and anti-electron simply appear where nothing had existed a moment earlier except energy; a photon can similarly transform into a Proton Anti-Proton pair; and (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 has geometric 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 of energy) which then each could transform into an 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 if the four different types of particles were each sent in selictively different directions where they would there only encounter particles of their own types, that 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!
One new implication of this premise is that this would not necessarily have to have occurred in a single explosive moment of a Big Bang. Indeed, it might easily be an ongoing process where the total mass and total energy of our Universe might therefore be changing at this moment.
Another new implication is that 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 that you 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 which 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 which has seemed to be available regarding the early stages of our Universe. It has been interpreted as indicating that some event of immense heat and power occurred around 13 billion years ago, and the heat from that event has been dissipating ever since, and is now at a remaining temperature of 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 "real" forward time, everything of the Universe would have seemed to have burst out of this single point in space, and has since been cooling, and that's why it is called a Big Bang.
Physicists have speculated about the details about how this could actually happen. They suggest that there were momentary stages 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, it 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 every know just what those rules were! The premise described here does not seem to have these problems. It seems to comply with both Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum, at all moments. In that, I believe it has potential value.
To suggest how incomplete the current logic necessarily is in these 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.
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, where you 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 hadn't 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 beam that seems to be going absolutely straight through the 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. So, if a light beam was aimed in any direction, it would actually be continuously bent back by that 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 imaginary box 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 fit in a really big box, you would be able to travel exactly west forever on its surface. The reality would be that you would wind up going around and around the Earth, but the path could be infinitely long.
Here is my logic about that 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 could ever 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 our Universe, 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 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 instantly annihilate each other, both instantly disappearing and creating a lot of new energy. 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 amount of 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 the anti-Sun! And then, the 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 the 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 original and 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 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 split apart into the matter and anti-matter. 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 annihilate each 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 of opposite phase; and (2) traveling away from the point of creation in precisely opposite directions.
Therefore, my speculation on the beginning of everything adds one more step prior to the division of initial energy into matter and anti-matter Universes. The new step is an earlier division 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) energy stream going in the opposite direction. It seems to me that, due to the standard symmetry arguments, whatever cause 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. And, 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 in an anti- Universe!
As I keep repeating, anyone's opinion on such things is sheer speculation, 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, where 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 potential value in this theory!
I considered this concept to be far more important than the Astronomy Project of the previous year. I won the Science Fair at the High School, and at an area Fair. I then attended the Chicagoland Science Fair, where I hoped to also have success. Unfortunately, the three Judges to whom I had to try to explain these things were two elderly housewives (who both smiled a lot but clearly had NO idea what I was talking about!) and a Garbage Truck Driver. They felt I deserved Second Place, so I did not get a chance to again compete in the Illinois State Science Fair
Conservation of Angular Momentum - An Exception or Violation (Sept 2006)
Galaxy Spiral Arms Stability and Dynamics A purely Newtonian gravitational explanation (Nov 1997, Aug 1998)
Twins Paradox of Relativity Is Absolutely Wrong (research 1997-2004, published Aug 2004)
Perturbation Theory. Gravitational Theory and Resonance (Aug 2001, Dec 2001)
Origin of the Earth. Planetary Gravitational Resonances (Dec 2001)
Rotation of the Sun (Jan 2000)
Origin of the Universe. Cosmogony - Cosmology (more logical than the Big Bang) (devised 1961, internet 1998)
Time Passes Faster Here on Earth than on the Moon (but only a fraction of a second per year!) (Jan 2009)
Globular Clusters. All Globulars Must Regularly Pass Through the cluttered Galaxy Plane, which would be very disruptive to their pristine form. (Nov 1997, Aug 1998)
Existence of Photons. A Hubble Experiment to Confirm the Existence of Individual Photons (experimental proof of quanta) (Feb 2000)
Origin of the Moon - A New Theory (June 2000)
Planetary Rotation of Jupiter, Saturn, and the Earth (Jupiter has a lot of gaseous turbulence which should have slowed down its rapid rotation over billions of years) (March 1998)
Cepheid Variable Stars. Velocity Graph Analysis (Feb 2003)
Compton Effect of Astrophysics. A Possible New Compton Effect (Mar 2003)
Olbers Paradox Regarding Neutrinos (Oct 2004)
Kepler and Newton. Calculations (2006)
Pulsars. Pulsars May Be Quite Different than we have Assumed (June 2008)
Sun and Stars - How the Sun Works - Nuclear Fusion in Creating Light and Heat (Aug 2006)
Stars - How They Work - Nuclear Fusion. Lives of Stars and You (Aug 2004)
Sundial Time Correction - Equation of Time. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (Jan 2009)
General Relativity - A Moon Experiment to Confirm It. Confirming General Relativity with a simple experiment. (Jan 2009)
General Relativity and Time Dilation. Does Time Dilation Result? (Jan 2009)
Geysers on Io. Source of Driving Energy (June 1998)
Mass Extinction, a New Explanation. A New Explanation for Apparent Periodicity of Mass Extinctions (May 1998, August 2001)
Precession of Gyroscopes and of the Earth. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
Ocean Tides - The Physics and Logic. Mathematical Explanation of Tides (Jan 2002)
Earth's Spinning - Perfect Energy Source (1990, Dec. 2009)
Earth's Magnetic Field - Source and Logic. Complex nature of the magnetic field and its source (March 1996)
Earth Spinning Energy - Perfect Energy Source From the Earth's Spinning (1990, Nov. 2002)
Nuclear or Atomic Physics Related Subjects:
Nuclear Physics - Statistical Analysis of Isotope Masses Nuclear Structure. (research 1996-2003, published Nov 2003)
Quantum Defect is NOT a Mathematical Defect- It Can Be Calculated The Quantum Defect is a Physical Quantity and not a Fudge Factor(July 2007)
Atomic Physics - NIST Atomic Ionization Data Patterns Surprising Patterns in the NIST Data Regarding Atomic Ionization (June 2007)
Nuclear Physics - Logical Inconsistencies (August 2007)
Neutrinos - Where Did they all Come From? (August 2004)
Neutrinos - Olbers Paradox Means Neutrinos from Everywhere (Oct 2004)
Quantum Nuclear Physics. A Possible Alternative (Aug 2001, Dec 2001, Jan 2004)
Quantum Physics - Quantum Dynamics. A Potential Improvement (2006)
Quantum Physics is Compatible with the Standard Model (2002, Sept 2006, Oct 2010)
Quantum Dynamics (March 2008)
Ionization Potential - NIST Data Patterns. Surprising patterns among different elements (March 2003)
Mass Defect Chart. (calculation, formula) (research 1996-2003, published Nov 2003)
Assorted other Physics Subjects:
Precession of Gyroscopes and of the Earth. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
Earth's Magnetic Field - Source and Logic. Complex nature of the magnetic field and its source (March 1996)
Earth Spinning Energy - Perfect Energy Source (1990, Nov. 2002)
Earth Energy Flow Rates due to Precessional Effects (63,000 MegaWatts) (Sept 2006)
Accurate Mass of the Earth. Gravitational Constant - An Important Gravitation Experiment. (Feb 2004)
Tornadoes - The Physics of How They Operate, including How they Form. Solar Energy, an Immense Source of Energy, Far Greater than all Fossil Fuels (Feb 2000, Feb 2006, May 2009)
Radiometric Age Dating - Carbon-14 Age Determination. Carbon-14, C-14 (Dec 1998)
Mass Extinction, an Old Explanation. An Old Explanation for Apparent Periodicity of Mass Extinctions (Aug 2003)
Hurricanes, the Physics and Analysis A Credible Approach to Hurricane Reduction (Feb 2001)
Sundial Time Correction - Equation of Time. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (Jan 2009)
Carl Johnson, Theoretical Physicist, Physics Degree from Univ of Chicago