A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Steady State Theory vs The Big Bang Theory



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 1st 04, 02:36 PM
Br Dan Izzo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Steady State Theory vs The Big Bang Theory

RUFUS'S GALAXY WEB PAGE





The Steady State Galaxy Theory

An Alternative To



The Big Bang Theory


Go to Text only version. INDEX


Introduction
Basic Operation of Galaxies
Mass and Energy
Shape of Galaxies
Red Shift
Microwave Background Radiation
Entropy
Hydrogen-Helium Ratio
Quasars
Summary Introduction

The purpose of this Web Page is to show that the Steady State Galaxy
Theory can provide an alternative to the Big Bang Theory in explaining
the universe around us. It covers the operation of Galaxies and shows
that they recycle both Matter and Energy and are able to carry on
indefinitely. It also explains the Shape of Galaxies, Red Shift,
Microwave Background Radiation, Entropy and the Hydrogen-Helium Ratio.

If the reader takes an open-minded approach and looks at all aspects
of the material presented here before reaching any conclusions, it
will, at least, provide them with some food for thought.

Basic Operation of Galaxies

At the center of each galaxy is a neutroid which acts to constantly
recycle all the matter and energy in the galaxy. This neutroid is
similar to a neutron star but is very much larger and has reached a
size where the pressure and temperature at its surface are great
enough to generate a nuclear fusion process. In the areas of the
neutroid's magnetic poles, the products of fusion are trapped by the
magnetic field and are pushed out along the magnetic field by the
pressure of the nuclear fusion process going on below. This results in
a column of material composed of hydrogen, helium and other light
elements being ejected at each of the neutroid's two magnetic poles.
This material moves out from the neutroid at essentially constant
velocity until it reaches a point where the magnetic field is no
longer strong enough to control it. Once free of the magnetic field
the material then continues under it's own momentum to travel to the
outer edge of the galaxy before starting to fall back toward the
neutroid.

This process enables the neutroid to eject matter from itself and
results in jets of hydrogen and helium ions being produced at each of
the neutroid's two magnetic poles. The larger the neutroid becomes,
the greater the size and velocity of its jets. This becomes a stable
and self-limiting process where the amount of material attracted to
the neutroid will be equal to the amount of material expelled at its
magnetic poles. Eventually if too much material is added to the
system, the velocity of the material being ejected from the magnetic
poles will be sufficient for it to escape from the system altogether,
thus limiting the total mass the system can accumulate. This process
forms the basis of operation of all galaxies. The size and shape of
galaxies are determined by the size of the neutroid at their center
and its rate and plane of rotation. In the case of our own galaxy (The
Milky Way) these jets have sufficient momentum to carry the material
out to 100,000 light years distance from the center.

As the jets of gas stream out from the Neutroid, large clouds of it
condense and form the stars which are predominately located in the
spiral arms of the Galaxies. These stars eventually burn up their
Hydrogen fuel and in the process create the other heavier elements we
find in the universe, all the while continuing to travel to the outer
edge of the galaxy. It has probably been at least 10 Billion years
since the material of which our solar system is composed was initially
ejected from the neutroid. It is now located about 2/3rds the distance
to the edge of the galaxy, but since it is constantly decelerating it
will take it another 20 billion years to reach its maximun distance
from the neutroid. The total transit time from when material is
ejected from the neutroid at the center of the Milky Way to when it
returns to the neutroid will be about 60 Billion years.

Although the material ejected by the neutroid appears to travel in a
spiral arc, in actual fact it is travelling in a straight radial line
out from the neutroid and will eventually travel back along the same
radial path to the neutroid. To help visualize this process, imagine
setting up two super cannons, each on opposite sides of the earth at
the equator and each pointing straight up and each capable of firing a
projectile with sufficient velocity that it will take 12 hours to
reach the top of its projectory. Now, fire a projectile from each
cannon every hour for 12 hours and plot the position of each
projectile at the end of the 12 hours. The result, as shown in figure
1, will be two spiral arms much like the Galactic arms are shaped.









IF we continue the experiment for another 3 hours and draw a new plot,
figure 2, we find that the first projectiles that were fired have now
passed the peak of their altitude and have started to fall back to
earth and the whole spiral pattern appears to have rotated
counterclockwise 45 degrees. However, the only changes in the
positions of projectiles No.1 have been to move slightly closer to the
earth along a radial line and they will continue falling back to earth
along the same radial path and will impact the earth 24 hours after
being fired. They do not themselves travel in a spiral path around the
earth although the loci of their instantaneous positions forms a
spiral which appears to be rotating.









Figure 3 represents a typical small galaxy which is composed of 3
parts, (a) a Central Core (Area 1), (b) 2 Jets of material being
ejected from the core (Areas 1 to 2), and (c) Spiral Arms (Areas 2 to
3). The Central Core consists of a neutroid at the center and an
obscuring mass of material trapped in the Neutroid's magnetic field.
The areas from 1 to 2 are gigantic jets of gas which are being ejected
by the Neutroid and are contained within its magnetic field. Star
formation occurs in these areas. At point 2 the magnetic field of the
Neutroid weakens to the extent that it no longer constrains the
material within it and as the material continues to move outward it
will now trace a spiral arc as per the previous illustrations in Figs.
1 & 2. At point 3 the hydrogen fuel has been consumed and although the
remains of the burned out stars are still there they become invisible
dark matter as they continue to travel to the top of their projectory
and then fall back to the Neutroid.









Thus, the galaxies form huge recycling systems which will carry on
indefinitely.


Hydrogen, helium and other light elements are ejected ejected from the
Neutroid.
Clouds of this material condense to forms stars which emit energy and
in the process form heavier elements.
These stars eventually exhaust their fuel and die. In the process many
of these stars will explode as supernovas. The heavier elements which
we find in our solar system are the remnants from these dead stars.
All this material will travel to the outer edge of the galaxy and will
then start falling back in toward the neutroid.
Upon hitting the neutroid, the force of the impact will be great
enough that the atoms of heavier elements will be split apart and the
temperature and pressure will be great enough that this incoming
matter will be converted to neutrons.
In the areas of the neutroid's magnetic poles, a nuclear fusion
reaction will take place that forces a streams of material to be
expelled thus completing the cycle.

(return to index)

Mass and Energy

Einstein showed that mass and energy are related by the formula
E=MC^2. What this famous formula says is that what we call the mass of
a particle is really nothing more than a measure of the sum total of
all forms of energy associated with that particle. The various forms
of energy include potential energy, kinetic energy, chemical energy,
nuclear binding energy, etc. Of these various forms of energy,
potential energy is the most important and accounts for the largest
part of the mass of particles which constitute our immediate
enviroment.

When a particle is in a deep gravational well, such as in the case of
particles that make up the neutroid at the center of galaxies, they
have very little potential energy,and hence, very little rest mass. As
they are pushed out from the neutroid their potential energy and hence
their rest mass is increased dramatically. When these particles
eventually fall back into the neutroid, this potential energy is
converted to kinetic energy and results in the particles making up the
neutroid having very little rest mass but a tremendous amount of
kinetic energy.

This combination of low rest mass and high kinetic energy prevent the
neutroid from collapsing into a black hole as has been speculated by
many scientists. This combination also makes it relatively easy for a
nuclear fussion process to push material out from the neutroid in the
area of the neutroid's magnetic poles.

(return to index)

Shape of Galaxies

The Concept of the Steady State Galaxy as put forth above can account
for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe. As explained
above, the spiral is the basic shape of galaxies. The exact shape will
be determined by the size of the neutroid, the tilt of its magnetic
axis with respect to its axis of rotation and its rate of rotation .

Our Milky-Way is typical of large mature galaxies in which it takes
many billions of years for the magnetic poles to make one revolution.
As well, the hydrogen ejected at the magnetic poles has sufficient
velocity to reach a distance of 100,000 light-years from the Neutroid
and it takes it tens of billions of years to reach that distance. If
the rate of rotation of the magnetic poles of the Neutroid were much
greater in relation to the velocity of the hydrogen jets, the spiral
arms would overlap and become nondistinct thus forming an ELIPICAL
Galaxy. If the magnetic axis were slightly less than 90 degrees with
respect to the axis of rotation, a thicker galaxy would result.

BAR Galaxies are small galaxies in which the hydrogen fueling the
Stars is all consumed before the Stars can escape the magnetic field
of the Neutroid's magnetic poles.

Many galaxies such as M104(NGC4594) exhibit a very prominent dust lane
about their edge. This is a feature that is difficult to explain using
presently accepted theories but is to be expected in some types of
galaxies under the steady state galaxy theory.

(return to index)

Red Shift

The Big Bang Theory was originally proposed in order to explain the
'RED Shift' of light received by us from distant galaxies. Light
received from distant stars can be broken down and analyzed as to its
spectral content. It has been found that stars of a similar size and
age produce identical spectral patterns which are related to their
atomic composition. However, it was also found that the wavelength of
the light from distant galaxies was increased in proportion to their
distance from us. Scientists have interpreted the cause of this effect
to be due to a doppler shift, meaning that it is caused by the distant
galaxies moving away from us,-i.e. the expanding universe. This
doppler shift is the same as one gets standing near a railway track
when a train passes blowing its whistle, as the train passes by, the
sound of its whistle appears to drop in frequency.

In reality the universe we live in is not expanding and is in a steady
state where its matter and energy are being constantly recycled. The
so called Red Shift is caused by other factors. We know from a branch
of Physics known as Quantum Mechanics that the Energy of a photon of
light is defined by the equation E=hv where E is the energy of the
photon, h is plancks' constant and v is its frequency. If for any
reason energy is lost from a photon, its frequency will decrease in
accordance with this equation.

Scientists do not as yet have a good understanding of the nature of a
photon as to whether it is a particle or a wave, or some combination
of both. Although experiments done by Michhelson and Morley and others
have been interpreted to rule out the existence of an universal
aether, this is by no means certain. Scientists can't measure what
happens to a photon over a period of a minute, let alone what happens
to to it over a period of a billion years. Based on current knowledge,
there is no way scientists can state with absolute certainty that
photons do not lose energy over time.

The mechanism for the lose of energy by photons over time is still
unclear. It could be by interaction of the photon with the stray atoms
of hydrogen which are dispersed throughout intergalactic space. It is
well known that photons do exert 'radiation pressure' on particles
they encounter and if pressure is exerted, then energy must be
transferred. Another possibility is that there is indeed an aether
which absorbs some energy over time and reradiates it as a black body
radiator having a temperature of 2.8 degrees K. One thing that is
clear is that the radiation density of the starlight photons which
leave own galaxy is equal to the radiation density of the Microwave
Background radiation which is received by our galaxy. This fact is
probably more than a coincidence and is an indication that the
starlight radiation is being converted by some unknown process to the
Microwave Background radiation. It is every bit as reasonable to
assume that the Red Shift is caused by loss of energy of the photon
over time as it is to assume that it is caused by a doppler effect.

Because of the downshifting in the frequency of light for whatever
reason, there is a limit to how far it is possible to image distant
galaxies. The actual universe will be far larger than we can imagine
or detect and will probably be infinite in size.

(return to index)

MicroWave Background Radiation

A second argument which has been made to support the Big Bang Theory
is the microwave background radiation. COBE has shown that the
spectrum of the Microwave Background Radiation (MBR) is that of an
ideal Black Body Radiator having a temperature of about 2.8 degrees K.
It has also shown that this radiation has a Redshift/Blueshift to it,
indicating that the earth is moving about 300Km/s relative to the
shell of matter that emitted the radiation. Since this speed is too
great for the earth's movement within the milky-way galaxy, it
indicates that the source is outside our galaxy and that our galaxy is
moving in relation to that source.

As indicated in the previous section dealing with redshift, the
starlight photons radiated by galaxies gradually lose energy through
some unknown process which then reradiates this energy as the
Microwave Background Radiation. The wavelength of the photons of the
MBR, at the peak of the spectrum radiation curve, will be about 1mm.
Since the rate of loss of energy by photons will be inversely
proportional to the wavelength of those photons, and since the MBR
photons have a wavelength of more than a thousand times that of
visible light, the percentage loss of energy by the MBR photons will
be at a rate of over one thousand times less than that of a visible
photon. (If it takes a visible photon 15 billion years to lose 3/4's
of it's energy, then it would take a MBR photon 15,000 billion years
to lose 3/4's of it's energy). It follows that since MBR photons have
a range of travel of more than one thousand times that of visible
light photons, they are also a thousand times more likely to encounter
a galaxy and be absorbed by the matter of that galaxy then a visible
light photon would.

Thus, energy is radiated by galaxies in the form of starlight photons.
Energy from these photons is gradually converted to MBR photons. These
MBR photons are eventually absorbed by some other galaxy.

Since the intensity of the microwave background radiation will be
relatively constant throughout the universe (assuming an infinite
steady state universe), the amount of energy a galaxy will absorb from
it will be proportional to the size of that galaxy. The amount of
energy a galaxy radiates is also proportional to it's size, thus an
equilibrium will be reached where a galaxy will receive as much energy
in the form of MBR photons as it itself radiates in the form of
starlight photons.

(return to index)

Entropy

A third argument that has been put forward in support of the Big Bang
Theory is entropy, in that, it is argued that the universe must
eventually run down into a state of thermal equilibrium. Energy exists
in various forms such as atomic binding energies, thermal energy,
potential and kinetic energy, etc., all of which are associated with
matter, or it exists in photons which have been radiated by matter and
will eventually be reabsorbed by matter. Under the Steady State Galaxy
Theory as put forth above, since all matter in a Galaxy is recycled
through the Neutroid on a regular basis, all energy contained by that
matter is also recycled at the same time and, thus, the universe does
not run down into a state of thermal equilibrium.

There is a perception that energy only flows from hot bodies to cooler
ones. This is not true for radiant energy. The MBR photons which
exhibit the characteristics of a 2.8 degree black body radiator do get
absorbed by the much hotter material which makes up the galaxies. The
critical factor which determines the direction of net flow of radiant
energy is not the relative temperatures of the bodies but the energy
densities they produce. In the case of our universe, the MBR radiation
has an energy density equal to the starlight radiation energy density
emitted by the galaxies. Thus, there is an equilibrium condition where
galaxies receive as much energy in the form of MBR Radiation as they
radiate in the form of Starlight Radiation and there will be no net
flow of energy from the galaxies to the material in intergalactic
space.

(return to index)

Hydrogen-Helium

A fourth arguement which has been used to support the Big Bang theory
is that it would account for the abundance of helium we find in the
universe. The amount of helium present (24%) cannot be accounted for
by star production and according to Gamow it was generated by the Big
Bang.

Under the Steady State Galaxy theory, the nuclear fusion process which
is expelling the material from the neutroid would generate large
amounts of helium as well as other light elements and is the source of
the excess helium found in the universe.

(return to index)

Quasars

The latest Hubble pictures of quasars show that they are associated
with galaxies and in most cases there is evidence that these galaxies
have recently collided with other galaxies.

In normal galaxies, the neutroid at their center is obscured by a halo
of material trapped in the neutroid's magnetic field. In the case of
quasars, this halo of material has been temporarily destroyed by the
collision with another galaxy and we are seeing the bare neutroid
which is, as expected, extremely energetic.

(return to index)

Summary

The Steady State Galaxy Theory as put forth above can provide the
basis for the operation of the Universe as it is seen to exist. It can
not only account for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe
which is something no other theory as proposed so far can accomplish
but it can also explain the existence of quasars.

As more data is gathered by the Hubble Space Telescope and other
sources, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Big Bang theory
cannot account for the universe around us. I believe the the Steady
State Galaxy Theory as presented here can provide the basis of an
alternative to the Big Bang Theory.

(return to index) (return to top of page) Other Interesting Papers

For a historical perspective of the Big Bang Theory see Keith Stein's
Essay "The Big Bang Myth"

"Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe" by Grote Reber -a pioneer in the
field of Radio Astronomy.

"Dark Matter" and "Hubble's Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect"
by John Kierein



Please E-mail me your comments and suggestions.


Last revised Dec 30,1996.
Copyright R.Rufus Young 1996 all rights reserved.




You are Visitor Number


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

Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004

When did motion first start ?

Science knows the formation of matter in our universe was caused by
the forces of the

universe.

These forces a

(1) The Force of Gravity

(2) The Force of Electro Magnetism

(3) The Strong Nuclear Force

(4) The Weak Nuclear Force

At some point in time, motion within the universe, had to begin.

The paradox would be, what force could cause motion to begin, without
moving in its

present space-time ?

The Gravitational Cosmological Theory of the formation of the
Universe is a theory I

developed that is rooted in theEinstein and the Bondi-Gold-Hoyle
Steady State theories ,

wherein the Steady State theory the universe contains more protons
than electrons that

create dust particles and galaxies formed in their current locations
and the cosmic

matter is recycled therein at the center of the galaxy furnace.

When the Universe started to fall:

The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of
the Universe.

The Theory:

(1) The expansion of the universe is a result of the " heat '
contained therein;

(2) The source of the " heat " is the cosmic microwave radiation
backround at 3 kelvin,

wherein;

(3) The microwave electro magnetic-nuclear energy was formed as a
result of the

interaction of two different static gravitational vacuum fields,
causing gravitational

instability and the motion, void of matter, at this time, wherein;
static gravitational

field (1) began to go into "motion".

Therefore; only (2) static gravitational vacuum fields alone,
being void of E=MC^2

could create E=MC^2; and the matter of the Universe.

Q: When did this motion start?

A: If a neutral particle is able to resist the universal motion, in
theory, that particle

would go back in time. Going back in time the neutral particle would
then enter into (1)

of the (2) motionless-static gravity vacuum fields void of motion, and
cause an unbalance

and gravitational instability and this interaction would create motion
and energy

particles.

Q: What causes a gravitational static vacuum field in the first place
?

A: Pressure force is used to create a vacuum on Earth, perhaps an
exotic something

100,000 weaker than the force of gravity decays causing a static
gravity vacuum field.



Theory by Br Dan Izzo

Cosmic magnetic force & God Bless us.

PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?
  #2  
Old September 1st 04, 05:37 PM
Bjoern Feuerbacher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Br Dan Izzo wrote:
RUFUS'S GALAXY WEB PAGE





The Steady State Galaxy Theory

An Alternative To



The Big Bang Theory


Go to Text only version. INDEX


Introduction
Basic Operation of Galaxies
Mass and Energy
Shape of Galaxies
Red Shift
Microwave Background Radiation
Entropy
Hydrogen-Helium Ratio
Quasars
Summary Introduction

The purpose of this Web Page is to show that the Steady State Galaxy
Theory can provide an alternative to the Big Bang Theory in explaining
the universe around us. It covers the operation of Galaxies and shows
that they recycle both Matter and Energy and are able to carry on
indefinitely. It also explains the Shape of Galaxies, Red Shift,
Microwave Background Radiation, Entropy and the Hydrogen-Helium Ratio.


Can it explain the power spectrum of the CMBR (e.g. the acoustic peak),
the change of its temperature with time, the fact that the oldest stars
we see are about 13 billion years old in our galaxy, although (small)
stars can live much longer, that we see only stars which are about 2
billion years old in galaxies whose light needed to travel for about 11
billion years in order to reach us, the fact that galaxies which are far
away from us look totally different from galaxies nearby (see the Hubble
Ultra Deep Field), the fact that starburst activity and the amount of
quasars was much higher in the past, the change in the redshift law at
large distances, the time dilation in supernova light curves, the large
scale structure of the universe, etc.?


If the reader takes an open-minded approach and looks at all aspects
of the material presented here before reaching any conclusions, it
will, at least, provide them with some food for thought.

Basic Operation of Galaxies

At the center of each galaxy is a neutroid which acts to constantly
recycle all the matter and energy in the galaxy. This neutroid is
similar to a neutron star but is very much larger


A neutron star which would be "very much larger" can not exist,
according to General Relativity - it would collapse to a Black Hole
immediately. Your argument below against does not work.

Do you dispute General Relativity? Apparently yes, since it also makes a
static universe essentially impossible. Well, already Newtonian physics
made a static universe essentially impossible...


and has reached a
size where the pressure and temperature at its surface are great
enough to generate a nuclear fusion process.


Err, the pressure at the *surface* is always zero. Do you mean somewhere
close to the surface, but still inside the star?


In the areas of the
neutroid's magnetic poles, the products of fusion are trapped by the
magnetic field and are pushed out along the magnetic field by the
pressure of the nuclear fusion process going on below.


I am not sure if this is possible, but I'll grant you this.


This results in
a column of material composed of hydrogen, helium and other light
elements


Other light elements? So the pressure and temperature is not only high
enough for hydrogen fusion, but even for other reactions?


being ejected at each of the neutroid's two magnetic poles.
This material moves out from the neutroid at essentially constant
velocity until it reaches a point where the magnetic field is no
longer strong enough to control it. Once free of the magnetic field
the material then continues under it's own momentum to travel to the
outer edge of the galaxy before starting to fall back toward the
neutroid.


Err, then most of the material should travel in two jets away from
the neutroid, as you yourself admit below. Then how is the stuff able to
reach all of the galaxy?



This process enables the neutroid to eject matter from itself and
results in jets of hydrogen and helium ions being produced at each of
the neutroid's two magnetic poles. The larger the neutroid becomes,
the greater the size and velocity of its jets. This becomes a stable
and self-limiting process where the amount of material attracted to
the neutroid will be equal to the amount of material expelled at its
magnetic poles.


Can you prove this by a calculation? I.e. can you prove that an
equilibrium will be reached, instead of other possible outcomes like a
violent explosion of the neutroid when it attracts too much material?


Eventually if too much material is added to the
system, the velocity of the material being ejected from the magnetic
poles will be sufficient for it to escape from the system altogether,
thus limiting the total mass the system can accumulate. This process
forms the basis of operation of all galaxies.


Any evidence for all of that? For starters, we have examined the center
of our own galaxy closely in the last decade. I don't remember that two
jets were seen there...


The size and shape of
galaxies are determined by the size of the neutroid at their center
and its rate and plane of rotation.


Where did the neutroid come from?


In the case of our own galaxy (The
Milky Way) these jets have sufficient momentum to carry the material
out to 100,000 light years distance from the center.


Then why do we not see them?


As the jets of gas stream out from the Neutroid, large clouds of it
condense and form the stars which are predominately located in the
spiral arms of the Galaxies. These stars eventually burn up their
Hydrogen fuel and in the process create the other heavier elements we
find in the universe, all the while continuing to travel to the outer
edge of the galaxy.


Huh? You claim that stars are continuously travelling to the outer edge
of the galaxies? That *strongly* contradicts the actual observations!
Or did you only mean that the heavy elements which are produced in the
stars travel to the outer edge?


It has probably been at least 10 Billion years
since the material of which our solar system is composed was initially
ejected from the neutroid.


Where did you get this number from?


It is now located about 2/3rds the distance
to the edge of the galaxy, but since it is constantly decelerating it
will take it another 20 billion years to reach its maximun distance
from the neutroid.


And this?


The total transit time from when material is
ejected from the neutroid at the center of the Milky Way to when it
returns to the neutroid will be about 60 Billion years.


And this?



Although the material ejected by the neutroid appears to travel in a
spiral arc, in actual fact it is travelling in a straight radial line
out from the neutroid and will eventually travel back along the same
radial path to the neutroid. To help visualize this process, imagine
setting up two super cannons, each on opposite sides of the earth at
the equator and each pointing straight up and each capable of firing a
projectile with sufficient velocity that it will take 12 hours to
reach the top of its projectory. Now, fire a projectile from each
cannon every hour for 12 hours and plot the position of each
projectile at the end of the 12 hours. The result, as shown in figure
1, will be two spiral arms much like the Galactic arms are shaped.

IF we continue the experiment for another 3 hours and draw a new plot,
figure 2, we find that the first projectiles that were fired have now
passed the peak of their altitude and have started to fall back to
earth and the whole spiral pattern appears to have rotated
counterclockwise 45 degrees. However, the only changes in the
positions of projectiles No.1 have been to move slightly closer to the
earth along a radial line and they will continue falling back to earth
along the same radial path and will impact the earth 24 hours after
being fired. They do not themselves travel in a spiral path around the
earth although the loci of their instantaneous positions forms a
spiral which appears to be rotating.

Figure 3 represents a typical small galaxy which is composed of 3
parts, (a) a Central Core (Area 1), (b) 2 Jets of material being
ejected from the core (Areas 1 to 2), and (c) Spiral Arms (Areas 2 to
3). The Central Core consists of a neutroid at the center and an
obscuring mass of material trapped in the Neutroid's magnetic field.
The areas from 1 to 2 are gigantic jets of gas which are being ejected
by the Neutroid and are contained within its magnetic field. Star
formation occurs in these areas. At point 2 the magnetic field of the
Neutroid weakens to the extent that it no longer constrains the
material within it and as the material continues to move outward it
will now trace a spiral arc as per the previous illustrations in Figs.
1 & 2. At point 3 the hydrogen fuel has been consumed and although the
remains of the burned out stars are still there they become invisible
dark matter as they continue to travel to the top of their projectory
and then fall back to the Neutroid.


Nice. But is this idea *quantitatively* consistent with the observations?

And where can we find these figures?



Thus, the galaxies form huge recycling systems which will carry on
indefinitely.
Hydrogen, helium and other light elements are ejected ejected from the
Neutroid.
Clouds of this material condense to forms stars which emit energy and
in the process form heavier elements.
These stars eventually exhaust their fuel and die. In the process many
of these stars will explode as supernovas. The heavier elements which
we find in our solar system are the remnants from these dead stars.
All this material will travel to the outer edge of the galaxy and will
then start falling back in toward the neutroid.
Upon hitting the neutroid, the force of the impact will be great
enough that the atoms of heavier elements will be split apart


Oh my goodness. Do you have any clue what energies are needed for
splitting apart nuclei? How on earth should the kinetic energy obtained
from falling on the nuclei be sufficient to achieve that? Have you ever
done an actual calculation on this?


and the
temperature and pressure will be great enough that this incoming
matter will be converted to neutrons.


Again, the pressure on the surface is zero.


In the areas of the neutroid's magnetic poles, a nuclear fusion
reaction will take place that forces a streams of material to be
expelled thus completing the cycle.

(return to index)

Mass and Energy

Einstein showed that mass and energy are related by the formula
E=MC^2. What this famous formula says is that what we call the mass of
a particle is really nothing more than a measure of the sum total of
all forms of energy associated with that particle. The various forms
of energy include potential energy, kinetic energy, chemical energy,
nuclear binding energy, etc.


You *do* know that this formula is valid only for particles at rest,
or if you mean the *relativistic* mass of a particle, whereas the common
usage in physics today is that one means the *rest* mass of a particle
when one says "mass", don't you?


Of these various forms of energy,
potential energy is the most important and accounts for the largest
part of the mass of particles which constitute our immediate
enviroment. When a particle is in a deep gravational well, such as in the case of
particles that make up the neutroid at the center of galaxies, they
have very little potential energy,and hence, very little rest mass.


Actually, in a deep gravitational well, the *magnitude* of the potential
energy is *large*, not small - but *negative*. If the well is deep
enough, the masses of the particles should be *negative*. Looks like a
problem for your idea, don't you think?

The error that you make here is that *gravitational* potential energy
is a concept from Newtonians physics and has no place in General
Relativity. I.e. gravitational potential energy has *nothing* to do with
the rest mass of a particle!


As
they are pushed out from the neutroid their potential energy and hence
their rest mass is increased dramatically. When these particles
eventually fall back into the neutroid, this potential energy is
converted to kinetic energy and results in the particles making up the
neutroid having very little rest mass but a tremendous amount of
kinetic energy.


Err, when the particles hit the neutroid, their kinetic energy is dispersed.


This combination of low rest mass and high kinetic energy prevent the
neutroid from collapsing into a black hole as has been speculated by
many scientists.


This simply is not possible. A neutron star exceeding a certain size
will inevitable collapse to a black hole, no matter how much kinetic
energy the particles in it have. After all, there is a speed limit for
the particles in the neutron star!

If you think that this *can* prevent a collapse, show your calculation,
please.



This combination also makes it relatively easy for a
nuclear fussion process to push material out from the neutroid in the
area of the neutroid's magnetic poles.

(return to index)

Shape of Galaxies

The Concept of the Steady State Galaxy as put forth above can account
for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe. As explained
above, the spiral is the basic shape of galaxies.


Err, have you ever heard of irregular galaxies?


The exact shape will
be determined by the size of the neutroid, the tilt of its magnetic
axis with respect to its axis of rotation and its rate of rotation .

Our Milky-Way is typical of large mature galaxies in which it takes
many billions of years for the magnetic poles to make one revolution.


What has that to do with the Milky Way being mature?


As well, the hydrogen ejected at the magnetic poles has sufficient
velocity to reach a distance of 100,000 light-years from the Neutroid
and it takes it tens of billions of years to reach that distance.


Please present an actual calculation showing that for a mass of the
neutroid which would enable it to produce fusion on its surface, the
motion of matter ejected from it would indeed be on such timescales.


If the rate of rotation of the magnetic poles of the Neutroid were much
greater in relation to the velocity of the hydrogen jets, the spiral
arms would overlap and become nondistinct thus forming an ELIPICAL
Galaxy.


An elliptical galaxy looks in no way like a spiral galaxy with
overlapping arms!!!

If the magnetic axis were slightly less than 90 degrees with
respect to the axis of rotation, a thicker galaxy would result.


A thicker galaxy, right, but not a spherical one!


BAR Galaxies are small galaxies in which the hydrogen fueling the
Stars is all consumed before the Stars can escape the magnetic field
of the Neutroid's magnetic poles.


How on earth does that explain the bar?


Many galaxies such as M104(NGC4594) exhibit a very prominent dust lane
about their edge. This is a feature that is difficult to explain using
presently accepted theories


How do you know? Have you read all the relevant articles?


but is to be expected in some types of
galaxies under the steady state galaxy theory.


Why?



(return to index)

Red Shift

The Big Bang Theory was originally proposed in order to explain the
'RED Shift' of light received by us from distant galaxies.


Only partly right. Theories about a dynamic universe were developed
already before the redshift relationship was known.


Light
received from distant stars can be broken down and analyzed as to its
spectral content. It has been found that stars of a similar size and
age produce identical spectral patterns which are related to their
atomic composition. However, it was also found that the wavelength of
the light from distant galaxies was increased in proportion to their
distance from us. Scientists have interpreted the cause of this effect
to be due to a doppler shift,


Again, only partly right. One *could* interpret this as a Doppler shift.
But the modern interpretation in cosmology is more along the lines that
the wavelength increased because the universe expanded since the light
was emitted.


meaning that it is caused by the distant
galaxies moving away from us,-i.e. the expanding universe. This
doppler shift is the same as one gets standing near a railway track
when a train passes blowing its whistle, as the train passes by, the
sound of its whistle appears to drop in frequency.

In reality the universe we live in is not expanding and is in a steady
state where its matter and energy are being constantly recycled. The
so called Red Shift is caused by other factors. We know from a branch
of Physics known as Quantum Mechanics that the Energy of a photon of
light is defined by the equation E=hv where E is the energy of the
photon, h is plancks' constant and v is its frequency. If for any
reason energy is lost from a photon, its frequency will decrease in
accordance with this equation.

Scientists do not as yet have a good understanding of the nature of a
photon as to whether it is a particle or a wave,


Totally wrong. We have known how to describe a photon accurately for
about 60 years now. The relevant theory is called "Quantum
Electrodynamics". Ever heard of it?


or some combination
of both. Although experiments done by Michhelson and Morley and others
have been interpreted to rule out the existence of an universal
aether, this is by no means certain.


Why not?


Scientists can't measure what
happens to a photon over a period of a minute, let alone what happens
to to it over a period of a billion years. Based on current knowledge,
there is no way scientists can state with absolute certainty that
photons do not lose energy over time.


Where should the energy go to? Ever heard of conservation of energy?


The mechanism for the lose of energy by photons over time is still
unclear.


But you simply postulate that this happens, because otherwise your
"theory" does not work, right?

BTW, this is called "tired light". Hint: it can neither explain the time
dilation in supernova light curves, nor the dependence of surface
brightness of galaxies on redshift. See e.g. Peeble's book on cosmology.



It could be by interaction of the photon with the stray atoms
of hydrogen which are dispersed throughout intergalactic space. It is
well known that photons do exert 'radiation pressure' on particles
they encounter and if pressure is exerted, then energy must be
transferred.


If the photons were scattered, they would not only change their energy,
but also their direction of travel. Care to present a calculation by how
much this would spread the images of stars to disks?

Also, why should this effect be the same for all wavelengths? Scattering
in general *depends* on the wavelength!


Another possibility is that there is indeed an aether
which absorbs some energy over time and reradiates it as a black body
radiator having a temperature of 2.8 degrees K.


Why on earth should the aether keep this temperature if it constantly
absorbs light? Also, again, why should this be the same for all wavelengths?


One thing that is
clear is that the radiation density of the starlight photons which
leave own galaxy is equal to the radiation density of the Microwave
Background radiation which is received by our galaxy.


One thing that is also clear is that the spectra are totally different.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/Eddington-T0.html


This fact is
probably more than a coincidence and is an indication that the
starlight radiation is being converted by some unknown process to the
Microwave Background radiation.


Nice. So your "explanation" for the CMBR is that there is an undetected
aether and an unknown process which converts the photons from star light
to blackbody radiation to that aether.

And *that* you consider to be a satisfactory explanation?


It is every bit as reasonable to
assume that the Red Shift is caused by loss of energy of the photon
over time as it is to assume that it is caused by a doppler effect.


Hint for you: actually, cosmology *does* assume exactly such an energy
loss. It is caused by the expansion of the universe. See the section
"Expansion of the universe leading to cosmological redshift" he
http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/GR/energy_gr.html


Because of the downshifting in the frequency of light for whatever
reason, there is a limit to how far it is possible to image distant
galaxies. The actual universe will be far larger than we can imagine
or detect


Finally something I can agree on!


and will probably be infinite in size.


Probably?



(return to index)

MicroWave Background Radiation

A second argument which has been made to support the Big Bang Theory
is the microwave background radiation. COBE has shown that the
spectrum of the Microwave Background Radiation (MBR) is that of an
ideal Black Body Radiator having a temperature of about 2.8 degrees K.


2.73 K, to be more precise. You are not up to date. Ever heard of the
WMAP satellite?


It has also shown that this radiation has a Redshift/Blueshift to it,
indicating that the earth is moving about 300Km/s relative to the
shell of matter that emitted the radiation. Since this speed is too
great for the earth's movement within the milky-way galaxy, it
indicates that the source is outside our galaxy and that our galaxy is
moving in relation to that source.

As indicated in the previous section dealing with redshift, the
starlight photons radiated by galaxies gradually lose energy through
some unknown process which then reradiates this energy as the
Microwave Background Radiation. The wavelength of the photons of the
MBR, at the peak of the spectrum radiation curve, will be about 1mm.
Since the rate of loss of energy by photons will be inversely
proportional to the wavelength of those photons,


Why should it be?


and since the MBR
photons have a wavelength of more than a thousand times that of
visible light, the percentage loss of energy by the MBR photons will
be at a rate of over one thousand times less than that of a visible
photon. (If it takes a visible photon 15 billion years to lose 3/4's
of it's energy, then it would take a MBR photon 15,000 billion years
to lose 3/4's of it's energy). It follows that since MBR photons have
a range of travel of more than one thousand times that of visible
light photons, they are also a thousand times more likely to encounter
a galaxy and be absorbed by the matter of that galaxy then a visible
light photon would.

Thus, energy is radiated by galaxies in the form of starlight photons.
Energy from these photons is gradually converted to MBR photons. These
MBR photons are eventually absorbed by some other galaxy.


Nice. Now you only have to present evidence for the existence of the
aether which makes this possible, and explain how exactly it makes this
possible.

Oh, BTW, you could also explain why, if one takes the fluctuations in
the CMBR as being due to density fluctuations, and studies how these
grow with time due to gravity, one gets the observed large scale
structure of the universe (voids, galaxy clusters, filaments etc.)


Since the intensity of the microwave background radiation will be
relatively constant throughout the universe (assuming an infinite
steady state universe), the amount of energy a galaxy will absorb from
it will be proportional to the size of that galaxy. The amount of
energy a galaxy radiates is also proportional to it's size, thus an
equilibrium will be reached where a galaxy will receive as much energy
in the form of MBR photons as it itself radiates in the form of
starlight photons.

(return to index)

Entropy

A third argument that has been put forward in support of the Big Bang
Theory is entropy, in that, it is argued that the universe must
eventually run down into a state of thermal equilibrium. Energy exists
in various forms such as atomic binding energies, thermal energy,
potential and kinetic energy, etc., all of which are associated with
matter, or it exists in photons which have been radiated by matter and
will eventually be reabsorbed by matter. Under the Steady State Galaxy
Theory as put forth above, since all matter in a Galaxy is recycled
through the Neutroid on a regular basis, all energy contained by that
matter is also recycled at the same time and, thus, the universe does
not run down into a state of thermal equilibrium.


So your recycling process contradicts the second law of thermodynamics?
Oh uh - bad for your "theory"...


There is a perception that energy only flows from hot bodies to cooler
ones. This is not true for radiant energy. The MBR photons which
exhibit the characteristics of a 2.8 degree black body radiator do get
absorbed by the much hotter material which makes up the galaxies.


Err, in turn, the photons of the CMBR get quite a lot of energy from the
hot matter in the galaxies, e.g. by inverse Compton scattering. In the
mean, the energy *still* flows from the hot to the cold "bodies". You
*do* know that the formulation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics about
energy flowing from hot to cold bodies is only true in the mean, don't you?


The
critical factor which determines the direction of net flow of radiant
energy is not the relative temperatures of the bodies but the energy
densities they produce.


So you indeed think that the second law of thermodynamics is wrong.
*Really* bad for you...


In the case of our universe, the MBR radiation
has an energy density equal to the starlight radiation energy density
emitted by the galaxies. Thus, there is an equilibrium condition where
galaxies receive as much energy in the form of MBR Radiation as they
radiate in the form of Starlight Radiation and there will be no net
flow of energy from the galaxies to the material in intergalactic
space.

(return to index)

Hydrogen-Helium

A fourth arguement which has been used to support the Big Bang theory
is that it would account for the abundance of helium we find in the
universe. The amount of helium present (24%) cannot be accounted for
by star production and according to Gamow it was generated by the Big
Bang.

Under the Steady State Galaxy theory, the nuclear fusion process which
is expelling the material from the neutroid would generate large
amounts of helium as well as other light elements and is the source of
the excess helium found in the universe.


Err, then why don't we see an excess of the other elements, too? But
only an excess of helium?


(return to index)

Quasars

The latest Hubble pictures of quasars show that they are associated
with galaxies and in most cases there is evidence that these galaxies
have recently collided with other galaxies.


That about the collisions is news to me. Reference, please.


In normal galaxies, the neutroid at their center is obscured by a halo
of material trapped in the neutroid's magnetic field. In the case of
quasars, this halo of material has been temporarily destroyed by the
collision with another galaxy and we are seeing the bare neutroid
which is, as expected, extremely energetic.


You are making no sense. Even if the neutroid is obscured by such a halo,
the energy emitted by it must nevertheless go somewhere (i.e. in heating
that halo), and thus despite the halo, we nevertheless should see that
something very energetic is there in the center of galaxies. We don't,
in general.

Also, please explain how exactly the collision is able to destroy the
halo. Why should such a collision produce forces which are so great that
they can overcome the forces of the neutroid on the halo?



(return to index)

Summary

The Steady State Galaxy Theory as put forth above can provide the
basis for the operation of the Universe as it is seen to exist.


Well, if one ignores most of the evidence and is satisfied by handwavy
argumentations instead of actual quantitative calculations...


It can
not only account for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe
which is something no other theory as proposed so far can accomplish


Wrong. The shapes of galaxies are rather well understood nowadays.



but it can also explain the existence of quasars.


And standard physics can do that also. Standard physics can also explain
the wide range of other types of active galaxy nuclei, which you
conveniently ignored.



As more data is gathered by the Hubble Space Telescope and other
sources, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Big Bang theory
cannot account for the universe around us.


Utterly wrong. As more data is gathered, it becomes increasingly clear
that the BBT fits the evidence quite well, and accounts for much more of
the evidence than your stuff above - and does do so *quantitatively*.


I believe the the Steady
State Galaxy Theory as presented here can provide the basis of an
alternative to the Big Bang Theory.


Your belief is based on ignorace. Please go to the literature and look
up the heap of evidence for the BBT. You could start with the things I
mentioned above, at the beginning of this post.


(return to index) (return to top of page) Other Interesting Papers

For a historical perspective of the Big Bang Theory see Keith Stein's
Essay "The Big Bang Myth"


Keith Stein? The one who posts to sci.physics, and demonstrates time and
time again that he does not understand a bit of Relativity?


"Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe" by Grote Reber -a pioneer in the
field of Radio Astronomy.


And that makes him qualified for discussing cosmology how?


"Dark Matter" and "Hubble's Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect"
by John Kierein


And who is that?



Please E-mail me your comments and suggestions.


Why don't you look at the posts in sci.astro?



Last revised Dec 30,1996.
Copyright R.Rufus Young 1996 all rights reserved.


Time to revise your ideas again in light of the new evidence of the last
eight years, don't you think?



You are Visitor Number


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

Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004

When did motion first start ?

Science knows the formation of matter in our universe was caused by
the forces of the universe.


Huh? Rather strange wording.


These forces a

(1) The Force of Gravity

(2) The Force of Electro Magnetism

(3) The Strong Nuclear Force


Wrong. This force is only a residual effect of the strong (colour) force
between the quarks, not a fundamental force on its own.


(4) The Weak Nuclear Force


Please notice that (2) and (4) had been unified in the 70ties.


At some point in time, motion within the universe, had to begin.

The paradox would be, what force could cause motion to begin, without
moving in its present space-time ?


Huh? Sorry, I do not understand the problem.


The Gravitational Cosmological Theory of the formation of the
Universe is a theory I
developed that is rooted in the Einstein and the Bondi-Gold-Hoyle
Steady State theories ,


Hoyle's theory had been soundly disproven. Even he himself admitted that
and developed a new "Quasi-steady state" theory.


wherein the Steady State theory the universe contains more protons
than electrons that
create dust particles and galaxies formed in their current locations
and the cosmic
matter is recycled therein at the center of the galaxy furnace.

When the Universe started to fall:

The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of
the Universe.

The Theory:

(1) The expansion of the universe is a result of the " heat '
contained therein;

(2) The source of the " heat " is the cosmic microwave radiation
backround at 3 kelvin,


Please present an actual calculation demonstrating that that "heat" can
explain the observed expansion.

Also, didn't you say above that you assume a static universe???


wherein;

(3) The microwave electro magnetic-nuclear energy was formed as a
result of the
interaction of two different static gravitational vacuum fields,
causing gravitational
instability and the motion, void of matter, at this time, wherein;
static gravitational
field (1) began to go into "motion".


Microwave energy has nothing to do with nuclear energy. And how,
precisely, was the interaction of thise two gravitational fields able
to produce this microwave energy?



Therefore; only (2) static gravitational vacuum fields alone,
being void of E=MC^2
could create E=MC^2; and the matter of the Universe.


Huh???


Q: When did this motion start?

A: If a neutral particle is able to resist the universal motion,


What universal motion, and why should a neutral particle be able to
resist it?


in theory, that particle would go back in time.


Huh??? Why???


Going back in time the neutral particle would
then enter into (1)
of the (2) motionless-static gravity vacuum fields void of motion, and
cause an unbalance
and gravitational instability and this interaction would create motion
and energy particles.


Does the word "gibberish" say anything to you?


Q: What causes a gravitational static vacuum field in the first place
?

A: Pressure force is used to create a vacuum on Earth, perhaps an
exotic something
100,000 weaker than the force of gravity decays causing a static
gravity vacuum field.


Gibberish yet again.



Theory by Br Dan Izzo

Cosmic magnetic force & God Bless us.

PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?


If you say so.



Bye,
Bjoern
  #4  
Old September 6th 04, 03:39 AM
Br Dan Izzo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mr. 4X" wrote in message ...
CeeBee wrote in message
. 6.84:

(Br Dan Izzo) wrote in sci.astro:


PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?


How about cosmic bunkum, like the rest of your post?


It's cosmic moronism.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
my reply
My post was that I thought the creative force we call God in the
universe was cosmic magnetism , possibly a monopole one , your
modivativation is not knowledge, everything you think of you title
good or bad and then think others deserving of death

God did visit me in june 2001, the throne looks like revelations
chapter 4 verses 1-6 and was in my livingroom , it appeared the moment
I told God that I couldn't go to heave for a million years because I'd
fight with God atleast once...then this machine throne image suddenly
appeared...I asked God how long that it had been here...meaning the
whole world...it said " THE WHOLE TIME " and left.....God is affraid
of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me for
your evil arousal


Br Izzo

The Decay of the False Vacuum
Written by Sten Odenwald

Copyright (C) 1983 Kalmbach Publishing. Reprinted by permission


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the recently developed theory by Steven Weinberg and Abdus Salam,
that unifies the electromagnetic and weak forces, the vacuum is not
empty. This peculiar situation comes about because of the existence of
a new type of field, called the Higgs field. The Higgs field has an
important physical consequence since its interaction with the W, W and
Z particles (the carriers of the weak force) causes them to gain mass
at energies below 100 billion electron volts (100 Gev). Above this
energy they are quite massless just like the photon and it is this
characteristic that makes the weak and electromagnetic forces so
similar at high energy.
On a somewhat more abstract level, consider Figures 1 and 2
representing the average energy of the vacuum state. If the universe
were based on the vacuum state in Figure 1, it is predicted that the
symmetry between the electromagnetic and weak interactions would be
quite obvious. The particles mediating the forces would all be
massless and behave in the same way. The corresponding forces would be
indistinguishable. This would be the situation if the universe had an
average temperature of 1 trillion degrees so that the existing
particles collided at energies of 100 Gev. In Figure 2, representing
the vacuum state energy for collision energies below 100 Gev, the
vacuum state now contains the Higgs field and the symmetry between the
forces is suddenly lost or 'broken'. Although at low energy the way in
which the forces behave is asymmetric, the fundamental laws governing
the electromagnetic and weak interactions remain inherently symmetric.
This is a very remarkable and profound prediction since it implies
that certain symmetries in Nature can be hidden from us but are there
nonetheless.

During the last 10 years physicists have developed even more powerful
theories that attempt to unify not only the electromagnetic and weak
forces but the strong nuclear force as well. These are called the
Grand Unification Theories (GUTs) and the simplist one known was
developed by Howard Georgi, Helen Quinn,and Steven Weinberg and is
called SU(5), (pronounced 'ess you five'). This theory predicts that
the nuclear and 'electroweak' forces will eventually have the same
strength but only when particles collide at energies above 1 thousand
trillion GeV corresponding to the unimaginable temperature of 10
thousand trillion trillion degrees! SU(5) requires exactly 24
particles to mediate forces of which the 8 massless gluons of the
nuclear force, the 3 massless intermediate vector bosons of the weak
force and the single massless photon of the electromagnetic force are
12. The remaining 12 represent a totally new class of particles called
Leptoquark bosons that have the remarkable property that they can
transform quarks into electrons. SU(5) therefore predicts the
existence of a 'hyperweak' interaction; a new fifth force in the
universe! Currently, this force is 10 thousand trillion trillion times
weaker than the weak force but is nevertheless 100 million times
stronger than gravity. What would this new force do? Since protons are
constructed from 3 quarks and since quarks can now decay into
electrons, through the Hyperweak interaction, SU(5) predicts that
protons are no longer the stable particles we have always imagined
them to be. Crude calculations suggest that they may have half-lives
between 10(29) to 10(33) years. An immediate consequence of this is
that even if the universe were destined to expand for all eternity,
after 'only' 10(32) years or so, all of the matter present would
catastrophically decay into electrons, neutrinos and photons. The Era
of Matter, with its living organisms, stars and galaxies, would be
swept away forever, having represented but a fleeting episode in the
history of the universe. In addition to proton decay, SU(5) predicts
that at the energy characteristic of the GUT transition, we will see
the affects of a new family of particles called supermassive Higgs
bosons whose masses are expected to be approximately 1 thousand
trillion GeV! These particles interact with the 12 Leptoquarks and
make them massive just as the Higgs bosons at 100 GeV made the W, W
and Z particles heavy. Armed with this knowledge, let's explore some
of the remarkable cosmological consequences of these exciting
theories.

The GUT Era

To see how these theories relate to the history of the universe,
imagine if you can a time when the average temperature of the universe
was not the frigid 3 K that it is today but an incredable 10 thousand
trillion trillion degrees (10(15) GeV). The 'Standard Model' of the
Big Bang, tells us this happened about 10(-37) seconds after Creation.
The protons and neutrons that we are familiar with today hadn't yet
formed since their constituent quarks interacted much too weakly to
permit them to bind together into 'packages' like neutrons and
protons. The remaining constituents of matter, electrons, muons and
tau leptons, were also massless and traveled about at essentially
light-speed; They were literally a new form of radiation, much like
light is today! The 12 supermassive Leptoquarks as well as the
supermassivs Higgs bosons existed side-by-side with their
anti-particles. Every particle-anti particle pair that was annihilated
was balanced by the resurrection of a new pair somewhere else in the
universe. During this period, the particles that mediated the strong,
weak and electromagnetic forces were completely massless so that these
forces were no longer distinguishable. An inhabitant of that age would
not have had to theorize about the existence of a symmetry between the
strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions, this symmetry would
have been directly observable and furthermore, fewer types of
particles would exist for the inhabitants to keep track of. The
universe would actually have beed much simpler then!

As the universe continued to expand, the temperature continued to
plummet. It has been suggested by Demetres Nanopoulis and Steven
Weinberg in 1979 that one of the supermassive Higgs particles may have
decayed in such a way that slightly more matter was produced than
anti-matter. The remaining evenly matched pairs of particles and
anti-particles then annihilated to produce the radiation that we now
see as the 'cosmic fireball'.

Exactly what happened to the universe as it underwent the transitions
at 10(15) and 100 GeV when the forces of Nature suddenly became
distinguishable is still under investigation, but certain tantalizing
descriptions have recently been offered by various groups of
theoriticians working on this problem. According to studies by Alan
Guth, Steven Weinberg and Frank Wilczyk between 1979 and 1981, when
the GUT transition occured, it occured in a way not unlike the
formation of vapor bubbles in a pot of boiling water. In this analogy,
the interior of the bubbles represent the vacuum state in the new
phase, where the forces are distinguishable, embedded in the old
symmetric phase where the nuclear, weak and electromagnetic forces are
indistinguishable. Inside these bubbles, the vacuum energy is of the
type illustrated by Figure 2 while outside it is represented by Figure
1. Since we are living within the new phase with its four
distinguishable forces, this has been called the 'true' vacuum state.
In the false vacuum state, the forces remain indistinguishable which
is certainly not the situation that we find ourselves in today!

Cosmic Inflation

An exciting prediction of Guth's model is that the universe may have
gone through at least one period in its history when the expansion was
far more rapid than predicted by the 'standard' Big Bang model. The
reason for this is that the vacuum itself also contributes to the
energy content of the universe just as matter and radiation do
however, the contribution is in the opposite sense. Although gravity
is an attractive force, the vacuum of space produces a force that is
repulsive. As Figures 1 and 2 show, the minimum energy state of the
false vacuum at 'A' before the GUT transition is at a higher energy
than in the true vacuum state in 'B' after the transition. This energy
difference is what contributes to the vacuum energy. During the GUT
transition period, the positive pressure due to the vacuum energy
would have been enormously greater than the restraining pressure
produced by the gravitational influence of matter and radiation. The
universe would have inflated at a tremendous rate, the inflation
driven by the pressure of the vacuum! In this picture of the universe,
Einstein's cosmological constant takes on a whole new meaning since it
now represents a definite physical concept ; It is simply a measure of
the energy difference between the true and false vacuum states ('B'
and 'A' in Figures 1 and 2.) at a particular time in the history of
the universe. It also tells us that, just as in de Sitter's model, a
universe where the vacuum contributes in this way must expand
exponentially in time and not linearly as predicted by the Big Bang
model. Guth's scenario for the expansion of the universe is generally
called the 'inflationary universe' due to the rapidity of the
expansion and represents a phase that will end only after the true
vacuum has supplanted the false vacuum of the old, symmetric phase.

A major problem with Guth's original model was that the inflationary
phase would have lasted for a very long time because the false vacuum
state is such a stable one. The universe becomes trapped in the
cul-de-sac of the false vacuum state and the exponential expansion
never ceases. This would be somewhat analogous to water refusing to
freeze even though its temperature has dropped well below 0
Centigrade. Recent modifications to the original 'inflationary
universe' model have resulted in what is now called the 'new'
inflationary universe model. In this model, the universe does manage
to escape from the false vacuum state and evolves in a short time to
the familiar true vacuum state.

We don't really know how exactly long the inflationary phase may have
lasted but the time required for the universe to double its size may
have been only 10(-34) seconds. Conceivably, this inflationary period
could have continued for as 'long' as 10(-24) seconds during which
time the universe would have undergone 10 billion doublings of its
size! This is a number that is truely beyond comprehension. As a
comparison, only 120 doublings are required to inflate a hydrogen atom
to the size of the entire visible universe! According to the
inflationary model, the bubbles of the true vacuum phase expanded at
the speed of light. Many of these had to collide when the universe was
very young in order that the visible universe appear so uniform today.
A single bubble would not have grown large enough to encompass our
entire visible universe at this time; A radius of some 15-20 billion
light years. On the other hand, the new inflationary model states that
even the bubbles expanded in size exponentially just as their
separations did. The bubbles themselves grew to enormous sizes much
greater than the size of our observable universe. According to
Albrecht and Steinhardt of the University of Pennsylvania, each bubble
may now be 10(3000) cm in size. We should not be too concerned about
these bubbles expanding at many times the speed of light since their
boundaries do not represent a physical entity. There are no electrons
or quarks riding some expandind shock wave. Instead, it is the
non-material vacuum of space that is expanding. The expansion velocity
of the bubbles is not limited by any physical speed limit like the
velocity of light.

GUMs in GUTs

A potential problem for cosmologies that have phase transitions during
the GUT Era is that a curious zoo of objects could be spawned if
frequent bubble mergers occured as required by Guth's inflationary
model. First of all, each bubble of the true vacuum phase contains its
own Higgs field having a unique orientation in space. It seems likely
that no two bubbles will have their Higgs fields oriented in quite the
same way so that when bubbles merge, knots will form. According to
Gerhard t'Hooft and Alexander Polyakov, these knots in the Higgs field
are the magnetic monopoles originally proposed 40 years ago by Paul
Dirac and there ought to be about as many of these as there were
bubble mergers during the transition period. Upper limits to their
abundance can be set by requiring that they do not contribute to
'closing' the universe which means that for particles of their
predicted mass (about 10(16) GeV), they must be 1 trillion trillion
times less abundant than the photons in the 3 K cosmic background.
Calculations based on the old inflationary model suggest that the
these GUMs (Grand Unification Monopoles) may easily have been as much
as 100 trillion times more abundant than the upper limit! Such a
universe would definitly be 'closed' and moreover would have run
through its entire history between expansion and recollapse within a
few thousand years. The new inflationary universe model solves this
'GUM' overproduction problem since we are living within only one of
these bubbles, now almost infinitly larger than our visible universe.
Since bubble collisions are no longer required to homogenize the
matter and radiation in the universe, very few, if any, monopoles
would exist within our visible universe.

Horizons

A prolonged period of inflation would have had an important influence
on the cosmic fireball radiation. One long-standing problem in modern
cosmology has been that all directions in the sky have the same
temperature to an astonishing 1 part in 10,000. When we consider that
regions separated by only a few degrees in the sky have only recently
been in communication with one another, it is hard to understand how
regions farther apart than this could be so similar in temperature.
The radiation from one of these regions, traveling at the velocity of
light, has not yet made it across the intervening distance to the
other, even though the radiation may have started on its way since the
universe first came into existence. This 'communication gap' would
prevent these regions from ironing-out their temperature differences.

With the standard, Big Bang model, as we look back to earlier epochs
from the present time, the separations between particles decrease more
slowly than their horizons are shrinking. Neighboring regions of space
at the present time, become disconnected so temperature differences
are free to develope. Eventually, as we look back to very ancient
times, the horizons are so small that every particle existing then
literally fills the entire volume of its own, observable universe.
Imagine a universe where you occupy all of the available space! Prior
to the development of the inflationary models, cosmologists were
forced to imagine an incredably well-ordered initial state where each
of these disconnected domains (some 10(86) in number) had nearly
identical properties such as temperature. Any departure from this
situation at that time would have grown to sizable temperature
differences in widely separated parts of the sky at the present time.
Unfortunately, some agency would have to set-up these finely-tuned
initial conditions by violating causality. The contradiction is that
no force may operate by transmitting its influence faster than the
speed of light. In the inflationary models, this contradiction is
eliminated because the separation between widely scattered points in
space becomes almost infinitly small compared to the size of the
horizons as we look back to the epoc of inflation. Since these points
are now within each others light horizons, any temperature difference
would have been eliminated immediatly since hotter regions would now
be in radiative contact with colder ones. With this
exponentially-growing, de Sitter phase in the universe's early history
we now have a means for resolving the horizon problem.

Instant Flat Space

Because of the exponential growth of the universe during the GUT Era,
its size may well be essentially infinite for all 'practical' purposes
.. Estimates by Albrecht and Steinhardt suggest that each bubble region
may have grown to a size of 10(3000) cm by the end of the inflationary
period. Consequently, the new inflationary model predicts that the
content of the universe must be almost exactly the 'critical mass'
since the sizes of each of these bubble regions are almost infinite in
extent. The universe is, for all conceivable observations, exactly
Euclidean (infinite and flat in geometry) and destined to expand for
all eternity to come. Since we have only detected at most 10 percent
of the critical mass in the form of luminous matter, this suggests
that 10 times as much matter exists in our universe than is currently
detectable. Of course, if the universe is essentially infinite this
raises the ghastly spectre of the eventual annihilation of all organic
and inorganic matter some 10(32) years from now because of proton
decay.

In spite of its many apparent successes, even the new inflationary
universe model is not without its problems. Although it does seem to
provide explainations for several cosmological enigmas, it does not
provide a convincing way to create galaxies. Those fluctuations in the
density of matter that do survive the inflationary period are so dense
that they eventually collapse into galaxy-sized blackholes! Neither
the precise way in which the transition to ordinary Hubbel expansion
occurs nor the duration of the inflationary period are well
determined.

If the inflationary cosmologies can be made to answer each of these
issues satisfactorily we may have, as J. Richard Gott III has
suggested, a most remarkable model of the universe where an almost
infinite number of 'bubble universes' each having nearly infinite
size, coexist in the same 4-dimensional spacetime; all of these bubble
universes having been brought into existence at the same instant of
creation. This is less troublesome than one might suspect since, if
our universe is actually infinite as the available data suggests, so
too was it infinite even at its moment of birth! It is even
conceivable that the universe is 'percolating' with new bubble
universes continually coming into existence. Our entire visible
universe, out to the most distant quasar, would be but one
infinitessimal patch within one of these bubble regions. Do these
other universes have galaxies, stars, planets and living creatures
statistically similar to those in our universe? We may never know.
These other universes, born of the same paroxicism of Creation as our
own, are forever beyond our scrutiny but obviously not our
imaginations!

Beyond The Beginning...

Finally, what of the period before Grand Unification? We may surmise
that at higher temperatures than the GUT Era, even the supermassive
Higgs and Leptoquark bosons become massless and at long last we arrive
at a time when the gravitational interaction is united with the weak,
electromagnetic and strong forces. Yet, our quest for an understanding
of the origins of the universe remains incomplete since gravity has
yet to be brought into unity with the remaining forces on a
theoretical basis. This last step promises to be not only the most
difficult one to take on the long road to unification but also appears
to hold the greatest promise for shedding light on some of the most
profound mysteries of the physical world. Even now, a handful of
theorists around the world are hard at work on a theory called
Supergravity which unites the force carriers (photons, gluons,
gravitons and the weak interaction bosons) with the particles that
they act on (quarks, electrons etc). Supergravity theory also predicts
the existence of new particles called photinos and gravitinos. There
is even some speculation that the photinos may fill the entire
universe and account for the unseen 'missing' matter that is necessary
to give the universe the critical mass required to make it exactly
Euclidean. The gravitinos, on the other hand, prevent calculations
involving the exchange of gravitons from giving infinite answers for
problems where the answers are known to be perfectly finite. Hitherto,
these calculations did not include the affects of the gravitinos.

Perhaps during the next decade, more of the details of the last stage
of Unification will be hammered out at which time the entire story of
the birth of our universe can be told. This is, indeed, an exciting
time to be living through in human history. Will future generations
forever envy us our good fortune, to have witnessed in our lifetimes
the unfolding of the first comprehensive theory of Existence?
  #5  
Old September 6th 04, 08:38 AM
Bjoern Feuerbacher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Br Dan Izzo wrote:
"Mr. 4X" wrote in message ...

CeeBee wrote in message
1.6.84:


(Br Dan Izzo) wrote in sci.astro:



PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?

How about cosmic bunkum, like the rest of your post?


It's cosmic moronism.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
my reply
My post was that I thought the creative force we call God in the
universe was cosmic magnetism , possibly a monopole one , your
modivativation is not knowledge, everything you think of you title
good or bad and then think others deserving of death

God did visit me in june 2001, the throne looks like revelations
chapter 4 verses 1-6 and was in my livingroom , it appeared the moment
I told God that I couldn't go to heave for a million years because I'd
fight with God atleast once...then this machine throne image suddenly
appeared...I asked God how long that it had been here...meaning the
whole world...it said " THE WHOLE TIME " and left.....God is affraid
of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me for
your evil arousal


Get professional help. Quickly.


[snip insane rants]


Bye,
Bjoern
  #6  
Old September 6th 04, 03:18 PM
Br Dan Izzo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ...
Br Dan Izzo wrote:
"Mr. 4X" wrote in message ...

CeeBee wrote in message
1.6.84:


(Br Dan Izzo) wrote in sci.astro:



PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?

How about cosmic bunkum, like the rest of your post?

It's cosmic moronism.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
my reply
My post was that I thought the creative force we call God in the
universe was cosmic magnetism , possibly a monopole one , your
modivativation is not knowledge, everything you think of you title
good or bad and then think others deserving of death

God did visit me in june 2001, the throne looks like revelations
chapter 4 verses 1-6 and was in my livingroom , it appeared the moment
I told God that I couldn't go to heave for a million years because I'd
fight with God atleast once...then this machine throne image suddenly
appeared...I asked God how long that it had been here...meaning the
whole world...it said " THE WHOLE TIME " and left.....God is affraid
of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me for
your evil arousal


Get professional help. Quickly.


[snip insane rants]


Bye,
Bjoern



I just stated your thinking as is,

re Cain and Able odepus complex

just the power of science as is

re read post

God is affraid
of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me for
your evil arousal



aka hunter savage drive...you didn't pick on my posts neutriid ,
instead you picked on cosmic magnetic force being able to go through
absolute zero kelvin, a creative motivating force


that I think is what people are refering to as God

If God is real God can be measured that is science as is
Br Izzo
  #7  
Old September 6th 04, 03:22 PM
Bjoern Feuerbacher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Br Dan Izzo wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ...

Br Dan Izzo wrote:

"Mr. 4X" wrote in message ...


CeeBee wrote in message
news:Xns9557C70921F38ceebeechesterstartco@195. 121.6.84:



(Br Dan Izzo) wrote in sci.astro:




PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?

How about cosmic bunkum, like the rest of your post?

It's cosmic moronism.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
my reply
My post was that I thought the creative force we call God in the
universe was cosmic magnetism , possibly a monopole one , your
modivativation is not knowledge, everything you think of you title
good or bad and then think others deserving of death

God did visit me in june 2001, the throne looks like revelations
chapter 4 verses 1-6 and was in my livingroom , it appeared the moment
I told God that I couldn't go to heave for a million years because I'd
fight with God atleast once...then this machine throne image suddenly
appeared...I asked God how long that it had been here...meaning the
whole world...it said " THE WHOLE TIME " and left.....God is affraid
of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me for
your evil arousal


Get professional help. Quickly.


[snip insane rants]


Bye,
Bjoern




I just stated your thinking as is,

re Cain and Able odepus complex

just the power of science as is

re read post

God is affraid

of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me for
your evil arousal




aka hunter savage drive...you didn't pick on my posts neutriid ,
instead you picked on cosmic magnetic force being able to go through
absolute zero kelvin, a creative motivating force


that I think is what people are refering to as God

If God is real God can be measured that is science as is
Br Izzo


I see that you have not yet sought professional help. A pity.


Bye,
Bjoern
  #9  
Old September 7th 04, 12:07 AM
vonroach
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 5 Sep 2004 19:39:38 -0700, (Br Dan Izzo)
wrote:

God is affraid
of men because you will try to kill God like you wanted to kill me


You are one very sick cookie. Better get help fast, sicko.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Infinite Universe Theory Vikram Arora Amateur Astronomy 75 January 6th 04 11:16 PM
Something more interesting for you to read! Greg Dortmond UK Astronomy 12 December 22nd 03 05:51 AM
Galaxies without dark matter halos? Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply Research 92 November 3rd 03 12:36 PM
The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of the Universe rev dan izzo History 8 October 9th 03 05:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.