Big Bang and density

In the frame of the Big Bang the study of the percentage of the primaries
elements ( hydrogen,deuterium , helium 3 ,helium 4 and lithium 7 ) gives for
the universe a density nearly 2,5 .10(-28)uSI . The reality gives 2,5
10(-27)uSI .This value is corroborated by the supernovae study .See the site
: Newton's law and dark matter , paragraph universe :
http://perso.orange.fr/claude.morichon/
Because this difference we have make up the dark matter . It is an error
..
We do not have a Big Bang . But many small bangs .;The scenario for the
Big Bang is good for the small bangs . The densities add ,but not the
percentages and the temperatures .
For the small bangs we find the mass of a mediocre galaxy , which is
nearly the mass of the quasars .

Dear Marie MORICHON:

On Jun 19, 2:47*am, "Marie MORICHON" wrote:
* In the frame of the Big Bang the study of the percentage
of the primaries elements ( hydrogen,deuterium , helium 3,
helium 4 and lithium 7 ) gives for the universe a density
nearly 2,5 .10(-28)uSI . The reality gives 2,5 10(-27)uSI.
This value is corroborated by the supernovae study. See
the site : Newton's law and dark matter , paragraph universe :
http://perso.orange.fr/claude.morichon/
* *Because this difference we have make up the dark
matter . It is an error
.
* * We do not have a Big Bang . But many small bangs.

Does not provide an answer to the current Dark Matter problem.

The scenario for the Big Bang is good for the small
bangs .

As long as they all occur at the same instant in the larger space,
sure. But if you spread them out over as much as 300,000 years, we
should be able to see *very* hot spots in the CMBR. And if you extend
them further, we should see Little Bangs now. We see neither.

The densities add ,but not the percentages and
the temperatures .

Right, the temperatures required would be "nearly infiinitely hot".
And if "local properties" (such as c, inertia) derive from the
gestalt, you should see step changes in basic physics in the Universe
around us.

* *For the small bangs we find the mass of a
mediocre galaxy , which is nearly the mass of
the quasars .

Does not work, for either explaining Dark Matter or quasars.

David A. Smith

On Jun 19, 3:47*am, "Marie MORICHON" wrote:
* In the frame of the Big Bang the study of the percentage of the primaries
elements ( hydrogen,deuterium , helium 3 ,helium 4 and lithium 7 ) gives for
the universe a density nearly 2,5 .10(-28)uSI . The reality gives 2,5
10(-27)uSI .This value is corroborated by the supernovae study .See the site
: Newton's law and dark matter , paragraph universe :http://perso.orange.fr/claude.morichon/
* *Because this difference we have make up the dark matter . It is an error
.
* * We do not have a Big Bang . But many small bangs .;The scenario for the
Big Bang is good for the small bangs . The densities add ,but not the
percentages and the temperatures .
* *For the small bangs we find the mass of a mediocre galaxy , which is
nearly the mass of the quasars .

Shape of the Universe. One very long straw connecting two epi-centers,
where one is sucking matter out of the smaller one. The two came close
enough to start
heating up and migration of stars.

We see how easily star trails form when two galaxies come close. The
Andromeda is 20 galaxies away but there is already a flow of stars
from ours to the Andromeda, a tail 20 of our galaxies long containing
500 million stars.

This tail once emerged our of our galaxy, and stars like galaxies
began drifting.

But what emerged at the big bang was gasses, dark matter everywhere,
almost no dark energy (today there is a lot of dark energy, some 70
percent of the Universe and today little dark matter, in the early
Universe was a lot of dark matter. Dark energy expands the Universe,
and dark matter keeps spiral galaxies together.)

Small big bangs on the other hand would carry the remnants of voids,
the great void and other voids perhaps, but I see voids as ones
between chains of galaxies and the voids are growing as the Universe
expands, nothing more to them, no galaxy chains travel in them.
Galaxies are narrowed to chain structures carrying millions of
galaxies. There is no proof for small big bangs.

We see a change, a drastic change in dark matter and dark energy over
time.

In the early Universe space was like lava, constantly moving
everywhere, that is dark matter. Today space quieted down, and dark
matter is not found between galaxies. In the early Universe space was
chaotic. I believe this chaotic dark matter in the early Universe
strongly overwhelmed dark energy.

One thing acts with chaos in motion: Heat, and by today dark matter
vanished, narrowed to the vicinities of spiral galaxies where it was
shown that in elliptic galaxies today there is no or near no dark
matter.

Gravity is weight and dark matter adds to weight in spiral galaxies,
is not made up of particles, around twice the weight, this was known
over 70 years ago.

Well, in a spiral galaxy there is chaotic whirling, classic of early
Universe conditions where things were made up of powerful dynamic
changes, one might also associate such chaotic motions to heat. Heat
was present in the early Universe and dark matter was everywhere, in
spiral galaxies, between galaxies, in elliptic galaxies, and this
chaos overwhelmed all dark energies. The Universe was not expanding
much. Today the Universe is expanding with great speed. Dark matter
gravitates and kept galaxies together.

Powerful whirling brings rise to dark matter, energies of swings,
tugs, inertias, exchanges of mass inertias run over another. Things
could end up running over and
things swinging out powerfully from heavy mass concentrations based on
accumulated
energies. Yes, energies accumulate.