Big Bang Cosmology Opens Us To A Dystopia

Center for Perfection StudiesThe Big BoardLittle Universe Project • Everywhere • July 2017 •
Homepages: Just Prior |1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23|24|25| Original

Consider It The Big Bang Fallout

hawking
Stephen Hawking, circa 1965

July 3, 2017: There are more people in the world who know Sheldon (Jim Parsons) Big Bang Theory than know Stephen Hawking’s theory. Notwithstanding, Hawking so oversold his concept, the global scientific community was mesmerized for well over 30 years. Scientists who questioned the theory were laughed out of the room. In June 2017 that all changed when Neil Turok announced to the world, “The big bang theory is wrong.”

Not many scholars have had the courage to protest, and fewer still offer alternatives. The chortling of the big bang crowd is going to begin to quiet down. Turok and Hawking are co-authors[1], [2], [3], [4], colleagues and personal friends. It takes great courage to tell somebody with Hawking’s place in history that there is a new footnote — he was wrong — and the aftermath is that he threw off millions of scholars, billions in research, and generations of young minds and budding thinkers.

But, one must not be too, too harsh. At the time, the big bang theory seemed like the best one out there. That it had an inherent nihilism, very little room for discussions, no gracious openness to the speculative, and a disdain for those who found meaning and value within philosophies and religions, will simply have to be forgiven.

Screen Shot 2017-07-03 at 6.27.03 PM
Comedian, Jim Parsons

Italian-French physicist, Carlo Rovelli, also thinks the big bang theory is flawed. The group of physicists who question the theory is formidable. The videos are wide-ranging; some are entertaining!

The starting point for big bang cosmology is infinitely dense and infinitely hot. Within this website the opposite is true. Because it all began in a high school geometry class, this nascent model — really just a collection of numbers to be analyzed — is intermittently called, “The kid’s model, Big Board-little universe, Quiet Expansion, or the UniverseView.”

This model is so simple Jim Parsons (Sheldon) was approached to learn about it in order to pitch it as way to begin phasing out of the television series. He could end up teaching the world a very simple mathematical model of the universe that begins with the infinitesimals, Planck Length and Planck Time, and the very small units of Planck Mass and Planck Charge. Fourth graders would get it! Doubling each value over and over again, 67 times before reaching the CERN-scale, it creates a very smooth, initially-simple, homogeneous universe that quickly becomes exquisitely-complex. This group holds that these 67 doublings, steps or notations are the foundations that give rise to our physical universe.

Turok says that there are a perpetual state of big bangs. Within the the kid’s model, these are the primordial fluctuations that have been below the intellectual radar of all those scholars who hold onto big bang cosmology.”

Though hardly-known among the scholarly community, this skeletal model has well-over 1000 calculations, all simple mathematics to study. The Big Board-little universe Project follows Max Planck definition of spacetime (c = lp ÷ tp) in terms of light symmetry and continuity. Its back door is a pathway between the finite and infinite. The first moment of creation is still happening now. Each notation of the total of 202 notations is actively defining the universe. So, in that regard, Turok and his group are correct, it is perpetual, but there is no a bang per se.

The Quiet Expansion model has a total of just 202 doublings from the Planck scale to the Age of the Universe. The first moment of creation is Notation #1. The first second of creation is between notations 143 and 144. The present day, current hour, and this very second is within the 202nd notation. In this model, everything is necessarily related to everything. Continuity-and-symmetry become the penultimate.

They say, “Although we have begun to interpret the numbers — it is not easy — there is a long way to go.”

Why didn’t the academics and scholars find this simple little model?

Planck Units: In the six years from conception to publishing, 1899-1905, Max Planck worked with five universal physical constants to define an essential reality and base platform for measurement. The result was four Planck base units: Planck Time, Planck Length, Planck Mass and Planck Charge that were “…properties of nature and not from any human construct.” Although engaged by many over time, the Planck numbers did not command basic respect across the entire scientific community. Not until 2001 when Frank Wilczek (MIT, Nobel laureate 2004) wrote a series of three articles for Physics Today, Scaling Mt. Planck, did I, II, III, these Planck units begin to move beyond numerology into wide-scale acceptability.

By that time, the big bang theory had gained the high ground. Nobody thought to follow simple nested or combinatorial geometries back to the Planck Length. Nobody thought to multiply the Planck units by 2. It took a huge amount of naïveté and almost no knowledge of cosmological models to bias one’s point of view. It also required discounting our commonsense view promulgated by Isaac Newton that space and time are absolute. In so doing, a more relational model as suggested in 1715 by Leibniz could be entertained.

Today, there are three simultaneous research projects to define this model more completely:
• Measuring an Expanding Universe Using Planck Units (work in progress)
• The Thrust of the Universe: What is it? (work in progress)
• Visualizing the Universe (work in progress)
We invite your comments and questions about our simple, highly-integrated, mathematical model of the Universe.
Thank you. – Bruce Camber

Let’s talk and let’s get to work!
• Revisit. June 5, 2017, Burst the Big Bang Bubble
• Contact! June 2, 2017, Email to the Editors of scientific publications
Contact! 1 June 2017: Email to Max Tegmark (MIT), re. the nature of infinity in light of his article, The Mathematical Universe
Contact! 4 May 2017: Email to Brandon Brown, author, Planck: Driven by Vision, Broken by War

News / Research
• Open Letter to the editors of Science (magazine) of the American Association for the Advancement of Science
Simple View of the Universe
• An Integrated Universe View: What is your expertise? There are many blanks within many cells — over 2000 of them in the entire chart — so, we assume it will always be “under construction.”

Recent-and-related:
• Background: Do you have a Worldview? Could it be part of an integrated Universe View?
• NASA SpaceApp Challenge Reports (work in progress)
• Very Small-Scale Universe: What is hypostatic?


Homepages: NASA Report|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|Original

June 12, 2017: We believe the big bang backfired and that it is breaking up.
June 13, 2017: We’ve put the big bang on ice to explore a simple model of the universe
June 20: Put the big bang on ice so we can explore a more simple model of the universe.

Navigation: The boldface entries will keep you within 81018.com. If you happen to find yourself on an unusual URL and want to return to the originating page, please use your “back arrow” button. Thank you.