From Lemaître to this day


Our Theory: Simple, Logical & Exponential
by Bruce Camber Related: Heard & BelievedIntegrated Structure of the Universe,  Subjects-Objects

Scholars say the hot big bang theory is not the best possible concept for the start of our universe.
Some of our best scholars have known for decades and many have been working on new concepts. Our alternative theory has a basic similarity with the 1927 work of Georges Lemaître — it all started at a very low temperature within a primordial structure. Lemaître postulates very high densities. We are not quite ready to engage the issue of density. Lemaître downplayed space and time and offered no ideas for the expansion of the universe; we recognize the emergence of space and time as the Planck Length and Planck Time; and, the exponential doubling and thrust at the heart our simple equations is more than enough to cover inflation.

Layzer.  In 1966 a Harvard astrophysicist, David Layzer, attempted to revive the concept of a cold start but he did not incorporate any mathematics for inflation and its necessary phase transitions so his cold start concept receded into the background. Some believe that the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations from 2001 to 2010 should end all cold start speculations. It won’t.

Anthony Aguirre In 2001 physicist, Aguirre, cracked open the door within his paper, The Cosmic Background Radiation in a Cold Big Bang (a technical article with extensive references), but he did not engage the Planck base units per se and he has not further developed his concepts as an alternative theory to our current infinitely-hot big bang cosmology.

Christoff Wetterich. In 2014, a physics professor, Christof Wetterich, of Universität Heidelberg began an exploration of a cold start by positing questions and concepts that require a cold start prior to the big bang.  That work doesn’t seem to be gaining any traction.

Planck Units. Yet, all these scientist/scholars miss the most simple numbers for space and time, the Planck’s base units. Then, they did not think to consider how there could be an exponential expansion from that simple start. That is, none of these people applied base-2 notation to those base units that Max Planck began to discern in 1899 (building from George Johnstone Stoney work in 1881). That base-2 application apparently would not happen until December 2011, yet even then, only with the Planck Length. Finally in June 2014, Planck Time was added, then in 2016 Planck Mass and Planck Charge. A natural inflation is assumed by engaging concepts from cubic close packing of equal spheres and the Fourier transform.

A Map of the Universe. Though in the earliest part of the progression, the doublings of Planck Length and Planck Time remain so small as to appear illogical; by the 67th notation, measurements of lengths begin. By the 84th notation, measurements of time begin. By the 134 notation, still less than a second into the creation of things, this chart finally begins to approximate the numbers of the hot big bang. We start from close to absolute zero temperature and go up to temperatures that would initiate the quark-gluon plasma all without any need to do any “supercooling” required within hot big bang cosmology. Our initial comparison of the numbers may be helpful. That chart came out of a longer, earlier analysis.

This most-simple, logical theory doesn’t spurn any mathematical formulation. If a formula works now, it will work within this model. The simple base-2 expansion provides a foundational infrastructure or a grid that literally includes everything, everywhere, throughout all time. Each of the 202 notations comes alive with its own space-and-shape dynamics.

That very first notation is described by Neil Turok. He says the universe is in a perpetual state of “big” bangs. Of course, we agree so long as the word, big, is understood to mean significant, NOT INFINITELY HOT,  and “bang” is not a sound but emergence.

In 2016 Turok clearly stated that the hot big bang is wrong. Yet, seventeen years earlier, he was part of an elite group of scholars who concurred that the concept was flawed. Entitled Structure Formation in the Universe, this 1999 conference (NATO Advanced Study Institute at Isaac Newton Institute in Cambridge) gave everyone permission to explore alternatives. Among them were Savas Dimopoulos, Alan Guth, Juan Maldacena, Lisa Randall, Leonard Susskind, Gabriele Veneziano, Alex Vilenkin and others.**

A multiverse of universes followed.

Too general and abstracted for our simple constructions, we are more concerned about the logical sequence of emergence and growth that first begets order, structure, relations, then substance, then qualities, and systems such that each notation has its own necessary-and-dynamic infrastructure and then each goes to define the overall dynamic infrastructure of what we call our universe.

That first notation is key. Of course, within our simple construct, it is the ever-so-blistering-fast generation of primordial spheres that are the essential finite-infinite bridge. Then follows the 64 or so notations that are well below the thresholds of any kind of physical measurement. Here is the goldmine for mathematics and logic and our unified theory of mathematics and string theory.

Infinity. Now, to avoid any sense that this universe requires anything more than what we can see and measure, physicists developed a means to avoid the concept of infinity. Over the years, that work has become its own unique art form and refined science. A leading thinker in this work, Kenneth G. Wilson, developed a theory of scaling and began work to define phase transitions within a scale with known boundary conditions. This work is a key part of the work of this website. Eventually connections between each of the 202 notations might be discerned with the help of Wilson’s renormalization group theory.

It is a bit ironic.

This site is not afraid of infinity and its rather tortured history. Our working concepts of infinity have been defined in other documents, however, just as a review, continuity (order), symmetry (relations), and harmony (dynamics) are considered the foundations of infinity and that which gives rise to space, time, mass and charge. It is a key part of our understanding of emergence, quintessence, physicality, and inflation.

Although we are quick to say, “…just 202 notations,” we also recognize that notation 202 is defined by 10.9 billion years. This entire model is mostly about the early universe. If the universe is currently measured to be from 13.78 to about 13.81 billion years, somewhere over 2.8 billion years of 10.9 billion years, is currently active. Quite fascinating is the observation that there is time asymmetry within the 202nd notation, but time symmetry throughout all the other notations.

So, in this model space and time are being redefined as an intimate part of light, mass, charge, and infinity. So, yes, there is much more come… looking back to look ahead.

** Others: Keith Dienes, Burt Ovrut, Valery Rubakov, David Spergel, Paul Steinhardt, and Michael Turner. An email alerting them to the use of their name will go to each of them and they will be reinserted within the list.

Header Picture:
1927: George Lemaître (left) postulated the universe started cold.
The concept of “infinitely hot” came later.
1966: Harvard’s David Layzer (right) began to re-explore the concept of a cold start, but he could not account for the dynamics of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR).