2.a) Theory of the origin of the Universe

Cosmology focuses on formation or origin of the Universe, as well as its evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is generally accepted; however, from our point of view, it has great problems when it comes to the Philosophical Principles of Astrophysics mentioned in the introduction of this book.

In addition, on the page on Fundamental Forces of Matter there is a list of elastic properties of the reticular structure of matter –global aether. Those properties together with processes and mechanisms explained here lead us to consider seriously the idea of a stationary or cyclical Universe on a large scale.

Cause of creation or origin of the Universe is a “dark cause”.

Weaknesses present in the Big Bang theory can be classified according to their relation to the following concepts:

  • Science

    • Spatial situation of the origin of the Universe

      We still have not completely understood how one can say the origin of the Universe was an initial explosion, and yet location of this explosion is unknown. We must admit the egg-like shape of the Universe according to the satellite WMAP is very pretty. We suppose it represents the Universe as seen from the Earth, and that its shape is due to something similar to the shape of an orange peel in a two-dimensional plane.


    • Temporal origin

      Problem of spatial origin of the Universe has a corresponding problem in time.

      Origin of the Universe with an egg-like shape NASA’s WMAP Satellite
      (Public domain image)
      Universe with an egg-like shape, NASA’s WMAP Satellite

      Given we have detected light from galaxies emitted over 13 10^9 years ago, as well as light of a similar age in the opposite direction, it would appear the Universe should be older than the 13.7 10^9 years said to be its approximate age. Particularly because not just light but the mass itself would have to have travelled from the initial location of the Big Bang to the two extremes in order to emit the observed light.

      We imagine this is why recently one hears more about the concept of observable Universe, which we believe to be much more accurate.


    • The Theory of Inflation

      This theory attempts to solve in some way the previous two problems, as it proposes a time of expansion of the Universe, at a much higher speed than the speed of light.

      Here, another great problem of Modern Physics arises, due to its insistence on including generally accepted and at the same time incompatible theories. There is probably some sort of quantum logic at play.

      However, it is also true that their incompatibility is generally accepted; therefore, one of them must be incorrect. This is despite some people saying that all proven theories can improve, but that this does not mean they are wrong. Quantum ingenuity!

    • An obsession for demonstrating the impossible

      Every year, there are attempts of new experiments to prove the Theory of Relativity again. Alternatively, they could be to improve it!


      "Two stars used to verify Einstein

      The importance of this discovery lies in the fact that these two celestial objects make it possible to study with great precision the curvature of space-time over there, at the extreme conditions, which are present in the surroundings of a black hole."

      El País 05-10-2012

      Concepts such as space and time are created or altered but cannot be proven. What’s more, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity does not demonstrate the relativity of space or time; it simply incorporates it as an axiom. Why do they always seem to insist on not making things clear?

  • Science fiction

    In our opinion, of course, Science in general and in particular Cosmology should have logic and common sense, in order to not deviate and become other branches of the study of life. In other words, we do not want to go into theories discussing origin of the Universe based on other physical dimensions or existence of parallel universes, for us, these ideas of space form part of the realm of science fiction and abhorrent logic.

  • Magic

    There is an epistemological problem when it comes to the concept of origin of the Universe. The idea that something could arise out of nothing makes no sense in the logic of our world or our nature. We suppose that, as our nature is finite, any concept that lacks limits, such as eternity or infinite space, evades our own internal logic.

    In a certain way, same philosophical argument supports the Principle of Global Conservation; things either transform or disappear completely, but the latter is usually called magic and not Cosmology or some other branch of Science.

  • Religion

    Within this scientific weakness, we can find various examples.


    • Faith

      In fact, the worst part is not to propose incorrect solutions, but to manage to make them generally accepted. It has merit, actually, to deny the need for convincement in Science because the human brain is not prepared for it; it sounds to us like religious faith regarding the origin of the Universe, or like a primary school class.

    • Scientific creationism

      Yet another subject is all religious ideas on the formation of life and the creation of the Universe, they generally make approximations not supported by logic.

      From a philosophical point of view, we cannot see any difference between whether the world was born 6000 years ago, or a few billion years ago. The creative element is there in both cases with an exemplary singularity.

    • Immortality

      Another example of nature of life and human race is the yearning or hope for immortality; reflected in this case by the triumph of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.

      Of course, it does not matter if it is incompatible with Quantum Mechanics, the theory of inflation or the most basic logic one could possibly imagine. In fact, it is even incompatible with quantum logic!

    Despite mentioning these religion-related aspects as scientific weaknesses in certain theories, we would like to make it clear that we understand why they exist. Many people believe that there is something different or something that the laws of Physics cannot explain; it is spirituality in generic sense, or more simply: Love.

This position is not conservative in Cosmology; it would be almost impossible to fit such a position with proposals of change presented in this book. It is simply convenient to distinguish between reasonable changes and changes that aim to justify the lack of normal logic or common sense itself, such as quantum logic.

It is also not necessary to be a radical skeptic to be uncomfortable with general acceptance of incompatible theories.

After having discussed philosophy of formation and origin of the Universe, let us briefly see evolution of the Universe independently from the observer.

We would like to call attention to aspects or characteristics of the Universe that would not alter due to a philosophical change towards in the more intuitive paradigm of Global Physics.

Among those characteristics are the non-imaginary effects currently explained by Modern Physics.

  • Increase of mass with velocity.

  • The orbit of Mercury

  • Change in angular velocity of light or gravitational lensing effect

  • Velocity of light is constant, though this has many conditions that would make it variable if not maintained.

  • Alterations in the atomic clocks, as they will continue to alter by mechanical effects of the global aether, this may be due to its displacement, its longitudinal tension, tension of longitudinal curvature, or velocity of the mass.

  • The origin of the Universe as a great explosion, or Big Bang, though this may have been the origin of just part of it –Small Bang.

  • Electrons will continue revolving around the atomic nucleus in the typical Dance of the Wavons.

  • The members of the Inquisition will continue to be inquisitive, just somewhat less skeptical.

  • Etc.

After all, it would not surprise us if current maps of the Universe were somewhat confused, rather like the maps of the Mediterranean in Ancient Greece.

The most important aspect, however, is that reasoning will become much more powerful and it will go back to be intuitive and comprehensible.