Question My "Refreshing Universe" Theory

Jan 10, 2021
1
0
10
Before I get started, let me say that I am not a scientist (that much I’m sure will be clear soon) but I am college educated in Aviation Science and I do like solving puzzles. About a year ago, I randomly started thinking about why the universe has perplexing issues with accelerating expansion and had what felt like an epiphany. It has been in the back of my mind since and I’ve been too short on time/and or courage to ask knowledgeable people their thoughts, but here I am now. My “epiphany” was that if the universe were sphere shaped and the Big Bang happened at the “North Pole” of the sphere and everything traveled south, then it would appear that different sectors of the universe had accelerating expansion of different rates. As matter traveled south across the Space-Sphere, it would generally spread out (as the lines of longitude got further apart) until the matter reached the equator and then generally start condensing again in the “Southern Hemisphere”. This spreading-out on the way to the “Equator” would cause greater expansion in some areas than others. There would, of course, be velocity due to the Big Bang but also apparent accelerating expansion due to travel across the sphere. If the Big Bang was strong enough to push enough matter past the equator of the Space-Sphere, then all matter would continue moving (due to gravitational pull of increasing mass in the Southern Hemisphere) until eventually reaching the next point of singularity near the “South Pole”. Matter that is behind us and still closer to the location of the Big Bang would appear to be accelerating away from us but that is only because we are accelerating at an exponential rate towards the “Equator” because we are closer to it and drawn more by the gravitation pull of matter that has started to condense in the “Southern Hemisphere”. If we can’t observe any galaxies getting systematically closer to each other in any sectors of the universe (beyond the rationale of gravity), then this could just mean that we are still in the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere isn’t yet within our observable range. I know that background radiation has been triangulated to show the universe is flat in some studies, but my question is: If we can’t see the fabric of space then why would the fabric of space affect measurements made with equipment that mimics functionalities of human vision? Unless that equipment can see the fabric of space, why would the fabric of space alter its measurements in any way?

Obviously gravity would play into the movements of matter and galaxies. And gravity is the next topic that came to mind after my thoughts on space as a sphere shape. Unlike space we are able to indirectly observe gravity-induced travel all the time. We can watch an object drop to the ground. Likewise, we can indirectly observe gravity in the formations of black holes. Like I said, space could be sphere shaped, and matter travels in one direction towards the next point of singularity located at the pole opposite to the Big Bang. Is it possible that gravity is a dimension also and that matter is traveling towards the core of the sphere, in a way, to get to the next point of singularity as well. Imagine a gopher, on Earth, left the North Pole to walk to the South Pole. But, he decided he liked digging too much to just travel across the surface of the Earth. Every bit further he traveled south, he also dug deeper into the Earth (vector along Z-axis) as he kept traveling. Imagine he dug at such a rate that when had ultimately traveled about 8,000 miles (diameter of Earth) in a Y-axis vector he also had dug enough in the Z-axis that he ended up popping out of the ground at the North Pole where he started. Is it possible that space and gravity interact in such a way that matter loops back around to the previous point of the Big Bang? Galaxies that started out with more matter would “dig” more with all their mass and may initially travel more in the digging direction than across latitude lines but eventually they would traverse the same amount of both space and the gravity-dimension. Their excess mass would create a greater pull between them and the matter in the Southern Hemisphere would accelerate more in the Southerly direction. Perhaps this is why we can't observe black holes directly. Perhaps it’s not the gravitational impact on light, but rather, things within the black hole are just farther away than we realize and the objects are beyond the range of our instruments.

The gravity due to local masses and the gravity due to condensing matter in the Southern Hemisphere could compete in such a way as to maintain a balance where any bit of matter reaches the end of the space axis and the end of the gravity axis at the same time.

It’s kind of mind-bending to think about and difficult to explain in a perfect way. But I suppose that is the nature of dimensions that we can’t see. Two very different things that both work in concert to produce the end result of all matter ending up back where it started. (I also think that when you’re in a black hole it just looks like a normal part of the universe, whereas, viewed from a black hole, the Milky Way may appear to be nothing but gas clouds, due to relativity.) Is it possible this convergence of matter happens (through both the space and gravity dimension) and then there is another Big Bang which means we have a “Refreshing Universe” on a loop?

Thinking on these ideas led me down a rabbit hole of other concepts that all seemed to connect. From the working of black holes, to the rise and collapse of societies, spirituality, human health, and even to why we yawn. It seems to connect to the concept of information and energy being the same thing (I’m aware this has been proposed by many others). It made me think there could truly be a mirror universe running in reverse so that “everything”, “the opposite of everything” and “nothing” could all exist simultaneously. Sort of like “-1+1=0”. One and its opposite, together, are the same as nothing. “Zero” and the “Negative One plus Positive One” are seemingly very different but also very much the same. They both have their own truth even though they contradict each other in a way. Similarly, I think it’s possible that reality creates perception and perception creates reality. They are seemingly opposite ideas but both true. And perhaps, like the measurable “refresh rate” of human visual perception, the universe may have a measurable “refresh rate”. Perhaps the refresh rate of structures is inversely related to the amount of information that is being perceived and/or the complexity of the structure. Human visual perception has a quick refresh rate. The universe may refresh at an unfathomably slow rate.

I don’t want to get too verbose on these extraneous ideas and their connections to my core ideas of both space and gravity being a dimension. I believe that there could be multiple seemingly opposite ways to understand and perceive space and gravity, but can you help and tell me if my proposed way to understand space and gravity is reasonable? I appreciate your gentle commentary. I do hope there is truth to this. If there was a scientific way to prove that the universe is a giant act of perception, then that would mean that we humans have purpose. It would mean that our rise to consciousness and resulting perception (which we have some control over) is a manifestation of the universe’s ultimate purpose: Perception. Perhaps the universe is simultaneously creating itself and perceiving itself much like we humans do. It could mean that our human perception ultimately affects the destiny of the entirety of the universe. It would mean that spirituality and science could co-exist… Your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Jan 27, 2020
122
50
680
Before I get started, let me say that I am not a scientist (that much I’m sure will be clear soon) but I am college educated in Aviation Science and I do like solving puzzles. About a year ago, I randomly started thinking about why the universe has perplexing issues with accelerating expansion and had what felt like an epiphany. It has been in the back of my mind since and I’ve been too short on time/and or courage to ask knowledgeable people their thoughts, but here I am now. My “epiphany” was that if the universe were sphere shaped and the Big Bang happened at the “North Pole” of the sphere and everything traveled south, then it would appear that different sectors of the universe had accelerating expansion of different rates. As matter traveled south across the Space-Sphere, it would generally spread out (as the lines of longitude got further apart) until the matter reached the equator and then generally start condensing again in the “Southern Hemisphere”. This spreading-out on the way to the “Equator” would cause greater expansion in some areas than others. There would, of course, be velocity due to the Big Bang but also apparent accelerating expansion due to travel across the sphere. If the Big Bang was strong enough to push enough matter past the equator of the Space-Sphere, then all matter would continue moving (due to gravitational pull of increasing mass in the Southern Hemisphere) until eventually reaching the next point of singularity near the “South Pole”. Matter that is behind us and still closer to the location of the Big Bang would appear to be accelerating away from us but that is only because we are accelerating at an exponential rate towards the “Equator” because we are closer to it and drawn more by the gravitation pull of matter that has started to condense in the “Southern Hemisphere”. If we can’t observe any galaxies getting systematically closer to each other in any sectors of the universe (beyond the rationale of gravity), then this could just mean that we are still in the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere isn’t yet within our observable range. I know that background radiation has been triangulated to show the universe is flat in some studies, but my question is: If we can’t see the fabric of space then why would the fabric of space affect measurements made with equipment that mimics functionalities of human vision? Unless that equipment can see the fabric of space, why would the fabric of space alter its measurements in any way?

Obviously gravity would play into the movements of matter and galaxies. And gravity is the next topic that came to mind after my thoughts on space as a sphere shape. Unlike space we are able to indirectly observe gravity-induced travel all the time. We can watch an object drop to the ground. Likewise, we can indirectly observe gravity in the formations of black holes. Like I said, space could be sphere shaped, and matter travels in one direction towards the next point of singularity located at the pole opposite to the Big Bang. Is it possible that gravity is a dimension also and that matter is traveling towards the core of the sphere, in a way, to get to the next point of singularity as well. Imagine a gopher, on Earth, left the North Pole to walk to the South Pole. But, he decided he liked digging too much to just travel across the surface of the Earth. Every bit further he traveled south, he also dug deeper into the Earth (vector along Z-axis) as he kept traveling. Imagine he dug at such a rate that when had ultimately traveled about 8,000 miles (diameter of Earth) in a Y-axis vector he also had dug enough in the Z-axis that he ended up popping out of the ground at the North Pole where he started. Is it possible that space and gravity interact in such a way that matter loops back around to the previous point of the Big Bang? Galaxies that started out with more matter would “dig” more with all their mass and may initially travel more in the digging direction than across latitude lines but eventually they would traverse the same amount of both space and the gravity-dimension. Their excess mass would create a greater pull between them and the matter in the Southern Hemisphere would accelerate more in the Southerly direction. Perhaps this is why we can't observe black holes directly. Perhaps it’s not the gravitational impact on light, but rather, things within the black hole are just farther away than we realize and the objects are beyond the range of our instruments.

The gravity due to local masses and the gravity due to condensing matter in the Southern Hemisphere could compete in such a way as to maintain a balance where any bit of matter reaches the end of the space axis and the end of the gravity axis at the same time.

It’s kind of mind-bending to think about and difficult to explain in a perfect way. But I suppose that is the nature of dimensions that we can’t see. Two very different things that both work in concert to produce the end result of all matter ending up back where it started. (I also think that when you’re in a black hole it just looks like a normal part of the universe, whereas, viewed from a black hole, the Milky Way may appear to be nothing but gas clouds, due to relativity.) Is it possible this convergence of matter happens (through both the space and gravity dimension) and then there is another Big Bang which means we have a “Refreshing Universe” on a loop?

Thinking on these ideas led me down a rabbit hole of other concepts that all seemed to connect. From the working of black holes, to the rise and collapse of societies, spirituality, human health, and even to why we yawn. It seems to connect to the concept of information and energy being the same thing (I’m aware this has been proposed by many others). It made me think there could truly be a mirror universe running in reverse so that “everything”, “the opposite of everything” and “nothing” could all exist simultaneously. Sort of like “-1+1=0”. One and its opposite, together, are the same as nothing. “Zero” and the “Negative One plus Positive One” are seemingly very different but also very much the same. They both have their own truth even though they contradict each other in a way. Similarly, I think it’s possible that reality creates perception and perception creates reality. They are seemingly opposite ideas but both true. And perhaps, like the measurable “refresh rate” of human visual perception, the universe may have a measurable “refresh rate”. Perhaps the refresh rate of structures is inversely related to the amount of information that is being perceived and/or the complexity of the structure. Human visual perception has a quick refresh rate. The universe may refresh at an unfathomably slow rate.

I don’t want to get too verbose on these extraneous ideas and their connections to my core ideas of both space and gravity being a dimension. I believe that there could be multiple seemingly opposite ways to understand and perceive space and gravity, but can you help and tell me if my proposed way to understand space and gravity is reasonable? I appreciate your gentle commentary. I do hope there is truth to this. If there was a scientific way to prove that the universe is a giant act of perception, then that would mean that we humans have purpose. It would mean that our rise to consciousness and resulting perception (which we have some control over) is a manifestation of the universe’s ultimate purpose: Perception. Perhaps the universe is simultaneously creating itself and perceiving itself much like we humans do. It could mean that our human perception ultimately affects the destiny of the entirety of the universe. It would mean that spirituality and science could co-exist… Your thoughts?
***

Let me try to answer what appears to me to be your salient question: "...why would the fabric of space alter its measurements in any way?"

The problem, or issue, has been shown to be the actual expansion of space itself due to the effects of dark energy upon it.

The cosmological constant was first offered by Albert Einstein, who was looking for a way to give solutions to the equation of the static universe while using it to compensate for gravity. It was proved very soon that Einstein’s static universe was unstable because the heterogeneity quickly led to the uncontrolled expansion of the universe. The equilibrium is unstable, so if the universe could expand, the energy that would be released would go into the void causing more expansion. Astronomer Edwin Hubble's galactic observations (Hubble's 1929 paper, "A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-Galactic Nebulae," would change astronomy forever) showed that the universe was expanding and not static and, like a movie, if you ran it backwards everything would become closer the farther back in time you ran the galactic "film."

Alan Guth, in 1970, proposed the existence of a field with negative pressure that could lead to an early cosmic expansion he called 'inflation'. This inflation postulated that there were repulsive forces similar to dark energy resulting in the expansion of the universe. The term dark energy was given by Michel Turner (https://www.ihmc.us/stemtalk/episode-31/ ), and the first proof of energy came from all the observations that had been made about supernova expansion, a theory confirmed by the American, Saul Perlmutter.

In 1998, two separate teams of astronomers observing distant type 1a supernovas (one led by Saul Perlmutter and the other by the Australians Nick Suntzeff and Brian Schmidt), which can be used as standard candles across space-time, made parallel discoveries which threw the scientific community into shock, and which also had important implications for the expanding universe and its critical mass.

The faintness of the type 1a supernova explosions seemed to indicate that they were actually further away from the Earth than had been expected, suggesting that the universe’s expansion had actually speeded up (not slowed) since the stars had exploded. Contrary to all expectations, therefore, the expansion of the universe actually seems to be wildly speeding up - we live in a universe where the space between galaxies is expanding ever faster!

The only thing that could be accelerating the expansion (i.e. more than countering the braking force of the mutual gravitational pull of all the stars in all the galaxies and clusters of galaxies) is space itself, suggesting that perhaps it is not empty after all but contains some strange “dark energy” or “antigravity” currently unknown to science. Thus, what appears to be a nearly complete vacuum actually contains energy in some currently unknown way. In fact, initial calculations (backed up by more recent research such as that on the growth of huge galaxy clusters by NASA's Chandra x-ray space telescope and in binary galaxies by Christian Marinoni and Adeline Buzzi of the University of Provence) suggest that fully 73 - 74% of the universe consists of this unfathomable dark energy.

Estimated distribution of dark energy, dark matter and normal matter in the universe - click for larger version

(Click for a larger version)
Estimated distribution of dark energy, dark matter and normal matter in the universe
(Source: Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy)​


If 74% of the total mass of the universe consists of dark energy, and about 85% of the remaining actual matter (representing about 22% of the total) is dark matter, then this suggests that only around 4% of the universe consists of what we think of as "normal", everyday, atom-based matter such as stars, intergalactic gas, etc. As of 2013, based on cosmic microwave background radiation data from the Planck satellite, the latest figures are closer to 68%, 27% and 5% respectively. Nowadays, this is generally accepted as the "standard model" of the make-up of the universe. So, for all our advances in physics and astronomy, it appears that we can still only see, account for, and explain a small proportion of the totality of our universe.

Incorporating dark energy into our model of the universe would neatly account for the "missing" three-quarters of the universe required to cause the observed acceleration in the revised Big Bang theory. It also makes the map of the early universe produced by the WMAP probe fit well with the currently observed universe. Carlos Frenk's beautiful 3D computer models of the universe (http://virgo.dur.ac.uk/Page_Projects/Projects/index.html ) resemble remarkably closely the actual observed forms in the real universe (taking dark matter and dark energy into account), even if not all scientists are convinced by them.

Alternative theories, such as Mordehai Milgrom's idea of "variable gravity*", are as yet not viewed as fully developed and would have the effect of radically modifying all of physics from Newton to Einstein onwards. So dark energy remains the most widely accepted option.

Further corroboration of some kind of energy operating in the apparent vacuum of space comes from the Casimir effect, named after the 1948 experiments of Dutch physicists Hendrik Casimir and Dirk Polder. This shows how smooth uncharged metallic plates can move due to energy fluctuations in the vacuum of empty space, and it is hypothesized that dark energy, generated by space itself, may offer a similar kind of vacuum fluctuation.

Unfortunately, like dark matter, we still do not know exactly what this dark energy is, how it is generated or how it operates. It appears to produce some kind of a negative pressure which is distributed relatively homogeneously in space, and thereby exerts a kind of cosmic repulsion on the universe, driving the galaxies ever further apart. As the space between the galaxies inexorably recedes, the effects of dark energy appears to increase, suggesting that the universe is likely to continue expanding forever.

Interestingly, astronomers have been able to shed some more light on the motion of our own solar system through the Milky Way, using the super precise Gaia satellite data. More specifically, scientists measured the acceleration of our solar system relative to the movement of distant galaxies captured by the cutting-edge Gaia observatory.

It was discovered that our home solar system is accelerating at a rate of 0.23 nanometers per second, and that this was altering the trajectory of the Sun and its planets by roughly one atom per second, which amounts to a deviation of 115 km (71.4 miles) over the course of one Earth year. This is the first time that the curvature of our Solar System’s path through space has ever been measured, which amounts to a deviation of 115 km (71.4 miles) over the course of one Earth year. This is the first time that the curvature of space in our Solar System’s path has ever been measured.**

Although no-one has any idea of what dark energy may actually be, it appears to be unsettlingly similar to the force of cosmic repulsion or “cosmological constant” discarded by Einstein back in 1929, and this remains the most likely contender, even if its specific properties and effects are still under intense discussion. The size of the cosmological constant needed to describe the accelerating expansion of our current universe is very small indeed, around 10-122 in Planck units. Indeed, the very closeness of this to zero (without it actually being zero) has worried many scientists. But even a tiny change to this value would result in a very different universe indeed, and one in which life, and even the stars and galaxies we take for granted, could not have existed.

Out of a potentially infinite number of parallel, each with slightly different properties and dark energy profiles, it is not so unlikely that ours just happens to be one with a dark energy that allows for the development of stars and even life, an example of the anthropic principle.

Representation of the Higgs mechanism and particle - click for larger version

(Click for a larger version)
Representation of the Higgs mechanism and particle
(Original Source N/A: library.thinkquest.org/C004707/
wmhm.php3)​


There has been some speculation that dark energy may be connected to the still little understood Higgs field. According to the theoretical work of the English physicist J. Peter Higgs and others in the 1960s, the vacuum of space is actually permeated by what has become known as a Higgs field. It is the interactions with this field that gives the other elementary particles their mass, as it stops them from flying off at the speed of light by clustering around them and impeding their progress.

Excitations of the Higgs field form particles known as Higgs bosons, an essential component of the current Standard Model of particle physics. Up until 2012, though, such a particle remained entirely theoretical and unproven. But experiments in 2012, at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, were finally able to create and isolate a particle which gives every indication of being the elusive Higgs boson, although more detailed tests are still ongoing.

Another possible candidate for dark energy arises from the theoretical work on supersymmetry, which effectively doubles the number of elementary particles in the current Standard Model with the postulation of massive unknown “super-partners” for each particle, whose spin differs by ½. Yet other candidates are so-called “quintessence” and so-called “phantom energy”, although these ideas are essentially still at the hypothesis stage.

Neither is it clear whether the effects of dark energy are constant or changing over time, although research using data from the Hubble Space Telescope suggests that it was already at work boosting the expansion of the universe as much as nine billion years ago.

* Mordehai Migrom "variable gravity": https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.7661.pdf
** Gaia satellite data shows our solar system is accelerating: https://newatlas.com/space/esa-gaia-data-milky-way/

See: https://www.euston96.com/en/dark-energy/
See: https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_bigbang_accelerating.html
See: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/12/02/could-dark-energy-wind-up-destroying-the-universe/?sh=29055277117f

We do live in an epoch of our universe where star stuff, us, can reach out and see, in wavelengths beyond our own eyesight, the wonders of our universe. At the same time we can grasp the majesty of the cosmos as well as comprehend the dangers and the terrors which exist beyond the relative quiescence of our solar system, our earth - moon system, and the protective cocoon of our planet's magnetic field; all as we drift in the habitable zone of a long life G-2 star.

We are stardust and water, contemplating forever. And we can write poetry uniting our innermost thoughts and dreams with the thousands of familiar nightly stellar lights, of fog, the eternal moon, ephemeral waves of dew and fishing. I find it beautiful.

wynken m parish.jpg

The old moon laughed and sang a song,
As they rocked in the wooden shoe;
And the wind that sped them all night long
Ruffled the waves of dew;
The little stars were the herring-fish
That lived in the beautiful sea.
"Now cast your nets wherever you wish,—
Never afraid are we!"
So cried the stars to the fishermen three,
Wynken,
Blynken,
And Nod.***

*** https://poets.org/poem/wynken-blynken-and-nod

Hartmann352
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY