Based on radioactive phenomena (weak force), Georges Lemaître conceives, as soon as 1927, the primeval universe as a “unique super-dense quantum”, whose disintegration gave birth to all the current compone...Based on radioactive phenomena (weak force), Georges Lemaître conceives, as soon as 1927, the primeval universe as a “unique super-dense quantum”, whose disintegration gave birth to all the current components of the universe [1] [2]. Using quantum mechanics, he proposes to explain the origins of the world from the point of view of quantum theory. He believes to find in the cosmic rays the manifestation of the initial fragmentation. However, regardless of the adopted cosmology, the hypothesis of the primeval atom (cold big bang) had no equation to support it and was not retained. Like all other cosmologists, he fell back on the Friedmann-Einstein equation with a repulsive cosmological constant which, according to supernova observations at the end of the millennium, propels expansion towards infinity. We juxtapose our equation of “quantum cosmology” to this equation of relativistic cosmology. We have already proposed this equation in an earlier paper [3], which has its source in quantum mechanics and fits Lemaître’s hypothesis of the “primeval atom”. It’s an equation in which the concept of matter-space-time is mathematically connected;gravitation and electromagnetism are also bound by space-time. A mechanism is described showing how velocity, time, distance, matter and energy, are correlated. We are led to ascertain that gravity and electricity are two distinct manifestations of a single underlying process: electrogravitation. For the first time, the cosmological time, considered as a real physical object, is integrated into a “cosmological equation” which makes coherent what we know regarding the time (its origin, its flow…), the matter and the space. Moreover, the equation indicates a constantly decelerated expansion. The concentration of the material medium and the importance of the decreasing energy of the vacuum contribute to the progressive increase of the positive pressure which becomes responsible for the increasing deceleration of the expansion. Does this mean that our equation leads us inevitably to the hypothesis of the primeval atom for the whole cosmos? Certainly not, since our model includes both the hot Gamow model and the cold Lemaître model. The term “dynamic evolution” (used in the beginning by specialists for big bang models) is appropriate for our model since there is both an explosive origin and, throughout the expansion, a disintegration of a hyper-dense matter. The discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation has confirmed the hot big bang model that Gamow and his team have achieved. The predicted light prevailed over the primitive cosmic rays (particles) suggested by Lemaitre. Nevertheless, we think that Lemaitre was also right. The so-called big bang theory (singular cataclysmic explosion), in addition to not meeting basic criteria of science, is contradicted by several observations that are ignored. For example, the work of Armenian astronomers has convinced us that the origin of cosmic particles results not only from supernova explosions, but also from the partition of radio galaxies, not only from the death of the world, but also from their birth.展开更多
Where did matter in the universe come from? Where does the mass of matter come from? Particle physicists have used the knowledge acquired in matter and space to imagine a standard scenario to provide satisfactory answ...Where did matter in the universe come from? Where does the mass of matter come from? Particle physicists have used the knowledge acquired in matter and space to imagine a standard scenario to provide satisfactory answers to these major questions. The dominant thought to explain the absence of antimatter in nature is that we had an initially symmetrical universe made of matter and antimatter and that a dissymmetry would have sufficed for more matter having constituted our world than antimatter. This dissymmetry would arise from an anomaly in the number of neutrinos resulting from nuclear reactions which suggest the existence of a new type of titanic neutrino who would exceed the possibilities of the standard model and would justify the absence of antimatter in the macrocosm. We believe that another scenario could better explain why we observe only matter. It involves the validation of the negative energy solution of the Dirac equation, itself derived from the Einstein energy equation. The theory of Relation describes a negative energy ocean with the creation of real particle/antiparticle pairs. The origin of the masses of the particles would come from this ocean. A physical mechanism would allow their separation in the opposite direction and, therefore, the matter would be enriched at the expense of the ocean. The matter would be favored without resorting to negation or annihilation of negative energy, without the need for a CP (the behavioral difference between particle and antiparticle) violation that would be responsible for matter/antimatter asymmetry in the universe. And without the savior contribution of an undetectable obese neutrino: his search appears to us more a desperate act towards an “ultra-massive catastrophe” than a real effort to try to discover what really happened.展开更多
文摘Based on radioactive phenomena (weak force), Georges Lemaître conceives, as soon as 1927, the primeval universe as a “unique super-dense quantum”, whose disintegration gave birth to all the current components of the universe [1] [2]. Using quantum mechanics, he proposes to explain the origins of the world from the point of view of quantum theory. He believes to find in the cosmic rays the manifestation of the initial fragmentation. However, regardless of the adopted cosmology, the hypothesis of the primeval atom (cold big bang) had no equation to support it and was not retained. Like all other cosmologists, he fell back on the Friedmann-Einstein equation with a repulsive cosmological constant which, according to supernova observations at the end of the millennium, propels expansion towards infinity. We juxtapose our equation of “quantum cosmology” to this equation of relativistic cosmology. We have already proposed this equation in an earlier paper [3], which has its source in quantum mechanics and fits Lemaître’s hypothesis of the “primeval atom”. It’s an equation in which the concept of matter-space-time is mathematically connected;gravitation and electromagnetism are also bound by space-time. A mechanism is described showing how velocity, time, distance, matter and energy, are correlated. We are led to ascertain that gravity and electricity are two distinct manifestations of a single underlying process: electrogravitation. For the first time, the cosmological time, considered as a real physical object, is integrated into a “cosmological equation” which makes coherent what we know regarding the time (its origin, its flow…), the matter and the space. Moreover, the equation indicates a constantly decelerated expansion. The concentration of the material medium and the importance of the decreasing energy of the vacuum contribute to the progressive increase of the positive pressure which becomes responsible for the increasing deceleration of the expansion. Does this mean that our equation leads us inevitably to the hypothesis of the primeval atom for the whole cosmos? Certainly not, since our model includes both the hot Gamow model and the cold Lemaître model. The term “dynamic evolution” (used in the beginning by specialists for big bang models) is appropriate for our model since there is both an explosive origin and, throughout the expansion, a disintegration of a hyper-dense matter. The discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation has confirmed the hot big bang model that Gamow and his team have achieved. The predicted light prevailed over the primitive cosmic rays (particles) suggested by Lemaitre. Nevertheless, we think that Lemaitre was also right. The so-called big bang theory (singular cataclysmic explosion), in addition to not meeting basic criteria of science, is contradicted by several observations that are ignored. For example, the work of Armenian astronomers has convinced us that the origin of cosmic particles results not only from supernova explosions, but also from the partition of radio galaxies, not only from the death of the world, but also from their birth.
文摘Where did matter in the universe come from? Where does the mass of matter come from? Particle physicists have used the knowledge acquired in matter and space to imagine a standard scenario to provide satisfactory answers to these major questions. The dominant thought to explain the absence of antimatter in nature is that we had an initially symmetrical universe made of matter and antimatter and that a dissymmetry would have sufficed for more matter having constituted our world than antimatter. This dissymmetry would arise from an anomaly in the number of neutrinos resulting from nuclear reactions which suggest the existence of a new type of titanic neutrino who would exceed the possibilities of the standard model and would justify the absence of antimatter in the macrocosm. We believe that another scenario could better explain why we observe only matter. It involves the validation of the negative energy solution of the Dirac equation, itself derived from the Einstein energy equation. The theory of Relation describes a negative energy ocean with the creation of real particle/antiparticle pairs. The origin of the masses of the particles would come from this ocean. A physical mechanism would allow their separation in the opposite direction and, therefore, the matter would be enriched at the expense of the ocean. The matter would be favored without resorting to negation or annihilation of negative energy, without the need for a CP (the behavioral difference between particle and antiparticle) violation that would be responsible for matter/antimatter asymmetry in the universe. And without the savior contribution of an undetectable obese neutrino: his search appears to us more a desperate act towards an “ultra-massive catastrophe” than a real effort to try to discover what really happened.
