ISU (Infinite Spongy Universe) Model - SciForums Update 2018

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by quantum_wave, Jan 9, 2018.

  1. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    A question: How do you view the possibility of something from nothing? Do you consider it possible, or impossible, from the standpoint of your personal logic?

    If the impossibility of something coming from nothing satisfies your logic, you might feel comfortable with the ISU, because “something from nothing” is not possible in the ISU model of cosmology, a model specifically for layman science enthusiasts.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I asked the previous question because the ISU is not a something from nothing model. Everything has always existed, and the three infinities of space, time and energy are axiomatic, not so much as self-evident, but from the stand point that they are necessary in order to invoke the ISU model.

    Here is a video that leads into the next argument for how considering the infinities can shape your view of cosmology (and thoughts on dark matter);

    See minute 2:19

    “and we have had to sort of invoke some


    tooth fairies to keep things sensible.


    One of those is dark matter.”

    Watch it and think about how the idea of dark matter might be a consequence of the finiteness of the consensus model, and if so, how the infinities of the ISU can resolve the dark matter question.

    To be continued …
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Did you view the video and get the gist of why finiteness of the cosmological model might be related to our current lack of understanding about dark matter?

    Let’s back up. Members and guestsmight have read earlier ISU posts that talked about things like high energy density spots at the convergences of gravitational waves, and in which it was posited that matter is quantum. It is simple logic in the ISU; matter is composed of energy in quantum increments, quanta are composed of high energy density spots at the convergences of gravitational waves that carry energy through space, and gravity waves have an infinite reach.

    The quanta that make up matter are composed of the convergences of many tiny, seemingly insignificant gravitational waves (the oscillating background) that individually carry energy through space and consequently fill all space. When there are a sufficient number and magnitude of their wave fronts intersecting at a given point in space, that constitutes the formation of one of those quanta; perhaps billions or even trillions of those quanta (high energy density spots) might be required to establish the presence of a single proton.

    All of that is going on in the infinitesimal realm, below the threshold of observability, but all infinite space has those convergences going on in it, though not in sufficient amounts to produce particles in all space. Huge numbers of convergences compose a single quantum increment of mass, and so each sub-quantum individual convergence, and the resulting momentary high energy density spot that is composed of many of those convergences, involves a hint of mass. On the basis that space is filled with gravitational wave energy coming and going in all directions at all points, space literally has mass in the ISU.

    Since all space is filled with those ongoing convergences, and the inner space of galaxies has a much higher concentration of them, why do we even need dark matter to explain the gravitational anomalies at the outer reaches of galaxies? It is caused by the presence of the hint of mass in each of those wave convergences, each emitting a gravitational third wave of energy that has an infinite reach.

    Combine that with the inverse square law, and there is your invisible dark matter. The gist is that all of the space occupied by the entire galaxy is fat with those sub-quanta, and though the sub-quanta are not visible, in aggregate they add a significant amount of mass to the gravitational potential, looking in from the spiral arms.

    Comment freely

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Just Go ahead and read the following quoted material from this “Whisper” article from Wired,, where the conclusion is that the early universe was much colder than predicted by the standard model. Also, remember back to the video linked in reply #22 where the point was mentioned at minute 02:24, “… we have had to sort of invoke some tooth fairies to keep things sensible; one of those is dark matter”.

    Both of those links support the ISU alternative model of an infinite big bang arena landscape that defeats entropy, and supports an eternal past, via that multiple big bang arena landscape.

    From the “Whispers” article, you might note the evidence that the researchers site to come to the conclusion that the early universe might have been much colder, sooner, than the standard model predicts. It has to do with the characteristics of the temperature readings surrounding the earliest stars, as indicated by the size and intensity of thermalized regions currently observed around those early stars.

    Quote from, “The Source of a Whisper”

    “The day after Bowman contacted Barkana to tell him about the surprising EDGES signal, Barkana drove with his family to his in-laws’ house. During the drive, he said, he contemplated this signal, telling his wife about the interesting puzzle Bowman had handed him.

    Bowman and the EDGES team had been probing the neutral hydrogen gas that filled the universe during the first few hundred million years after the Big Bang. This gas tended to absorb ambient light, leading to what cosmologists poetically call the universe’s “dark ages.” Although the cosmos was filled with a diffuse ambient light from the cosmic microwave background (CMB)—the so-called afterglow of the Big Bang—this neutral gas absorbed it at specific wavelengths. EDGES searched for this absorption pattern.

    As stars began to turn on in the universe, their energy would have heated the gas. Eventually the gas reached a high enough temperature that it no longer absorbed CMB radiation. The absorption signal disappeared, and the dark ages ended.

    The absorption signal as measured by EDGES contains an immense amount of information. As the absorption pattern traveled across the expanding universe, the signal stretched. Astronomers can use that stretch to infer how long the signal has been traveling, and thus, when the first stars flicked on. In addition, the width of the detected signal corresponds to the amount of time that the gas was absorbing the CMB light. And the intensity of the signal—how much light was absorbed—relates to the temperature of the gas and the amount of light that was floating around at the time.

    Many researchers find this final characteristic the most intriguing. “It’s a much stronger absorption than we had thought possible,” said Steven Furlanetto, a cosmologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who has examined what the EDGES data would mean for the formation of the earliest galaxies.” (end of quoted material)

    I make a reference to Tesla’s interpretation of the stationary wave nature of the transmission of lightening through the earth, combined with Oliver Lodge’s demonstration that electromagnetic oscillations can resonate at fixed frequencies along a conductor. Those are examples that relate the ISU’s speculation about the presence of an oscillating wave energy background that occupies all space mentioned throughout my threads.

    By its nature, that background energy would be a self-perpetuating, oscillating foundational wave energy background that assists the propagation of all energy waves, not just through space, but through any wave energy density environment, short of the current descriptions of the nature of blackholes.

    Gravitational wave energy is emitted and absorbed by matter in the ISU, and it is the oscillating energy in the background that advances the more meaningful gravitational wave energy of the cosmic microwave energy background. That foundational oscillating background energy is a basic characteristic of an infinite multiple big bang arena landscape, perpetuated by an eternal history of big bang arena action. It points to a much colder environment during the early expansion of each big bang arena, and every wave intersection in that background produces a hint of mass.

    That hint of mass occurs everywhere in open space, but the gist is that it is more than a “hint” deep within the heart of galaxies, and adds up to what I referred to earlier as fat space within galaxies. That is the ISU speculation for what researchers are seeking, referred to as a "tooth fairy" in the video; an explanation for the effect that otherwise requires an as yet undetected source of dark energy.

    Thanks for reading; comment freely.
  8. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    I am wondering about the statement made by others occasionally that objects only radiate energy when they are accelerating, and I’m still pursuing answers about how that is dealt with in GR.

    I gathered from reading Isaacson’s biography of Einstein, that not long after Einstein had explained his as yet incomplete Entwurf equations on generalizing special relativity to Hilbert, Hilbert was said to have launched a feverish effort to come up with the correct formulations on his own; the race was on.

    During that period in 1915, Einstein’s found that his Entwurf equations didn’t actually account for rotation which he thought of as a form of relative motion. He also knew that there was a problem in the equations in regard to the orbit of Mercury. His realization was that the Entwurf equations were not covariant under a transformation that uniformly rotated the coordinate axes; which was a setback.

    He went into a period of working “horrendously intensely” as he referred to it. The result was new equations, and though not yet in final form, he applied them to what was known about the shift in Mercury’s orbit, and got the right answer, 43 arc-seconds per century which agreed with observations. That correct result confirmed his EFEs to himself, and the rest is history, lol.

    During the period of completing his equations, he said, “… Gravitation must play a fundamental role in the composition of matter, and that my own curiosity is interfering with my work”. Hilbert joked that physics was too complicated to be left to the physicists”. I find those statements a good motivation for the ideas that I put forward in my layman enthusiasts model of cosmology, the ISU, that invokes an infinite universe with a multiple big bang landscape, and an eternal past, suggesting the defeat of entropy on a grand scale, and including ideas about quantum gravity.

    As for my questions, logically, the calculation of relative motion of objects should include acceleration due to the effect of gravity, so I have been wondering how that portion of an object’s relative motion gets into Einstein’s calculations?

    At this point I am setting out to examine the results of a few DuckDuckGo searches (having abandoned Google search :shrug: ):

    Geodesics vs acceleration

    General Relativity and acceleration

    General Relativity and the tensors

    Certainly the answer to my questions will be there, and I will post it here.

    To be continued …
  9. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Reply #26

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Conclusion: GR includes acceleration, and it recognizes that not just matter, but energy in all forms has an influence on the motion of all objects in space. My conclusion is that in the grand scheme of spacetime, every object in space is in relative motion to every other object. In response to the statement mentioned in the last post, that only accelerating objects radiate energy, there is no case where an object is not experiencing acceleration. Feel free to object to that conclusion and post arguments to support a different case.

    When including all forms of energy in GR, the gravitational wave energy that is traversing open space counts too, as does the hint of mass that forms where convergences of gravitational waves form peaks. In fact, these peaks are the components of the “fat” space deep inside galaxies as mentioned in the recent posts about an ISU solution to the missing dark matter. Note that there are gravitational waves and wave convergences in varying densities happening everywhere, including in deep space between galaxies, and in the corridors of continuity between arenas for that matter. It all counts as energy that influences the motion of matter through space.

    The conclusion above is in accord with, and helps support the big picture of the ISU, which is presented as being consistent with the fact that GR includes matter and energy in all forms in the equations. GR is a comprehensive macro level field theory and does the best job yet of predicting the motion of objects. This is no new realization though, and supports the earlier stance, as mentioned back as early as in reply #18, that the ISU acknowledges the mathematics of GR as the most precise quantification of gravity yet.

    What differentiates the ISU from GR/BBT is that the ISU comes up with an alternative explanation for why the EFEs work so well. The math is the best yet, but instead of matter telling spacetime how to curve, and curved spacetime telling matter how to move, the ISU picture has to do with quantum level wave mechanics of quantum gravity. Quantum gravity is at the heart of the acknowledgement that there is a gravitational wave energy density profile of space, mentioned earlier, and throughout. In the ISU, objects follow the gravitational wave energy density profile of space, instead of following the geodesics that are characteristics of curved spacetime. In the ISU, all objects emit and absorb gravitational wave energy, as part of the micro process of quantum action, where wave-particles are composed of gravitational wave energy in quantum increments.

    The motion of objects through space in the ISU is consistent with the motion in GR, but seems more appropriately platformed than GR as we look into the future, where the platform of quantum gravity is likely to become the new norm. The discovery of gravitational waves gives support to GR, and fulfills Einsteins prediction, but also gives support to the ISU description of the wave-particle and quantum level wave-particle mechanics, including the inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave energy components of matter, from particles to blackholes, and even to whole arena waves that compose the landscape of the greater universe.

    Further support of the ISU comes from the hint of a greater universe, with adjacent big bang arenas beyond our own big bang arena, as implied by the famous discovery of the “cold spot” in the cosmic microwave background.

    The ISU also has going for it the fact that you don’t need the unsatisfying implication that the universe had a beginning, though BBT doesn’t actually address it directly or suggest any cause for such a beginning; in the ISU, the Big Bang was not only the start of our particular arena that occurred about 14 billion years ago, but our arena is one in the multiple big bang arena landscape of the greater universe. Therefore, the ISU does not need to invoke a beginning singularity out of nothing, or finite stretching space like Big Bang Theory has to do; it answers the question of the beginning of the universe with the proposition that there was no beginning; the universe has always existed. Accordingly, the ISU universe, and there is only one universe, features the three infinites (space, time, and energy) mentioned throughout the thread.

    To get to the ISU from BBT, you only need to follow some simple steps. Broaden your concept of the scope of the universe from a single finite expanding universe, to an infinite steady state universe that features a perpetual active big bang arena landscape, where the finite expanding big bang arenas like ours are commonplace. Expansion is the result of the force of energy density equalization, one of the two primary forces in the ISU, the other being quantum gravity. That view positions our expanding observable big bang arena as just one of a potentially infinite number of active big bang arenas whose expansion is playing out, governed by the macro process of arena action. Out there, arenas are viewed as huge expanding waves of matter and energy emerging from the big bang events, that then converge, overlap, and produce gravity induced big crunches in the overlap spaces; the crunches reach a capacity limit and collapse/bang into new expanding arenas. Each big bang arena across the landscape of the greater universe experiences those same preconditions, and they all have the same physics.

    The ISU also replaces eternal accelerating expansion, which offers only a narrow finite time period before the famous heat death of the universe that is predicted by GR will occur, replacing it with the defeat of entropy on a grand scale as big bang arena action perpetually plays out across infinite space and time. Our grand universe is continually hosting arenas that fill with galaxies, and galaxies that host stars with planets, and planets where life is generated and evolves.

    To be continued …
  10. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Reply #26

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    A copy of the book “Mass” by author Jim Baggott, a science writer, chemist and science/historian, published by the Oxford University Press, turned up in the local library science section last week and I grabbed it. It is pretty current layman level stuff on the topics of matter, mass, physics and cosmology.

    That book motivates me to follow up on the enthusiasm I have about the developments in the ISU dark matter scenario (the high energy density peaks at the convergences of gravitational waves that make for “fat” space deep within galaxies, accounting for the invisible missing mass). That speculation really seems to improve the overall internal consistency of the model; what I had proposed about dark matter earlier is pretty significantly modified now for the better.

    Let’s just jump in at Part 4, chapter 14 of Baggott's “Mass”, with a quote about dark matter, GR, and the standard model of particle physics: “Then there’s the puzzle of dark matter … which is detectible by virtue of its gravity but invisible to all forms of electromagnetic radiation. … None of the elementary building blocks of the standard model meet the requirements of dark matter. We have no idea what it is.” Further, “…there is no room in the standard model [of particle physics] for the ‘force’ of gravity, which is constructed from a set of quantum field theories.” So, “…GR handles large-scale behavior of mass-energy spacetime. QFT handles the colour-force, weak-force and electromagnetic interactions of atomic and sub-atomic particles. When we try to put the two theoretical structures together to create some kind of a unified theory that could do the work of both we find that they really don’t get along.”

    And that is why I do the ISU layman level contemplations; to speculate about a quantum mechanical solution, while we wait for the scientific community to reach a consensus (I refer to it as the “Big Wait”, lol).

    This series of posts will readdress the ISU cause of gravity, which is the quantum level solution that I have been talking about throughout the thread. When I have talked about it elsewhere, it seems that there is sometimes some confusion when I mention the process of quantum action, which is at the heart of the quantum gravity solution. Baggott makes a point in Part 3, chapter 9 about the Planck constant, so let me take the opportunity here to say, quantum action, and the quanta discussed as the quantum increments of matter, are not to be confused with the “quantum of action” in the Planck regime, i.e., the quanta I discuss as the increments that make up the presence of matter in the ISU are an order of magnitude smaller than the energy of Planck's constant. I’ll make the difference clearer in this series of posts.

    And I want to close the post by noting that Baggott, who makes a practice of putting a pertinent quote at the beginning of each chapter, used Einstein’s statement, “The mass of a body is a measure of its energy content” at the beginning of the chapter titled, “A Very Interesting Conclusion”. That is perfectly consistent with the statement in the ISU that particles are composed of gravitational wave energy in quantum increments, and the quanta that make up those increments are described as the energy peaks at the convergences of meaningful gravitational waves in and around the particle space, making up the particle’s standing wave pattern as the inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave energy courses through.

    It is my speculation that the wave energy mechanics at the quantum level that I refer to as Quantum Wave Cosmology, (QWC) of the Infinite Spongy Universe model, is a wave energy solution to quantum gravity and supports the mathematical calculation of the predicted motion of matter of the EFEs (GR’s way to handle the large-scale motion of macro objects).

    To be continued …
  11. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Reply #27

    Addressing the cause of gravity again might seem like overkill, but it is for my own benefit. The best way for me to accomplish the goal of putting my latest personal views of cosmology on the Internet, as I have been doing here for many years, is to readdress the various scenarios from time to time, and the upcoming rewrite of the cause of gravity in the ISU is one of those cases.

    The best place to start is with the role that gravity plays in the preconditions to the our own big bang arena. Every big bang event has the same preconditions across the infinite big bang arena landscape of space and energy.

    That type of “sameness” may be hard to accept if you are not used to thinking from the perspective of the three infinities of space, time, and energy, but the ISU model is derived by applying the three infinities axiomatically, along with the body of cosmological knowledge that a layman can gain over time.

    The application of all of that is done in a step by step fashion, where the logical starting point of the speculations would be the conclusion that our big bang had preconditions. That isn't so much of an alternative view in regard to GR/BBT, but it is just that the consensus cosmology doesn't address the cause of the Big Bang. My elaboration of those preconditions departs from GR/BBT and the Standard Model of particle physics quite significantly, at least in regard to the parts of both that just don't work together to yield a unified model. In the ISU model, those preconditions include an infinite and eternal big bang arena landscape where the process of arena action defeats entropy and puts an end to the current cosmological concept of the "heat death" of the universe which GR predicts will occur.

    The ISU model invokes a cosmological order to the universe that defeats the scenario of endless expansion, and in doing so, is seen to be a perpetual, steady state, multiple big bang arena landscape. It hosts ongoing conditions that assure life has the opportunity to be generated and evolve to free-willed, self-aware life forms, who contemplate the existence of the universe. In the model, the speculation is that intelligent life forms exist plentifully across all stretches of space and time.

    That may seem like quite a grandiose picture, difficult for one to get one’s arms around, but any scenario that doesn’t include the three infinities of space, time, and energy must fail. In that respect the ISU philosophy addresses the problem of infinite regression, i.e., the failure to arrive at a first cause, by invoking the philosophical answer that he universe has always existed, had no beginning.

    If the model you like doesn’t invoke the “always exited” explanation for the existence of the universe, you would find yourself having to either assume some unknown first cause as in BBT, or you are faced with having to make a choice between a limited list of possibilities for that first cause.

    Is it “God did it”? No, the Supernatural is excluded from the scientific method. Is it “Something from nothing”? No, that assumes the existence of “nothingness” and we have to invoke the saying that, “If at first there was nothing, then nothing could ever be”. You could simply conclude that the laws of nature are not invariant or eternal, but that position just avoids the question of first cause altogether. It may be as simple as a natural born-in proclivity on my part, but I conclude that the laws of nature are invariant and have been in effect over an infinite past, and that is the case in the ISU.

    Given the preconditions of an infinite and eternal universe, gravity plays a major role, and in the ISU model, the force of energy density equalization is always there in the mix of major forces along with gravity. Via the processes of arena action and quantum action, gravity is addressed on both the macro and micro scales.

    To be continued …
  12. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Reply #28

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The cause of gravity continued …

    I wrote this post and had to read it more than once or twice to be sure it covered the difficult territory I wanted to cover. It is admittedly hard to understand if considered completely from the consensus view; I am looking at it from the ISU perspective with differences from the consensus view that have been introduced throughout the thread. You are invited to comment freely as always.

    For talking purposes, we say that the energy that fills all space in our ~fourteen billion year old and expanding big bang arena, consists of about 4% detectible matter, 21% dark matter, and 75% dark energy.

    One problematic issue has to do with the energy of light in the EM spectrum. Based on a major departure from the consensus view, the energy of light in the ISU is broken down into two gravitational wave energy portions. One portion of that energy is in the form the photon wave-particles which are composed of gravitational wave energy in quantum increments, and the other is in the form of the spherically outflowing gravitational wave energy from the photon wave-particles.

    The two portions of the energy of light are what lead me to say that light in the ISU is not easily understood from the perspective of the consensus theory. To take a step toward explaining it though, the following descriptions of each category of energy in space are written to indicate that I put the photons in the category of detectible matter since they are wave-particles with mass in the ISU, and I put the out flowing gravitational wave energy emission from the photon wave-particle (which in the ISU are light waves of the EM spectrum) in the category of dark matter, which is gravitational wave energy that forms convergences as it traverses open space. Neutrinos present a similarly difficult issue.

    Given that outside-of-the-consensus explanation of why light is in two pieces, and is separated into two different categories when describing the components of the three categories of energy in the observable space of our arena, we get the following breakdown:

    Detectible Matter 4%

    In the ISU, the portion that is visible (detectible) matter generally represents all wave-particles (and objects with mass) in space. Wave-particles are composed of gravitational wave energy in quantum increments that establish a complex standing wave pattern that has two components, the inflowing gravitational wave energy arriving to the pattern from all directions in space, and the out flowing gravitational wave energy that is generally a spherical emission.

    The presence of matter in the wave-particle is represented by gravitational wave fronts that carry energy within and through the standing wave pattern. When two wave fronts converge, there is a momentary peak of energy at each convergence, and each convergence peak is defined as a quantum of energy. The particle is composed of many quanta that, taken together at any instant, represent the mass of the wave-particle. Note: In the ISU, photons fall in this category and have mass; they are wave-particles emitted at the speed of light by electrons.

    Dark Matter 21%

    Dark matter is characterized as the weight of all of those individual gravitational wave front convergences that form momentary peaks in space; they are hints of matter called high energy density spots in the ISU. Deep within galaxies the space is said to be “fat” with these convergences.

    Generally all space has those hints of mass and therefor has weight (mass in a gravitational field), and the gravitational wave energy density of that space determines if it is “fat” space, “thin” space, or in between. Light waves traversing space fall in this category and are the spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy component from the photon wave-particles which are included as detectible matter above.

    Dark Energy 75%

    Dark energy is the expansion energy of big bang arena action which is initiated by each big bang event, i.e., the big bang arena wave of matter and energy that emerges from the collapse/bang of each of the big crunches. Expansion energy is imparted to wave-particles that form in the new arena as it expands and cools, and manifests itself in the form of wave-particle momentum (separation momentum imparted to particles as they form during the rapid expansion). The momentum of the wave-particles is conserved as they clump into objects, stars, and galaxies; all galaxies in any given arena are generally moving away from each other as a result of dark energy.

    In Total

    The components add up to 100% of the energy in an aged arena like ours, but in a new arena, as a big bang event occurs, the mix will be a very high percentage of dark energy and dark matter, maybe 49.9% each, with maybe only a fraction of a percentage of detectible matter, for discussion purposes.

    The cause of gravity in the ISU to be continued …

Share This Page