The Cosmological Quantum Field and dark energy

Xelasnave.1947 said:
The CMBR is the key stone in the Big Bang Theory isnt it?
Alex
Click to expand...

Yes, but the ecliptic alignment of CMB anistropy, is an issue and hits the very bottom of the CMB source as understood under BB cosmology. You may refer to the wiki link in post #39. It kind of makes the earth very centre of our universe.

In fact if we do the CMB measurement on some planet of a star of Andromeda, then CMB map shall be aligned with that planet's plane around that star, instantly falsifying BB. Why go so far away. Lets do the CMB map around moon, the proposed CQF idea predicts that the CMB map structure around the moon shall be correlated with moon's plane around the Earth, and if this is found to be true then BB cosmology in problem.
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
Not really it will only mean the model requires adjustment.
Alex
Click to expand...

Not with CMB. There are certain crucial pillars of any theory, which when collapse kill the entire theory. CMB is one such pillar of BB cosmology.
If it gets established that the source of CMB radiation is local, then no adjustment can save BB cosmology.
 
Pioneer Anomaly

This was a problematic observation wherein an additional acceleration term was observed towards sun in pioneer spacecraft motion. Even though currently the cause of this slow down is attributed to recoil of thermal photons as emitted by spacecraft, but this can be resolved by additional CQF stretch energy term in equation under the proposed idea. The solution of the problematic observation appears plausible under this theory.
 
The pioneer Anomaly was proposed to be resolved by various means. Most prevalent is recoil (force) of thermal emission, but it was also proposed by Mc Culloch that equivalence principle is violated (modification in inertial mass). The idea was that acceleration (GM/r2)*(Mg/Mi), where Mg is gravitational mass and Mi is the inertial mass will be different. Alternatively the anomaly can be resolved either by considering increase in G or increase in M. The proposed theory rules out increase in G but increase in M is already built into in the eqn #2 of proposed idea. Thus removing the anomaly.
 
Unruh Effect and Larmour effect

Under the proposed theory CMBR, Unruh Effect, Vacuum fluctuation and Larmour radiation are all interlinked, not only interlinked but through same cause, that is relaxation in stretched CQF.

The Unruh effect is that an accelerating observer will see Black Body radiation while an inertial observer will not. It is like an accelerating particle shall see the thermal bath. On the other hand the Larmour effect is that an accelerating charged particle will radiate away electromagnetic waves.

Under the proposed CQF theory, the Unruh effect is expected to come alive even when an observer is moving with a constant speed subject to the observer default stretch (energy density) is more than the surrounding CQF. For example if a quark or neutron or proton is moving with constant speed, as all these three particles are expected to have higher stretch than the prevalent space CQF stretch. Both Unruh and Larmour effect talk of effect of acceleration and charge on the surrounding CQF, but the radiation shall be present even when an uncharged particle of significantly higher CQF stretch moves with a constant speed. Charge and acceleration act as add-ons only. It is also to be observed that this radiation is not of the particle but that of stretched CQF, so there is no significant energy loss of the particle.

What is to be seen here is that will the free fall also cause relaxation in CQF, considering that orbital motion is not taken as free fall for the sake of this consideration.
 
There is an interesting thread here in which the issue regarding everything came from nothing is being discussed. The proposed theory has a substantially different approach on this aspect, which appears plausible too.

1. The CQF in its rest state is zero energy (E), zero temperature (T), no motion/no change (t), no matter (M). So we can say that (E, T, t, M) set is null (0,0,0,0).

2. Now the assumption about the trigger point, this theory cannot tell what triggered the onset, so we just assume that something happened and the CQF started clumping, and the stretch started developing at some point or at multiple points. The set (E,T, t, M) became (X, Y, Z, 0) as the matter was still not formed but stretch energy, temperature due to stretch and the time came into existence (non zero dynamic values).

3. As the accumulation continued, the stretch became more than a critical value and the matter came into existence, so it was (X,Y,Z,A), all no-zero values.

4. The lump formation (matter) causes a stretch in the surrounding CQF, the total stretch potential energy (not gravitational potential energy) is equal to Mc^2, thus we can safely say that [(Matter + Energy) + Stretch Energy] of the universe is zero, supporting the unproved contention that everything came from nothing.
 
The key to Gravity is non-Electromagnetic state of matter. In my work I have coined this as Dark state of matter and energy (DSME). In fact dark matter is nothing but this DSME only.

Lets think rationally, we know that around 5% matter is Baryonic (EM type) and 27% is Dark Matter. why do we need dark matter? To explain the gravitational effects not the EM effect. So why can we not see this DM somewhat differently, from a different perspective? Why we need to see DM as particles (all those MACHOs or WIMPS)?

I propose that this DM (renamed as DSME) is the progenitor of matter and radiation. It has few peculiar properties which are attributable without any intuitive issues. One such property is elasticity / Stretch and that is Gravity. When two lumps (baryonic matter) are formed from DSME it causes certain stretch in the intervening DSME, which manifests as gravity. The total of [matter + stretched DSME] around a Gaussian surface / volume is responsible for gravity, thus solving the mystery of DM too. I am working extensively on this, and I found that not even a single observation (Gravitational or otherwise) remains unexplained under this proposal. No fudge factors required, no out of universe concepts like inflation required, no singularities required. Despite having newtonian form, it has no such issue as instantaneous transmission of gravity.

The maths has been suitably changed, but still more work is needed. I sent the paper to Nature, they regretted. I will try once again after some changes. I get a feeling that somewhere the maths will merge with Einstein's (EFEs), but in a conceptually different manner. He talked of curvature of spacetime (maths), this theory may yield curvature of space having DSME, some kind of fluid mechanics analysis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top