905 lines
66 KiB
HTML
905 lines
66 KiB
HTML
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
|
||
<html>
|
||
<head>
|
||
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
|
||
<title>Spatiomaterialist cosmogony</title>
|
||
<meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 4.2.8.2 (Linux)">
|
||
<meta name="author" content="Amr Gharbeia">
|
||
<meta name="created" content="20010831;0">
|
||
<meta name="changed" content="20150722;204715623057041">
|
||
<style type="text/css">
|
||
<!--
|
||
@page { margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 1.2cm; margin-top: 1.2cm; margin-bottom: 1.25cm }
|
||
p { text-indent: 1.27cm; margin-bottom: 0.25cm; direction: ltr; color: #99ccff; line-height: 120%; text-align: left; widows: 2; orphans: 2 }
|
||
p.western { font-family: "Arial", sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; so-language: en-US }
|
||
p.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt }
|
||
p.ctl { font-family: "Simplified Arabic"; font-size: 10pt; so-language: ar-EG }
|
||
-->
|
||
</style>
|
||
</head>
|
||
<body lang="en-GB" text="#99ccff" dir="ltr" style="background: transparent">
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif">S<img src="" name="TtsOtkCLCos_20" align="right" hspace="5" width="175" height="52" border="0">patiomaterialist
|
||
cosmogony. </font>The spatiomaterialist alternative to received
|
||
cosmogony will be presented here in two stages. First, I will show
|
||
that spatiomaterialism is not falsified by the evidence for the big
|
||
bang because is has another way of explaining it, a way that make it
|
||
a better theory, at least in the eyes of ontologists. Then, I will
|
||
show that there is a variation on it that is an even better
|
||
explanation of all the relevant evidence, because it also explains
|
||
certain observations that are currently acknowledged to be puzzling
|
||
and problematic. I call the first stage of this explanation “the
|
||
big shrink” and the second stage the theory of “local big
|
||
shrinks.”</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>T<img src="" name="TtsOtkCLCos_21" align="right" hspace="5" width="150" height="27" border="0">he
|
||
big shrink.</b></i> It is possible to explain all the observations
|
||
offered in support of the big bang theory without supposing that the
|
||
universe is expanding, because they can be explained at least as well
|
||
by the shrinking of particles with rest mass in size.
|
||
Spatiomaterialism assumes that space and matter are infinite in
|
||
extent and that they have existed from eternity. But let us assume
|
||
for now that the universe as we know it did begin with a singular
|
||
event, which is currently called the “big bang.” But instead of
|
||
assuming that it was like an explosion, let us assume it was more
|
||
like an implosion. Instead of a big bang, it could have been a big
|
||
shrink.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">This
|
||
theory assumes that until that point in the history of the universe,
|
||
space was filled with matter. All the particles with rest mass were
|
||
so big that they coincided with every part of space. Since according
|
||
to our theory of the basic particles, the proton never decays, we
|
||
should think of space as being densely packed with baryons, or
|
||
triplets of quarks, all existing side-by-side everywhere. There need
|
||
not even be any electrons, if these baryons were all neutrons. There
|
||
is nothing inconceivable about infinite space and matter existing in
|
||
that condition from eternity. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>Possibility
|
||
of big shrink.</i> What is called the “big bang” could have been
|
||
what happened when all that rest mass matter started shrinking.
|
||
Assume that the shrinking happened simultaneously everywhere in
|
||
space. Set aside for now why it occurred when it did. Just suppose
|
||
that it happened. Our theory about the nature of the basic particles
|
||
explains how it would be possible.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Such a
|
||
shrinkage of particles with rest mass is possible, on our theory of
|
||
the basic objects, because baryons are constituted by both space and
|
||
matter. If quarks are weakons traveling on twisted circular pathways
|
||
provided by neutrinos, the condition of matter at the beginning could
|
||
be explained by the huge size of those neutrinos. The shrinkage of
|
||
rest mass matter in size could then be explained by the neutrinos
|
||
shrinking in size. The quarks (and, thus, the baryons) would become
|
||
smaller, and since there is only a finite amount of matter in any
|
||
finite region of space, distances between baryons would begin to
|
||
grow. Thus, the “big shrink,” as I will call it, would not
|
||
require space to expand. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The strong
|
||
forces between baryons, mediated by mesons, could have held neutrons
|
||
together from eternity. But as baryons began to shrink, spaces
|
||
between them would begin to open up, and at least at the boundaries
|
||
where empty space appeared, particles and small clumps would break
|
||
off and start moving and interacting with one another. The strong
|
||
force is actually a repulsive force at small distance between
|
||
independent hadrons, tending to keep them apart, but the temperature
|
||
might be high enough in places for them to fuse again into masses.
|
||
The weak force would make neutrons decay into protons, leaving
|
||
electrons to interact independently, and if the temperatures were
|
||
high enough, they would interact like a plasma. But let me set aside
|
||
for now the description of how they move and interact in order to
|
||
focus on the effects of the big shrink on photons and the basic
|
||
forces of nature. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Photons
|
||
would be generated in the usual way by the interaction of charged
|
||
objects. But photons would be unaffected by the shrinkage of rest
|
||
mass matter, because they are not constituted by neutrinos. They are
|
||
quantum cycles that coincide with space in a way that moves them
|
||
along at the velocity of light, though at first they would not be
|
||
able to travel very far before they were scattered by charged
|
||
objects. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nor would
|
||
the electromagnetic force be affected directly by the shrinking of
|
||
neutrinos. The electromagnetic field is imposed on space, as we have
|
||
seen, by electric charges, and they would do so in the same way
|
||
(which we have assumed involves a universal pulsation in which a 180<sup>0</sup>
|
||
phase shift distinguishes negative from positive). Since space is not
|
||
changed, this reflection of electric charges in space would be the
|
||
same. However, the particles carrying the electric charges would be
|
||
much larger, and thus, the electric and magnetic forces would be much
|
||
weaker relative to the weak force. That is, virtual photons by which
|
||
the electromagnetic force acts on particles with rest mass would be
|
||
the same size, but the charged particles would be much bigger and,
|
||
thus, less affected by their point like charges. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The short
|
||
range forces would dominate interactions. The weak force is also
|
||
mediated by gauge bosons, and the main role of virtual weakons is to
|
||
exert forces that keep the quantum cycles of weakons traveling along
|
||
their neutrino pathways and to keep the neutrinos lined up as twisted
|
||
circles in quarks, though they also mediate all the decay patterns of
|
||
high energy particles. The color force would work the same way, given
|
||
our theory of the basic particles, because gluons are just how the
|
||
weak force keeps the quarks lined up either in triplets or
|
||
quark-antiquark pairs (when the weakons are contorted by traveling
|
||
twisted circles). Hence, the strong force would work the same way as
|
||
it does now, except that the mesons would be much larger and its
|
||
reach would much greater. Since there is a neutral weakon, <i>Z</i><sup><i>0</i></sup>,
|
||
the weak force could also mediate elastic collisions among particles
|
||
as well as keeping the basic objects together. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
gravitational force would also work basically the same way with
|
||
swollen rest mass matter, because on our theory, it is just the
|
||
effect of accumulations of matter on the inherent motion in space.
|
||
But there would be one important difference. The particles with rest
|
||
mass would be much bigger and have much less rest mass. The quantity
|
||
of rest mass depends on the number of quantum cycles per second
|
||
involved in their constitution, and with larger neutrinos, the
|
||
weakons would have farther to travel. Baryons and leptons would,
|
||
therefore, have fewer quantum cycles per second, or less rest mass.
|
||
That would affect the sizes of the quantum kinetic cycles by which
|
||
particles with rest mass move across space, because according to this
|
||
ontological explanation of quantum mechanics, the wavelengths of the
|
||
quantum kinetic cycles are scaled according to the mass of the object
|
||
(that is, constitute momentum, not just velocity). The smaller rest
|
||
masses of particles together with their swollen sizes would mean,
|
||
however, that the gravitational force has considerably less effect on
|
||
what happens. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>Compatibility
|
||
of spatiomaterialism.</i> Unlike the big bang, the big shrink is
|
||
compatible with spatiomaterialism. It is not necessary to deny that
|
||
space is infinite nor to believe that space is expanding. And given
|
||
the spatiomaterialist ontological explanation of the basic particles,
|
||
we can conceive how the big shrink would work. There would be no
|
||
change in Planck’s constant, only a change in the size of
|
||
neutrinos. But as the shrinking of neutrinos continued, the quantum
|
||
cycles constituting particles with rest mass would speed up. The
|
||
increase in their rest masses would mean an increase in gravitational
|
||
force-field matter, because the gravitational force is in proportion
|
||
to mass and the distances in space across which the force is acting
|
||
will be increasing. That is, the force-field matter of the
|
||
gravitational field would increase with the total quantity of quantum
|
||
matter. But that seems to be a violation of the conservation of
|
||
matter. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Such an
|
||
increase in the total quantity of matter in the universe is not,
|
||
however, unthinkable at this point. It does not pose the same problem
|
||
for spatiomaterialism as the expansion of space would, because it is
|
||
possible to conceive how it would happen, even in an infinite world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
it does violate the conservation of matter. But we merely used the
|
||
principle of the conservation of mass and energy as working
|
||
hypothesis by which to figure out what spatiomaterialism had to
|
||
assume about the forms of matter in order to explain the natural
|
||
processes described by classical physics. Having done that, we are
|
||
now in a position to derive new conclusions about the world from
|
||
spatiomaterialism. If the universe began with a big shrink, then the
|
||
total quantity of matter has been increasing ever since. That is just
|
||
the nature of a spatiomaterial world with the big shrink.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">However, at
|
||
the second stage of this theory, we will see how matter can be
|
||
conserved, even though its total quantity increases throughout the
|
||
big shrink. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>Explanation
|
||
of relevant phenomena.</i> As the shrinking of rest mass matter
|
||
continued after the beginning, physical processes would take place
|
||
that could explain the phenomena cited as evidence for the big bang.
|
||
At first, the strong (and weak) force would dominate, holding large
|
||
clumps of neutrons together as they separated from one another. They
|
||
would be cool, but energetic interaction would occur only at their
|
||
boundaries. Assuming that the shrinking were fast enough, the
|
||
continued shrinking of particles with rest mass would eventually
|
||
break up the clumps of neutron into smaller clumps and independent
|
||
baryons along with other particles. But since huge groups of baryons
|
||
would already be separated by huge distances, the increasing strength
|
||
of the gravitational force would draw the still swollen matter into
|
||
collisions with one another where the temperature would be high
|
||
(relative to their size). </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Nucleosynthesis.
|
||
</i>As some point in the shrinking of matter, the temperature would
|
||
reach a point at which larger clusters of neutrons would be broken up
|
||
by the kinetic energy of their interaction and only small nuclei
|
||
would be stable. Since it would depend on the temperature of their
|
||
interaction, such a process could give rise to the same proportion of
|
||
helium and other small nuclei that Gamow predicted.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Background
|
||
radiation.</i> There would also be point during the big shrink when
|
||
electrons and nuclei through out the universe would become coupled in
|
||
atoms, making it possible for photons to travel long distances
|
||
without interacting with charged particles. The wavelengths of those
|
||
photons would mirror the swollen sizes and lowered masses of the
|
||
charged particles that were interacting, and since those elongated
|
||
photons would not shrink further, that would explain the cosmic
|
||
background radiation. We are parts of galaxies in which rest mass
|
||
matter is much smaller as a result of the continued shrinking, and
|
||
thus, the photons generated when nuclei and electrons were much
|
||
larger would have a much longer wavelength than photons generated by
|
||
similar processes on earth.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Hubble’s
|
||
law.</i> The big shrink would explain why Hubble’s law appears to
|
||
be true. At some point during the big shrink stars would from, and
|
||
assuming that the shrinking has continued throughout the universe to
|
||
this day, the radiation generated by those bigger and slower
|
||
processes would have a longer wave length. In fact, there would be a
|
||
correlation between the red shift observed in galaxies and their
|
||
distances from earth, because light from more distant galaxies would
|
||
have spent more time traveling before being intercepted by us, and it
|
||
would be measured as longer by us, since the rest mass matter
|
||
constituting us would have shrunk more since it was emitted than from
|
||
galaxies that lie nearer to earth. To be sure, the red shift would
|
||
not indicate the expansion of space nor the velocity of their
|
||
recession, but rather how much matter had shrunk since the time the
|
||
light was emitted. That would require a reinterpretation of Hubble’s
|
||
constant. However, there would still be a correlation between the red
|
||
shift and distance, which is the observation in which Hubble based
|
||
his law about recession velocities. And it would be possible to use
|
||
the red shift to measure the relative distances of faint galaxies. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
is not impossible, therefore, to explain the three main observations
|
||
used as evidence for big bang cosmology in another way — one that
|
||
is compatible with spatiomaterialism. And since the big shrink theory
|
||
does not have to hold that something comes from nothing, it is <i>prima
|
||
facie </i>a better theory, if it possible — at least in the eyes of
|
||
naturalists, who believe that the natural world is constituted by
|
||
substances that exist independently of themselves. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
possibility of big shrink, instead of a big bang, makes it possible,
|
||
therefore, to believe that the universe is infinite in every way,
|
||
except for the finite divisibility of matter. Both space and time are
|
||
infinite in both senses, being infinitely divisible, or continuous,
|
||
as well as infinite in extent. Time is eternal not only in the
|
||
direction of the future, but also toward the past, for it is not
|
||
necessary to believe that substance comes into existence, as entailed
|
||
by the big bang theory, though there was a time when the big shrink
|
||
began. And since space is infinite in extent, the total quantity of
|
||
matter in the universe can also be infinite, even though there is a
|
||
finite quantity in any finite region of space.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
the big shrink does imply that the total quantity of quantum matter
|
||
in any closed region of space is increasing. But that extra matter
|
||
does not come from nothing. It comes from the matter that exists at
|
||
the time and the shrinking of neutrinos. Since neutrinos are just an
|
||
aspect of space having to do with its interaction with weakons,
|
||
neutrino size could be just a changing property of space. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
increase in the total quantity of quantum matter in any closed region
|
||
is conceivable because matter is finitely divisible. The existence of
|
||
elementary units of matter is the only way in which the universe does
|
||
not have a twofold infinite in its basic aspects: time, space and
|
||
matter. And there is, as we shall see, a way that the total quantity
|
||
of matter in sufficiently large regions of space can be conserved
|
||
even though quantum matter increases during the big shrink.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">There
|
||
is, however, still a problem about big shrink cosmology, because it
|
||
does not explain why the big shrink happened when it did. Even if the
|
||
substances constituting the universe always existed, the big bang
|
||
still implies there was a change at some moment when rest masses
|
||
suddenly started shrinking. Why did it happen then? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>L<img src="" name="TtsOtkCLCos_22" align="right" hspace="5" width="150" height="29" border="0">ocal
|
||
big shrinks.</b></i> Not only can spatiomaterialism offer a better
|
||
explanation of the observational evidence used to support the big
|
||
bang theory than the big bang theory, but like so many times before
|
||
in this ontological argument, it opens up the possibility of a
|
||
explanation which heretofore has not even been considered. In this
|
||
case, the fruitfulness of spatiomaterialism as a way of explaining
|
||
the natural world is shown by its solution to the problem about when
|
||
this remarkable event occurs. That is the second stage of the
|
||
spatiomaterialist ontological explanation of the origin of the
|
||
universe, the “theory of local big shrinks.” What is more,
|
||
however, it solves other cosmological puzzles posed by current
|
||
astronomical observations. Thus, unless this approach is on the wrong
|
||
track, some such theory as they will make a credible claim to being
|
||
the best explanation of astronomical phenomena, according to the
|
||
empirical method of science. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
is not necessary to explain why the big shrink occurred when it did
|
||
in order to believe that substance has always existed, because its is
|
||
possible to hold that the big shrink is a local event, rather than a
|
||
global event. A big shrink could occur repeatedly as time passes, but
|
||
in different places at different times. That is the theory of local
|
||
big shrinks. It holds that the universe has always existed pretty
|
||
much as it appears now. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The theory
|
||
of local big shrinks is, therefore, a “steady state” theory of
|
||
the universe. Such a theory was advanced in 1948 by Herman Bondi,
|
||
Thomas Gold, and independently by its most famous defender, Fred
|
||
Hoyle. Their steady state theory accepted that the universe was
|
||
expanding, and it held that matter comes into existence as hydrogen
|
||
atoms (or, later, so called Planck particles). This was the result of
|
||
a so-called “creation field,” which is one way of interpreting
|
||
Einstein’s cosmological constant. A creation field requires new
|
||
physical processes, but so does the big bang theory. Thus, it was
|
||
once considered a viable alternative to the big bang theory. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The steady
|
||
state theory has, however, fallen into to disfavor. It could not
|
||
explain the cosmic background radiation, when it was discovered. And
|
||
since it assumes that the universe appears the same way at every
|
||
moment in its history, it cannot explain the evidence that the
|
||
universe was previously in a radically different condition. For
|
||
example, quasars are extremely intense sources of radiation, but
|
||
since they tend to have an extremely high red shift, they must be far
|
||
away (according to Hubble’s law), and thus, most cosmologists take
|
||
quasars to be characteristic of a much earlier era in the history of
|
||
the universe. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The local
|
||
big shrink theory is, however, different from the traditional steady
|
||
state theory. It does not agree that the universe is expanding, but
|
||
explains that appearance by the shrinking of rest mass matter. And as
|
||
we shall see, it can explain the background radiation. Indeed, it can
|
||
explain all the phenomena covered by the big bang theory, including
|
||
quasars.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
scale of the local big shrink on this theory is roughly that of a
|
||
supercluster of galaxies. It has recently been recognized that the
|
||
large scale structure of the universe includes not only stars
|
||
configured as galaxies, but also clusters of galaxies, and clusters
|
||
of clusters, or superclusters of galaxies. Indeed, it now seems that
|
||
there are vast empty regions of space between such clusters of
|
||
galaxies that look something like soap bubbles because of how they
|
||
are bounded by galaxies. Let us assume, therefore, that from time to
|
||
time in such empty regions, very swollen matter comes to exist and
|
||
starts to shrink as described above. Let me also emphasize some
|
||
aspects of this process and also refine the assumptions we are making
|
||
about the big shrink.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">We
|
||
assume that particles with rest mass start off packed together in a
|
||
swollen condition coinciding with a huge region of space. Assuming it
|
||
was made of baryons held together by the strong force, it would be
|
||
like a giant neutron star. Since this matter would be surrounded by
|
||
empty space, there would be a gravitational attraction that tends to
|
||
pull all the particles towards the center of mass. It might seem,
|
||
therefore, that a local big shrink could not develop as described
|
||
above, because the gravitational force would accumulate enough to
|
||
cause a giant black hole. But that is not inevitable, for two
|
||
reasons. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">First, the
|
||
condition of matter at the beginning makes the gravitational force
|
||
weaker in its effect. The weakons are traveling the pathways of much
|
||
larger neutrinos in baryons and charged leptons, and thus, those
|
||
particles are constituted by fewer quantum cycles per second than the
|
||
same kinds of particles on earth. On our theory, that means that they
|
||
are not only larger, but that they also have less rest mass. Hence,
|
||
the gravitational field that they impose on space will be much weaker
|
||
than it comes to be later on. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Second, let
|
||
us assume that the shrinking is initially much more rapid than it is
|
||
later. In fact, we will assume that the shrinking slows down
|
||
asymptotically to a limit that is not much smaller than matter
|
||
constituting earth. Though at first, the electromagnetic force is
|
||
weaker and interactions among basic particles are dominated by the
|
||
strong force (and the weak force), the rate of shrinkage could be
|
||
fast enough for spaces to open up between huge clumps of baryons that
|
||
are still held together by the strong force. These huge clumps of
|
||
matter would still attract one another by gravitation on the largest
|
||
scale, but if the shrinking were fast enough, they would remain
|
||
isolated from one another, and the main role of gravitation on a
|
||
smaller scale would be to help the strong force hold the remaining
|
||
clumps of matters together.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The same
|
||
process of division could occur more than once. As particles with
|
||
rest mass shrank further, baryons would still tend to stick together
|
||
because of the strong force, and thus, the clumps would subdivide
|
||
into smaller clumps, opening up huge distances between them as they
|
||
continued to shrink. And those sub-clumps of matter might do so
|
||
again. Such a process could explain the large scale structure of a
|
||
supercluster of galaxies, that is, the huge distances between
|
||
clusters of galaxies, between local groups of them, and ultimately
|
||
between single galaxies. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
rapidity of the initial shrinking means that this phase of the local
|
||
big shrink would be completed in much shorter period of time than
|
||
assumed by the big bang theory, because the local big shrink occurs
|
||
in a much smaller region and it does not require galaxies to spend a
|
||
lot of time moving away from one another. Instead, the galaxies would
|
||
“precipitate out” from the original mass of swollen particles as
|
||
they shrink in size. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Eventually,
|
||
however, the shrinking of the basic particles would weaken the strong
|
||
force relative to the electromagnetic force, and the strong force,
|
||
together with gravity, would no longer be able to hold matter
|
||
together in huge clumps. In addition to the kinetic energy of the
|
||
collision among masses of baryons, the repulsive electromagnetic
|
||
forces between protons would help separate them, and the short range
|
||
repulsive force between baryons that are not bound together by the
|
||
strong force would keep them separate. Thus, baryons would break up
|
||
into smaller and smaller clusters and eventually into individual
|
||
baryons. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">As the
|
||
shrinking continued, the temperature would fall, because the
|
||
distances separating baryons and bunches of baryons would increase.
|
||
Gravitation would be pulling them into regions of dense collisions,
|
||
but they would still be too swollen and light to form stars. This is
|
||
the point at which the “nucleosynthesis” that explains the
|
||
proportion of helium and other simple nuclei in the universe would
|
||
take place. Large groups of baryons would be unstable at that
|
||
temperature, but simple nuclei would be stable and remain stable as
|
||
the temperature fell. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Not long
|
||
after that, electrons would couple with nuclei to form atoms, and
|
||
since photons would be able to travel much longer distances, more
|
||
photons would escape into the space beyond these more or less
|
||
isolated clusters of matter, and there would be a vast increase in
|
||
the radiation from them. That would account for the cosmic background
|
||
radiation, because matter would still be swollen enough for the
|
||
photons released to have longer wavelengths. The size of the
|
||
particles would make it appear that it is a 2.7<sup>0</sup> Kelvin
|
||
blackbody radiation, though actually it would be a much higher
|
||
temperature relative to swollen rest mass particles. To be sure,
|
||
photons with even longer wavelengths would have been emitted by
|
||
clusters of matter prior to that, when matter was even more swollen.
|
||
But that radiation would not be nearly as intense, because photons
|
||
could come only from the edges, as the radiation from stars. When the
|
||
region became transparent, however, photons could also escape from
|
||
throughout the clusters of matter, and that is what is observable. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">By
|
||
this point, the “precipitation” from the shrinkage of matter
|
||
would already have isolated galaxies from one another and,
|
||
presumably, made the distribution of matter in each galaxy somewhat
|
||
uneven. But since particles with rest mass have been shrinking in
|
||
size and increasing in rest mass, the total mass accumulated in these
|
||
local regions would increase and gravitation would begin to play the
|
||
dominant role in what happens. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
from the beginning, gravitation would have been attracting clusters
|
||
of matter toward one another, and that attraction would also increase
|
||
as rest mass increased. But since, initially, gravitation was not
|
||
strong enough to keep up with the effects of shrinking, clumps of
|
||
matter would separate off from one another leaving vast distances
|
||
between them that gravitation could not overcome quickly enough.
|
||
Thus, gravitation would wind up exerting much the kind of attraction
|
||
among galaxies that is observed now. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Within each
|
||
galaxy that precipitated out during that earlier process, however,
|
||
the continued shrinking of matter would increase the effective
|
||
gravitational force, because fermions would be smaller and have
|
||
greater rest masses than ever. Gravitation would play two roles at
|
||
this stage, pulling matter throughout the galaxy towards its center
|
||
and turning regions of relatively denser accumulation of matter
|
||
within each galaxy into stars. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
gravitational attraction at the scale of an entire, separate galaxy
|
||
would create enormous pressures at the center, where matter would
|
||
accumulate, and with smaller, heavier particles, it would be enough
|
||
in most galaxies to create giant black holes which would gobble up
|
||
all the extra matter that had accumulated at the center. They would
|
||
give off, at least for a while, enormous quantities of energy as
|
||
matter tried to spiral into them, and their magnetic fields might
|
||
even spew out prodigious quantities of particles in certain
|
||
directions at enormously high velocities. And the gravitational field
|
||
centered on such a black hole would organize the motion of matter
|
||
throughout the galaxy.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">On a more
|
||
local scale, gravitation would cause the formation of stars of
|
||
various sizes. Regions of highest density would tend to be the first
|
||
to form stars, and those giant stars would explode rather quickly as
|
||
supernovae, spewing heavy nuclei throughout the regions around them.
|
||
Smaller would form from smaller variations in density, and since most
|
||
of them would form later, the planets that formed out the matter
|
||
spiraling into them would be rich in atoms with heavy nuclei. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">[Perhaps,
|
||
some aspect of the process of galactic development by “precipitation”
|
||
from the local big shrink would even account for the observations
|
||
that now lead to the belief that there must be a great deal of dark
|
||
matter that exists in an unusual form.]</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
formation of a black hole and stars would give galaxies the
|
||
appearance they now have, for matter would be much smaller and
|
||
heavier, radiating photons with much shorter wavelengths. Visible
|
||
light would make galaxies observable from great distances, and their
|
||
spectra could be examined by astronomers. Assuming that the shrinking
|
||
of matter had not quite reached its asymptotic limit when it was
|
||
emitted, a red shift is precisely what we would expect to observe
|
||
from earth, where the shrinking has gone on longer. On the other
|
||
hand, assuming that earth is very close to the asymptotic limit where
|
||
matter stops shrinking, it would also explain why there are no
|
||
galaxies with a blue shift, as one would expect, if the shrinking
|
||
went on. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The theory
|
||
of local big shrinks would imply, nevertheless, that Hubble’s law
|
||
is false. Since local big shrinks would be occurring at different
|
||
times at different locations throughout the universe, there would be
|
||
no general correlation between the red shift of a galaxy and its
|
||
distance from earth, as Hubble concluded from his observations. But
|
||
that does not necessarily falsify the theory of many local big
|
||
shrinks. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The reason
|
||
it escapes falsification is the difficulty in measuring the distances
|
||
to faint galaxies. Hubble was able to measure galaxies only up to
|
||
about ten million light years away, and even current attempts to
|
||
extend the range of independent measurement of distance beyond that
|
||
do not yield reliable, independent readings of distances to galaxies
|
||
beyond our supercluster of galaxies. The most reliable measurement of
|
||
distance depends Cepheid variable stars, whose intrinsic brightness
|
||
is known, but it does not reach beyond our own Virgo cluster of
|
||
galaxies, that is, about 50 to 75 million light years away. And
|
||
though supernovae and sheer brightness of galaxies can be used beyond
|
||
that limit, the reliability of those standards has not been
|
||
established. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
correlation between red shift and distance within our supercluster of
|
||
galaxies is what would be expected, according to the theory of local
|
||
big shrinks, since it assumes that all those galaxies were generated
|
||
at roughly the same time by the same local big shrink. The red shift
|
||
of a distant galaxy within our supercluster would be explained by the
|
||
length of time that light has been traveling since it was emitted,
|
||
since both our galaxy would have been shrinking further during that
|
||
entire period. Thus, the red-shift of a galaxy would be a good
|
||
indicator of the relative distances to galaxies within our
|
||
supercluster.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Disagreements
|
||
about Hubble’s constant tend to cluster around two different
|
||
values, one yielding about 20 billion years as the age of the
|
||
universe and the other yielding about 10 billion years. That
|
||
disagreement may be due, in part, to the attempt of one group of
|
||
astronomers to measure the Hubble constant by more distant galaxies,
|
||
some of which are beyond our supercluster, where it is much more
|
||
difficult to measure distance. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, it is
|
||
possible to reject Hubble’s law as a misinterpretation of data from
|
||
relative nearby galaxies in terms of the big bang theory and its
|
||
assumed expansion of the universe. But recognizing its falsity would
|
||
revolutionize out view of the universe, because red-shift would no
|
||
longer be a reliable way of estimating the distance to faint
|
||
galaxies. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Not
|
||
only can the theory of local big shrinks explain all the phenomena on
|
||
which big bang cosmogony is based, but there are observations that
|
||
can be explained only by the theory of local big shrinks. For
|
||
example, there is accumulating evidence of stars whose lifetimes are
|
||
longer than the lower estimates of the age of the universe based on
|
||
Hubble’s constant. But the most spectacular fallout is that it
|
||
explains the observation of quasars. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Quasars are
|
||
extremely red-shifted light sources that seem far too intense to be
|
||
located as far away as they seem to be according to Hubble’s law.
|
||
Its radiation is typically much more intense than the rest of the
|
||
galaxy of which is a part. The radiation seems to come from something
|
||
like a star, because its strength can vary too quickly for an entire
|
||
galaxy to be its source. And it is widely assumed that the only
|
||
currently plausible such an enormous quantity of energy is a giant
|
||
black hole which is drawing large quantities of matter beyond the
|
||
event horizon (at the Schwartzschild radius). But since they have
|
||
much greater red shifts than is measured in galaxies from our
|
||
supercluster, they are assumed to have existed very early after the
|
||
big bang. Relatively few have less than an enormous red shift of z =
|
||
2, that is, with wavelengths twice as long as those generate by
|
||
similar processes on earth, and some, with red-shifts approaching z =
|
||
5, seem to come from sources that existed as long as 12 billion hears
|
||
ago. Twelve billion light years is an enormous distance in space, and
|
||
it is quite astonishing that we are receiving light from a source
|
||
that far away, because it means that the universe must be completely
|
||
transparent throughout a sphere with that radius. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">However,
|
||
all these observations are precisely what would be expected on the
|
||
local big shrink theory. As we have seen, it is likely that black
|
||
holes would form early in the history of isolated galaxies because of
|
||
the accumulating gravitational forces at the centers of those
|
||
clusters of matter. Their formation early in the history of galactic
|
||
development would explain their relatively greater red-shifts,
|
||
because at that point in their development, particles would still be
|
||
quite swollen. Assuming that the sizes of the particles varies with
|
||
the wavelengths of the photons that their interactions give off, it
|
||
would mean that matter at that stage is from two to five times the
|
||
size it is on earth. The intensity of the radiation could be
|
||
completely explained by its origin in a black hole, because quasars
|
||
could be located so much closer to earth that would be required by
|
||
Hubble’s law (though those with high red-shift must be located
|
||
beyond our supercluster of galaxies). And this theory does not
|
||
require us to believe that the universe is so transparent that
|
||
photons can travel without being intercepted for 12 billion light
|
||
years in every direction from earth.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus,
|
||
quasars cannot be used as evidence against the theory of local big
|
||
shrinks. It is much more likely that they are not how the universe
|
||
looked early on after the big bang, but simply how it would look
|
||
anywhere in the universe where the local big shrink had reached the
|
||
stage at which galaxies were separate and black holes began to form
|
||
at their centers. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">But
|
||
there is still one ontological objection to the theory of local big
|
||
shrinks. Even if the universe as a whole is eternal and infinite,
|
||
this theory seems to imply that matter is coming into existence,
|
||
which contradicts the assumption of the conservation of matter
|
||
(though not the more basic ontological principle that something
|
||
cannot come from nothing). Where would the matter for the big shrink
|
||
come from?</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Again,
|
||
however, spatiomaterialism seems to have an answer — an answer that
|
||
also has to do with black holes. The one puzzling feature about black
|
||
holes is what happens to the matter that falls into them. If there is
|
||
a singularity at the center of the black hole, as seems required by
|
||
the infinite force there, the matter seems to just disappear forever
|
||
from the universe. The size of the Schwartzschild radius is the only
|
||
indication of how much matter has disappeared into it.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">However,
|
||
that loss would not be permanent, if black holes were the source of
|
||
the matter that shows up in local big shrinks. The laws of physics do
|
||
not cover conditions as extreme as those that hold for the
|
||
singularity in the center of the black hole, and thus, it is possible
|
||
that matter is transformed into an aspect of space, that is, into a
|
||
condition of space that could be the source of the matter that shows
|
||
up as local big shrinks. This condition would hold only when enough
|
||
matter had been gobbled up by black holes in the galaxies surrounding
|
||
some vast empty region. But it is possible that when space has
|
||
absorbed enough matter through those black holes, it gives birth to a
|
||
big shrink in the nearest vast region of empty space between
|
||
superclusters of galaxies. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">There may
|
||
be no need, therefore, to believe that the matter that comes to exist
|
||
at the beginning of the local big shrink or the matter that comes to
|
||
exist as particles with rest mass shrink and become more massive is
|
||
coming into existence our of nothing. Instead of the “creation
|
||
field” of earlier steady-state theories, what is needed is only a
|
||
transformation field, in which matter absorbed by space from black
|
||
holes re-emerges as a local big shrinks. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">That is a
|
||
process that could go on forever. Matter would be recycled, and the
|
||
universe need never run out of room, for gravitational attraction
|
||
would always be shrinking existing superclusters of galaxies away
|
||
from some huge region of empty space or another. But it could mean
|
||
that all galaxies are ultimately destined to be consumed by black
|
||
holes. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">No
|
||
doubt, this theory of local big shrinks needs further refinement
|
||
before it will be fully reconciled with what is known about physical
|
||
processes. But it illustrates what could be true, if this is a
|
||
spatiomaterial world and physics is explained ontologically. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<br><br>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>Conclusion
|
||
about local regularities. </b></i>What has been established by
|
||
<font face="Arial, sans-serif">Cosmology</font>, and more broadly, by
|
||
this ontological explanation of contemporary physics? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
is clearly not a necessary truth of ontological philosophy. This
|
||
spatiomaterialist ontological explanation of the basic particles of
|
||
physics and the origin of the universe is, like its explanation of
|
||
quantum mechanics, more speculative than that. It is obviously
|
||
incomplete, for there are many quantitative details to be filled in.
|
||
And it would be surprising if it is not mistaken in some ways,
|
||
especially the theory of the big shrink. What I have said above will
|
||
have to be changed, not merely expanded.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Even what
|
||
has been said about Einstein’s special and general theories of
|
||
relativity is not a necessary truth. It is also just an ontological
|
||
explanation of the truth of relativity theory. But I do claim that it
|
||
is closer to the truth that contemporary physics. That is what needed
|
||
to be shown to pay off the mortgage on spatiomaterialism and use it
|
||
as the foundation for ontological philosophy. But I do not mean to
|
||
make such a strong claim for what has been said about quantum
|
||
mechanics, the basic objects, and cosmogony. They are more
|
||
speculative, and I suspect that there still much gold to be mined in
|
||
the hills of the theory of local big shrinks. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">What
|
||
I believe has been show in these past two chapters, on <font face="Arial, sans-serif">Quantum
|
||
mechanics </font>and <font face="Arial, sans-serif">Cosmology,</font>
|
||
is that some such theory is probably true. It is possible to give an
|
||
ontological explanation of the truth of quantum mechanics, high
|
||
energy physics, and big bang cosmology based on spatiomaterialism.
|
||
That shows, at least, that spatiomaterialism cannot be rejected by
|
||
claiming that it contradicts what has been discovered empirically in
|
||
any of the fields of physics. But it also shows the fruitfulness of
|
||
spatiomaterialism in physics.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The widely
|
||
acknowledged problems about the theories in these fields of physics
|
||
make them a rather flimsy foundation for denying a theory of
|
||
empirical ontology. Though the big bang theory, for example, is
|
||
warmly embraced by popular culture, where mystery and faith live
|
||
comfortably with relativism, it is held with much less confidence by
|
||
physicists, if only because they are, as naturalists, more inclined
|
||
to believe that that the natural world is constituted by substances
|
||
that exist independently of themselves. Though it is not an explicit
|
||
principle of science, it simply does not make much sense to hold that
|
||
something can come from nothing. Puzzles in the other fields likewise
|
||
make scientists more skeptical than dogmatic. Few scientists would
|
||
claim that physics has already discovered the deepest truth about the
|
||
nature of what exists. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">By saying
|
||
that spatiomaterialism is fruitful in physics, I mean that it opens
|
||
up new ways of explaining the observations made by physics. But to
|
||
show that there is no reason to doubt that some ontological
|
||
explanation along the lines of those given here is also to show that
|
||
some such theory is probably true, because any such theory would
|
||
explain more of the phenomena and explains it better than physics
|
||
does at present. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">What
|
||
explain the power of spatiomaterialism to cast new light on physics
|
||
is the difference between ontological-cause explanations and
|
||
efficient-cause explanations with which we began in the <font face="Arial, sans-serif">Foundation
|
||
</font>of ontological philosophy. Instead of trying only to discover
|
||
the laws by which it is possible to predict and control what happens,
|
||
empirical ontology tries to discover the substances that would
|
||
explain why those laws are true. In addition to efficient causes, it
|
||
seeks ontological causes. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In these
|
||
chapters on contemporary physics, we have seen what ontology can add,
|
||
when it infers independently of empirical science to
|
||
spatiomaterialism as the best ontological explanation of the natural
|
||
world. Whereas physics relies on mathematics to represent the
|
||
quantitatively precise relationship among properties by which it can
|
||
predict the outcomes of measurements, ontological philosophy relies
|
||
on our spatial and temporal imagination to represent geometrically
|
||
the substances whose aspects are those properties. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The kind of
|
||
mathematical representations used by physics are based on Cartesian
|
||
coordinates, and that means that everything can be reduced to
|
||
algebra, that is, basically, arithmetic. As we saw in <font face="Arial, sans-serif">Relations</font>,
|
||
the explanations of the truth of arithmetic and geometry are
|
||
independent on one another. One comes down to counting units, while
|
||
the other comes down to representing spatial relations spatially (or,
|
||
more accurately, as we shall see, spatio-temporally), and both can be
|
||
shown to correspond to aspects of a spatiomaterial world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The power
|
||
of ontological philosophy to illuminate contemporary physics comes
|
||
from how spatiomaterialism adds spatial and temporal imagination to
|
||
the more abstract mathematical imagination that is the workhorse of
|
||
physics. Keep in mind that ontological-cause explanations do not
|
||
replace efficient-cause explanations, but rather explain their truth.
|
||
That provides a deeper explanation of the world, because it adds
|
||
constraints that are understood through spatial and temporal
|
||
imagination to constraints that are understood through mathematical
|
||
manipulations. The puzzles in physics arise from the limitations
|
||
inherent in its mathematical representations, mainly its attempt
|
||
describe physics with nothing but the algebraic representations
|
||
introduced by Descartes, and spatiomaterialism sheds light on
|
||
physics, because it shows how it is possible to use spatial and
|
||
temporal imagination to impose additional constraints on our beliefs
|
||
about the world. And that is what I believe has been shown in these
|
||
past four chapters. It points the way to new physics, a physics that
|
||
is ontological. Some such ontological explanation of physics is
|
||
possible.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
|
||
order to refute this argument, in other words, what is required is a
|
||
proof that no such theory is possible. It is not enough to point to
|
||
details that have not been explained. Nor even to point out ways that
|
||
it is mistaken. I would be surprised if there were no mistakes in
|
||
these theories. But goal in formulating them has not been to avoid
|
||
small errors, but to show a larger truth. I believe I have done that.
|
||
And to show that I have not, it is necessary to show that no
|
||
spatiomaterialist ontological explanation of the truth of physics can
|
||
be given. Having answered the challenge that contemporary physics
|
||
might be thought to pose for the belief that this is a spatiomaterial
|
||
world (and solved, in the process many of its unsolved problems),
|
||
that is the challenge I make to physicists.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">This
|
||
concludes the ontological explanation of local regularities, but that
|
||
is not all that is regular about change in a spatiomaterial world. We
|
||
have been focusing, as physics usually does, on regularities about
|
||
the motion and interaction of bits of matter that can be described
|
||
relative to those bits of matter. We have seen the role that space
|
||
plays in their explanation. But since the bits of matter all coincide
|
||
with parts of space, space plays another role in making change
|
||
regular, namely, how the wholeness of space makes the change that
|
||
occurs in whole regions of space regular. That is what will be taken
|
||
up at this point, and the conclusions to be drawn from that part of
|
||
the argument are necessary truths of ontological philosophy. What
|
||
will be said global regularizes does not depend on the truth of this
|
||
ontological explanation of the truth of physics, because except for
|
||
the implications of quantum mechanics for chemistry, it does not
|
||
depend on contemporary physics at all. However, just as in the
|
||
explanation of contemporary physics, the power of spatiomaterialism
|
||
to cast light on what has been discovered empirically by these less
|
||
general branches of science comes from how it adds a constraint to
|
||
its conclusions that is understood through spatial and temporal
|
||
imagination. And what is more, those conclusion will include an
|
||
explanation of the nature of the faculty of imagination that makes it
|
||
possible. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
</body>
|
||
</html> |