The teachings of the Angel
Occam's razor: inference 2
The Big Bang Revisited by Quantum Field Theory
Arguments:
The closest evidence of the Big Bang is the cosmic microwave background, which suggests a homogeneous and isotropic universe, the opposite of a single gravitational singularity. Since the two are incompatible, another explanation must be sought. Quantum mechanics offers the concept of "interaction" between energy and matter, which could better explain the arrival of the energy that activated the cosmos. In short, "interaction" (quantum mechanics) and "singularity" (general relativity) must be compared. This is the work undertaken here.
Summary:
Thanks to Edwin Hubble's observations, we know that the expansion of the universe unfolds the cosmos. Looking back in time, we think the universe was more concentrated. This is where the confusion between concentration and volume arises: because the universe was more concentrated, we think it was also smaller. But the size of the universe remains a great unknown. Its limits have never been definitively established. What is certain are human errors: initially, the universe was thought to be limited to the Earth. Then, the Sun became the center of the cosmos. Next, it was believed that the universe was limited to our galaxy. Today, despite the work of James Webb, the limits of the universe remain a mystery! In short, what makes us believe that the universe has limits? Olbers' paradox? Certainly not!
Indeed, it is important to distinguish between the attribute of the universe (static or in motion) and its size: Olbers' paradox is specific to a static universe, and not to an expanding universe, whether limited or not. In this context, the size of the universe matters little, provided it can emit light from everywhere.
Olbers' paradox is an old debate stemming from Albert Einstein's conception that the universe was static and infinite. Olbers argued that if this were the case, our gaze would always fall on a bright star, regardless of where we look in the starry sky. Therefore, the sky would have no dark spots, and everything would appear bright. Einstein's view was thus erroneous, and Edwin Hubble proved that the universe is expanding and, consequently, not static.
However, this paradox has limitations, as it does not take into account the clouds of gas that obscure our view. It also doesn't take into account redshift, which shifts light towards the red end of the spectrum as the universe expands. Therefore, beyond a certain distance, we need James Webb and his Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI) to observe distant galaxies.
Furthermore, gravity opposes expansion. When gravity is very strong, as in the bulb of galaxies, stars are very close together and numerous enough to produce this diffuse light effect within galaxies. Consequently, we can indeed observe a very bright area emanating from a region of space.
In addition, intergalactic voids form between galaxies as the universe expands. These galactic bulges move away from each other due to the lack of gravity. Therefore, our view is no longer of a single star, but of clusters of stars (the galactic bulges) receding into the distance. It is these expanding spaces that we perceive, with an increasing number of galaxies in the background. Over time, these galaxies move further and further away. After 13.8 billion years, they have dispersed so much that we can contemplate our current starry sky.
In summary, Olbers' paradox is not an indication of the size of the universe; it merely contradicts the idea of a static universe. Size is of a different nature: the universe is so vast that light is lost in its immensity! Consequently, it struggles to reach us. Indeed, beyond a certain distance, light is so far away that it has no chance of reaching us due to the expansion of the universe. Thus, our perception of the universe is limited… since we are unable to perceive its boundaries.
Finally, expansion suggests a younger and less expansive universe in its early stages. But in reality, it is energy that has a beginning, not spacetime! It was energy that was more concentrated, offering incredible mass-energy potential. And it is energy that has a date, 13.8 billion years ago, not spacetime.
So, what still makes us believe that the universe has limits?
Arbitrariness: human beings have their own limits. Territorial borders, among others. Like their house, their garden, or their country. Thus, when they interpret their environment, they automatically look for limits. Yet, it wasn't human beings who created spacetime. They only interpret it… in their own way: with automatic limits! Limits that have never been established.
What is established, on the contrary, is the immensity of space and the cosmological principle that defines the universe as flat and infinite. A universe composed of unlimited quantum fields that interact with each other and curve spacetime under the effect of gravity! And for 13.8 billion years, these fields have contained an energy that gave "life" to our cosmos. This energy constantly evolves in complexity by traveling or transforming, but it never disappears! How is all this possible?
General relativity speaks of a gravitational singularity, a space without spacetime, while quantum mechanics considers a space with unlimited fields. Nevertheless, an extremely concentrated cosmos suggests a high mass-energy potential, similar to that of black holes. General relativity thus seems suitable for describing the origins of the universe. However, it leads to a gravitational singularity, a space without spacetime, while quantum mechanics considers a space with unlimited fields.
Introduction:
It is doubtful that the theory of everything exists: the union of forces leads them to have the same intensities. Thus the gravity which is the smallest should seriously change. However, a quasar always responds to the laws of general relativity as described by Einstein. This suggests that even in extreme temperatures, gravity remains true to itself. Nevertheless a very concentrated cosmos speaks of a high level of potential mass/energy as in black holes. Thus general relativity seems to be adapted to describe the beginnings of the universe. However, this leads to infinite gravity and where space-time is lost. These are the famous «gravitational singularities». But it is hard to believe that such a big universe comes from such a tiny point !
Literature Review:
Physical phenomena cannot be explained by general relativity alone. To understand them, it is necessary to apply all four fundamental forces, not just one. Unfortunately, the mathematics associated with general relativity is highly precise in space and time, while that associated with quantum mechanics deals only with probabilities. This mathematical difference makes their reconciliation difficult. Thus, general relativity describes an irresistible gravity that absorbs everything, while quantum mechanics evokes a mathematical impossibility: the Pauli exclusion principle. Some even believe that singularities prevail over this principle. In short, that gravitational singularities modify the laws of physics! This is impossible since everything in this universe is causal. It is the laws of physics (the cause) that generate gravitational phenomena (the consequences), and not the other way around. However, both disciplines are based on mathematics. General relativity is founded on infinite collapse, while quantum mechanics evokes an impossibility that makes the appearance of a singularity difficult. So, which one prevails?
Discussion :
To understand this, one must distinguish between causes and consequences, but also consider mathematical subtleties that have their physical realities. The laws of physics are causes, and the way fundamental forces use them are consequences. Thus, the Pauli exclusion principle leads to degeneracy pressure. With electromagnetism, this pressure resists gravity, even in a white dwarf. With the strong force, it resists it in a neutron star. It is the degeneracy pressure that changes, not the Pauli exclusion principle itself, which remains constant. Therefore, it must still be found in another form in a black hole.
It is therefore important to clearly distinguish the laws of physics from the phenomena that use them: the former are universal, the latter are local! For example, glass breaks under certain conditions, but since these conditions depend on events, the way it breaks differs locally. Thus, the laws of physics are causes, while the phenomena that result from them are consequences. To be clearer: the laws of physics are universal; they do not depend on locality; they are timeless and therefore do not vary with time. Finally, they are immutable; they cannot be transformed and therefore cannot be avoided! This makes any journey beyond c impossible. Phenomena, on the other hand, are local and depend on circumstances. Since these circumstances are variable, the phenomena associated with them are also variable. They are therefore local, temporal, and limited! The best example for distinguishing laws from their consequences is the EPR paradox: an electromagnetic phenomenon that generates the creation of a pair of attributes: a spin! Indeed, Alain Aspect succeeded in entangling photons whose spins are bound, even at a distance. This contradicts Albert Einstein's principle of locality: "two distant objects cannot have an instantaneous influence on each other." This is true for phenomena arising from fundamental forces, such as entanglement, but not for those required by the laws of physics, in this case, the creation of pairs of opposite attributes. These are universal and immediate, since they depend neither on locality nor on time. This means that nothing can escape the laws of physics and therefore the Pauli exclusion principle, not even under the influence of overwhelming gravity. Thus, the Pauli exclusion principle persists, even in a black hole, that is to say, an extreme spacetime phenomenon.
However, here is a subtle point: the Pauli exclusion principle only affects identical particles, not particles with different attributes. Differences such as spin, charge, color, angular momentum, velocity, and energy level. They are different phases of the particles and negate the Pauli exclusion principle. Thus, by increasing the energy level, it's still possible to place more particles of the same type in the same location... but not an infinite number! However, the mass of a black hole attracts an infinite number of particles that inevitably move towards its center. Therefore, once the maximum phase limit is exceeded, the Pauli exclusion principle must become insurmountable and prevent matter from occupying the same space. Neighboring spaces must then fill in the same way. As soon as their maximum is reached, adjacent spaces take over. The result is a vast number of fermion volumes nested within one another. Volumes/fields of real (and therefore massive) particles, all possessing the same attributes and all enclosed within the center of the black hole, effectively plugging it, thus preventing the appearance of a singularity.
Consequently, we must admit that the principle of gravitational singularity is dubious. In short, general relativity alone solves nothing. Now, if we turn to Niels Bohr's quantum fields, things become more interesting: they describe an environment that has no beginning, no end, and no limits (cosmological principle). An environment composed of numerous virtual fields in which particles/quanta move according to the laws of conservation of energy. Thus, a photon traveling 13.8 billion light-years (cosmic microwave background) is a quanta of energy that generates a perturbation and has been moving for 13.8 billion years in an infinite field: the field of electromagnetism! A field that is itself composed of other fields, such as magnetic or electric. Together, these define space, that is, the setting in which the action takes place: quanta/perturbations moving within the different fields and interacting with each other. And everything that exists interacts with one field or another. In this view, the universe has no limits, but the energy that interacted with it had a beginning: 13.8 billion years ago!
Findings :
In the first view, the energy that affected the universe, a universe limited by a singularity, is local. In the second, the universe has no limits. Nevertheless, its fields can be perturbed with energy (E=mc²). Therefore, what was virtual becomes real! However, infinite energy is required to ignite infinite fields. This is possible since the nature of the energy that affected our universe is unknown to us. We only know that it broke all the laws of conservation of energy upon its appearance, and thus the laws of physics associated with it, whose properties are universal. However, this is inconceivable to humans, who cherish their imaginary limits and not what transcends them!
In the version of relativity, the universe has limits, and therefore a size that is constantly increasing. Consequently, the density of the universe and its temperature decrease. Similarly, within a volume, the universe has a center. In a state of extreme compactness, the universe tends to collapse towards this center. To counteract this, a mysterious scalar field is needed, one that seems to possess all powers: exceeding the speed of light, making a point homogeneous and isotropic everywhere in spacetime, and finally, creating the matter of the universe… Quite a vast universe for such a tiny point! However, only the laws of physics are instantaneous, while only fundamental forces trigger repulsive scalar fields. Since these phenomena have different origins, they should not be confused. The first phenomenon is instantaneous because it does not depend on time, while the second depends on its bosons and therefore on speed. This makes the existence of an instantaneous scalar field impossible. This is a confusion between the laws of physics and fundamental forces.
In the quantum field theory, the universe has no beginning, no end, and no limits. It is simply there, like an eternal backdrop that fluctuates slightly (vacuum pressure) and within which the action takes place: energy that arrives from nowhere! Energy has no coordinates since it is not a point or a volume that appears. It is a global (not local) interaction that is established between the universe and the energy that activates its quantum fields. It is not confined to one place but is uniform, that is to say, everywhere. Indeed, it is enough to activate the quantum fields with energy (E=mc²) and what is virtual (empty potential) becomes real (full potential), that is to say… all the fields! This state of the universe offers the highest level of mass/energy potential per cm². It is also uniform and isotropic at every point (KMS state). However, an infinite KMS cosmos does not offer a center to the universe. A center toward which particles can drift. Without this center, even if the universe is in a state of extreme compactness (black hole), general relativity no longer applies! Indeed, all spacetime curvatures cancel each other out! As long as the quantum fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background are inoperative, the universe, as seen by quantum mechanics and general relativity, has no center! And without this center, there is no collapse due to gravity. On the other hand, there is tremendous pressure due to kinetic energy (heat). This kinetic energy needs space to express itself… in a universe that no longer has any, since all of space is filled with particles! Then come the various fundamental forces: electromagnetism should release repulsive fields that separate magnetic leptons (electrons and positrons) coexisting in the same space (with different phases). These repulsive fields are extreme and universal! Similarly, the strong force will try to join particles (confinement of quarks) to form volumes composed of quantum vacuum: hadrons! These new volumes will force space to expand… all of this to end up with a universe made up primarily of protons! So, once again, the repulsive magnetic field kicks in. In this version, the universe is also in a state of compactness (a high level of mass/energy potential), but there is no collapse. On the contrary, there is a powerful inflation of space due to extreme repulsive fields… in addition to the dynamism of the particles!
Conclusion :
General relativity speaks of a gravitational singularity whose very nature drives collapse, not expansion. To counteract this phenomenon, space would need to inflate faster than the speed of light itself… in order to make a point homogeneous and isotropic in the universe. This rampant expansion would be explained by a mysterious scalar field that creates matter at the end of its life. But none of these phenomena have been observed. They are purely theoretical and therefore doubtful in reality.
Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, more easily explains the cosmic microwave background: fields that are already uniform remain uniform as they expand. Even more so when they fill the entire universe. Indeed, if they are "ignited" by energy, all the fields materialize to infinity! This also offers a high mass/energy potential, but without a center driving collapse. With other forces interacting, this universe expands violently!
Thus, between Albert Einstein's principle of locality, which is his true greatest error (though he couldn't have known it), and the principle of the universality of quantum fields, the most obvious explanation for the Big Bang lies in quantum mechanics, not in general relativity, which is neutralized in an infinite KMS universe! So why does everyone follow Albert Einstein and his mistake instead of focusing on Niels Born: "quantum mechanics is self-sufficient"... even for explaining the Big Bang? Because, whether we like it or not, humans remain what they are: relative!
These informations come from this French book : the book of the evolution, part 1 : the origin of matter.
This volume explores the Dark Force, dark matter, and black holes, revealing the surprising complexity of the origin of matter. It explains the formation of galaxies from clouds, but also from supermassive black holes (quasars) thanks to dark matter. It also recounts the origin of the Milky Way, then the creation of the solar system. Next comes the story of the Earth and the Moon, with the arrival of water, comets, and meteors. This essay concludes with stories by Pascale Courtois, inspired by the book's teachings. Thus, young and old alike are entertained while enriching their knowledge and understanding.
How did the universe form? Many are looking for answers to this question. But these only happen in bits with scientific discoveries. Alas, between discovery and understanding, there is a long work. A work that is done here in order to explain the inexplicable. Thus this work teaches about the fundamental principles of the physical laws of the universe. It gives the point of view of general relativity about the Big Bang. However, this one is contradicted by quantum mechanics. The latter offers a completely different version of the beginnings of the universe, detailed here.