Our primordial chook or goog dilemma of the Big Bang.
MW Rhodes © 20221014
The giants of science and their great Big Bang, Primordial Chicken, Something from Nothing for real.,
Chicken or the egg? = Thermal radiation oscillations or the mechanism that transmits it? Big Bang votes for Chicken, I’m thinking about an Egg..
Want to have some fun? Read this, decide for yourself and leave your answer in the form at the very bottom of this post.
The chook or the goog? There’s a form below that you can leave your answer on.
According to nature, chooks evolved from a goog-laying reptilian type critter. In the beginning of the universe this may not be far from it either in physics terms.
It would be interesting to know.
Welcome to my scribbles.
If I may, before you read on please read the following entries.
https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/7/successful-space-species-nbsp
https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/12/successful-space-species-ii
The Giants of Science and their great Big Bang.
Georges Lemaitre was on a path then some science gods stepped in and contributed with their brilliance, influence and authority. The reinforcement of these gods and the authority they wielded altered the path Lemaitre was on and it turned a simple cold big bang into a smokin’ hot 10^32 degrees celsius or hotter Big Bang than the universe could possibly ever create. The Ev of S-bonds notwithstanding.
I sometimes wonder how this original model might have evolved had these gods not stepped in.
Of course, I’m being silly by calling them gods and there are lots of ironies one could poetically play with but they were the giants of science. Hubble, Einstein and other gods gave it their stamps of approval with their own contributions and considerations.
A few hundred years ago, the Royal society was established with a code of arms and a motto “Nullius in verba,” which translates to “take no one’s word for it.” basically it means that the authorities dictating the knowledge of what things are and how things be, may not be as correct as the authority dictates them to be.
In today's fickle pickle sociopolitical environment this might be considered a society of TinHat theorists who were average everyday people but who were actively interested in finding out about the nature of everything and who weren’t happy with the official explanations of things. It’s the society that brought us so many wonderful discoveries of our natural world and new questions to ask.
As time went on and the value and power of good knowledge became apparent the motto of this society then became “Conidunt en scientia” or “ Trust in Science”. Prior to this TinHat society the authority of knowledge was the Holy church and their slogan was “Confidio in deo” or “Trust in god”.
So I was being silly by saying that the science gods stepped in but perhaps poetic parallels exist. Here’s a nice little article on that history path of science.
https://www.palladiummag.com/2022/10/10/the-transformations-of-science
Hi, I’m Murry let’s explore some of the science that came long after Georges Lemaitre presented his Cold Big bang hypothesis. I’m going to ignore the gods authority for now and see how the Cold Big Bang theory might have evolved given the century of science since its inception.
One of my Primordial Bush Chooks. Her name is Begerk.
Why am I doing this? Because I can and it’s fun and because there remains a chicken or the egg conundrum in today’s Big Bang that niggles at me.
The chicken is thermal radiation and the egg is the mechanism that makes it oscillate. Science mandates that an environment of more than 10^32 degrees celsius of thermal radiation needed to exist before the recombination of sub-atomic bonds can occur. It may be hotter by now.
Consider this amount of energy to transform the entirety of a universe whose edge we still have yet to discover. There are videos below that better describe the reasoning for the chicken and as much as I love chickens I love baby eggs too.
The conundrum is, that these bonds are the mechanism that makes thermal radiation that makes the bonds that make the radiation. Hence a chicken ‘n’ egg scenario. A good enough reason to play around with some alternatives that make the thermal radiation rather than just have them magically pre-exist.
I honestly can only think of one way to make thermal energy without the mechanisms and it requires a probability function that shows the chance is almost infinitely as close to zero as the natural world can muster plus then we run into the problem of accumulating all the thermal energy into one or more singularities and then containing it. Containment is a problem too because then somehow ignoring the forces containing it or introducing another new thing to then release that containment force/environment.
So I’ve gone down a different path that starts cold without relying on contained radiation that couldn’t exist until the mechanisms that make it does. Indeed stuff that contains the potential for such radiation but has not yet transformed into that form of energy.
We can produce thermal radiation via matter and gravity easily but turning radiation into matter takes some doing on a path of much greater resistance. I think this grants the levity to explore the other side of this Big Bang and consider that matter came from an environment before thermal radiation existed. This translates to an environment of Zero Degrees, Kelvin in a purer flux of space. I prefer the path of least resistance as do all the laws of nature and so I hope these notes do not cause too much resistance.
My apologies, if you don’t know who Georges Lemaitre is, he was a physics teacher and a priest who started toying with the expansion idea in winding the observable universe’s clock back to the beginning of time to the moment of creation. Basically, he got the ball rolling with a cold Big Bang.
Technology for studying our cosmology was improving and new observations came to light where the expansion of the universe was being reported by observers. One of the gods of science Edwin Hubble made an official observation of it and confirmed the phenomena then he engaged in the theory of winding the clock back with Lemaitre. He added the heat of all the stars cumulatively into the Unity of the Big Bang and made it smoking hot. With the recent developments in nuclear science, he predicted that if a big bang were to occur then it was possibly atomic in nature and would show thermal radiation somewhere in the background.
A little further on the possible background radiation was discovered and so this reinforced Hubble’s suggestion and contribution to the Hot Big Bang. This pretty much sealed the deal that the Big Bang had to be Hot. Further nuclear science suggests it needed to be hotter than 10^32b degrees celsius to account for the recombination of subatomic bonds to occur. That figure has grown I believe.
Einstein’s brand as a god of science was well established and energy, matter, time and gravity was right down his alley so he also met with Lemaitre on the theory and with a handshake that says enough, reinforced the theory. The tragedy of Einstien’s endorsement is that by accepting the Hot Big Bang this may have blindsided him from his search for a grander more unified theory. One that has been right in front of us for quite a while but just a dot or two not connected. It’d be like our ancestors trying to figure out the magic of how to make fire and by the time someone connected the dots they learned that the materials were always present and easily accessible for thousands of years of searching and yet connecting those dots of rubbing the sticks didn’t happen until it did. Anyway, I’ll explore this further in Successful Space Stuff III. By that time, stuff won’t need too much splaining.
That’s enough history for now.
Let me introduce you to a sequence that does not require more thermal energy than the natural universe has ever revealed to us. Our measurements and extrapolations of Ev for breaking nuclear bonds may not be nature’s path of least resistance. Indeed by the path of least resistance, it’s far easier for us to make radiation from matter than it is to make matter from radiation. Maybe nature is hiding a conservation card up its sleeve. Near Zero Degrees Kelvin, our physics gets a little unpredictable. Bonds get weaker and things start to fall apart as atoms get closer to this final equation of state threshold. It’s anti-intuitive because thermodynamics normally sees atoms/elements bond closer as the temperature drops. We also see bonds get weaker as temperatures rise which is the common understanding and origin of intuition of adding more thermal energy to the big bang to account for the separation of subatomic particles from the nuclide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero
Here’s a little philosophy.
Matter or the stuff with the properties of mass is little more than a tightly wound field flux. How did it get that way? How does a quanta of a uniform field come into existence as a quanta? At Zero degrees Kelvin the flux exists in perfect harmony, balanced to entropy. That quantisation or parcelling of such a field can occur without a mechanism means that the field itself is exerting something of itself onto itself. The theoretical graviton is a parcel but it can’t be segmented into a parcel without some force or exertion acting on a flux containing the properties that roll into or get concentrated into that parcel. Chicken or egg?
Radiations of thermal or electromagnetic or electroweak fields or others can be observed in nature to be transmitted, to be transported and then to be transformed by the harmonics present in the waveforms in sympathy to the fields tightly wound in the bonds or other polarised parcels. If the harmonics do not exist in the signal then the constructive harmonies do not respond. Polarities or phase shifts away from the natural symmetries are those that can communicate along the flux for its own harmonic tendency toward the path of least resistance. I know, I’m not very good at philosophy.
Philosophy can go beyond infinity so I’ll stop now
Here is a poem for you and then we can go on and apply some physics.
https://www.murryrhodes.com/our-place-in-space/2022/10/2/something-from-nothing
Primordial Chicken.
Where the chicken or the egg provides a conundrum of one object cancelling the other out in the order of things, the ability to get something from nothing is it own conundrum and yet that we observe fields telling us that the stuff of those fields is not nothing but something and so what can we do but conclude that nothing never existed and tinker with what little of something we have even if it looks like nothing. Of course we can redefine the word nothing to exclude some things but then you’d have to be a god with authority to do that.
I don’t want to get stuck at the beginning of all things coming from nothing because it is a complex thing to solve and describe and once we get past the beginning we then have a physical universe to try to understand or describe and do so while observing the verifiable laws of nature.
Below is a cool video on the Schwinger effect it’s very close to a model that I started drawing some time ago. Enjoy the video, I’ll make a comment afterwards and then we can move on from this nothingness stuff and see some stuff about something.
Visual of a few primary symmetries.
I was unaware of the Schwinger effect while I was toying with my own symmetry scribbles so I was really happy to find out about it in the video above. It has some striking parallels in the Hex symmetry I was toying with but in a 3D XYZ three-dimensional configuration beginning with the primary numerical symmetry of (one) in a unit sphere but where the hexagonal symmetry of six results from squashing a large number of unit spheres with a uniform inward force where the spheres tend toward the path of least resistance morphing the (one) spheres into Hexagonal prisms.
In the diagram, stack A on B on A for 3D where blue and green represent a binary for up & down spin requirements. Not indicative but exploratory where boundaries are only representations of apparent as they are transitional fields.
I don’t much like the position of the diamond in this 2D Schwinger as it introduces a weakness in the symmetry with weakened spots along the long edges. Besides, we don’t really have a 2D universe but an XYZ three-dimensional one. Adding or subtracting dimensions to our universe seems like the stuff that only gods can do when forcing things to fit their narrative so I try to stay on the XYZ. I may use the weakness of the diamond symmetry somewhere else as a weakness may be required.
I’ll share more notes on my nothing-from-nothing observations in a separate scribble post, it’s fun but can get very scribbly. Let’s move on from all this nothing stuff. I’ve got something to show you and you may like it. It’s just a sequence of stuff that happens after the something-from-nothing happened that gave us the initial cold stuff that started unwinding a tightly wound bound bond decaying the properties of mass tending back to its original harmonious entropy and producing the oscillations of thermal energy that exist in this physical universe.
The end of nothing happened and something came to exist. It started in an environment of Zero Degrees Kelvin and by the time something arrived, there was still no thermal radiation in the universe because the mechanisms that makes it haven’t started making it yet. But the very moment this sub atomic bond formed out the cold low energy of nothingness, it did start to produce some kind of oscillations that we call the weak force. It’s beta decay. It’s produced from the bond of quarks which are the tightly wound field flux.
The dominant natural symmetry of three played a role in rolling the field flux. It’s dominant because although there can be some variation in production the main production of such particles occurs in threes.
The polarity of fields such as those identified in the binary properties of quarks ( Up or Down ) comes from the squashing of these unit spheres which in itself provides the foundations of polarity.
In a two dimension anecdote, if we take three wheels touching side by side on a flat surface the wheels will not roll. Remove the flat surface and the wheels roll freely if given a nudge. We notice the two outer wheels rotate in the same direction, the inner wheel rotates in the opposite direction. Our hexagonal units are contracted flux bundles of old fields and so they contain more flux per unit volume than the media of flux from which they came. Up,Up and Down three units, two phases. It’s classical physics on a small scale.
To get a feel for nodes and primary symmetries in field flux we could visualise strings as they represent certain apparent forces that we are more familiar with. Here’s something of the like below. It’s not saying that strings exist and this has very little to do with the probability functions of string theory, this is just a fun visual exercise. OR you may like to try it with strings. Some trials can be anchored and some not maybe even some elastic ones to add a little spice to the recipe. :)
Are the flux fields strings? Not unless there exists an analogue sequential bonding field which then requires its own mechanism to exist which is another chicken or egg scenario. Perhaps the apparent boundaries of the field in a particular state and our demand of probability distribution are applicable when working with it but other than this, string boundaries are only mathematically apparent possible boundaries. So too are hadrons but it’s the tight field interaction and resistance that defines the boundary distinctly.
Speaking of Hadrons. The particle being produced by these bonding quarks in the symmetry of three is a free neutron. I know. It goes against the common theory of squashing an electron into a proton to balance and conserve the charge but how about the conservation of mass? This was a niggling thing for me as you’ll see below.
Our current science shows that Free neutrons decay into an electron with apparent mass, some beta mass which has 10x the mass of an electron and leaves a proton. So a proton is just a depleted neutron and the magical thing here is that the electron is effectively a phase-shifted charge of the neutron system leaving the system now oppositely charged to the electron. A binary system, like polarity but separated. It’s quite amazing really.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron_decay
So the niggling thing about squashing an electron and proton together to form a neutron is the missing mass of the beta mass. The beta mass or weak force seems to have been ignored in the presence of gravity. Supplying the Beta radiations for something like a neutron star is a complexity that nature may be able to achieve in some of today’s physical environments but on a universal scale to account for the number of neutrons in our universe may not be a path of least resistance in the early universe.
Basically meaning that the neutron star is said to be the result of an Iron galaxy core gravity being sufficient to squash an electron into a proton in these Iron cores. From where the beta radiation comes?.. Perhaps from the decaying neutrons in the system. It’s a chicken or the egg again on several levels.
Ok, say we’ve summarised some science and added a few concepts that don’t agree with the authoritative science but this must be the case if we are to explore new things. Besides this just leads to a possible pathway from the original cold big bang but with some additional stuff that Lemaitre didn’t have access to at the time.
I’ll finish up by leaving you with a sequence that I’ll describe in further detail in later posts.
This sequence begins from the very moment that the cold emptiness of space begins to Quasi precipitate neutrons out of the fabric of space. Quasi precipitate because I don’t know how to make Zero Degrees Kelvin any colder and average precipitation requires cooling or media saturation in order to achieve a new equation of state threshold as observed in the macro world.
N= free Neutron, not fNitrogen..
fN->H->He->Li = Primary mineral distribution event.
So the chicken of the egg? It’s just a bit of fun. Here are some videos that explain the Hot Big Bang plus a few problems we seem to be facing in our progress in science. As long as my writings may seem consider these presentations. It’s a long topic to explore. :)