Tensions in Cosmology

I thought I would start a list of tensions in cosmology. I’ll include the NPQG solution in bold red font. I’ll also group issues that are related to the same NPQG solutions.

  • The root cause of the big bang and inflation.
    • The physical implementations of the big bang and inflation is parallel, intermittent, independent and ongoing.
    • Each galaxy is going through a grand recycling cycle.
    • The SMBH at the center of each galaxy is responsible for the constant ‘crunch’ of ingested matter-energy towards a Planck core state.
    • A Planck core may breach the event horizon at the poles of an SMBH under certain conditions (e.g., spin) and jet for as far as 3 megaparsecs.
  • The variety of inconsistent measurements of the Hubble ‘constant‘ as well as non overlapping portions of error ranges.
    • Expansion is galaxy local.
    • The universe is not expanding outward as a whole.
    • We would expect the Hubble rate to vary.
    • Galaxies are not receding from one another in fact just the opposite galaxies expand into one another.
    • Accelerating expansion — it appears to be a difference that grows due to two different calculation methods.
      • The accelerated expansion idea was that as type Ia supernovae have almost the same intrinsic brightness (a standard candle), and since objects that are further away appear dimmer, we can use the observed brightness of these supernovae to measure the distance to them. The distance can then be compared to the supernovae’s cosmological redshift, which measures how much the universe has expanded since the supernova occurred. The unexpected result was that objects in the universe are moving away from one another at an accelerated rate. Cosmologists at the time expected that recession velocity would always be decelerating, due to the gravitational attraction of the matter in the universe. Confirmatory evidence has been found in baryon acoustic oscillations, and in analyses of the clustering of galaxies.” – Wikipedia
  • The age of the universe.
    • The age of the universe is estimated at 13.8B years by ΛCDM and is calculated by four methods according to Ethan Siegel.
      • The density and temperature imperfections in the cosmic microwave background, left over from the Big Bang,
      • The clustering of stars and galaxies at present and going back billions of light years,
      • The Hubble expansion rate of the fabric of the Universe,
      • The history of star formation and galactic evolution
    • Measurements of the expansion rate of the universe can be used to calculate its approximate age by extrapolating backwards in time” – Wikipedia (This was LeMaitre’s idea.)
    • Some processes have durations much larger than 13.8B years which is suspiciously odd that we would happen to find ourselves near the beginning of that cycle.
      • “Small, relatively cold, low-mass red dwarfs fuse hydrogen slowly and will remain on the main sequence for hundreds of billions of years or longer” – Wikipedia
      • “Astrophysical models suggest that red dwarfs of 0.1 M☉ may stay on the main sequence for some six to twelve trillion years, gradually increasing in both temperature and luminosity, and take several hundred billion years more to collapse, slowly, into a white dwarf.”
      • Evaporation time for black holes based on Hawking radiation alone measured in unbelievably long time and also based on ingesting nothing else in that timeframe.
    • With the correct understanding of the galaxy local recycling model, it is evident that the universe is much older than previously thought.
    • The galaxy local recycling model does not lend itself to determination of beginning or end or size of the universe in any obvious way.
    • Until theorized otherwise the age, future, and size of the universe should be considered unknown and treated as infinite.
    • Note LeMaitre’s flawed logic in extrapolating backwards with the apriori assumption of a single process.
    • Perhaps the 13.8B year figure could be related to the duration of a typical recycling cycle in a galaxy.
  • The article The Standard Model of Cosmology: A Skeptic’s Guide by Douglas Scott ( has a list of technically detailed tensions in ΛCDM. I will defer going through those for now.
  • This paper lists six major observational differences from the predictions of ΛCDM.
  • This paper discusses ΛCDM issues at small scales, i.e., galactic scale.
  • ALMA Discovers Massive Rotating Disk in Early Universe “A new discovery made with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) of a massive rotating disk galaxy, seen when the Universe was only ten percent of its current age, challenges the traditional models of galaxy formation.”

The following list is from Wikipedia:

  • Problem of time: In quantum mechanics time is a classical background parameter and the flow of time is universal and absolute. In general relativity time is one component of four-dimensional spacetime, and the flow of time changes depending on the curvature of spacetime and the spacetime trajectory of the observer. How can these two concepts of time be reconciled?
    • Absolute time is an abstract concept in the vessel that contains the universe which is a 3D Euclidean void space.
    • In the context of the spacetime æther each composite particle with a shell experiences its own sense of time related to the energy density of the shell which is stored in the speed relative to local speed of light of the Planck spheres comprising the shell. At high particle energies the particle experiences time dilation, meaning time appears slower to an observer in the Euclidean frame. The Euclidean frame or Map 1 is the proper terminology in NPQG as opposed to ‘non-relativistic’ in GR which suggests that the observer is located in low energy spacetime æther.
  • Cosmic inflation: Is the theory of cosmic inflation in the very early universe correct, and, if so, what are the details of this epoch? What is the hypothetical inflaton scalar field that gave rise to this cosmic inflation? If inflation happened at one point, is it self-sustaining through inflation of quantum-mechanical fluctuations, and thus ongoing in some extremely distant place?
    • See the discussion earlier in this post. What has been called an ‘inflaton scalar field’ is a Planck particle plasma jetted from the Planck core of an SMBH. The Planck plasma quickly forms photons and other shelled particles which rapidly expand or inflate as they undergo energy shedding transactions.
  • Horizon problem: Why is the distant universe so homogeneous when the Big Bang theory seems to predict larger measurable anisotropies of the night sky than those observed? Cosmological inflation is generally accepted as the solution, but are other possible explanations such as a variable speed of light more appropriate?
    • With the implementation of the Big Bang and Inflation being billions and trillions of galaxy local processes in the observable universe, each based upon exactly the same physics and starting point (Planck core) then isotropy is to be expected.
  • Origin and future of the universe: How did the conditions for anything to exist arise? Is the universe heading towards a Big Freeze, a Big Rip, a Big Crunch, or a Big Bounce? Or is it part of an infinitely recurring cyclic model?
    • See the discussion earlier in this post. It is a cyclic model after all, but a parallel cyclic model.
  • Size of universe: The diameter of the observable universe is about 93 billion light-years, but what is the size of the whole universe?
    • See the discussion earlier in this post.
  • Baryon asymmetry: Why is there far more matter than antimatter in the observable universe? (This may be solved due to the apparent asymmetry in neutrino-antineutrino oscillations.)
    • Planck sphere particles are immutable, which is even stronger than conserved.
    • We can be assured that there are an equal number of electrinos and positrinos in the universe.
    • As scale is reduced the proportion of electrinos to positrinos remains roughly equal, even to rather small scales of neutral atoms.
    • Some processes are capable of creating an imbalance, which results in a charged state.
    • Specifically, we can surmise that a reaction ingredient to the formation of a proton includes an anti-electron (positron) and likewise a reaction ingredient to the formation of a neutron includes an anti-neutrino.
  • Cosmological constant problem: Why does the zero-point energy of the vacuum not cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?
    • This problem is also called the vacuum catastrophe.
    • QFT calculated the energy density of the vacuum as 10113 which is insanely higher than free space.
    • It turns out that when the vacuum, e.g., the æther transitions to the Planck core state, if we calculate the energy density of closely packed Planck spheres each carrying the Planck energy it matches the 10113 of QFT.
  • Dark matter: What is the identity of dark matter? Is it a particle? Is it the lightest superpartner (LSP)? Or, do the phenomena attributed to dark matter point not to some form of matter but actually to an extension of gravity?
    • Dark matter is implemented by the particles comprising the æther.
    • The æther is generally quite low energy in free space but gains energy in the proximity of standard matter-energy.
  • Dark energy: What is the cause of the observed accelerated expansion (de Sitter phase) of the universe? Why is the energy density of the dark energy component of the same magnitude as the density of matter at present when the two evolve quite differently over time; could it be simply that we are observing at exactly the right time? Is dark energy a pure cosmological constant or are models of quintessence such as phantom energy applicable?
    • Dark energy and accelerated expansion issues needs to be recast in a galaxy local context.
    • Accelerated expansion is detected by a comparison of Hubble rate to luminosity.
    • Since Hubble rate is not a universe wide phenomenon (see above) it is not really clear if dark energy is an issue.
  • Dark flow: Is a non-spherically symmetric gravitational pull from outside the observable universe responsible for some of the observed motion of large objects such as galactic clusters in the universe?
    • There may be large concentrations of matter-energy beyond our observational capabilities.
  • Axis of evil: Some large features of the microwave sky at distances of over 13 billion light years appear to be aligned with both the motion and orientation of the solar system. Is this due to systematic errors in processing, contamination of results by local effects, or an unexplained violation of the Copernican principle?
    • Since bang/inflation/expansion are galaxy local, it is possible that this issue is a misinterpretation of evidence.
  • Shape of the universe: What is the 3-manifold of comoving space, i.e. of a comoving spatial section of the universe, informally called the “shape” of the universe? Neither the curvature nor the topology is presently known, though the curvature is known to be “close” to zero on observable scales. The cosmic inflation hypothesis suggests that the shape of the universe may be unmeasurable, but, since 2003, Jean-Pierre Luminet, et al., and other groups have suggested that the shape of the universe may be the Poincaré dodecahedral space. Is the shape unmeasurable; the Poincaré space; or another 3-manifold?
    • The background vessel of the universe is a Euclidean void space, which is flat.
  • The largest structures in the universe are larger than expected. Current cosmological models say there should be very little structure on scales larger than a few hundred million light years across, due to the expansion of the universe trumping the effect of gravity. But the Sloan Great Wall is 1.38 billion light-years in length. And the largest structure currently known, the Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall, is up to 10 billion light-years in length. Are these actual structures or random density fluctuations? If they are real structures, they contradict the ‘End of Greatness’ hypothesis which asserts that at a scale of 300 million light-years structures seen in smaller surveys are randomized to the extent that the smooth distribution of the universe is visually apparent.
    • See earlier in the post on the physical implementation of bang/inflation/expansion as galaxy local and an indeterminately and possibly infinitely old universe.
  • Extra dimensions: Does nature have more than four spacetime dimensions? If so, what is their size? Are dimensions a fundamental property of the universe or an emergent result of other physical laws? Can we experimentally observe evidence of higher spatial dimensions?
    • No. The universe is quite simple after all.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : August 6, 2020 : v1

By J Mark Morris

I am imagining and reverse engineering a model of nature and sharing my journey via social media. Join me! I would love to have collaborators in this open effort. To support this research please donate:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s