Neoclassical Physics and Quantum Gravity

Let’s talk about the expansion of spacetime! In the process we will examine one of the largest errors in LCDM Big Bang cosmology.

In 1929, Edwin Hubble discovered that galaxies are not just standing out there, but that they are moving away from one another. Using his sparse data and some approximations, Hubble concluded that the galaxies receded from each other with speeds proportional to their distance. A galaxy twice as far from ours would move away from us twice as fast. This became known as the expansion of the Universe. From then on, the Universe gained a history. It became an entity existing not only in space but also in time. For if the galaxies were moving away, that means they were closer in the past. If we push this image to the limit, there was a time far back when all galaxies were squeezed into a very small region of space. That time, by extrapolation, was the beginning of cosmic history, the moment in time that became known as the Big Bang, where scientific reasoning, as we will see, turns murky.

Edwin Hubble and a really big telescope: How cosmology was born. Marcelo Gleiser [MG]

Expansion of the universe is misunderstood by scientists. Every particle assembly slowly redshifts energy into spacetime aether. Each particle assembly displaces Higgs spacetime aether assemblies from a volume of Euclidean time and space. The displacement volume varies with the energy of the particle assembly. Nature shape-shifts the Noether cores in spacetime aether particles, photons, neutrinos, and all standard model particle assemblies as a function of particle energy. Particle energy includes the internal kinetic and potential energies as modified by assembly velocity and the local spacetime potential fluctuations. The photons we observe have passed through Higgs aether spacetime that was expanding in place.

Reactions shed energy in many ways. There are energy shedding mechanisms that repurpose Higgs aether assemblies and spin them up as photons or neutrinos. One energy shedding mechanism uses the personality charges of fermions to excite the Higgs aether. In some cases this mechanism produces a photon which will have Bose-Einstein flatness and zero mass, aka apparent energy. In other cases the photon energy threshold is not reached, so a neutrino launches. Neutrinos don’t quite have enough energy to reach Bose-Einstein state and they don’t have perfect energy shielding, so their apparent energy oscillates over time as a changing orientation of its three dipoles reveals mixes of the three energies.

The point is that there are a lot of processes going on simultaneously that are changing the size of Noether core particles dynamically. At large scales the net sum of these processes is a steady state universe where things swirl around to some degree, but there is no outward expansion as a whole.

Note that these shapeshifting processes, particularly the ones for the life cycles of the photon and the spacetime, implement Einstein’s geometry at scale. In other words, most of spacetime by volume is dominated by very small low apparent energy Higgs Noether cores. This is doubly true since all matter is formed upon Noether cores.

Now let’s map the cosmology ontologies from LCDM to NPQG. The emerging LCDM confusion involves a tree of incorrect interpretations.

LCDM Cosmology	NPQG Cosmology
Edwin Hubble observes photons from various galaxy sources. He discovers that the observed photon specta are shifted towards lower energy, i.e. redshifted. Hubble discovers that the redshift of photon spectra correlates with distance estimates.	Facts.
Hubble attributes the redshift vs. distance correlation to be caused by the Doppler effect. “Hubble concluded that the galaxies receded from each other with speeds proportional to their distance.” [MG]	Photon emissions from moving sources may experience a Doppler effect. However, Hubble’s conclusion was incorrect. The redshift distance correlation was not caused by the Doppler effect. Instead, photons experience a very small energy toll as they travel through expanding Higgs spacetime aether. This type of redshift was the cause of Hubble’s correlation.
“Einstein, then, assumed a finite, spherical, and static Universe, one with a closed geometry characterized by a three-dimensional generalization of the surface of a sphere. As such it had a radius, which was determined by the total mass of the Universe. This is as it should be, since matter bends geometry. As he proudly announced in 1922, “The complete dependence of the geometrical upon the physical properties becomes clearly apparent by means of this equation.”” [MG]	Einstein was correct that the universe is static, aka steady-state on large scales. Einstein was incorrect in his imagination of the universe as finite and spherical. In NPQG cosmology, the universe has no known beginning or end in time or space.
“Much to Einstein’s disappointment, this solution came with a high price tag. If the Universe is finite and static, and gravity is an attractive force, matter will tend to collapse on itself unless it has negative pressure, which is a weird property. When filled with a constant density of matter that has zero or positive pressure, this Universe simply could not exist. Something else was needed.” [MG]	NPQG parallelizes the Big Bang into mini-Bangs implemented by supermassive black holes and distributed in time and space. These mini-bang events or processes emit Higgs spacetime aether assemblies from inside the black hole. So not only is there recycling that regenerates a flow of Higgs aether, but Higgs assemblies change size as they lose energy, first inflating rapidly, and thereafter expanding slowly. However, since each bang process is galaxy local, the outflows from each galaxy meet and reach a steady state temperature of 2.8K.
“To keep his Universe static, Einstein added a term into the equations of general relativity, one he initially dubbed a negative pressure. It soon became known as the cosmological constant. Mathematics allowed the concept, but it had absolutely no justification from physics, no matter how hard Einstein and others tried to find one. The cosmological constant clearly detracted from the formal beauty and simplicity of Einstein’s original equations of 1915, which achieved so much without any need for arbitrary constants or additional assumptions. It amounted to a cosmic repulsion chosen to precisely balance the tendency of matter to collapse on itself. In modern parlance we call this fine tuning, and in physics it is usually frowned upon.” [MG]	Einstein’s equations work very well. They model the aggregate affect of the interactions of standard matter assemblies with the Higgs aether assemblies. The equations cover an incredible range of matter density from deep spacetime to the event horizon of black holes. We are unable to observe Einstein’s theory applicability inside a black hole however. In the point charge universe, the inside of the black hole is characterized by a very high gradient of point charge dipole radius as a function of the radius to the center of the black hole. If point charge dipoles were to escape through this gradient they would experience very rapid inflation. On the other hand, for infalling matter, not only does it decay quickly to dipoles, but those dipoles experience deflation as their dipoles descend to some equilibrium layer.
“Einstein knew that the only reason for his cosmological constant to exist was to secure a static and stable finite Universe. He wanted this kind of Universe, and he did not want to look much further. Quietly hiding in his equations, though, was another model for the Universe, one with an expanding geometry. In 1922, the Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann would find this solution. As for Einstein, it was only in 1931, after visiting Hubble in California, that he accepted cosmic expansion and discarded at long last his vision of a static Cosmos.” [MG]	The emerging LCDM cosmology described in the quotes shows how a vague jumble of conceptions and imaginations were refined over time to match the evolving science. To the credit of Hubble and Einstein, the LCDM cosmology has done a decent job of matching observations. Tragically, the narrative of LCDM is all inside out because of a lack of a foundation in point charge theory. With the architecture of nature described by NPQG we can see nature for what it is, an emergent set of assemblies that form from energetic point charges.

I hope you enjoy following my sleuthing out nature and the history of how physics and cosmology went off track into narrative fantasy land.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California

p.s. In a 2018 paper (1107.2485v2.pdf (arxiv.org)) J.G. Hartnett examines whether the universe is really expanding. That caught my eye and the table below shows the evidence pro and con that was examined. It would be really great if scientists would perform such an analysis on NPQG cosmology. My expectation is that not only would it reconcile all the confusion, but that it can explain why the confusion happened. I expect that the JWST telescope observations will shed a lot of light on this.