Sylwester's 'Everlasting theory'

[paddoboy]

Particle physicists and cosmologists block my theory since 1997 but it is obvious that without the succeeding phase transitions of the Higgs field there will not be a significant progress in theoretical particle physics, in theoretical cosmology, in theory of DNA and in theory of minds.

I don't believe that for one minute.
This isn't the age of Galileo, the church no longer runs the state or science.
We have a legitimate tried and tested scientific methodology and peer review system that all potential theories need to submit to, to gain recognition and validity.
Your hypothesis has obviously failed that....I cannot tell you exactly why, other then to say it is substantially flawed in some way.

A few more questions anyway....
As a practical scientist [which I'll presume you are] what notable scientific instrument do you have access to?
LHC, SLAC, RHIC?....any of the worlds notable telescopes? the HST?

You make some extraordinary claims in your above post: Don't you think that those claims require extraordinary observational or experimental evidence?

You claim that it is difficult to convince people, and that thousands of papers published in peer review journals, are railing against you, and preventing acceptance of your claims.......This is the year 2014!
How can such conspiracies be possible?

You do realise that on this forum alone, we have three alternative theorists, all claiming to have a validated TOE, and all are pushing it with as much 100% faitre complei certainty as yours.......So again, why wouldn't any layman or scientists alike not put such apparently arrogant claims down to delusions of grandeur?

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

Paddoboy, you prove that you understand nothing. You, as well, do not understand what you are reading.

Can you prove that at least one my sentence in my last post is untrue? Of course, you are unable to do it and it does not follow from the fact that you are a layman. Just you are very weak thinker. Why?

Even a layman must understand that sizeless/mathematical point cannot have any physical properties such as, for example, bare mass, electric charge or spin but it is the foundations of the Standard Model. Do you understand it? If you do not understand such simple conclusion then our “discussion” is useless.

In my post, I wrote the word ‘theoretical’ using the capital letters. It was especially for you. But all can see that you did not notice it because you write about experiments, not about theory.

Do you understand that the string/M theory is still the not fruitful theory?
Do you understand that for 50 years scientists cannot calculate the exact masses and spin of the nucleons from the initial conditions applied in the Quantum Chromodynamics?

Do you understand that my set of criterions defining better theory is indeed the correct definition? Can you prove that it is untrue that my theory contains at least three times less parameters than the Standard Model, that my theory describes more and gives better results? Can you? If you are unable to do it then you should not be cynical.

Moreover, contrary to the Standard Model and General Relativity, within my theory I calculated the fundamental physical constants from initial conditions and proved that the renormalization is not needed. Just contrary to the two leading mainstream theories, the Everlasting Theory is free from singularities and infinities.

So once more: can you prove that at least one my sentence in this post is untrue? Why you are such naïve layman? You should read more articles concerning theoretical particle physics and theoretical cosmology. Then, you should notice that there are tens unsolved BASIC problems which we can solve directly within the Everlasting Theory.

Yes, it is 2014 year and it is tragedy that the lacking part of ultimate theory, i.e. the succeeding phase transitions of the Higgs field which solve all basic problems, is outside the mainstream theories. In future, historians of science will write about the period when scientific army blocked my theory.

 

[paddoboy]

In future, historians of science will write about the period when scientific army blocked my theory.

Oh crap!...Pure unmitigated crap!

Yes, as you so sarcastically have noted, I am a layman. But a layman quite able in most cases to sort the wheat from the chaff and able to implement that quality of logic and common sense, the two qualities that alternative theorists such as yourself ignore....and a layman quite able to treat with deserved contempt, the inflated egos and delusions of grandeur so often displayed by would be's if they could be's, alternative theorists.

I'm also a layman who has noted that you have posted 30 pages of your silly ego driven claims, interspersed with plenty of criticism as to why you are delusional....I'm also a layman that doesn't believe that mainstream science is going to close ranks and gang up on any new potential hypothesis out of pure vindictiveness.

There is a scientific method to be followed and that includes peer review, and in most cases they do get it right.
And again, common sense and logic tells me that if there was any substance in your theory, mainstream would be lapping it up....I mean the potential for furthering knowledge and further application is mind boggling.

I also realise that for someone with such a highly inflated ego and delusions of grandeur, to be told he is delusional by a layman, would not be too easy to take.

As someone early on in this thread has noted, what you have in fact, is not a theory, it's just high-grade woo.

 

[paddoboy]

1.
Can we explain TODAY theoretically the ‘acceleration’ of the expansion of the Universe? No. This means that there can be not in existence the ‘acceleration’.

As a layman, I am unable to see how acceleration is not possible, just because we cannot explain it.



The above is on page 1, and apparently goes down hill from that silly claim.

 

[paddoboy]

. This means that the ‘acceleration’ CAN BE in existence or CAN BE NOT. My theory proves that the ‘can be not’ is correct.

Again, from page 1.......As someone who claims to be a scientist of sorts, surely you know that any scientific theory is not proof....Scientific theories do not deal in proofs....

Just part of the downhill topography of this thread I mentioned in the previous post.

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

I in details explained why acceleration of expansion of our Universe is impossible (see my previous posts). But you are unable to notice it. A short recapitulation is as follows.

Constancy of the gravitational constant leads to conclusion that the Cosmos composed of the universes and antiuniverses, as a whole, cannot even expand. Due to expansion of the dark energy, there expand the universes and antiuniverses. The dark energy are the additional Einstein-spacetime components so the front of the dark energy has the radial speed equal to the speed of light in ‘vacuum’ i.e. the c. The Einstein-spacetime components cannot have speed higher than the c so acceleration of expansion of the dark energy is impossible. Acceleration of expansion of the groups of galaxies was possible at the beginning of expansion when the radial speeds of the groups of galaxies were smaller than the local radial speeds of the dark energy.

Paddoboy, you should read more. Even cosmologists assume that maybe the distant Type Ia supernovae are fainter than they should be due to the incompleteness of the General Relativity. It is obvious that this theory is incomplete because GR leads to singularities and infinities the same as the Standard Model. Moreover, the modern physics postulate existence of tachyonic field which is beyond the GR. In the Everlasting Theory, the Higgs field consists of the superluminal internally structureless pieces of space (which I refer to as the tachyons).

Paddoboy, you completely do not understand what in physics is assumed to be accepted. It follows from the definition of a better theory (less initial conditions, more described phenomena and better theoretical results). Today, my theory is the best theory because it solves problems which cannot be solved within the mainstream theories (for example, I described origin of the physical constants and calculated them from initial conditions) and leads to the initial conditions from which start the fruitful mainstream theories (for example, to the masses of quarks and leptons).

Paddoboy, I have no time for nonsensical discussion with layman who is too lazy to read at the very last the Wikipedia before writing the nonsensical posts (just the ble, ble, ble…).

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

In the abstract of the paper published in Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 151301 - Published 14 April 2014, we can read as follows.

“…If indeed spacetime is arising as some sort of large scale condensate of more fundamental objects,…”

and it is exact what is described in details in the Everlasting Theory already since 1997. Just the Einstein spacetime appeared due to the first two phase transitions of the Higgs field composed of the superluminal pieces of space. Size of the Einstein-spacetime components is close to the Planck length whereas the mean size of the pieces of space is about 10^29 times smaller.

See
http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151301

 

[Kittamaru]

So... you are claiming that the "Open Universe" theory is incorrect then?

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

So... you are claiming that the "Open Universe" theory is incorrect then?

To answer your question first of all I should define ‘the Cosmos’ and ‘universes’.

There is paper on vixra and Chapter on my website titled “The Origin and Fate of the Cosmos and Universes and the Classical-Quantum Asymmetry”. On base of it I wrote this post.

The Cosmos: It is finite and is fully filled with the Higgs field and Einstein spacetime. The Higgs field, due to the succeeding phase transitions, during the inflation, partially transformed irreversibly into the Einstein spacetime. I calculated the radius of the Cosmos applying two different methods. The initial radius of the Higgs field that transformed into the Einstein spacetime, i.e. at the beginning of the inflation when it was a liquid, was about 1.2*10^11 m. At the end of the inflation, the radius of the Cosmos (without the boundary) was and still is about 2.3*10^30 m i.e. about 10,000 times greater than the today radius of our Universe.

The Einstein-spacetime components are moving with the speed of light in vacuum c and have mass. It means that there is dynamic pressure in the Einstein spacetime. The Einstein spacetime cannot collapse when near the boundary of the Cosmos the gravitational pressure acting on an Einstein-spacetime component is equal to the dynamic pressure. It leads to the radius of the Cosmos. It is easy to notice that dynamic pressure inside the Cosmos is higher than the gravitational pressure.

How was created the boundary of the Cosmos? At first, due to the inflation, the radius of the Cosmos was greater than today so on surface the gravitational pressure was higher than the dynamic pressure. It caused that the layer near the surface once more collapsed so there appeared timeless boundary non-transparent for the Higgs field and the Einstein spacetime.

The universes: Due to the entanglement and confinement of the Einstein-spacetime components during the inflation, there appeared the cosmic structures (they appeared due to the fourth phase transition of the Higgs field) which transformed into the expanding dark energy and the mass and radiation the universes consist of. Evolution of all the universes is the same as our Universe. The Everlasting Theory shows that all the universes are the open universes. Since there are the universes and antiuniverses so one day they will start to overlap and there will be the matter-antimatter annihilation.

We can estimate the number of the universes and next the mean time to the era of the matter-antimatter annihilation (see my paper).

The ratio of gravitational densities of the Einstein spacetime and the today density of the Universe is about 10^55 (see my book). This means that the universes are the infinitesimal ‘wrinkles in the Einstein spacetime’. Today, no one detector can measure it. It causes that the universes are flat.

BTW, the inertial energy frozen inside an Einstein-spacetime component to its gravitational energy (E = mcc) is about 0.6*10^119. It solves the problem that leads to the ratio about 10^120.

Recapitulation
The Cosmos as a whole has boundary whereas the universes and antiuniverses are the open universes.

 

[Kittamaru]

So what about the multiverse theory? Or the idea of something such as quantum foam?

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

So what about the multiverse theory? Or the idea of something such as quantum foam?

Multiverse
The infinite nothingness is filled with small, big and very big pieces of space. Some of them can be porous or contain cosmoses as our or similar to our. The cosmoses are created due to collisions of the very big pieces of space. This leads to cosmoses with different physical constants. But the scenario is always similar: the very big pieces of space crack onto the smaller pieces. Due to their dynamic viscosity there can be created the closed strings composed of the smaller pieces of space. In some cosmoses, there are possible succeeding phase transitions similar to the phase transitions in our Cosmos.

Quantum foam
The moving pieces of space in our Cosmos are the classical objects. The quantum effects appear on higher level of Nature. In our Cosmos, the quantum effects are characteristic for the particles composed of entangled or/and confined the Einstein-spacetime components. It means that the fundamental field in our Cosmos, i.e. the Higgs field, is not the quantum foam. The Higgs field is the classical and non-relativistic field.

The many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is incorrect.

 

[Kittamaru]

So... you are saying that ultimately our universe will crack and decay into smaller "pocket" universes?

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

So... you are saying that ultimately our universe will crack and decay into smaller "pocket" universes?

No, due to stability of the Higgs field and the Einstein spacetime in our Cosmos and due to the superluminal pieces of space the Higgs field consists of and due to the superluminal entanglons exchanged between the entangled Einstein-spacetime components, the physical constants will be constant forever unless a collision will destroy the boundary of our Cosmos - then particles will decay to the pieces of space.

The universes and antiuniverses in our Cosmos expand and there will be the period of matter-antimatter annihilations.

 

[Kittamaru]

So then you do subscribe to the idea of an open universe - that things will continue as they are until we reach a point at which every star has burnt out and all life in the universe ceases?

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

So then you do subscribe to the idea of an open universe - that things will continue as they are until we reach a point at which every star has burnt out and all life in the universe ceases?

No, it will be the end of the first generation of the universes and antiuniverses. But there will be the remnants and, what is most important, there still will be created the infinitesimal fluctuations in the Einstein spacetime. Such fluctuations can transform into new universes but their mass and evolution can differ very much from the strictly quantized mass and evolution of the first-generation universes (such universes are fit for life - see my book).

 

[Kittamaru]

How would a dead universe, in which entropy has sapped all energy, possibly flare into a new universe without re-condensing first?

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

How would a dead universe, in which entropy has sapped all energy, possibly flare into a new universe without re-condensing first?

The Cosmos never will be dead unless something will destroy the boundary. The two first phase transitions of the Higgs field are non-reversible. It leads to conclusion that the number of the free superluminal pieces of space the Higgs field consists of, is constant. The same concerns the neutrinos plus the neutrinos in the neutrino-antineutrino pairs (they are the Einstein-spacetime components). And there is the boundary of the Cosmos. This leads to conclusion that there is strictly determined energy associated with the ground state of the Higgs field and the Einstein spacetime. And there are the additional rotational energies (the photons and gluons) of the Einstein-spacetime components. The rotational energies cannot transform into the pieces of space so the excited states of the Einstein-spacetime components will be forever. The loops of the rotational energies locally decrease pressure in the Einstein spacetime so there are the flows in the Einstein spacetime that increase local mass density of the Einstein spacetime - they can transform into the known particles. Such is origin of the Einstein formula E = mcc (see my book). It is not true that the rotational energy can DIRECTLY transform into gravitational mass.

Recapitulation
Due to the irreversible processes during the inflation, there is strictly determined energy associated with the ground state of the Higgs field and the Einstein spacetime plus neutrinos. On the other hand, the quantum entanglement causes that the perfect distribution of the rotational energies is impossible. Additionally, not all Einstein spacetime components and neutrinos are simultaneously entangled.

 

[paddoboy]

I in details explained why acceleration of expansion of our Universe is impossible (see my previous posts). But you are unable to notice it. A short recapitulation is as follows.

Constancy of the gravitational constant leads to conclusion that the Cosmos composed of the universes and antiuniverses, as a whole, cannot even expand. Due to expansion of the dark energy, there expand the universes and antiuniverses. The dark energy are the additional Einstein-spacetime components so the front of the dark energy has the radial speed equal to the speed of light in ‘vacuum’ i.e. the c. The Einstein-spacetime components cannot have speed higher than the c so acceleration of expansion of the dark energy is impossible. Acceleration of expansion of the groups of galaxies was possible at the beginning of expansion when the radial speeds of the groups of galaxies were smaller than the local radial speeds of the dark energy.

Unmitigated gobbldydook!
Let me as a layman to a delusional alternative/conspiracy theorist tell you why it is possible...and quite logical as well.
First off you should realise that Einstein's Universal speed limit of "c", only applies to massive objects. So space/time is allowed to expand at whatever speeds it wants...
[1] The unknown impetus for the BB, started the evolution of space and time as we know them.......
[2] That impetus responsible probably for Inflation, and the general expansion of space/time, immediately began to slow down due to the gravity of the density of the matter/energy within the Universe/space/time.
[3] Logically, as the Universe/space/time expanded, the density of the Universe/space/time grew less, as did the gravitational effects from it.
[4] At the same time, the Impetus [DE, CC or whatever] that drives the expansion rate remained constant over an ever increasing space/time......
[5] This means that as the gradually diminishing effects of gravity trying to halt the expansion, opposing the ever consistent impetus of whatever the component force driving expansion is, we logically then observed an ever increasing speed of that expansion rate, or an acceleration.
I hope that helps.

Paddoboy, you should read more. Even cosmologists assume that maybe the distant Type Ia supernovae are fainter than they should be due to the incompleteness of the General Relativity. It is obvious that this theory is incomplete because GR leads to singularities and infinities the same as the Standard Model. Moreover, the modern physics postulate existence of tachyonic field which is beyond the GR. In the Everlasting Theory, the Higgs field consists of the superluminal internally structureless pieces of space (which I refer to as the tachyons).

"Some" Cosmologists may surmise that GR is incomplete, but at this time mainstream sees it as an indication of acceleration in the expansion rate.
Yep, obviously also GR has limitations which reveal themselves at the BB and the centre of BH's, but you can bet your house that any future QGT will almost certainly encompass and extend the parameters of the accepted BB/SR/GR cosmology that is so well supported today.
Tachyons of course are still highly speculative and as yet have never been observed, and if your hypothesis contains them, then it will forever remain just an hypothesis, at least until they are found, if they at all exist.

Paddoboy, you completely do not understand what in physics is assumed to be accepted. It follows from the definition of a better theory (less initial conditions, more described phenomena and better theoretical results). Today, my theory is the best theory because it solves problems which cannot be solved within the mainstream theories (for example, I described origin of the physical constants and calculated them from initial conditions) and leads to the initial conditions from which start the fruitful mainstream theories (for example, to the masses of quarks and leptons).

If your theory is the best, it would be recognised as that by now, and you would have a Nobel prize.
The reality is you DO NOT HAVE A THEORY.....you only have an hypothesis and a huge ego problem.

Paddoboy, I have no time for nonsensical discussion with layman who is too lazy to read at the very last the Wikipedia before writing the nonsensical posts (just the ble, ble, ble…).

And I have no time for nonsensical conspiracy theorists, who claim the whole world is against them and there hypothesis out of sheer vindictiveness.
Again, if you have anything of any validity, then get it peer reviewed.

PS: You do realise that you have two other delusional people on this forum, also claiming to have a ToE and claiming to rewrite 20th/21st century cosmology, don't you?
Each claim the superiority of there own hypothesis, just as enthusiastically as you do, and may I add just as apparently delusional as you are.

 

[Sylwester Kornowski]

Paddoboy, I should not discuss with a dunce. I write the non-questionable scientific arguments. On the other hand, you write still the same nonsensical posts shaming that my scientific arguments are not in existence. It looks as paranoia.

I cite the new papers in which appear proposals I described 17 years ago. You still write the not proved speculations based on the mainstream theories.

I write that my theory starts from the smallest number of initial conditions (moreover, they concern the BEGINNING of the inflation what is very important), that my theory describes more than the mainstream theories and that my theory gives MUCH BETTER results. You cannot prove that it is untrue (you know, you can read it because it is in two places in Internet) but you still write the nonsense about my theory.

Paddoboy, are you unable to see that you prove that you are a big dunce?

You completely do not understand the difference between the expansion of the dark energy and expansion of the spacetime. Within the mainstream theories we can only speculate about the origin of the PHYSICAL CONSTANTS, dark energy, dark matter, expansion of spacetime, and so on. It follows from the fact that contrary to the Everlasting Theory, within the mainstream theories we cannot define the initial conditions before the big bang and we cannot describe the cause of the exit from the black-hole state. It causes that in the mainstream cosmology and particle physics appear many speculative ideas and many wrong interpretations.

So once more: Within my theory (according to the definition, it is the best theory) I described origin and calculated the physical constants from the truly fundamental initial conditions. From it follows that physical constants are changing when spacetime expands. It suggests that there is stable boundary of spacetime so spacetime as a whole cannot expand so cannot accelerate its expansion as well.

Do you understand it? Do you understand that it follows from my theory whereas the assumption in the mainstream cosmology that spacetime expands is taken from ‘ceiling’? Do you understand it?

Our Universe expands because there expands the dark energy, not the ground state of the spacetime. Today, the density of the dark energy is about 10^55 times lower than the ground state of the spacetime (within the mainstream theories, there are only the speculations concerning the dark energy - do you understand it?). Of course, the dark energy infinitesimally changes the physical constants but due to the very big number 10^55 such changes cannot be measured by any detector.

Do you understand the difference between the expanding dark energy and not expanding spacetime? Do you understand that it follows from the coherent theory which comprises both cosmology and particle physics? Do you understand that in the mainstream THEORETICAL cosmology there are only the speculations concerning expansion of the spacetime and origin of the dark energy? Should I write it once more?

What stopped the inflation, i.e. what caused that there appeared the stable boundary for the spacetime? I described it in post #589.

Paddoboy, it is obvious that the General Relativity is the incomplete theory, the same as the Quantum Physics. Why you still write the nonsensical sentences? Why?

Paddoboy, you completely do not understand that there can be in existence objects the detectors cannot see DIRECTLY but the indirect observations suggest that such objects exist, for example, the unseen objects responsible for the quantum entanglement of the photons. I wrote about it many times. Paddoboy, why you still write the nonsensical sentences?

Is on this Forum someone who formulated better ToE than my Everlasting Theory? Of course, it is a joke. You know, you should once more read the DEFINITION OF A BETTER THEORY. Then, you will not write the nonsense.

There will be not a reply to your next nonsensical posts unless you will accept my scientific arguments. They indeed are the scientific arguments.

Recapitulation
Contrary to the Everlasting Theory, the mainstream theories are the incomplete theories because they do not start from the truly fundamental initial conditions. It causes that there appear many speculations, wrong interpretations and free parameters that delude people, especially deludes Paddoboy.

 

[Kittamaru]

Still curious why this hasn't been published and peer-reviewed if you are so certain it's correct...