Beating the Big Bang v2

Rodney Bartlett

ABSTRACT

In “The Science Show” on Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s “Radio National” (July 4, 2020 - https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/are-physicists-bonkers/12420840?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=%5bspecialist_sfmc_08_07_20_science%5d%3a125&user_id=b7e4b6d0f231fe39df990ab0f6a02ac733ca2656aa135ec8a0e2050d4e67f107&WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Email%7c%5bspecialist_sfmc_08_07_20_science%5d%7c125catchup_6), Robyn Williams says

“Let's continue this quest into the weird and wonderful with Geraint Lewis's latest book, The Cosmic Revolutionary's Handbook (Or: How to Beat the Big Bang).”

Then Professor Lewis says,

“What we wanted to lay out in the book that we have is essentially what is the observational evidence that astronomers used to build up the picture of the Big Bang theory, and outline that if you want your theory to supplant the Big Bang theory, you're going to have to explain this observational evidence as well as the Big Bang picture does, if not better, before scientists will take note. Number one fact; the night sky is dark. It's Olbers' paradox, it's one of the nice famous philosophical, scientific ideas. If your scientific theory can't explain that simple fact, you are already in trouble.”

This article will address several points in its refutation of the Big Bang – Olbers’ paradox, Edwin Hubble, redshift, blueshift, the cosmic microwave background, gravitational waves, quantum entanglement, the quantizing of E=mc2, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the initially plausible (though, I conclude, ultimately incorrect) multiverse hypothesis, vector-tensor-scalar geometry, dark matter, dark energy, mass, quantum spin, the Higgs boson and Higgs field, bosons of the strong and weak nuclear forces, as well as advanced waves and retarded waves. It concludes with the Mobius strip, figure-8 Klein bottle, Wick rotation, Albert Einstein’s time dilation, and Rene Descartes’ space-matter relation.

Following the advice of Dr. Luke Barnes (coauthor of The Cosmic Revolutionary's Handbook), I’ve refined my ideas - by adding about 1,500 words I previously wrote to explain the ideas better. This new section is called INTERSTELLAR, INTERGALACTIC AND TIME TRAVEL PLUS SIMPLY-CONNECTED AND NONORIENTABLE TOPOLOGY and all additions, such as these extra lines in the abstract and the new paragraph about dark matter and dark energy, are highlighted in yellow.

THE PARADOX OF AMATEUR ASTRONOMER HEINRICH OLBERS (1758-1840)

Why is the sky dark at night if the universe didn’t begin with a Big Bang but is infinite and eternal? If light from the most distant stars has been travelling for a literally infinite amount of time, why hasn’t it reached this planet and made our night sky an unbearable blaze? The answer is light’s finite speed (specifically, the finite velocity of the “retarded” components of electromagnetic waves which travel forwards in time-space at 186,282 miles per second, or ~300,000 km/s). If space is infinite in extent, it can only be traversed by something journeying at infinite speed. No matter what the unbelievably huge number of light years travelled by the finite speed of a light beam is, light from the most distant stars would still have an infinite distance to cover before it reached Earth.

The inverse-square law only serves to keep the night sky dark. Take two stars of equal brightness. When one of those stars is moved twice as far away, it looks one quarter as bright as its companion. In an infinite universe, that distance could be doubled a million times (an infinite number of times, actually) and the light from the star would - a long, long time ago - have become too faint to ever detect at all by any means.

EDWIN HUBBLE AND HIS NON-EXPANDING UNIVERSE

Edwin Hubble (1889-1953), the astronomer credited with discovering cosmic expansion, remained doubtful about the expansion interpretation for his entire life. He believed “expanding models are a forced interpretation of the observational results.” (E. Hubble, “Effects of Red Shifts on the Distribution of Nebulae”, Ap. J., 84, 517 [1936]) According to astronomer Allan Sandage, "Hubble believed that his count data gave a more reasonable result concerning spatial curvature if the redshift correction was made assuming no recession. To the very end of his writings he maintained this position, favouring (or at the very least keeping open) the model where no true expansion exists, and therefore that the redshift "represents a hitherto unrecognized principle of nature." (Sandage, Allan, "Edwin Hubble 1889–1953", The Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, Vol. 83, No.6 [1989])

In other words, Hubble must be turning over in his grave because he'd be horrified by modern cosmology endlessly claiming that he proved universal expansion. Today's astronomers aren't indebted to Hubble for their beliefs, but to their interpretation of both redshift and the cosmic microwave background (CMB). As shown here, the data from these are capable of being interpreted differently - by, respectively, Einstein's gravitational redshift and quantum mechanics' entanglement.

The universe's redshift could be seen not as galaxies receding from each other, but in Einsteinian terms of all space-time being a gravitational field in which gravitational redshift causes electromagnetic waves to become increasingly redshifted as distance increases. A large, close galaxy like M31 (Andromeda) would appear to be approaching us because it isn't far enough away to send us light that's significantly redshifted; but a huge number of its stars are currently approaching us as they orbit Andromeda's centre, and therefore sending us blueshifted light.

All warm objects emit low level microwave radiation eg the Sun and other astronomical radio sources emit low level microwave radiation known as the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). The photons of the CMB could be quantum-entangled with every other particle existing in space as well as time.^ Then the Background would be radiated from every direction in the sky without requiring a Big Bang. Particles of matter separated by billions of light years or more would interact, and experience similar temperatures and densities and curvature (or flatness) of space because of quantum entanglement - not because they were once in contact in a pre-inflationary universe. And if gravitons are entangled with microwave photons (they would be if entanglement exists everywhere and everywhen), imprints in the Microwave background caused by gravitational waves must be unavoidable. This recalls BICEP (Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization) and the Keck Array - a series of experiments which aim to measure the polarization of the CMB. Reports stated in March 2014 that BICEP2 had detected imprints from gravitational waves but cosmic dust is now considered the most likely explanation for the detected signal by many scientists. This artice predicts that imprints in the CMB from gravitational waves will oneday be accepted as real, though they won’t be evidence of inflation.

^ “Physicists now believe that entanglement between particles exists everywhere, all the time, and have recently found shocking evidence that it affects the wider, ‘macroscopic’ world that we inhabit.” (New Scientist, “The Weirdest Link”, vol. 181, issue 2440 - 27 March 2004, 32, http://www.biophysica.com/QUANTUM.HTM) Though the effect is measured for distances in space, the inseparability of space and time means that moments of time can become entangled too. (Caslav Brukner, Samuel Taylor, Sancho Cheung, Vlatko Vedral, “Quantum Entanglement in Time”, http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402127)

EXTENDING AND QUANTIZING E=mc2

Many scientists have said mathematics is a universal language because 1+1=2 no matter who you are. The trend in modern physics is towards a unified theory of the universe - starting with the unified theories of the 20th century (notably Einstein's) and extending to string theory and quantum gravity. What happens if a person in, say, the 24th century is raised believing in a unified theory that has implications in physical terms for everything in space-time? Would he or she think there is actually only one thing? Would (s)he think it's a mistake to add one apparently separate thing to another apparently separate thing to produce two, and that such addition is merely the result of the way the body's senses operate? (Our whole mathematical system is ultimately based on the idea that 1+1=2, and would therefore be incomplete in a unified universe.) Assuming the maths humanity has developed does indeed apply to the universe, it cannot be totally in error – merely incomplete. Even Einstein's famous mass-energy equation E=mc2 would be incomplete, requiring quantization ie production of a theory of quantum gravity via unification with the wave-particle duality of quantum mechanics (which has also been repeatedly verified by experiment).

The wave-particle duality mentioned above can be described by starting with v = fλ (wave velocity equals frequency times Greek letter lambda which denotes wavelength). Velocity (speed in a constant direction) of a collection of particles like a car equals distance divided by duration. Since distance is a measure that has to do with space while duration is a measure that has to do with time, it equals space divided by time. (Brian Greene in "Speed", part of his "Space, Time and Einstein" course at http://www.worldscienceu.com/courses/1/elements/YhF9pw) Gravitational and electromagnetic wave motion (space-time motion) travels at c, the speed of light ie v= fλ = distance/duration = space/time = c A particle's velocity, whether the particle be a boson or fermion, is directly dependent on its energy – so it may be said that E = v=fλ = distance/duration = space/time = c This is not quite right since c represents energy alone, and space-time deals with mass-energy, so it's better to say E = v=fλ = distance/duration = space/time = mc What about the 2 in E=mc2? In later papers Einstein repetitively stressed that his mass-energy equation is strictly limited to observers co-moving with the object under study, and comovement may be represented by the exponent 2.

In order for E=mc2 to apply to the universe (and it does), observers must be able to co-move with anything being studied (even a light beam). Moving in the same direction is no problem but how can anyone or anything move at the same speed? Present-day observers can never move at the speed which light covers in the vacuum of space-time, so the only way for observers and light to co-move is for the nature of electromagnetism to be revised. Like waves of water, electromagnetic waves are known as transverse. Consequently, the particles (photons) of light and microwaves etc that travel through space-time would have relatively little movement themselves. It's the disturbances from the sources of electromagnetism (shock waves of fluctuating amplitudes and frequencies) that travel. (They go through the fields of energy filling the so-called vacuum.) Since E=mc2 applies to photons when they're at rest, the equation can only describe photons that have no motion in one direction – the horizontal "line of propagation" in which the shock wave moves. The photons can only move in the vertical direction, perpendicular to the shock wave – if they move at all.

"A photon is a quantum of excitation of the electromagnetic field. That field fills all space and so do its quantum modes." (Paul Camp, Ph.D. in theoretical physics, https://www.quora.com/How-big-is-a-photon)This is consistent with energy being transferred from one place to another (as wave motion) without involving an actual transfer of particles (little or no movement of photons). General Relativity says gravitation results from the curvature of spacetime (gravity IS space-time) ie the gravitational field also fills all space, so the seeming motion of gravitational waves could also be due to fluctuations of shock waves' amplitudes and wavelengths causing excitations (called gravitons) in the field. These excitations cover 186,282 miles every second.The above ideas of gravitational and electromagnetic waves displaying little or no motion are a new interpretation of John Wheeler's geon or "gravitational electromagnetic entity", an electromagnetic or gravitational wave which is held together in a confined region by its own nature. (J. A. Wheeler, [January 1955]. "Geons". Physical Review. 97 [2]: 511 - doi:10.1103/PhysRev.97.511) If there's little or no movement of photons and gravitons, the universe could not be expanding (neither can it contract).

1ST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

The 1st Law of Thermodynamics states that a body can only gain or lose heat by taking it from, or passing it to, its environment or another body - this is because energy can neither be created nor destroyed. How can the 1st Law be reconciled with the Big Bang's creation of matter/space-time and its energy? It looks as though either Thermodynamics has to go or the Big Bang has to go. And I think thermodynamics is here to stay, even if it says energy had to exist an eternal amount of time before the Big Bang. We could say there was no time before the Big Bang and therefore, no energy could exist. But that's just another way of saying the Big Bang created energy (when thermodynamics says it couldn't). And how can the death of the universe ever happen? Surely, that means energy will eventually be destroyed - something the 1st Law says can never happen.

Science can try to use the fact that, though energy can't be created or destroyed, it can change from one form to another - and thus possibly be subject to different laws of physics in other universes within the infinite and eternal multiverse. The universe you and I live in could thus have a beginning and end even though energy is neither created nor destroyed. This argument is mistaken. If energy changes form under new laws of nature in another universe, that means the different universes in the spatially and temporally infinite multiverse would not be truly separate but would interact – new, changed energy only exists in relation to an older and previous state. They'd therefore constitute one system and be components in what could properly be called "the universe". The word multiverse would just be a red herring distracting us from an accurate description of reality; and we'd be living in an infinite, eternal universe. If you and I are united with the cosmos in a comparable way to seemingly separate objects and events in a computer game being united (by strings of the binary digits 1 and 0), our lives cannot be limited to these bodies and brains we currently possess. We'd also be eternal in time, and will one day be infinite in space.

It sounds too weird that we’ll someday occupy every point in space (of course, not in anything resembling these present finite bodies unless those bodies are paired with minds that are infinite). But if we’re eternal, and if time and space cannot exist independently, our omnipresence is inevitable. Perhaps this will be achieved by learning to apply our connection with everything in space and time through 1’s and 0’s. The connection would be instantaneous if the “advanced” component of electromagnetic and gravitational waves – which travels backwards in time – cancelled the “retarded” component and therefore produced quantum entanglement.

ADVANCED AND RETARDED WAVES

"When we solve (19th-century Scottish physicist James Clerk) Maxwell's equations for light, we find not one but two solutions: a 'retarded' wave, which represents the standard motion of light from one point to another; but also an 'advanced' wave, where the light beam goes backward in time. Engineers have simply dismissed the advanced wave as a mathematical curiosity since the retarded waves so accurately predicted the behavior of radio, microwaves, TV, radar, and X-rays. But for physicists, the advanced wave has been a nagging problem for the past century." ("Physics of the Impossible" by Michio Kaku [Penguin Books, 2009] - p. 276)

Advanced waves are usually discarded because they are thought to violate the causality principle: advanced waves could be detected before their emission. On one level, I can appreciate that reasoning. But ultimately, I think it's an error that should be replaced by Isaac Newton's idea of gravity and the modern idea of quantum mechanics' entanglement. 17th century scientist Isaac Newton's idea of gravity acting instantly across the universe could be explained by the ability of gravitational waves to travel back in time. They thereby reach a point billions of light years away not in billions of years, but a gravitational wave would already be at its destination billions of years before it left its source^, and its journey is apparently instant.

^ Arriving at its destination billions of years before it left its source is an absurd impossibility if we cling to the traditional view of time flowing in one direction from cause to effect. But it's plausible if we accept the Block Universe theory which developed from Special Relativity's non-simultaneity of events for different observers. In the Block Universe, all time coexists (the entire past, the present, and every point in the future all exist at once). Time can be visualized as a Cosmic DVD where our brains and consciousnesses take the place of the DVD player's laser. Everything in time exists at once but we're only aware of an extremely limited number of events at any instant (these make up our present). Gravitational waves arriving billions of years prior to emission can be compared to playing part of the Cosmic DVD in reverse. Waves travel from a later frame of the cosmic movie to an earlier frame.

VECTOR-TENSOR-SCALAR (VTS) GEOMETRY, WITH DARK MATTER AND DARK ENERGY

“Dust grains assemble by chemical bonding. Once they are sand or gravel sized, how they continue to stick is a mystery. Metre-sized rocks should spiral into the star rapidly due to disk drag (the gas orbits a little slower than the rocks as a pressure gradient partially supports it). Once rocks somehow get past these barriers, they collide with each other in in a chaotic and random way assembling the planets.” (Australian National University’s online astrophysics course “Greatest Unsolved Mysteries of the Universe” [presented on edX by Prof. Brian Schmidt and Dr. Paul Francis), 2012-2019, ANUx - ANU-ASTRO1x: Lesson 8 [Solar System Formation])

The following method of building planets is preferred to collisions between rocks and dust in the disk because most planetary systems seem to outweigh the protoplanetary disks in which they formed, leaving astronomers to re-evaluate planet-formation theories. (AstroNews: Astronomy, February 2019, p. 17)

Fig. 1 – VTS (VECTOR-TENSOR-SCALAR) GEOMETRY

A vector is a quantity which possesses both magnitude and direction. Two such quantities acting on a point may be represented by two adjoining sides of a parallelogram, so that the resultant diagonal also represents the vectors. The two sides thus illustrate the graviton's spin 2 and the photon's spin 1. The resultant diagonal represents the interaction of the sides/vectors (1÷2 = the spin ½ of every matter particle). Tensor calculus changes the coordinates of the sides and diagonal into the coordinates of a single (scalar) point on the diagonal. This scalar point is associated with particles of spin 0. If the mass produced during the photon-graviton interaction (the energy and momentum of photons and presently hypothetical gravitons* produces a pressure we call mass) happens to be 125 GeV/c2, its union with spin 0 produces the Higgs boson. 125 GeV/c2 united with spin 0 means the central scalar point of the Higgs boson is related to the vector of the graviton’s spin 2, and the Higgs field is therefore united with the supposedly unrelated gravitational field (together with the latter’s constant interaction with the electromagnetic field).

*Material from a star could fall onto a neutron star, heating it up and causing it to emit radiation.** Now suppose the paragraph above is true. Then, the energy and momentum of the photons and presently hypothetical gravitons would be the interaction of electromagnetism (the charged particles and strong magnetism) with the neutron star's powerful gravity. This results in wave-particle duality. The heating could produce gravitational and electromagnetic radiation which would produce the mass and quantum spin of subatomic particles - instead of only radiation being emitted, jets of matter would be emitted too (normally, the matter would be emitted as beams or jets from the neutron star’s magnetic poles). We should consider what will happen to gravitational and electromagnetic waves that – according to VTS Geometry – form the 3 dimensions of length, width, and depth. Waves could rotate 90 degrees from ordinary matter’s horizontal x-axis to the vertical, “imaginary” y-axis which is described by numbers like i² = −1. It’s rotated into another large-scale dimension. Since this rotation twists the electromagnetic spectrum perpendicular to our perceptions and each physical dimension of our scientific instruments, the dark matter is only detectable gravitationally (because it still resides in space-time and General Relativity says gravity is the curvature of space-time; therefore, gravity is space-time). Though united with this dimension, dark matter may be visualized as existing “above” and “below” ordinary space-time: in “hyperspace” and “subspace”. Or its relation to ordinary matter may be compared to infrared radiation’s undetectability prior to William Herschel’s investigations. E=mc^2 tells us that matter possesses energy, so what is known as dark matter would possess what is called dark energy (dark energy would not be associated with universal expansion in an eternal, infinite universe).

Following Einstein’s E=mc2, the relation between Dark Matter (DM) and the Dark Energy it possesses (DE) would be DE=DMc^2. There's more than one DM/DE dimension. 5.5 rotations, each of ~ 65.45 degrees, means – since VTS Geometry combined with Wick rotation can produce dark matter as well as ordinary matter - there would be 5 1/2 times as much dark matter as ordinary matter (or, to use NASA's number in "NASA SCIENCE - Dark Energy, Dark Matter" [December 20, 2019], https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy, about 27% of the universe would be DM). Constant rotation keeps the x- and y-axes interactive but doesn't make more ordinary matter since the x-axis is restricted to E=mc^2 (the amount of available energy limits the production of matter). Mass-energy equivalence would not be DE=DMc^2 in every "dark" dimension. In some, there would be more "dark" energy available. It'd be possible for the universe to contain more than 5.5 times as much energy as our dimension. DE could be roughly 68% of the content of the cosmos.

** Speaking of stars emitting or radiating light is only a matter of convenience - like saying the sun rises and sets, when we know Earth's daily rotation on its axis is the proper explanation. It’s proposed that space-time disturbances occur within the stars, producing shock waves that excite already-existing photons in their paths to particular frequencies (in this idea, photons fill all space-time and mass). In the related photoelectric effect, shock waves from some device or event excite photons which bump into electrons and create an electric current. When black holes merge, the space-time disturbance produces shock waves which excite gravitons in addition to photons, giving gravitational and electromagnetic waves. (Compared to the massive gravitation in black holes, processes in a star are minor and produce gravitational effects of far less magnitude.)

It must be remembered that referring to space alone is incomplete. Living in space-time, it’s necessary to add some sentences about the time factor. The photon must interact with the graviton to produce the mass of the weak nuclear force’s W and Z bosons. To produce their quantum spin, the photon’s spin 1 needs to react with the graviton’s spin 2. That is, the photon’s turning through one complete revolution needs to be combined with the graviton’s being turned through two half-revolutions.^ Incorporating the time factor as a reversal of time in the middle of the interaction: a gravitonic half revolution is subtracted from the photonic full revolution then the graviton’s time-reversal adds a half revolution (1-½+½ = the spin 1 of W and Z bosons). The strong nuclear force’s gluon’s quantum spin of 1 could arise in the same way as the spin 1 of weak-force bosons. Every reaction in this section except one may be explicable purely by the retarded portions of waves interacting. The masslessness of gluons might be produced by retarded and advanced waves cancelling. They neutralize each other, producing a mass of zero and relating gluons to the Higgs boson whose zero quantity is its quantum spin.

^ Professor Hawking writes,

"What the spin of a particle really tells us is what the particle looks like from different directions." (Stephen Hawking, 1988, 'A Brief History of Time', pp.66-67 - Bantam Press)

Spin 1 is like an arrow-tip pointing, say, up. A photon has to be turned round a full revolution of 360 degrees to look the same.

Spin 2 is like an arrow with 2 tips - 1 pointing up, 1 down. A graviton has to be turned half a revolution (180 degrees) to look the same.

Spin 0 is like a ball of arrows having no spaces. A Higgs boson looks like a dot: the same from every direction.

Spin ½ is logically like a Mobius strip, though Hawking doesn’t specifically say so. This is because a particle of matter has to be turned through two complete revolutions to look the same, and you must travel around a Mobius strip twice to reach the starting point.

The interacting gravity and electromagnetism produce mass e.g. they can form a Higgs boson or the strong/weak nuclear forces’ bosons as well as matter. On a cosmic level - if gravitational and electromagnetic waves focus on a protoplanetary disk surrounding a newborn star, the quantum spin of the particles of matter in the disk (1 / 2) could imprint itself on the waves’ interaction and build up a planet layer by layer from vector-tensor-scalar geometry’s 1÷2 interaction. If the waves focus on a region of space where there’s no matter, the opposite interaction occurs and the graviton’s spin 2 is divided by the photon’s spin 1 to produce 2÷1. The mass produced has the spin inherent in each of the gravitons composing spacetime - and could be an alternative, or complementary, method to supernovas for producing the gravitational waves making up black holes.

BITS AND TOPOLOGY

Fig 2 – Mobius/Wick/Klein

In relation to Spin ½ being like a Mobius strip ... in 1924 the scientist Wolfgang Pauli was the first to propose a doubling of electron states due to a two-valued non-classical "hidden rotation". Extending the ideas of “doubling”, “two-valued” and “hidden rotation” to the Mobius strip being a basic, fundamental unit of reality; it can be seen that Pauli’s proposal has an analogy to this article. The doubled Mobius strips – each strip is only two dimensional (2D) – could possibly be produced by the two-valued binary-digit system used in electronics traversing a wormhole, or shortcut between folds in space and time, designed by humans of the far future. These Mobius strips might then be used to form the universe, if a recent paper in ”Physical Review Letters” is correct when it says that in a holographic universe, all of the information in the universe is contained in 2D packages trillions of times smaller than an atom. (Niayesh Afshordi, Claudio Corianò, Luigi Delle Rose, Elizabeth Gould, and Kostas Skenderis, “From Planck Data to Planck Era: Observational Tests of Holographic Cosmology”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 041301 (2017), Published 27 January 2017, https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.041301) (Just as the interference between two laser beams produces a three-dimensional holographic image, "holographic" would also have the accepted cosmological meaning of the entire universe being seen as two-dimensional information – from Mobius strips, according to this article - projected into the third and fourth dimensions we’re familiar with.) The binary digits give that cosmos Artificial Intelligence (AI), and two united Mobius strips create a three-dimensional figure-8 Klein bottle (Polthier, Konrad, "Imaging maths - Inside the Klein bottle", http://plus.maths.org/content/os/issue26/features/mathart/index) that acts as a building block of space, time, forces’ bosons and matter’s fermions. This creates a supersymmetry (linkage) between fermions and bosons. Also - trillions of Mobius strips could form a photon and trillions of more complex figure-8 Klein bottles could form a more complex graviton (suggesting union of electromagnetism and gravitation), and electromagnetism's photons interact with gravitation's gravitons via vector-tensor-scalar geometry to form forces’ bosons and matter’s fermions (see INTERSTELLAR, INTERGALACTIC AND TIME TRAVEL PLUS SIMPLY-CONNECTED AND NONORIENTABLE TOPOLOGY).

The bottles possess a hidden rotation, now identified as adaptive Wick rotation, which gives a fourth dimension to space-time. This Wick rotation is consistent with Special Relativity’s slowing of time (a.k.a. time dilation) because -

The electromagnetic and gravitational waves composing space-time rotate in a circle. The waves rotate through the vertical y-axis that is home to so-called Dark Matter and the non-expanding universe’s Dark Energy, and back to the horizontal x-axis' space-time. Since quantum mechanics says particles can be in two or more places at once, the photons and gravitons which make up the waves in space-time can be on the x- and y-axes simultaneously and thus interfere with themselves, causing time to slow down.

The relation of space (to be precise, spacetime) and matter was spoken of by French philosopher/mathematician/scientist Rene Descartes (1596-1650). Today I wish to discuss how the space-matter relation fits in with my idea that it's time for a new scientific paradigm. The equivalence of space and matter is something Albert Einstein also believed in. He wrote a paper in 1919 which asked if gravitation plays a role in the composition of elementary particles of matter. (Albert Einstein, “Spielen Gravitationfelder in Aufbau der Elementarteilchen eine Wesentliche Rolle?” [Do gravitational fields play an essential role in the structure of elementary particles?], Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, [Math. Phys.], 349-356, Berlin, 1919) This present article agrees when, in Vector-Tensor-Scalar Geometry, it talks about gravitational-electromagnetic interaction forming the mass and quantum spin of particles (whether fermion, boson, or Higgs). Since General Relativity states that gravity is nothing more than the result of spacetime's curving, gravity is spacetime and the mass/quantum spin of particles can be regarded as space itself forming matter instead of as gravity playing a role in matter's composition. In other words, we have Descartes’ space-matter relation.

INTERSTELLAR, INTERGALACTIC AND TIME TRAVEL PLUS SIMPLY-CONNECTED AND NONORIENTABLE TOPOLOGY

Unifying gravitation and electromagnetism has this consequence: A 2009 electrical-engineering experiment at America's Yale University, together with the ideas of Albert Einstein, tells us how we could travel to other stars and galaxies. Electrical engineer Hong Tang and his team at Yale demonstrated that, on silicon-chip and transistor scales, light can attract and repel itself like electric charges or magnets. (Mo Li, W. H. P. Pernice & H. X. Tang, “Tunable bipolar optical interactions between guided lightwaves”, Nature Photonics 3, 464 - 468 [2009]) This is the Optical Bonding Force. For 30 years until his death in 1955, Einstein worked on his Unified Field Theory with the aim of uniting electromagnetism (light is one form of this) and gravitation. Achievement of this means the quantum components (gravitons) of gravity/spacetime-warps between spaceships and stars could mimic the Optical Force and be attracted together, thereby eliminating distance (this, possibly acting in partnership with repulsion, could produce a wormhole, or shortcut between folds in space and time). If the gravitons are superposed and entangled, distances between both points in space and points in time are totally eliminated. So-called “time travel” would actually be space travel within the block universe where the past, present and future all exist — and are equally real — in a possibly infinite four-dimensional block and are relative, just as time is not absolute in Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Visualizing an infinite block universe might be helped by picturing it as a DVD that extends infinitely in every direction. Every event on a DVD always exists but their positions are relative to the location of the laser reading the disk (which corresponds to the location of a brain’s consciousness) - they aren’t all accessed at once. Of course, this elimination of the distance ladder doesn't need to be reserved for trips to other stars, galaxies, and periods of time. It can also be used for a quick journey to Mars - saving you months in space and the attendant wasting of muscles and bones, as well as sparing you from the potentially deadly "sunburn" cosmic rays might give you.

If engineering teams decide to build a spaceship that can travel to other stars in the manner described above, they’d naturally want this paper’s ideas about cosmic topology to have scientific support, assuring their endeavour has a very good chance of success. To give the above ideas support; a few paragraphs will be added here about space-time curvature, universal unification, the concepts of simply- and multiply-connected, and non-orientability.

This paper’s conclusions, though unconventional in certain ways, are supported by Albert Einstein’s General Relativity Theory which concluded that space-time is curved. Curvature of space-time (from it being constructed of the curvature of Wick rotation, Mobius strips and figure-8 Klein bottles) implies this range of allowable energies could be continuous and not restricted to certain bands. Since it's known the energy of electrons can only have discrete values, these values (and space-time's curves) must be determined by discrete pulses (possibly, the binary digits of 1 and 0).

Instead of using the BITS (1's and 0's) of today's computers, would the quantum computers’ QUBITS, in which there can be a superposition of 1 and 0 (they both exist at the same time), be preferable? A universe built on the uniting of binary digits might give us the universal unification scientists anticipate. In turn, that universal unification of everything into one being might explain how 1's and 0's can exist at the same time, as well as how subatomic particles can be in two places at once (there'd actually only be one binary digit, constituting one particle – and like the stellar or galactic images in gravitational lensing’s Einstein ring, this particle appears as more than one object). I shouldn't restrict myself to traditional, or even quantum, computers. They'll probably come up with totally different electronic systems in the next thousands of years. Those computers - and the unimaginable way they're programmed - might make my ideas realizable. In fact, those computers themselves might be in a form we can't even imagine. If my ideas have any truth in them, the universe itself - all of spacetime and everything in them - is a computer.

For the note below on the figure-8 Klein bottle, I refer to

Bourbaki, Nicolas (2005). "Lie Groups and Lie Algebras". Springer

Conway, John (1986). "Functions of One Complex Variable I". Springer

Gamelin, Theodore (January 2001). "Complex Analysis". Springer

Joshi, Kapli (August 1983). "Introduction to General Topology". New Age Publishers

Spanier, Edwin (December 1994). "Algebraic Topology". Springer -

Informally - if an object in space consists of one piece and does not have any "holes" that pass all the way through it, it is called simply-connected. A doughnut (and the figure-8 Klein bottle it resembles) is “holey” and not simply connected (they’re multiply connected).

"The doughnut is technically a flat Universe, but one that is connected in multiple places. Some scientists believe that large warm and cool spots in the Cosmic Microwave Background could actually be evidence for this kind of ... (doughnut/figure-8 Klein bottle) ... topology". ("What Shape is the Universe?" by Vanessa Janek: May 11, 2015 - http://www.universetoday.com/120157/what-shape-is-the-universe/#google_vignette)

A flat universe that is also simply connected implies an infinite universe. (Luminet, Jean-Pierre; Lachi`eze-Rey, Marc - "Cosmic Topology" - Physics Reports 254 [3]: 135–214 [1995] www.arXiv:gr-qc/9605010) So it seems the infinite universe cannot be composed of multiply-connected subunits called figure-8 Klein bottles. But positive and negative curvatures can complement each other's shape, and digitised images can morph to perfect the complementarity if necessary (perhaps by binary digits filling in gaps and irregularities in the same way that computer drawings can extrapolate a small patch of blue sky to make a sky that's blue from horizon to horizon). This makes space-time relatively smooth and continuous - and gets rid of holes - making figure-8 Klein bottles simply connected, and plausible subunits of the universe's composition.

On the subject of plausibility, the following quote voices an objection to the cosmos being composed of the Möbius strip and figure-8 Klein bottle:

"If the universe was nonorientable ie if it contained orientation-reversing curves such as the Möbius and Klein, there would be strange physical consequences that have not yet been observed. While they could be happening outside of our field of vision, it is unlikely that our universe is nonorientable." ("The Shape of the Universe" by Stacy Hoehn, formerly of Vanderbilt University's Mathematics Department https://my.vanderbilt.edu/stacyfonstad/files/2011/10/ShapeOfSpaceVandy.pdf)

My comment: It can indeed be nonorientable if these strange physical consequences are happening outside of our field of vision i.e. if the universe is infinite. What I regard as the strangest physical consequence resulting from orientation-reversing curves would be that of the universe violating the Copernican ideal – this ideal makes man's view as typical and ordinary throughout the course of time as it is throughout the extent of space. Violating that ideal means our little corner of space-time really is different, in non-fundamental ways, from particular portions of the rest of spacetime (those different parts would still have binary digits / Mobius strips / figure-8 Klein bottles as their basis). Another strange consequence is the inclusion of extra dimensions in time and space.

The Klein bottle is a closed surface with no distinction between inside and outside. The inside and outside of the universe are continuous when it's composed of Mobius strips and figure-8 Klein bottles - there cannot be other universes outside our infinite and eternal universe (such a state of multiple universes is called the multiverse, and the term “multiple universes” might be unconsciously used by scientists to state that every period of time co-exists alongside every other). The above paragraphs seem to explain astronomer Alex Filippenko's statement, "there's something important missing in our physical understanding of the universe." ("Universe expanding faster than expected" by Korey Haynes - Astronomy Magazine's October 2016 issue, p.11)