1

New Theories / Re: Evolutionary cosmology

« on: 13/02/2020 16:29:06 »

This topic comes high on a google search of "evolutionary cosmology"

There are updated pages on

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78110.0

and

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78272.0

2

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 25/01/2020 23:54:31 »

There are two other very imoportant additional benefits to the approach to cosmology that I am suggesting

Firstly it explains why our large universe consists largely of matter when most theories of origins suggest that when matter is created it from energy is always in particle pairs with one matter and its corresponding antimatter particle.  The tendency is to suggest that there is a slight imbalance in favour of matter and that most of the matter and antimatter created during the big bang has annihilated releasing energy.  There are hints of a very slight asymmetry between matter and antimatter in Tau particles but this is very small.

The matter in this concept is locked into the compacted dimensions of what was space and is now time.

Secondly the fact that the multidimensional compacted time dimensions are common to all particles at all times allows the wilder concepts of quantum physics to be explained and understood as all the matter particles in our universe have their antimatter partners locked in these compacted time dimensions which are colocated.

3

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 18/01/2020 23:51:20 »

Puppypower your latest statements are slightly more coherent and on topic but still do not show a proper understanding of what I am trying to get over to the experts in the field.

Let me explain.  My whole professional life has been involved successfully in creating innovation in areas of systems science and technology in advance of the developments of technology at its growing points together with persuading businesses to adapt and develop their products and skills to make use of them as they become available.  As part of this I have had to keep up with scientific advances over a very broad field as well as exercising my personal interest in the fundamental limits of physics and astronomy.  One of the main things is to find "holes" through which totally new industries and products can emerge.

I do not dispute any of the established science and mathematical theories.  These involve a great deal of skills and knowledge and also a lot of painstaking observations.

The message I am trying to get over is that there is a very important blind spot or gap where theoretical and experimental study is possible.   That is the behaviour of material inside the event horizon of a black hole from shortly after it formed to a short period later when conditions reach the limits of experimental science.  These are well researched and understood for the big bang but are not considered for what I will call for want of better words "the medium sized crunch"!

To my mind this is about the same as saying that the future of our universe is uninteresting because it is perfectly obvious that it will all end in the heat death after a suitably long time.

The possibility of an Evolutionary Cosmology leading to a theory of everything is an interesting aspect that could make putting effort into the study of this critical period more attractive.   However even if this is not possible it could result in further insight into the potential choices in string theoretical and quantum gravitational studies and break down the current impasse brought about by the generalities and multiple solutions caused by unlimited mathematical synthesis.

What is needed is some good ideas to generate suitable boundary conditions for the equations and geometries involved.

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?

« on: 10/01/2020 19:25:39 »

I have just realised that I had not answered a couple of important comments on this thread and must apologise for the wrong draft that has been posted up for a few days.

Firstly in reply to CPT Ark Angel  reply no 14 on 16 nov 2019.  I have tried to make it quite clear that I am not suggesting any sort of Anthropic principle.  Life as we experience it is just a fortuitous stable conditions and low temperature addition to the fact that complex nucleii are essential for the creation of conventional stellar mass black holes.

As far as dimensionality is concerned  I am suggesting 6 complex (two part) dimensions ie 12 in all of which only three of space and one of time are large scale dimensions and the remaining are compact and Co located with all the other extended dimensions.. Whether a dimension is "space like" or "time like" is flexible and an event horizon is the first stage in the transfer of space like to time like dimensions and vice versa.  This results in alternate expansions of the universe being dominated by matter and antimatter.  All the expanded matter particles have essentially a "counterpoise" of quantum entangled antimatter locked inside the collapsing co-located compact dimensions.   That is probably enough on that for the moment.

AS far as the number of critical parameters to form a universe like ours  I refer you to the excellent book "Just Six numbers"  By Martin Rees who points out how very few finely balanced constants define our universe.  There are several other good books on the same theme.

One other aspect of your comment seems to suggest that following on the lines I am suggesting os pointless.  I hope to answer these shortly but must go elsewhere now.

5

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Were any heavy elements created in the Big Bang?

« on: 10/01/2020 18:12:33 »

The simple answer amalia is No. 

Only a few more complex nuclei were created during the big bang.  Mostly helium, a smaller quantity of Duterium  and a tiny quantity of lithium. 

The reason for this is that there is an unstable gap in stable nuclei in that two helium nuclei cannot fuse to form a beryllium nucleus it needs another neutron to hold them together and to get beyond this impasse requires the high temperatures densities and pressures that are found in the cores of stars  to normal stars make all the elements from beryllium to iron that are common on our planet.  They cannot get beyond this because nuclear fusion energy runs out at this point.  anf the formation of all the elements beyond iron are formed using violent stellar core collapses and supernovas.

6

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do the electrons that generate an electric current come from the wire's atoms?

« on: 10/01/2020 17:58:23 »

Amelia,   Kryptid has given a good reply but I think that there is one more vital fact to get over.  The electrons associated with atoms that are bound together in the form of liquids solids or compounds behave very differently fro the electrons associated with atoms that are on their own in empty space as gases.  This is where the changes in energy levels can produce the emission of electromagnetic radiation including light.

When elements and compounds are in the liquid or solid state the electrons in the outer shells of the atoms are in effect linked to form the physical and chemical bonds that hold the atoms together.  These bonds can take several forms and this has a great bearing on the properties of the solid or liquid. 

In some substances they are locked together solidly in a formal pattern and this creates hard insulators that can be transparent like glass and diamonds. 

Sometimes they are freely moving and this creates metallic conductors like copper and aluminium  that can also  be soft and formed to shapes. 

The really interesting ones are the ones that are half way between these tow extremes  the semiconductors where with care the properties can be controlled by physical and electrical effects.  These semiconducting elements and compounds are the source of almost all of today's information technology.

7

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Bottles And Hemholtz Resonace?

« on: 10/01/2020 17:27:58 »

The Helmholtz resonator happens when a "piston" oscillates on the volume of air in the bottle the best angle is found by practice with a particular bottle.  the resonant frequency depends on the effective size and mass of the piston of air and the volume of the bottle  in both cases the larger the lower frequency.  Good low notes are produced by wine fermenting demijohns with a one gallon volume ( see jug bands) 

If you drill holes in a reasonably sized bottle that is a good helmholtz resonator you can make a simple musical instrument  when all the holes are closed by your fingers the note will be that of the bottle an as the holes are opened the note will change but it will not matter much which of the holes are opened just the number.

The ocarina is a musical instrument that is designed to operate using the principle of the Helmholtz resonator
here is an example of the somewhat mystical sound it makes

8

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Why do sheets get so tangled in the dryer?

« on: 10/01/2020 16:50:03 »

I presume your annoyance is that If they form a hard ball and roll around in the dryer they will not dry properly or take much longer.

I can see three possibilities. 

Washing machines can cause things to form a ball which is flattened out by the spin drying process but is still in effect a knotted mess.  It is important to separate them out and put them in individually or this could continue.  This is particularly easy if you use a washer dryer and run the process straight through from washing to drying without a quick sort out before starting the drying.

The second possibility is that you are overloading the dryer.  For a washer dryer or a domestic sized dryer the drying load is usually half that for the washing process.  This is because the clothes need more room to fall through the air than be agitated when heavy and wet during the washing process.  Commercial dryers are much bigger and give the material much more room to fall through the warm air.

Finally you have a very badly designed dryer which should include reverse rotation processes to help to prevent forming lumps like this.

9

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 08/01/2020 17:56:00 »

Puppypower

Firstly I have taken the trouble to scan through your vast number of words and come to the following conclusions.

What you are writing has nothing to do with any sort of analysis of the topic that I started.

It appears to have been written using a science and cosmology keyword random text generator and is total garbage.

It is therefore not worth the effort of taking apart and is best ignored by others.   

I would request that if it is possible all the conversations and flaming after my initial presentations on the main topic be deleted or moved to another location by the administrators because it is just not worthy of this site's attention.

10

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 17/12/2019 17:41:18 »

Awkward questions.
 
I have been thinking of these ideas for nearly. 30 years now and have developed them slowly.  All the time I have been looking for anything that can prove them false.  I may have missed a fundamental fact that rules the whole thing out if so I will be glad to hear it.  However I have considered answering a few awkward questions that could be asked.
 
     Black hole mass
 
Q.  if all this mass is being created inside a small stellar mass black hole shouldn't this show in the gravitational field outside of it.
 
A. No because like light, which cannot escape, any additional gravitational fields created by new particles cannot escape from the event horizon.
 
     Black Hole Mergers
 
Q.  If our universe is, in effect, inside a small black hole in another universe what would happen if it merged with another similar black hole or even fell into a massive black hole.
 
A.  Firstly to generate enough energy to create a whole universe the actual "size" of our universe inside this small black hole is almost infinitesimally small it would also have a powerful but short range hawking radiation “barrier” around it associated with the gravitational gradients around the collapsed space dimensions that have now become recycling (complex) time dimensions and the two baby universes could well in effect bounce off each other and never merge.  If that is true a very large black hole will in effect contain a whole swarm of tiny universes all milling around and bouncing off each other.  This could describe the "brane world" description of a big bang in which two "dead" universes are revived by a collision between them.
 
It is also interesting to note that this concept could in fact explain the biggest "error" in physics namely why the energy density of the universe to be expected from quantum theory is out by a factor of 10^120.
 
     The conservation of information
 
One of the big questions about black holes was the fact that information appeared to be lost from our universe and it was felt that information was conserved like energy in our universe.  It has now been agreed that the eventual evaporation of a black hole would result in the release of this information so no information is actually lost.
 
The release of energy during gravitational collapse in effect creates information in the form of particles and this continues the link between energy and information so no problems are created here.
 
       What about quantum gravity?
 
So far I have not discussed quantum gravity because initially this is not needed.  Current thinking in this area based on the equations which show that the simple collapse inside the event horizon of a black hole leads to the formation of a "mathematical singularity" in a finite amount of time.    String theory approaches to particle physics using the classic pure mathematical approach and an arbitrary vibrating string offer a vast number of solutions with little prospect of physical proof without the ability to restrict this selection in some way.
 
I strongly feel that some physical insight will be also needed to solve the problem of creating a quantum gravitational theory and I would like to return to one of the first ideas I had about the universe when I was a teenager and first became aware of space time distortion and general relativity.  I considered that the ultimate structure of the universe would in the end turn out to be that the entities in any universe were in effects bits of the space time of the universe screwed up in one way or another. 

Now a simple vortex in a fluid creates a linear string like structure and can be quite stable in conventional fluid media as can a toroidal "smoke ring" structure this together with some concepts of the physical properties a multidimensional "bulk" fluid medium and the concept of the dimensionality effects on conservation laws could be a starting point with a bit of physical insight to those who wish to solve this problem.  The people who wish to study this might find a lot of help on this from people currently solving problems in computational fluid dynamics where pseudo quantum like effects can occur in classical fluid media.

One of the things that puzzle me about the literature is the concept of the graviton as a particle of gravitational energy.  To me it seems obviously that this is in effect a gravitational analogue of the photon ie a massless particle with the energy in each element dependant on the frequency of the gravitational waves and linked by Planck's constant and in fact is probably the source of the value of that constant.  It is interesting to consider the scales on which gravitational interactions will have to take place between particles in a quark lepton plasma at fantastically high densities for the interaction frequencies to be high enough to to be related to the mass of the particles and start to drive the processes.

One other particle concept that I would like to introduce is that of the gravitino that is the the gravitational equivalent of a neutrino.  That is a particle with half integer spin that exhibits fermionic repulsion but only interacts via gravity  similar to the concept of the sterile neutrino others have used.  The creation of this particle (which would be a supersymmetric particle member)  in the final stages of the toroidal collapse of a spinning black hole could well provide the inflation drive to fully expand the the time dimensions into a new universe and represent a large proportion of dark matter and dark energy,
 
    Where does the second law of thermodynamics fit into all of this?
 
This is probably the most misunderstood law in all of physics. I do not dispute simple facts of the universe continuing downhill run towards a final state of heat death as we can see in the eventual demise of our universe as the black holes in it finally evaporate into mostly very low energy quanta but this aspect of the law only applies to NON INTERACTING PARTICLES!   If particles interact, the route to this final state can be very different because as it is well known and accepted that the precursor state of our universe evaporating is a collapse into black holes! The same is also true for the crystallisation of substances into highly ordered crystals not a diffuse gas.  The eventual evaporation of a black hole in our universe should not affect the existence of the new universe it created because other dimensions in "the bulk" must be involved for these ideas to work.
 
There is another important philosophical point about what aspects of a universe we should study here.  It is largely accepted that our universe is heading irrevocably towards its heat death of infinite scale and zero energy this is not considered as being a good reason not to study and model the route by which it achieves this.
 
The same is true for what is going on during the collapse of a black hole inside its event horizon which is at least accessible theoretically during its initial stages even though the ultimate Condition is the precise opposite of the heat death, a singularity of zero dimensions and infinite energy.  The important feature about this collapse process is that it involves the behaviour of a complex collection of interacting elements just like the heat death.
 

11

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?

« on: 13/12/2019 17:33:30 »

Further work on this idea has been moved into the New theories area  go to

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78272.0

12

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 13/12/2019 11:48:23 »

Page 3         Step 2  An analysis of the processes going on during the collapse

• As the temperature rises with the release of this gravitational energy a significant amount of the energy will be converted into matter and antimatter this will continue to drive the collapse and result in a largely balanced quantity of matter and antimatter interacting.
• It is highly probable that the black hole will contain a significant amount of initial angular momentum probably close to the maximum that a black hole of the originating mass can have.  This will result in a Kerr black hole structure where the collapse is not towards a point singularity but a ring (or toroidal surface due to the angular momentum residuals in other dimensions) singularity.
• This increase in final state spatial dimensionality from zero to 1 (or 2) will result in a reduction in the rate of collapse and possibly the achievement of a stable collapse state as a minute toroidal surface containing all the energy of the collapse in the form of a quark lepton plasma.
• Interactions between the particles and photons in this plasma will cause it to cool down (relatively) slowly  In fact the final dimension of space has in fact become a dimension of time.

                     Step 3  the conversion of the collapse towards the "singularity" into a "big bang" expansion.

• It is also accepted that as space contracts inevitably to a reduced dimensional state and becomes "time like" time also expands to become "space like" that is having three dimensions and bidirectional as particles and waves move through the contracting physical space
• My critical thesis is that during this process the collapse of space becomes "time" and the expansion of time becomes space, that is the expanding space in a new universe.
• Mathematically this has resulted in a change of sign in the equations  instead of the four dimensions of space time being x y z and -c  they are -x -y -z and c 
• What then does this mean for the material of this new big bang universe
• If you take the wave equations of a matter particle moving and collapsing towards the singularity and reverse their signs you get an antimatter particle expanding from a point source  so a black hole ha been converted into a white hole in new dimensions that do not intersect with the collapsing dimensions.
• The main structure of our universe is therefore explained by three complex dimensions of "space" and three complex dimensions of "time" of which only three space like dimensions and one time like are large at any time the remaining dimensions of time are curled up and colocated in time.  This goes a long way to explaining all the oddities of quantum theory because the universe is simultaneously very large in space and very small in the two time dimensions.

This is still work in progress there are other pages still to be added and this includes possible observations of our universe that could ad credence to this idea.

The developed concept stated simply

Our universe originated in the collapse of a stellar mass black hole in a universe, similar to ours but consisting largely of what we call antimatter.  It is probably still linked into this universe via a one way umbilicus in which antimatter particles can enter our universe but through which we cannot observe that universe. 

During the life of our universe which is dominated by what we call matter particles it will create many stellar mass black holes.

Each of these black holes contain a universe similar to ours but consisting largely of what we call antimatter.  We can send particles but not complex objects into this universe from our universe but we can never receive any information back from it other than the standard behaviour of a black hole in our universe as it grows through the absorption of matter and energy or shrinks through Hawking radiation.
 

13

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 13/12/2019 11:42:04 »

Page 2   Scientific steps
This details the critical scientific steps through the known properties of matter in our universe that allow me to propose this concept.  I will describe this in several major steps.  The each step is more tentative than the first.

Step 1  The release of gravitational energy inside a black hole to create the energy and matter required for a new universe

• We are familiar with and can observe the release of gravitational energy during the collapse of cool clouds of interstellar gas and particles to form stars. 
• Simple inverse square law energy release analysis integrating 1/r² shows that for every reduction in the radius of an isolated (approximately spherical cloud) Mass M radius r  collapsing due to its self gravity releases energy in proportion to the reciprocal (1/r) of the radius.  It follows that for a change in radius from  r to r/2 releases a constant amount of energy.  This energy release increases the temperature of the gas and particles involved in the collapse and eventually it can form a star if the collapsing material is within a couple of orders of magnitude of the mass of the sun in either direction.
• It is known that high mass stars of the order of ten solar masses or more can at the end of their lives collapse to form black holes.
• During the formation of an event horizon in the sort of black holes created within our current universe,  that is mostly stellar mass black holes,  The conditions are well within the range of experimental high energy physics and the gravitational fields and gradients although very high would not affect the expected results.
• From point 4 here is therefore no reason to believe that the laws of physics suddenly change radically from immediately outside (observable)  to immediately inside  (not observable).
• From point 5 it is therefore quite reasonable to consider what would happen to the material collapsing towards the theoretical singularity using currently observed physical laws right up to the limits of our understanding of high energy physics when any quantum theory of gravity might start to dominate the process.
• During this process of collapse a great deal of gravitational energy will be released.  This tends towards infinity as a mathematical singularity is approached but this will not be observable outside of the black hole.
• Some form of physical process will prevent this situation of infinite energy but it is clear that sufficient energy to form a universe is in theory available.

I do not believe that any serious mathematical physicist working with black holes would dispute this argument it is the same argument about the "Ultraviolet Catastrophe"  solved by Max Planck  that helped to expose Quantum theory.  This has driven a lot of work to define a Quantum theory of Gravity


Next. We go to step 2  an analysis of the basic process in a simple scwartschild black hole and then extend it to include the most probable, the rotating or Kerr form of black hole.

on Page 3

14

New Theories / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 13/12/2019 11:22:47 »

Critical Steps in the Evolutionary Cosmology Concept Page 1
 
This note aims to describe the critical logical and scientific steps in the process of developing my concept of an Evolutionary Cosmology that fits within current cosmological thinking.
 
Logical steps
These are steps in my thinking that lead to the consideration that the investigation of a possible physical process that might explain the origin of our universe as it is currently understood could be something worth considering by others with greater skills and experience than me.
 

• Our studies of the earliest origins of our big bang cosmology are largely limited at the point of the cosmological microwave background and any imprints that may gave been left on it by earlier events although neutrino and primordial gravitational wave astronomy and spectroscopy may produce more insight if devices could be designed to perform the observations.
• High energy experimental physics is also limited by similar horizons of practicality which prevent the direct observations of gravitational effects between fundamental particles. 
• This means that speculating about the origin of our universe is the province of theoretical mathematical physics.
• The current mathematical approach is on two fronts; firstly the search for "a theory of everything"  that fully explains the fundamental laws that govern all interactions that can be observed experimentally and can include the concept of a gravitational force, and Secondly  the development of a quantum theory of gravity that could then explain the origin of the universe and its physical laws.
• Current mathematical synthesis has produced a vast number of potential theories without any way of creating insight into which version is the most likely to be worth investigating at a deeper level.
• It follows that a plausible physical approach could possibly produce this insight.
• It has been shown that very small deviations in the values of the few physical constants that define the development of our universe through time would result in a universe that is very different from ours and probably does not have the complexity and variety that ours has.
• We have faced this problem before.  This was when science first started to consider the origins and evolution of life.  Could then  an evolutionary solution be proposed for this cosmological problem.
• Lee Smolin made the first step by suggesting that our physical laws appeared to be finely balanced to create the maximum number of stellar mass black holes during its lifetime.
• If an evolutionary cosmology did exist where a universe could produce many progeny similar to itself, it could dominate a multiverse of cosmologies and make our universe much more probable.
• It is therefore worth looking further to see if an evolutionary cosmology could exist and a good place to start would be to study what could go on inside the event horizon of a stellar mass black hole as it forms

The Initial concept stated simply
 
Our universe originated in the collapse of a stellar mass black hole in a universe, similar to ours.
 
During the life of our universe which is dominated by what we call matter particles it will create many stellar mass black holes which themselves are new universes .
 

15

New Theories / Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?

« on: 13/12/2019 10:56:20 »

My original Question and discussion "Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible"  aroused quite a lot of interest. and has helped me greatly to find out where the sticking points in the arguments are, and encouraged me to create a different approach to what I am trying to get over. 

If you are a new reader you can find this via this link 

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78110.new#new

It has also encouraged me enough to "go the whole hog and complete the thinking on this subject.  In the hope that it may stimulate a few more innovative minds to do some serious work on it

       "The complete Theory of everything
Here is a brief explanation on what I mean.

Many people talk about a "Theory Of Everything"  and mean a complete understanding of all the laws of physics that define how our universe works.  This is in effect only part of the story.  A true theory of everything should include a reasonable model describing how and why these physical laws exist and how and why they work together to produce our universe and any others if there are good reasons why they should exist.  This is what I will call "A Complete Theory of Everything"

What follows requires several steps of innovative thinking that work together so it is a good idea to try and read and understand all of it before nit picking on detail.

My wish is for people with a good solid knowledge and understanding of this range of subjects to analyse seriously What I am saying and find any real fundamental errors in the analysis and synthesis I propose.

16

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?

« on: 11/12/2019 23:57:16 »

I am not by any means suggesting that black holes are escapable in our universe except that they could in theory evaporate by Hawking radiation over an incredibly vast time provided the universe was cold enough. 

Currently the microwave background is far too hot for any stellar mass or larger black hole to loose energy.

From the Hawking radiation calculator, for a black hole to have a Hawking radiation temperature equal to the 2.725 deg K background radiation it would have to have a mass of .00754 of the mass of the earth (4.5E19 metric tons) and have a radius of  6.6 micrometers.  So for a black hole to evaporate it must be smaller than this.

What I am suggesting is that the newly created  universe expands in totally different "spatial" dimensions that exist in our universe but are currently very small and "wrapped up".  These "wrapped up" dimensions are an accepted part of most string and cosmological theories.

If you look at the maths  the collapse of some dimensions leads to an expansion of others.  The simplest illustration is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle  as you squash the space dimension the time dimension becomes more uncertain and expands.

As you cross an event horizon and continue the collapse space becomes "time like" in its unidirectional progress towards the "singularity" and time becomes space like and expands to become multidimensional and multidirectional through uncertainty.  ref Penrose "The road to reality"

17

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?

« on: 09/12/2019 11:24:06 »

Halc you are producing fatuous and not properly thought out arguments here for example in talking about pulling things out with strings what about the weight and strength of the string. 

I appreciate that you are one of the moderators here and have some knowledge of physics but i would really like to have a proper discussion with a good mathematical physicist well versed in gravitation and cosmology and not someone who has been blinded by a lot of the "gee whizz" presentations of many popular authors.

Can I recommend that you start by reading Roger Penrose  "The road to reality"  this should clear out a lot of your initial hangups on what after all is only the preamble for what I am trying to get over.  It provides a really good introduction to proper mathematical physics.  I have read it several times and use it as a reference on many topics.

In reality  the most fundamental message that I am trying to get over is that:-

Not thinking seriously about the physical processes that happen inside event horizons, as defined by the point at which the escape velocity from a gravitational felt of a body reaches the velocity of light and no more information other than hawking radiation,   is just the same as thinking that what is happening in our own universe at the moment is not interesting because thermodynamics tells us that everything will in our universe will end with the "heat death" and stasis.

I am in the process of creating a third approach to my concept of an evolutionary cosmology in which I will present the concept in a series of small logical and scientific steps together with a simple statement of the cosmological concept.

I am also developing a slightly modified Penrose Diagram illustrating the whole process ver simply.

I plan to post these here shortly.

18

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?

« on: 29/11/2019 23:48:00 »

Long lived Complex nuclei at least up to the complexity of iron (the last exothermal synthesis nucleus) are essential  for the development of stars as we know them today and the nucleosynthesis processes that lead to core collapse in supernovae that create black holes. 

If there were no stable nuclei beyond say lithium. Stars would be very different.  Smaller ones would fade out as the proton proton reaction ran out of fuel.  Large stars would evaporate to become smaller as the radiation pressure dispersed them by their stellar winds. 

The only black holes would be created by extreme mass stars (100s of solar masses) which can (in theory) collapse directly into black holes without first dispersing themselves by the pressure of the high radiation outflows.   

These conditions existed shortly after the end of the "dark ages" as the universe re-ionised although the large stellar winds seeded the universe with nuclei of carbon nitrogen and oxygen (ie created metallicy)  and allowed the standard population 1 stars (low metallicy) stars to form.  The sun is a population 2 star with a much higher metallicy.

We have not yet observed any of these high stellar mass primordial black holes all though a very high mass one (75 solar masses If I remember it right) has been observed in a binary star recently.

It is also essential to have a particularly accurately defined metastable resonance in a carbon nucleus (predicted originally by Fred Hoyle and later observed in fact to allow nucleosynthesis to jump the "beryllium gap" caused by the fact that 2 helium atoms do not have a metastable resonance to form an isotope of beryllium.

As all this involves bare nuclei in a very hot plasma.  The low temperature electron shell (chemical) interactions of carbon that are essential for life like us are totally irrelevant.

Another important aspect of the evolutionary cosmology concept is that the initial core collapse conditions from the Neutron (or possibly Quark) core star that that form a stellar mass black hole are probably quite precisely defined.  This happens when conditions exceed their version of the Chandrassakar limit in the formation of a white dwarf star.     This would in turn be expected to define quite precisely the size and properties of the emergent universe. 

So far I have been unable to find a good reference on this part of the process

19

New Theories / Re: Is the designation "positive" and "negative" in electricity arbitrary?

« on: 27/11/2019 10:43:59 »

I am sorry to contradict this.  There may be logical reasons why the choice was made in the first place but the choice is an arbitrary one.

20

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?

« on: 27/11/2019 10:26:44 »

The only information that particles inside the event horizon receive are of course other particles and photons falling through the horizon if they chance to interact with them.

Now if you were in a space ship that thad fallen into a quiet supermassive black hole as described in my example on reply 18 above and also reply 5  (page 6)  above. 
That is chosen  to avoid being fried by the energy of material trying to lose angular momentum to get across the event horizon and the excessive gravitational gradients that would tear you apart.
You would see absolutely nothing at all except for the very cold residual radiation due to the hawking radiation associated with the increasing gravitational gradient.   As you continued your fall this radiation would gradually increase as the gravitational gradient increased.    However you would be torn apart by the gravitational gradient long before things got too hot to deny you that experience!

You must remember   from  http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/ to  get a hawking radiation temperature of 40 deg C from the gradient the radius of the black hole has to have shrunk to a mere 600 nanometers.