Theory: Expansion of the Universe
Is the Universe really speeding up? Could it all be an illusion as a result of Hyperinflation Theory?
It has been established and reestablished that, while observing type 1A supernovas, scientist, have been given the impression that the expansion of the universe is speeding up. I do not know all, the necessary math, and have not analyzed the results they have seen. I can only lead you on this mind experiment that I came up with while watching a documentary on the fate of the universe (the History Chanel’s “The Universe” TV series). The mind experiment is to show that the quickening expansion may be an illusion.
First we must set the stage. Let’s explore where I think scientist have predominately overlooked. Light, because it is so hard to measure, most scientists assume in their equations that it has no mass. I believe this to be a fallacy. Light has effect on matter and matter has effect on light. Without mass this would not happen. Scientists also believe, that matter can be transformed into pure, massless energy. Mass being converted to energy is correct in a way but energy, if you think about it, is the movement of particles, i.e. the movement of mass. The loss of mass to energy may consist of particles too small for our instruments to measure with any confidence but that does not mean that the radiation is massless. It is likely to be just smaller particles. If you were able to slow them down they will form recognizable masses again. In their current state we can only see the matter in waves. Waves are many particles moving together. The wave is the transfer of movement between particles.
Energy and mass are heavily linked but there does seem to be a slight difference in their definition. Mathematical formulas do not include this because that difference is so slight. Ptolemy could accurately predict the ways of the heavens with what his time was capable of observing with his theory of the spheres. That did not make it reality.
Energy is movement of mass. Mass is the collection of particles moving towards a less energetic state. Gravity is the force that slows energy down. Gravity is a result of the play between the strong, weak and electromagnetic forces within all subatomic particles. That is what causes the warpage of space that causes bodies moving in a strait line to orbit, and causes matter to clump in larger and larger objects. Space is a wash in subatomic particles going in all directions. On scales that we see here on earth, these random particles effects seem negligible. On the scale of galaxies though, they have enough collective mass to make what we theorize to be, the elusive, Dark Matter. Dark Matter may be made up of mostly light. It would be very amusing to me if that turns out to be the case!
Dark matter is not the only mystery these elementary particles may cause. Most of these particles are very energetic. The photon is the most, traveling at the speed of light (Neutrinos are giving light a challenge for it’s speed in current research). As long as stars shine and things in the universe are giving off radiation there will be a continued force pushing away from all radiating bodies. The greater the number of objects with mass that radiate the greater the pressure to push away from one another in space. Close in gravity easily overwhelms this force explaining why galaxies do not fly apart at the seams. Outside the galaxy gravity is not as strong though. The radiation pressure will push the galaxies apart. This sounds a lot like dark energy to me. The Big Bang is still exploding as long as the stars shine! It could mean that, on the cosmological calendar, toward the start of the black hole era, when stars and other galactic bodies no longer radiate, dark energy will disappear. At that time gravity might be able to usher in a big crunch.
Traditional big crunch theory states that as all galactic bodies move toward one another they will heat up and the universe will die in a pressure-cooking fireball. That is probably not completely true. By the time gravity takes charge in the universe the universe will be unbelievably cold. While moving together will cause friction, which will cause heat (particles moving causes heat) the heat will be temporary. It will slow the collapse of the universe but not stop it. The crunch will only happen when there is no more energy to hold space and matter apart. It is much like a star collapsing into a black hole after it has used all of its fuel. Black holes trap light. This is because their gravitational pressure is greater than the speed of light. Outside and at their event horizons particles will be orbiting with incredible energy and heat, but at their core I bet black holes are cold and dead.
At the black holes core there will be next to no sign of energy whatsoever. The cores of black holes may be the coldest places in the known universe because particles cannot move there. Light will also be motionless all the way out to the surface of these bodies.
Now that I have lain out the groundwork, here is the insight that struck and got stuck within my thoughts. We must go back to the Big Bang, The moment we think out universe, as we know it, formed. The Big Bang theory was validated in the 1960s by the discovery of the Cosmic Background Radiation. The Cosmic Background Radiation was later measured precisely, by satellites in space, and a problem was discovered. Though it was lumpy in heat distribution it was not lumpy enough. The average temperature was too uniform for it’s incredible size and short thirteen billion year history (comparably speaking). The theory that is the accepted model to explain the uniformity of the Cosmic Background Radiation is called Hyper Inflation. This theory states that the initial radiation of the Big Bang traveled faster than the speed of light. The faster than light travel is explained by forces not being in the right state to check this expansion. The forces were neglecting their duties, another words!
Now I hypothesize that the forces were in place, and were so prior to the Big Bang. The reason, I think, that the universe appears to be speeding up when looking back through time is that the speed of light is slowing down. The Big Bang is the most powerful explosion the universe has ever seen. It made every physical thing we can see ether initially of with the process of star formation. The energy at the beginning was too high and hot for much of anything to form. This means that particles were moving much faster than they do today. The universe had to slow down to form atoms, then stars and then planets etc. As the explosion lessens the average expansion of space lessens. I think the speed of light is tied to the expansion rate of the universe. As the expansion slows the maximum speed light can travel slows. Viewed via telescope, there would be light speed time differentials that will play havoc with our space-time calculations. The stuff in the far past would be moving far faster than what our observations would see.
I also have a theory about what may have lead to the Big Bang. The cosmic egg that the universe arose from was almost certainly a very large black hole. It was also very, very, very, cold. Mater sometimes does very strange things when it approaches absolute 0º. If anything in existence can reach absolute 0º I believe the center of the cosmic egg black hole would be the place. It is possible that the most elementary of particles became a super fluid. A super fluid has no viscosity and will experience no friction in its movement. Without the viscosity the matter will begin to flow freely across the surface of the black whole and will pick up speed as it flows from one side to the other. At the other end it will punch through the mass and explode the black hole and create the big bang via its velocity. It is a cold explosion. Granted it won’t be long before it is an unmercifully hot explosion with every ounce of mater breaking apart as fast as is materially possible.
This is my hypothesis. I am not a mathematician and I have not used observations to come up with this theory. I have instead listened closely to what scientist have said in many television interviews and have compared notes. Then I tried to make reasonable since out of what I could comprehend. I made an attempt to simplify what I could, believing that the ultimate answers are usually simpler than we can conceive. My curiosity now strives for what the real scientist will make of this idea. What does the math and observations say? Is it a realistic model that can be built off of?
It would be nice if some of this hypothesis could be turned into real theory, but explanations as to why it can not be would be informative to my curiosity too, probably more so than if some of this could be corroborated.