Jump to content
Kurt Mueller

An extension of Quantum Field theory concerning universal expansion

Recommended Posts

Key: 

Wave functions are not the same thing as meant by fields, as a wave function is a probability calculation, but for the purposes of basic
understanding they can be used interchangeably here.

Dark Energy = Field pressure.


Core theory: All matter in the universe consists of fields. Particles are what is observed when two or more matter fields interact with sufficient energy. 
A stable particle is what happens when two or more matter fields interact with sufficient energy constantly. Not all matter field interactions create particles,
but can create pressure.


Predictive/proofs:

Quantum entanglement: We are observing two points of interaction in either a connected field or the same matter field, which is why they seem to interact. 
We can only observe points of interaction on the field with sufficient energy. The particle is part of a matter field, it isn't the whole matter field.

Particles at two places at once: Again, two points of interaction on the same matter field.

Wave/particle duality: Under this theory it's merely matter with a propensity toward high energy interaction or not. 
There are only fields (waves) and interaction points between fields. We've been looking at it the wrong way.
Protons/neutrons are just being reacted upon constantly by each other and the electron field. 

Photons: They do not reveal particles, they create them or reveal larger particle structures by 
creating points of interaction that we can then observe due to their high energy state.

Dark Matter: Any matter field that does not directly interact with photons, but does interact with the Higgs Boson field. 
This would mean that, as we've already observed, there is no empty space in our Big Bang expansion. Much of matter in the universe is in a pressured or 
perhaps even collapsed state. It would also be a mistake to assume Dark Matter is only one type of matter, complexity is implied.
There very well could be new matter fields forming all around us constantly due to lowering field pressure. 
Although, less likely in high gravity areas due to consistent field pressure.

Dark Energy: The sum total of field pressure throughout a Big Bang expansion, minus the pressure outside the Big Bang expansion!!! 
Dark Energy is field pressure potential energy being released.

Why The Big Bang is due to a Higgs Boson field collapse and an explanation of accelerated expansion:

Core theory: When the elastic potential energy of space/time plus total field pressure (as we see in star stages with other field collapses) 
equals the energy of our Big Bang expansion (minus the energy of the field itself collapsing) the Higgs Boson field collapses, 
causing a temporary suspension of the mass effect. 

Even if the mass effect stabilizes, its collapse alone (and the resultant release of energy that we see with any field collapse, again as we see in stars) 
creates enough potential energy to begin the cascade reaction as the Big Bang expansion is exposed to lower field pressure around it, 
which increases inner field pressure as it increases in size.

We can visualize the curvature of space/time right before the Big Bang (the same overall shape as it takes when exposed to Black Holes, on a grander scale), 
then right after the Big Bang expansion with an opposite curve as potential energy is released and there is little mass holding the field pressure, 
then how it is currently with higher curves at the ends/outside signifying us being surrounded by lower pressure. 
Think of a drop of water in a clear lake surface a moment after impact, the ripples as gravity waves.

Thus, that is why our Big Bang expansion is accelerating outward. It's getting bigger, 
thus more surface area of our field pressure is being exposed to the lower pressure zone around it, which creates acceleration. 
We've been looking at Dark Energy from the wrong angle. It's what's around it that matters. 

Think of filling your fist with air and moving to a room of lower pressure. The lower pressure of that room, and the larger the surface area of your fist full of air, 
the more expulsatory force you will feel. Dark Energy is field pressure potential energy being released.

Now, this is where I need help. I know how to prove the theory (If the rate of acceleration relates to the Big Bang expansion's size and the pressure around it) 
and a precise enough measurement of any of those variables would be sufficient to produce the other variables, though
admittedly, while I may have a working understanding of most aspects of quantum mechanics, I don't know how to structure that equation. 

This would also mean, after that equation is defined, we can measure the potential energy left in our expansion, and thus when the expansion will end,
if field pressure around our expansion isn't lowering as it expands.


Why our misunderstandings about basic matter structure will now be an advantage. 

We already built the tools because they had utility regardless of our misunderstanding:
The particle accelerator.

Core theory: Mass fields like electrons aren't composed of particles as we understood them, therefore it is most likely is either field interaction or a coherent field of its 
own that only breaks into other mass fields during collapse.
Predictability in how fields collapse will allow us to divine their base field structure, not just how they break down and interact,
as we can now understand them as breaks in a larger field.

Problem 1: With this theory we have no way of knowing if some fields that break down are non-interactive with other fields, and only with mass. 
Without precise mass measurement we may be missing key areas of field structure.

Problem 2: Not all matter fields may interact with mass. This would be difficult to determine, and also mean the universe is constantly shedding energy that cannot 
be regained through Higgs Boson collapses, but if there is no energy/mass loss observed this problem can be dispensed with and all field structures can be determined 
through mass interaction, since the parts that do not create field interaction can still be measured through mass before collapse and after. 

Problem 3: Existing observed structures may only be in their current state due to the current field pressure of our big bang expansion. 
Over time as field pressure lowers matter may shift how it interacts, and the cohesion of atoms change, thus altering how they interact and their base structure.  
Not a problem for life on Earth, thankfully, since mass creates some level of stability. 
In other words, it will be difficult to produce a true vacuum state, especially on a planet.

Problem 4: Do matter fields operate on the same principle of three dimensional surface tension that space/time does, as it itself is possibly a matter field? 
If so, string theory is most likely correct, best visualized in three dimensional bubbles.

Problem 5: The observed curvature of the universe may be a local phenomena due to Big Bang expansion and lower pressure 
at the outer edges. An inverted gravity bend of massive size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my it would take forever to highlight every error above. So let's start with what a field is.

A field is an abstract assignment of values or mathematical objects under a geometry treatment. It isn't a thing unto itself. Don't worry myself and others will point out numerous other errors above.

 Yes thermodynamics are involved in cosmology (it is one of the primary aspects of expansion) however the above is nowhere near accurate in how thermodynamics is involved.

 

Edited by Mordred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Don't worry myself and others will point out numerous other errors above.

Which is what a "Gish gallop" is not designed for:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

Edited by taeto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Oh my it would take forever to highlight every error above. So let's start with what a field is.

A field is an abstract assignment of values or mathematical objects under a geometry treatment. It isn't a thing unto itself. Don't worry myself and others will point out numerous other errors above.

 Yes thermodynamics are involved in cosmology (it is one of the primary aspects of expansion) however the above is nowhere near accurate in how thermodynamics is involved.

 

But Nobel prizes have been won describing confined force, and Quantum field theory is already an accepted theory of matter? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:

But Nobel prizes have been won describing confined force, and Quantum field theory is already an accepted theory of matter? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

Don't worry. You are not going to have to fly to Sweden on the basis of this incoherent nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kurt Mueller said:

Wave functions are not the same thing as meant by fields, as a wave function is a probability calculation, but for the purposes of basic
understanding they can be used interchangeably here.

No they definitely are not, but they are definitely not probability calculations either, though a probability can sometimes be derived from some quantum expressions.

1 hour ago, Kurt Mueller said:

Dark Energy = Field pressure.

 

1 hour ago, Kurt Mueller said:

Not all matter field interactions create particles,
but can create pressure.

Pressure on what?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Strange said:

Don't worry. You are not going to have to fly to Sweden on the basis of this incoherent nonsense.

I was just saying constant pressure on a field has already been described. Don't worry, my head remains firmly on my shoulders.

6 minutes ago, studiot said:

Pressure on what?

 

 

One another, causing potential energy. I also just meant to hand wave away wave functions since most people probably have probably heard of them and not quantum fields. Yeah, it was unnecessary and poorly stated.

Edited by Kurt Mueller
Double quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kurt Mueller said:

I know how to prove the theory

Would you mind to share? You have in mind experimental "proof"? Or theoretical proof, and in that case, based on which theory?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, taeto said:

Would you mind to share? You have in mind experimental "proof"? Or theoretical proof, and in that case, based on which theory?   

Maybe I didn't describe that with enough detail. If the size of the big bang expansion relates to the current acceleration and the lower zone of field pressure around it that would mean it's the difference in pressure causing the acceleration. I.e., if you can determine the size of the big bang expansion based on the acceleration or visa versa. 

Edit: To my knowledge acceleration is still being nailed down, so it'll be a while till that can be proven, I'm just hoping someone can help me with the equation itself.

Edited by Kurt Mueller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:

Maybe I didn't describe that with enough detail. If the size of the big bang expansion relates to the current acceleration

How can we measure the size of the big bang expansion, and how can we measure the current acceleration? You are right to say that it is very interesting if they are not the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:
38 minutes ago, studiot said:

Pressure on what?

 

 

One another, causing potential energy. I also just meant to hand wave away wave functions since most people probably have probably heard of them and not quantum fields. Yeah, it was unnecessary and poorly stated.

I can only say that if your previous statement was poorly phrased, this is even more puzzling.

Whatever do you mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:

If the size of the big bang expansion

What does this mean? What is the “size” of the Big Bang expansion?

35 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:

the lower zone of field pressure around it

What is this lower zone of pressure? And around what?

 

36 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:

it's the difference in pressure causing the acceleration.

Difference in what pressures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pressure is derived via the equations of state in cosmology. Matter for instance in cosmology applications exerts zero pressure.

 The entire FLRW deceleration equation takes pressure into account in accordance to the ideal gas laws for an adiabatic and isentropic fluid.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_state_(cosmology)

With this one can calculate the individual rates of expansion in a matter, Lambda, radiation only universe. In each case our universe will expand even without dark energy or dark matter.

 Though understanding how a matter only universe would expand requires applying the Shell theorem to Newton's gravitational laws. As it is essentially pressure less.

There is no need to involve QFT for a macroscopic effect. QFT is excellent and highly accurate in the quantum regime however one doesn't require the quantum regime to explain expansion nor how to calculate the rate of expansion.

Fields can be any arbitrary set of values one chooses to assign at each coordinate. The field doesn't even require to be real. 

A prime example is the tensor fields described by the Einstein field equations that is simplified by the FLRW metric.

A field is any mathematical representation even one that has probability functions at each coordinate. Such as QFT which also gives the probability of a particle being created at each locale.

 For example applying the blackbody temperature of the universe one can derive the probabilistic number density of each particle species. (Though this can also be done with classical mathematics via the Bose Einstein and Fermi Dirac statistics.) One can also apply the S matrix and path integrals under QFT to those two equations. Both methods will get the required accuracy.

 

Edited by Mordred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kurt Mueller said:

 

Edit: To my knowledge acceleration is still being nailed down, so it'll be a while till that can be proven, I'm just hoping someone can help me with the equation itself.

The cosmological constant which leads to the acceleration of expansion is still being nailed down. Without Lambda the universe should eventually decelerate and eventually start collapsing depending on its critical density value however Lambda changes that due it's constancy regardless of volume. In particle processes as the volume increases the pressure and temperature decreases so too does the density hence the critical density term which originally described the point at which and expanding universe will commence collapse. This isn't true for the cosmological constant itself as it stays constant per cubic volume you have in essence continuous expansion with no potential for collapse. (Unless somehow Lambda does not stay constant in the future)

3 hours ago, taeto said:

Which is what a "Gish gallop" is not designed for:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

I always prefer to focus on one misconception or error a time. The first misconception I chose is the term Field.

The other misconception is that expansion doesn't originate from some point outward. Expansion has no preferred location or preferred direction. (Homogeneous and isotropic).

One cannot point in any direction and state the BB happened in that direction. The entire observable universe expands uniformly and was all contained in one Planck length at 10^-43 seconds. (Planck time).

 

 

Edited by Mordred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your insightful comments and helpful links, and sorry I didn't reply earlier but I just joined and hit the five reply limit. You've helped me see the flaws in my thinking and weak areas of understanding, especially misunderstanding space/time to have elastic potential energy (as this was just a misunderstanding of how the models are visually represented), not using accepted vernacular, and uniform expansion. In retrospect, I should've just left out the Quantum Field explanation as I'm sure most of you understand more of it than I do already and it's already discussed on these forums.

It's all forced me into the frightening conclusion that if my thoughts in this area are to have any value I'm going to have to move from being interested to being dedicated and learn some math. Darn it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kurt Mueller said:

It's all forced me into the frightening conclusion that if my thoughts in this area are to have any value I'm going to have to move from being interested to being dedicated and learn some math. Darn it. 

Not darn it but xciting ain't it.  +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur +1 to the OP. Here is some assist in learning.

 

http://cosmology101.wikidot.com/redshift-and-expansion
http://cosmology101.wikidot.com/universe-geometry

Page 2 of Universe Geometry which will help with the FLRW metric.

http://cosmology101.wikidot.com/universe-geometry

Couple of free textbooks.

ttp://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0004188v1.pdf :"ASTROPHYSICS AND COSMOLOGY"- A compilation of cosmology by Juan Garcıa-Bellido
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0409426 An overview of Cosmology Julien Lesgourgues
http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0503203.pdf "Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology" by Andrei Linde
http://www.wiese.itp.unibe.ch/lectures/universe.pdf:" Particle Physics of the Early universe" by Uwe-Jens Wiese Thermodynamics, Big bang Nucleosynthesis
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30155/30155-pdf.pdf: "Relativity: The Special and General Theory" by Albert Einstein
http://www.blau.itp.unibe.ch/newlecturesGR.pdf "Lecture Notes on General Relativity" Matthias Blau
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.4598 "Introduction to Loop Quantum Cosmology by Abhay Ashtekar
http://arxiv.org/abs/hepth/9912205 : "Fields" - A free lengthy technical training manual on classical and quantum fields

That should get you started in the FLRW metric and the Mathius Blau article will cover how GR applies to the FRW metric in the later chapters.

Edited by Mordred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Here is some assist in learning.

+1

Kurt, if you would Indicate your level of maths and physics, (I am not a cosmologist) I will try to add some suitable references to Mordred's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.