Model of Universe Allowing Creation of Particles

Your Name]In summary, Einstein acknowledged the possibility of negative mass-energy in his theory but did not include it due to lack of physical observation. The model presented suggests that all particles have a probability of creation and annihilation, including negative mass particles. This model also considers the impact of negative mass particles on gravitational and electromagnetic interactions, as well as the potential for creating neutron stars and black holes. However, further research and experimentation is needed to validate these concepts and their alignment with existing data and observations.
  • #1
john shoemaker
Einstein repeatedly noted that the his theory didn't preclude
>>negative mass-energy. He wrote that he wouldn't elaborate on it in
>>a physical theory since it had not been physically observed. His
>>predilection for a net density of 0 can be seen in his writing as
>>is his almost plaintive admission that "this does not appear so."
>>He never wavered in his disallowing of physical singularities and
>>could he have known of their popularity soon after his death he
>>likely would be especially receptive to a possibility that would
>>preclude them and provide tests for which data might (and did) soon
>>appear.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Model of Universe Allowing Probability of Creation of Particles
>>
>>This model holds that all existing particles have non-zero
>>probabilities for creation and annihilation (Pc, Pa) and these same
>>probabilities exist for particles of like observable descriptors
>>except that the mass is negative and equal in quantity---- |m-| =
>>|m+|. (Pc=particles/time-cubic three space, Pa = particles/time.
>>Probabilities operate in proper space-time).
>>
>>In laboratory of m+ matter observation of E/M interactions between
>>m- and m+ matter inhibited by lack of m- matter. This lack of
>>perception within the laboratory produces difficulty in conceiving
>>of possible E/M interactions between m+ instruments in the
>>laboratory and m-matter at large distance. m- collections thus
>>appear transparent, unusually devoid of m+ matter.
>>
>>The probability for creation of neutrons apparently being
>>considerable, this is the only probability considered here.
>>Particles of one type of mass will tend to collect gravitationally
>>and repel oppositely massed particles. M(sum of m+ minus sum of m-
>>within a radius r) divided by |M|( sum of m- plus sum of m+) tends
>>monotonically to zero as r increases about any point. Likely GR
>>will agree that E/M and other physics of m- matter are similar to
>>that for m+ matter.
>>
>>A collapsing m+ neutron star will speed clocks of m- matter . These
>>"clocks" acting thru Pc preclude developed black hole: the formulas
>>below relate to neutrons entering a sphere of radius R(inside
>>neutron star) at velocity dr/dt.
>>
>>Density at its surface is D(finite number).
>>
>>dm/dt, R, D are observed, measured far from star.
>>
>>dm+/dt = 4 xPi x Rsquare x D(R) x dr/dt < 4 x Pi x Rsquare x D x C
>>(light speed=1)
>>
>>dm-/dt > Pc x 4/3 x Pi x R^3 (1+ M/2R)^3 over 1-2M/R.
>>
>>M = D x volume of sphere of radius R. Note that when integrating
>>IntD/r over this sphere to get metric-- ruler-clock expansion
>>factor, the largest r between any mass element and any 3space
>>element for which we desire the factor is 2R. Thus actual expansion
>>factor greater. Note we are ignoring mass outside the sphere.
>>
>>If R is such that M(R)/2R is close enough to 1 that dm-/dt > dm+/dt
>>(note that expansion of rulers goes to 2) that is:
>>
>>Pc x 4/3 x Pi x 2^3 R^3 over 1-M/2R > 4 x Pi x R^2 x D
>>
>>or Pc x 8/3 R over 1-M/2R > D --- then
>>
>>net mass within radius R does not increase. The alternative to the
>>above "If" is that there is no R such that M / 2R approaches one.
>>m- neutrons appearing within high enough density of m+ neutrons
>>will annihilate with m+ neutrons(QM extrapolation)
>>
>>Very large collections of m+ matter containing much hydrogen will
>>present high energy--low particle density which decreases
>>probability of annihilation of m+-m- matter and escape of m-
>>matter. Local region of order 10^10 Ly possibly artifact of prior
>>collapse of region of this order and subsequent fusion-excursion
>>expansion.
>>
>>A large region of relatively constant density m- matter containing
>>a smaller void(perhaps due to presence of m+ matter there) can be
>>handled in the elementary physics classroom by imagining the region
>>to have no void but have imbedded in the m- dominated region a
>>small region of m+ matter of absolute density equal to the
>>"average" density of the voided region of m- matter. A void induced
>>by an m+ galaxy in a large m- region could be approximated as a
>>sphere of m+ matter of radius of order of the galaxy. As the
>>gravitational(centripetal) effect of this incompressible imaginary
>>matter would proceed from 0 at r=0 to maximum at the surface, far
>>observation would show that the outer reaches of the galaxy suffer
>>a higher central attraction(and velocity) than more central matter.
>>This effect is superimposed on the effect of the visible(m+) matter
>>
>>A compact enough galaxy cluster could induce above Elem. Phy. void
>>of cluster size thus effecting the dynamics of peripheral galaxies
>>within the cluster more than central ones in their co-orbiting.
>>Individual galaxies would not exhibit the appearance of higher
>>central attraction for peripheral matter. Individual galaxies in
>>less compact clusters would exhibit combination of above dynamics.
>>
>>Thank you for your consideration,
>>
>>John Shoemaker
>
>>
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Dear John,
>>
>>Thank you for sharing your model of the universe with us.
>>Einstein's theories have certainly been influential in shaping our
>>understanding of the universe, and it is interesting to consider
>>how he may have responded to the concept of negative mass-energy.
>>It is also intriguing to think about the potential implications of
>>such a model, particularly in regards to the creation and
>>annihilation of particles.
>>
>>However, as scientists, it is important for us to approach new
>>theories and models with a critical eye. Have you conducted any
>>experiments or observations that support your model? How does it
>>align with existing data and observations? What predictions does it
>>make that can be tested? These are all important considerations in
>>evaluating the validity of a scientific theory.
>>
>>Thank you again for sharing your ideas, and I look forward to
>>hearing more about your research and findings.
>>
>>
>>
 

1. How does the model of the universe allow for the creation of particles?

The model of the universe that allows for the creation of particles is known as the Big Bang Theory. According to this model, the universe began as a singularity and expanded rapidly, creating space, time, and matter. This expansion also created a high-energy environment in which particles, such as protons and neutrons, were able to form.

2. What evidence supports the model of the universe allowing for the creation of particles?

One of the main pieces of evidence supporting the Big Bang Theory is the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is a remnant of the intense heat from the early universe. This radiation is evenly distributed throughout the universe and has a temperature consistent with the predictions of the Big Bang Theory. Additionally, the abundance of light elements, such as hydrogen and helium, also supports the model of the universe allowing for the creation of particles.

3. Are there any alternative models to explain the creation of particles in the universe?

While the Big Bang Theory is the most widely accepted model for the creation of particles in the universe, there are alternative theories, such as the Steady State Theory and the Oscillating Universe Theory. However, these theories are not as well-supported by evidence as the Big Bang Theory and are not widely accepted by the scientific community.

4. Can the creation of particles in the universe be observed or replicated in a laboratory?

The creation of particles in the universe occurred in an extreme environment that cannot be replicated in a laboratory setting. However, scientists are able to study and observe the behavior of particles in high-energy particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider, which can provide insight into the conditions of the early universe and the creation of particles.

5. Does the model of the universe allowing for the creation of particles have any implications for our understanding of the universe?

Yes, the Big Bang Theory and the creation of particles have important implications for our understanding of the universe. This model helps explain the expansion and development of the universe, as well as the distribution of matter and energy. It also provides a framework for understanding the formation of galaxies, stars, and planets. Additionally, the study of particles and their interactions can help us understand the fundamental laws of physics and the origins of the universe.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
2
Replies
49
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
998
Replies
1
Views
829
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
29
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
579
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top