As a new member to this forum I would like to introduce myself along with my idea. To be honest, finding your community and body of research is a massive vindication to me personally as I have been developing my own idea for the last three years in complete isolation. So to find a community of people who are asking the same questions on the same subject matters as I have been doing is such a relief.
My idea in summary is this: Firstly, given that both the Big Bang and Black Holes are gravitational singularities and secondly from astronomical observations we can see a clear defined input and output pattern from a feeding black hole. For instance, consider an active galaxy, or quasar, whereby the supermassive black hole at the centre of the galaxy is feeding. That is, its input comes from the dust and material falling into it from the surrounding galactic accretion disc. As the material from the accretion disc falls in it is first accelerated around the black hole where it either falls into it or is ejected out along the poles as two relativistic jets. That is to say, the input is the galaxy from which it is feeding and the output the two relativistic jets travelling away from the galaxy, both perpendicular to the galactic plane on which the disc resides.
Seeing this input disc and two output jet pattern from a known gravitational singularity would it not also make sense to apply the same logic to the Big Bang and the birth of our universe? That is, our universe and hence everything we know and see is one relativistic jet of a pair and that our observable universe is a subset of the volume of that whole jet. Furthermore, this jet has a structure whose image is painted again and again on religious artwork from ancient times right up till the modern day. e.g. As I witnessed at the top of Solsbury Hill the other week.
In one swoop this resolves a major question: What happened to all the anti-matter in the universe? Is it not after all that other jet? The angry response in venturing out my idea is “CPT-Symmetry” which in my eyes only reconfirms my idea.
To quote wikipedia
Is that not the description of a relativistic jet travelling in the opposite direction?“The implication of CPT symmetry is that a "mirror-image" of our universe — with all objects having their positions reflected by an arbitrary plane (corresponding to a parity inversion), all momenta reversed (corresponding to a time inversion) and with all matter replaced by antimatter (corresponding to a charge inversion)— would evolve under exactly our physical laws. The CPT transformation turns our universe into its "mirror image" and vice versa. CPT symmetry is recognized to be a fundamental property of physical laws.”
There is an episode in The Big Theory comedy series, where there is a joke about quantum physicists only know one joke regarding spherical chickens in a vacuum. I think in the mind of most physicists when it comes to which came first the chicken or the egg the universal answer is the egg. Or rather, did fundamental particles of nature produce the universe or was it the birth of the universe that gave rise to the particles? I am convinced of the latter and it was the chicken that came first. At which point the penny dropped and I suddenly got the joke about spherical chickens in a vacuum.
Last year I made my first serious attempt at putting my idea down in order to communicate to other people. On reflection, being the perfectionist that I am, it falls short in many areas. But it is what I’ve done so far in terms of trying to communicate my idea. It is rather problematic trying to put done the philosophical basis and evidence chain when you literal are trying to figure out a new theory/vision of everything. Vision at the moment really, but I have been hypothesising and unbelievably to my eyes seeing those tests pass. So certainly not ready for peer review but rather the very first step in stepping down that path.
My write up, or “cosmological argument” as I would call it now is on my website:
The pictures really do all the talking I think.
What I never understood was why I was coming up with this idea. I am after all by training and profession a software engineer not a physicist. However in looking back I would say that I have spent my entire life trying to fill my head with every bit of knowledge I could find. Never mind the numerous things I have done in my career.
As you can see, if you look at my website;
I have spent about 25 years developing numerous audio compression codecs whose entire theoretical basis is information theory and compression. Add to that, 10 years in the oil and gas service industry developing structural geology and geophysical software. A medical science degree added to a lifetime’s habit of watching and reading anything everything about the latest discoveries in science, particularly physics and astronomy.
It was during my time in the oil industry that I got to know my colleague in academia, Dr. Dave Waltham from Royal Holloway, who has been providing me with good and honest feedback in regards to my idea. I figure if I could convince him then that would at least be a start.
I was working at a company called Midland Valley Exploration who were essentially the world experts on structural geology and where I met my wife. Dave was friends with Dr Alan Gibbs whose company it was and I got handed Dave’s personal research project doing numerical modelling of turbidite flows and deposits.
A turbidite flow is exactly like an avalanche flow, but rather than snow falling down a mountain it is sediment cascading down an underwater mountain into the deep ocean. Distinct sedimentary deposits of interleaving sand and mudstone are created from these newly discovered underwater events.
As seems typical in the software engineering world, my opinion, I was left to my own devices and had to educate myself in numerous subjects in order to develop and do the R&D in developing Dave’s model such that it could be turned into a software analysis tool. Looking back, it was like doing a physics Phd on steroids; commercial pressure to create a properly validated model that could be sold. By the end I had mastered computational fluid dynamics and looked into any and every scientific numerical modelling technique that I could find.
Also I got a good number of published papers from this project, some making the front page of various geological publications. So I can honestly say that I am a published scientist. I will need to dig through the publications to find the links to them, if anyone so wishes.
As you can see, from my write up, it is when you get to Fig 32 suddenly there is a picture completely out of place in such a discussion. In putting together the anomalies from the Microwave Cosmic Background Radiation I guess it is only normal to meditate on the idea of God when looking at the very literal light of creation. For myself, I had my own very personal reasons.
I have to be really honest at this point here. I know exactly what I saw in my mind’s eye. I alone know, with my wife as my witness, exactly the reasons and trials that I went through in order to get to this juncture. If I were to tell even a tenth of the tale I fear you’d probably wouldn’t believe me. I have known the very depth of madness, or rather my whole belief system has completely changed in the process. And the things I’ve seen. If lightning were to strike right next to me I’d just laugh and tell the Gods to just bring it on….. which I did on more than one occasion come to think about it.
The most latest example, that comes to mind in regards to this is the back of the ossuary identified to Joseph son of Caiaphas, the Jewish priest who sent Jesus to the cross. Learned about this watching “Decoding the Ancients”, on Amazon Prime Video, just not three weeks ago. As a scientist and a skeptical mind I think the guy in the documentary provided a very convincing argument that this artefact was indeed who it belonged to. The front is just nice to my eyes but the back of the box, well I had seen that before, but emblazoned across my mind. And the depth to the image, well one level its my structural interpretation of the Big Bang, on another it is the seed of future plan in another verse, if my imagination is anything to go by.
This idea, it is not mine, rather it was like it was injected into my mind and forced upon my conscious. I have heard people say that about the great ideas they have had. Well, I now know.
I called my write up The Song of Ice, Verse 1. Verse 2 is currently being prepared and it starts to get into the “quantum argument” and really into the mathematics. I called it the Song of Ice because there is a Song of Fire, or rather every person has a story to tell, I think that is the saying. I have my own made up imaginary world and characterisation that just makes for a fantastic fantasy based story that tries to tell the biological life story of the God Apollo and his resurrection from the underworld as the promised “Prince of Darkness”. Hence the Ice and Fire in tribute to G.R.R. Martin but also more to the poems author Robert Frost. And I adopted a cat called Ghost, which is a ghost story itself.
Just, two weeks ago emboldened at seeing the Caiaphas ossuary I decided to try and test the idea my current hypothesis. Where there is artwork containing concentric rings AND tree/pillar combination then that is a positive sign that something super-natural is going on. Based on the toss of where there would be the best weather the previous weekend my family and I went to Solisbury Hill. The alternative candidate was Catenbury Cathedral. My wife and I admired the geology while walking up Solisbury Hill but jokingly I said “well guess in about 10 minutes when we get to the top it’ll be concentric circles”…. It was not such a joke 10 minutes later looking at the concentric ringed shaped tree artwork freshly dug by some artist.
As I said to my wife, “This is me actually testing my hypothesis.” And not for the first time.
I mean seriously, WTF!!!!
I have pictures on my phone, if anyone so desires.
Before I close up, my main focus at the moment is on my “quantum argument” which mostly is a very large song and dance about the work and experiments of Martin Tajmar.
In particularly, I came down on Martin’s work because of a prediction regarding gyroscopic behaviour in a Bose-Einstein condensate. My exact line of reasoning for which I am still to commit to paper. But can you see what I see?
https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwese ... on-physics
As the son of a former RAF test pilot I know we haven’t built any “flying saucer” or “cigar” shaped craft, as I have heard here tell of. But such a craft to my eyes can produce quantum effects at the macroscopic level. i.e. Quantum teleportation of such a craft… Well I need to get my full write up on that one done. Just need to get it good it enough so I can persuade my dad and his friends of its viability.
That quite literally is the level of my ambition now is: Yeah, I want to be build a flying saucer. First thing first reproduction of Martin’s experiment would be a start.
At least, I am over the most difficult hurdle. Persuading my wife.
Yours most humbly,