could the universe began with complete zero no mass/energy?
My general idea is the location for creation mass/energy, is the edge of the universe,on the jacket of the universe,more I claim that if Hubble (the astronomer)didn’t take the view that the universe began without mass/energy ,the reason it is because he didn’t take option that mass/energy could be created. If he was taking that option he would have arrived at a first point without any energy or mass just emptiness.
i was writtimg 3 pages -i call them icarus5-unlimitted energy been creation at the edge of the universe.
who do you see the first point of the universe?
and where came all the matter and energy?
thank you cohen avshalom charly isreal/haifa
icarus5.com
The Universe didn’t begin, this is why most run into so many paradoxes. There is no such thing as ‘no energy’. The non-spatial is energy, the spatial is ‘energy with weight’.
Hubble, by the way, has been proven to be wrong.
Why do you keep posting things like this? What on earth do you mean by “spatial” and “non-spatial”? “Energy with weight” makes no sense as a term because weight is a measure of the gravitational pull on a mass. If you mean “Energy with mass” then again, the term is meaningless becase Energy IS mass, after a fashion.
And please don’t post statements like “Hubble has been proved wrong” without at least a semblance of an explanation.
Wrong on one count, HVD. You say that it’s incorrect to say that energy has weight. However, if energy = mass and mass has weight then energy has weight.
Well, ish. We are still unsure what it is that gives objects mass (the popular hypothesis right now is the Higgs Boson) hence “after a fashion.” What I said was saying “energy with weight” is somehow distinct from “energy without weight” somehow relates to this overall idea of things being “spatial” or “non-spatial” and ultimately to the origin (or lack thereof) of the universe makes no sense.
I don’t understand quantum physics because I hardly understand regular physics because I’m 14.
I just spotted what seemed to be a blatant minor incoherency.
Spatial= the first three dimensions.
Non-spatial= the fourth dimension.
Energy with weight is anything spatial, in the first three dimensions.
Energy with only momentum is in the fourth dimension (seminal energy). The fourth dimension has no spatial qualities but moves itself. The ‘connector’ is the non-spatial photon.
Hubble’s law has been shown to be wrong. The Universe is not expanding uniformly. We have witnessed galactic collisions. Galaxies are zig-zagging the spatial.
Gravity does not pull. No force pulls. A pull would require a reach, a grab and a pull- six ‘forces’. Gravity is a structural force. Caltech cannot find gravitational waves. They (NASA) built LISA to do so and it will fail.
The reason they must find the waves is because when galaxies collide, the theorectical black holes would have attracted and became a super black hole. This did not happen. The reason is because they do not exist.
So Caltech, etc says they have to find the gravitational wave burst to show that the BH’s did collide. It’s their last gasp.
Once LISA fails they will be forced to give up the foolish theory. That’s when they will come around to our side. And our side already figured it out. Timing is everything, hold tight…