I am new around here, just want to say hello before I begin.
I want to thank any readers of this post for your time and attention.
I came here to present some of the work I have so far invested into an idea. My ideas do not contradict mainstream ideas, merely build upon them. In some cases, I do separate myself from current physics, but that is expected of any new theory.
My theory in a nutshell, is that space is not at all empty. In fact, the very expansion of space indicates to me that there is evidence to argue that space is actually made up of "stuff." If space is indeed empty, then how can it expand? If space is made of nothing, then how can nothing cause time dilation and red shifting? Space and even time itself are indeed made of "something" in this theory. I have named this theory: Distinction Theory
Distiniction Theory is based upon the simple idea that no aspect of reality, not even the eternal emptiness of outer space itself can be taken for granted at its face value only. Space and even the passage of time can be described and explained in a quantun language of some sort. All things, be them physical entities or conceptual ones have multiple facets, more than one side, a dual and distnct nature. Nothing happens by accident. Or better said, all actions no matter how trivial have real and grand consequences over time. Time is not a complete illusion, but the key to understanding distinction. If space expands there must be a distinct reason. If this expansion is accelerating, there must be a distinct reason for that too.
Gravity and time dilation are the primary puzzles to solve. Einstien has offered much insight into these phenomena, but it is obvious to all that his description is yet incomplete. Quantum theory has proven highly accurate at describing sub atmoic phenomenon down to but not including the planck length, but it cannot answer the question of gravity. Why?
To me there are some very basic problems with the current big bang theory, and they tend to revolve around the idea of gravity. I do not however think the big bang is completely wrong, but merely underestimated in its true significance. More on that in a second. Here are the major problems I have with current accepted big bang theories.
How could the big bang have occurred in a Universe where gravity is present?
Specific questions: If all of energy and time and matter were condensed into one super small area perhaps as a black hole singularity, then wouldn't the incredible concentration of energy/gravity at such a point cause the universe to remain collapsed onto itself as a singularity? Better stated, what kind of force is powerful enough to blow up a black hole into separate pieces? There is no known force capable of destroying a black hole in our current universe except the passage of time itself as hawking radiation, so how did it happen the first time?
Naturally, we have no way of determining the physics of such high energy interactions, but we can assume that down to the planck scale is relatively well understood by quantum theory of today. There is no known quantum force that can compete with gravity enough to destroy an established blakc hole. To understand the pre-big bang universe, we need theories to explain sub planck level interactions.
Distinction Theory has led me to believe that at the sub planck level instant of the big bang there was no force of gravity at all, nor that of any other force we would recognize today. Gravity would have prevented the big bang from ever occurring if it had existed in the attractive form we know of it today.
There are many big bang theorists who explain around this irony by stating that the universe was made up of pure energy at a very high temperature, there were not yet any particles as such and therefore no bosons to carry forces such as gravity between particles. Only when the big bang fully occured and began cooling did the force carriers such as gravitons and photons condense into existence.
So already, there are many reasons to assume that gravity (and even electormagnetism to some level but I will not go into that today) has not always existed in the manner we think of it today. For a least a fraction of a second, attractive gravity could not have existed at all.
Many theorists talk about how the universe underwent superluminal expansion from the size of nothing to the size roughly of a grapefruit. This inflation outran the effects of gravity giving rise to an ever expanding universe. This expansion arranged the universe so that it was homogenous, with no overall density bias in any particular direction. From then on expansion has continued but not at the same rate. After thousands of years the universe cooled enough for light to escape and illuminate the Universe.
I mention these things just to point out that I am not the only one who has determined through logical analysis that gravity could not have existed in its current attractive form at the instant of the big bang. More on that later.
Even if you reject quantun descriptions of gravity and conceive of gravitiation as a continuous fabric of space time, it is still difficult to conceive of how the big bang could have occurred if space had been so fully curved in upon itself.
Problem 2: How can the Universe expand at an increasing rate in a Universe where gravity is present?
Specific Questions: If gravity did indeed exist at the pre big bang scale, then an infinitly powerful force would have been required to accomplish this black hole destruction. The force applied would have been quantum or discreet, not infinite at all. Over time gravity should rob this initial explosion energy of momentum, resulting in a Universe that expands more slowly over time. If gravity did not exist until a few quintillionths of a second after the big bang, then at the time gravity occured the expansion would have begun to slow from that time forward. No matter how you slice it, the Universe should not be expanding at an accelerating rate in a gravitationally bound Universe.
Rotation of the Universe. Why do we not know where the center of the universe is located?
Specific Questions: Gravitation principles dictate that massive objects will orbit their common center of gravity. Two black holes will orbit each other around a common center until they eventually merge. If gravity as we know of it is indeed present throughout the Universe, then the Universe has a gravitational center. It would stand to reason that the universe is spinning around that center point. Surely, there are already many galaxies that are receeding from ours at a rate greater than the speed of light. These galaxies will remain forever hidden from our view. Does this also mean that they have no gravitatinal effect upon us due to their distance and speed of recession? Is it possible that as such distances the spin of the Universe if it spins at all might be observable?
Just how fast is the graviton or higgs boson able to travel?
The only way to bring gravity into the fold of quantum theory is to present gravity as a boson interaction, force carrying particles such as gravitons, higgs bosons, you know. To describe a black hole in quantum terms demands that gravitons be unique to all other bosons and indeed travel fast enough to overcome the event horizon of a black hole. Just as light photons cannot escape the horizon, neither should the graviton, and just as a black hole radiates no visible light from its center, it should mediate no graviation from its center. Clearly, gravitation must be capable of superluminal travel. If this is indeed the case, then the big bang inflation that homogenized the early Universe is very difficult to explain, superluminal gravity would have kept pace with the inflation canceling it out.
Again I will state that even if you reject quantun descriptions of gravity and conceive of gravitiation as a continuous fabric of space time, it is still difficult to conceive of how the big bang could have occurred if space had been so fully curved in upon itself.
Okay, that is all for now. I want to see if anyone offers me any feedback. My proposal is that gravity did not exist at the moment of the big bang and actually does not exist today. The phenomena we consider gravitational attraction is not at all what it appears. More on that later.
Thanks all for your time.