does the world swing actually?
Today, one remarks, a "big bang" would give the
consequence of an expansion of the "original world."
The effect of the mass attraction could turn the movement
under certain circumstances, whereby the universe also could
concentrate itself. S. W. Hawking is straying from this idea.
His space now should eternally prolong in accordance with the
alleged "big bang".
However each simple person knows well more then a sly
philosopher. He knows namely, that on a year follows the next,
etc. Everything of this world is connected with a going to and
back. States are changing and turning again on a new manner.
These things are shown by the oscillation! Therefore however
the individual state is to find in the general state of the
Here given United Field Theory is available fully done as
different declarations of the present sciences, that wants to
see the genius of the presence essentially in Hawking.
Basically each cosmos swings, better it oscillates, so its
space or its microcosms! Is this premise also connected with a
repetition of a "big bang"? No, the course is much
more complicated. Therefore you already can see the old
theories only as primitive constructions: bang - and the
matter runs apart, bang - and it thunders together again -
completely as a mash? That already is a quite coarse of
contemplation manner, out of that you hardly can interpret the
multiplicity of the phenomena, if you don't cite the
substitute for the creator inside - the accidence.
Defiance of the complicated connections the new theory
remains well comprehensible. Underneath I’m giving here a
picture from the book and an explanation text:
Picture 3; 5: Each cosm in
the scheme of basic structure
gravity-radiuses ro respectively incident horizon
gravity-center, center of gravity
cosm-amplitude Ro (maximum of the free-setting of
maximum parity orbit of a protocosm over ½Ro,
track of the light
area of the vacuum sphere Ro = ro - Ro
light, that of the point of 2 is getting out of starts, only
can accept the maximum of the orbit, like it is shown at the
designation of 4.
Scientists suspect now
several universes and "big bangs" side by side. This
thesis is near our theory. But as long as they don't rule out
the "big bang theory", they will get nothing. No
cosm seed is banging! You see it at the quasars: Spooky energy
quantities stream from them. However not in form of fogs, but
in form of pairs from a subordinate handful of cosm seeds,
which on their other hand local energies are setting free. The
temperatures of these energies nevertheless don't reach to
hypothetical 1032 Kelvin like in the big bang, but
only to the maximum of 6 billion Kelvin from the
electron-positron-annihilation – the origin of the gamma
radiation in series of lightning.
"quantum-theory" therefore leads to a fictive origin
of the movement connections of the particles, to a pure
energetic origin! To an origin, which locally and temporally
never existed this way!
The following tells us: The
"quantum-theory" shows by means of their waves
energy levels, on which temperature level the particle
certainly exists few-wisely. This way it also explains, which
particle-types are at these pure levels on scale. Each
unstable particle can approach itself at such a standard, but
it can never give up its programmed identity. Now it seems so,
as you made a fraction distillation and win differently high
scalding fat at different temperatures. Who wants to claim
now, that at the highest temperature of this process all fats
have their origin in this one high scalding fat? For example:
lard and food oil are mixed and heated at 300 °C. Then both
is miscellaneously liquid and physically without difference.
Do both fats origin from of 300 °C? No! We heat them both
until they are separating themselves into their particles.
Does their programmatic ancestry lay approximately there? No!
Now we heat both fats even at almost 1032 Kelvin.
Maybe do they come from there programmatically? Finally, no!
Each thing is formed out
from the stable particles. And likewise, all particles are
formed from isolated particles. Does the isolation come out
from a stability into the outside? No. However lard descends
of the pig and oil descends for example of seeds of
sunflowers. At 10° C lard gets solid, the oil around swims
inside. At -16 °C then also the oil was getting solid. Has
the oil turned into lard then? No!
Why therefore do we deduce
all matter from the hottest of all particles on the basis of a
temperature scale in the matter of existing particles at an
assumption of the "big bang", if however the
particles live an inside construction principle? Scientists
want to standardize and to orient themselves at the alleged
accidence and they don't know how! This way the sunflower oil
should come accidentally from the sunflower seeds and the lard
should also accidentally com from the pig.
However: The cosm theory
ELECTROGRAVITATION explains the origin really!
Each stable particle is
given elementary. Particles move into the existing vacuum.
Furthermore they are implied under different
particle-surfaces. They form a hierarchy of systems. Never the
stable particle changes itself with energy into different
stable particles! Alone at the weak force the effect changes
to a conversion, those peculiarities have nothing to do with a
"particle melting point."
An unstable particle only
decays into the direction of a stable particle, if it also has
the opportunity, therefore if it doesn't move with vacuum
speed of light; but with fewer. That temperature scale also
doesn't tell us:
At the inside of the local
stars the temperature amounts to about 2 x 1013
Kelvin to the falling of the stable protons and about 1010
Kelvin for stable electrons. To the surface the temperatures
fall on some thousand Kelvin.
At the isolated inside of
the particle, which exists in the proton, to organize the
protocosms, the temperature is crucially higher. It reaches to
that suspected and of me calculated 2.4 x 1031
Kelvin for the origin. That is the temperature of the forming
of pairs of gravitons (subtrons will be shaped at 1028
K). However here into our universe area we never find high
temperatures in such a way! To the parceling of our stars it
gets right cold anyway. Never there was a hot "big
bang", but a cold zero walk through the central area of
the universe in analogy of the winter! It remains to unlock:
assumption of the "big bang" in the consequence of
such a beautiful theory of the waves phenomena, the matter
represents a head-rank of the sciences!