Was the Universe created from big or small?

*** What strikes me looking at Einstein's formula E= m*c^2 is its inherent simplicity when you think that it stays at the foundation of the Universe's laws and our World as we know it.

The way it has been looked at for decades is, naturally, the way as the formula has been written, energy is created by a large amount by transforming even a very small quantity of matter thanks to the square of a speed of light c which is indeed a very large value, 300,000 Km/s. That's in fact the base of producing energy out of nuclear fission of radioactive matter.

But when we read the formula from the mass viewpoint, m= E/c^2, so not only energy that can be created out of matter but also, inversely, the matter that can be created out of energy such as the case of 2 photons, the basic elements of light having no mass that after colliding each other can create matter in terms of a positron and an electron, things are quite different. Yes, mass can be created out of energy according to Einstein's formula but the result is that a very small amount of energy occurs to create these elementary particles.

When the mass is created, despite the large square value of the light speed you realize that a very small amount of energy is involved to create a positron and electron which have a mass in the order of 10^-31 against about 10^17 of the square c. Only energy in the order of 10^-14 joule is needed to create matter.

We also know that not only positrons and electrons can be created out of photons but also gluons which stay at the base of the strong nuclear bonding of elementary elements of atoms such as quarks, the building blocks of protons and neutrons.

Small energy is needed to create the basic mass particles in the Universe. You just need light in Space.

Light and Space

What is light? We know that light travels at the speed of 300,000 Km/s which means that to exist it needs Space to travel. A bulb inside a solid box doesn't let the light go outside and the light is stopped from traveling. Then, light needs empty Space to travel at that speed of 300,000 Km/s.

If Space were a limited confined box we should wonder what is there outside the box.... Of course, if Space is infinite light would never stop traveling. That is likely true but I rather think that Space exists because light exists and it becomes measurable only when matter populates it.

Looking at Space this way we can think of it as a CAD-like environment, which means it is not infinite but it has no limits. It goes along with the speed of light and becomes measurable only when the matter is created for the physical relations such as gravity that interact between matter created at different locations.

Space in its visible dimension exists only when the matter is created. We often dream of being in a beautiful place in the World and instantly we jump to another place thousands of miles away. We do not physically move by a cm but our mind can span from one World to another instantly. Space, like our mind and dreams can appear infinite, a virtual place that becomes physically measurable only if matter is created. We are the objects produced by Nature's dreams, when energy is transformed into matter.

Space becomes real if only matter or light populates it. When matter is created it occupies a position in Space and objects such as planets and stars define the relative distance between them in such a way distance becomes measurable.

Space is the environment where all the potential energy (or dark energy) that has created the Universe is stored. There are no limits to its envelope as long as energy is transformed into matter.

As there are no limits to Space in our dreams, Space has no limits, it is not infinite but it has no limits because it can't be measured.

Did the Universe start from big or small?

The current most accredited theory is that the Universe started with a big bang at time zero with an immensely hot and dense single point that inflated and stretched, first at incredible speed exceeding the speed of light for a very short time, and then at a lower rate, to the ever expanding Universe we know today.

I don't have arguments to argue that is not true but I like to think that it could also be possible the other way around, that is, what if the Universe started from very small? At least that is what we see in Nature, when life starts in a very little form, a seed, the mating of a male sperm and female ovule, and even less is needed for the creation of bacteria.

Why then not imagine a Universe that instead of concentrating all the mass/energy that is supposed to have provided the big bang, in a way only God knows how, has started from very tiny light collisions that have provided the first basic elements of the Universe, the elementary parts of an atom by which the smallest one, the hydrogen atom, the Stars basic fuel, has been created.

Following this theory, the matter was created and is still continuously created from the dark energy Nature has gotten since the beginning.

Nature has built itself block by block transforming its energy into matter using light as a means. It is likely possible that previous attempts failed until the speed of light was reached the only condition that permitted the matter to be created.

Nature makes small steps one after another

That is definitely what we learn from Nature, every day. The most complex processes are in the reality the combination of previous attempts and, often, occasionally succeeded attempts, always from small to large, never the other way around.

It is widely accepted that life on Earth has been possible starting from the combination of simple amino acids that combined when temperature and pressure were the right ones for life to kick off. Life has been proven to be likely anywhere in the Universe looking at the survival of bacteria in vacuum space.

Proteins, acids that are the building blocks of life demonstrate that any complex living being, including humans is the result of the combination of much more simple elements, without which no life would be possible.

Cannot then, the Universe, be created then by very simple block elements?

General Relativity and Quantic Mechanics cannot be merged into a unique theory

The mechanics that stays behind the big bodies in our Cosmos, Planets, Stars, Galaxies are normally associated to the Einstein theory of General Relativity of which experimental data have given sufficient proof of validity.

The same can be said about the Quantic Mechanics applied to the microcosm particles/waves for which the principle of in-determination of Heisenberg applies.

Because the mass of the elementary parts of atoms is so tiny with respect to objects having the mass we can appreciate in our World, we can argue that is not possible for these particles obeying to, say, the inertia law that is so impacting at the scale we live on Earth, some 10+34 orders of magnitude higher.

It's a bit like predicting the position and speed of a leaf in a windy day, its low mass and geometry is such that if pushed on one side its trajectory can be rather different than the direction of the force and so its inertia doesn't seem to follow the Newton law of action-reaction if not for an instantaneous moment. Whereas a stone will be much less affected by external forces like the wind and its trajectory can be easily predicted.

That's why it doesn't make sense to find a unique theory that can explain both properties of the micro and macrocosm which are regulated by forces that are different in intensity (Nuclear forces, strong, for micro particles with a mass close to zero and gravitation, then weak force for the bodies that populate our Universe with a mass going to infinity).

Light is the Universe bricklayer and messenger, Gravitation is the builder

We can think for a moment that to put up dreams Nature needed a dream builder: that was the light and its speed. Light has permitted to build the building blocks of Nature and its unique characteristics have mapped the universal constants of our Universe. I would not be surprised that this has happened after several attempts, the same way Nature's life is developing through natural selection. Only the ones having the right characteristics can survive.

The light has permitted to build everything we know in the Universe. Having the dimensions of a speed I am surprised why some people argue its value could not be constant, being the by-product of a quantum of kinetic energy. Its constant value of 300,000 Km/s is the assurance that matter properties are just right about to create the basic particles matter is made, including its cohesion forces. Likewise a body in a resistant mean such as an Aircraft flying into air, light reduces its speed depending on the density of the resisting mean.

Light is also the messenger of how the matter appears at time T0 to an observer located at a certain distance who will receive the message at time T1 for large distances. Without light nothing gets old because there is nothing to show up. A hypothetical person enclosed in a dark room (until will not get crazy) will have no sign to get old without light.

But without constraints, the speed of massless photons is the maximum speed that can be achieved in the Universe. A body with mass cannot achieve this speed because the force needed to change its energy would be infinite.

Once the mass is created gravitational and electromagnetic forces take over, gravitational forces particularly are the ones responsible to shape our Cosmos as we know it.

Light is the memory element in our Universe that records what has been built, like the constant speed of a film tape that shapes the events over time. It shows events of the past and how they evolved up to date.

Gravitation forces have permitted to build all we know in the Universe, Stars, Planets, Galaxies. They are the builder of our Universe and the full expression of Nature.

How time and Universe expansion fits with the theory of Nature's small steps

Time makes sense only if applied to an inertial system not traveling at the speed of light. A system becomes old when measured from an inertial system. Traveling at the speed of light means keeping the clock at time zero because light doesn't get old.

The initial Universe could show up as light turned on in uncountable parts of the initially empty Space a bit like a Christmas tree. This light distribution can correspond more or less to the Galaxies framework the Universe is made up of. It looks like the design of the Galaxy's distribution into Space is such that the possibility of clash between Galaxies is low but possible.

At the very beginning, only light was present in different parts?of the Universe and there was no possibility for other forces such as gravitational to act on the small particles. It is indeed possible the design of the "Christmas tree" -like light distribution would slightly differ each other to permit a different development for each Galaxy always in reason of Nature natural selection that applied to Galaxies can turn out to verify which model works best. Galaxies are in fact somehow similar but not identical one another.

We know that the most faraway stars and Galaxies that are normally used to date our Universe today, estimated at around 14 billion light years, are the expression of the Universe's infancy. However, the Universe span about 96 billion light years across which means that Galaxies expand one other at a rate higher than the speed of light.

Actually, that would seem in contradiction with Einstein's relativity principle that a body cannot have a speed higher than light. But this law makes sense when applied to bodies whose total energy can vary with time such as when a force is applied. The force applied to a body changes its velocity and kinetic energy. The energy required to accelerate a body to the speed of light would be infinite.

A Galaxy, however, can be considered a closed system with its own internal energy, a total energy that cannot change, only transformation between mass and energy is allowed but the total energy remains the same. This means that its own speed relative to other Galaxies does not determine an increment in energy and for this reason speed can be higher than light when undergoing gravitation forces carried out by other Galaxies. This can explain the Galaxies relative speed in the Universe at a rate higher than that of light.

According to the Nature principle that steps are made one after another it is reasonable to think gravitational forces have raised their influence in forming the Universe as a function of the creation of atomic elements having more and more density.

Light, out of dark energy, built up, in a step-by-step process, the elementary particles that formed the hydrogen atom, the fundamental element of stars and only with the nuclear fusion of hydrogen atoms more complex atoms could be created, as we know, and this process has widely influenced the variation of gravitational forces.

In a big bang context, seen as a dramatic dynamic of an explosion the expansion rate should be the highest at the very beginning and destined to be reduced with time, something not supported by current data that see first-age light expansion increasing. The big bang theory only finds a sort of justification in attributing to the dark matter pull out forces the reason why expansion is growing.

In a step-by-step context, dark matter is not needed to explain the erratic behaviour of distant Galaxies, Supernova,.. because black holes can themselves explain that.

Gravitational forces grew up according to the creation of ever heavier atoms out of Star's atomic fusion up to black holes events, in such a way the mass of Galaxy's could grow up steadily.

As we said the mass at large scale is controlled mainly by gravitation forces which means that for the same unit of conical angle having the Earth at the centre, in a spherical-like Universe architecture, the most distant Galaxies, being in higher number than the closer ones carry out a higher gravitation force towards the inner ones and this, in turn, produces the expansion characteristics of our Universe. This is another way to explain the Hubble theory that Galaxies are moving away at a speed proportional to their distance, the farther they are the faster they are moving away from Earth.

The theory of small steps doesn't need an initial inflation of Galaxies or dark matter to explain the Galaxies expansion because gravitational forces are numerically higher going farther away from the Earth in a spherical-like Cosmos architecture.

The more distant Galaxies are from one another the smaller is, in theory, the attraction force in an ever inflating Universe but, actually, the force is likely compensated by the increment of mass of the Stars by-products which have a higher atomic mass. This process keeps a balance in gravitational forces among galaxies in the Universe in such a way the rate of expansion increases just because new galaxies are continuously formed at the edge of the Universe, which increases gravitation forces in the large part of the cone.

The design of Nature is to create life to give a sense to its dreams.

Before light broke out into Space Nature was in a dimension we can't get access: the dimension where only dark matter and energy exist. We could call it the "after death" environment which is part of our Universe but it just can't show up because it is not made of matter.

Had this environment got a design for Nature to create matter and things as we know? I think yes, the same way we can virtually travel in our dreams without really moving. Nature design is I guess aimed at bringing life into the Universe in such a way, whatever is the outcome, memory can be transmitted to creatures who follow from the ones who die.

This is more or less what we experience in our life with generations that run through time, natural selection of the most adaptable species and memory that is transmitted to next-generation creatures.

The Universe's architecture is also such that the space between Galaxies is so big that cross-contamination is unlikely possible, something that would suggest Worlds belong to each Galaxy only and no life transfer is likely possible.