Over the past year I have watched a cable t.v. show named “The Universe.” I really enjoyed it because it dealt with many complex ideas in a manner I could understand. Always a plus! There were shows on the stars, the galaxies, how the universe came into being (big bang theory), how the universe might end, etc. These shows were thought-provoking to say the least. And there we have it, thought-provoking. So I did a lot of it, thinking that is. I even bought a couple of books on quantum physics and the universe.
I have talked over some of my own theories with a guy who I consider to be extremely intelligent and seems to be versed somewhat in this area. I truly suck in math. I got through trigonometry and advanced algebra, but when I tried to calculus, I crashed and burned, horribly. I bring that up because physics is heavily reliant upon math to prove its models. From that the obvious question arises, how I can propose anything or take to task any widely held “truths” about physics if I don’t have the means to do so? I use logic.
I have long believed that the idea that light was not the fastest thing in the universe and that you can go faster than the speed of light. No, this was not to satisfy latent “Star Trek” desires because I have none of those. I simply had a feeling. Having feelings in science is a really good thing if you can offer proof. I could not until recently. That proof came from an Italian physicist who believes he has measured neutrinos going slightly faster than the speed of light. Now, if he is proven correct then Einstein’s general and special theories of relatively take a hit. Einstein stated categorically that nothing went faster than light. That’s actually the easier of the ideas I’ve come up with and I fully expect that when other scientists have vetted the Italian physicist’s findings, they will confirm them.
My next offering is that physicists have done science a huge disservice by suggesting that at “the bottom” of a black hole exists a thing called “singularity.” That simply means that the four accepted forces of nature, the strong force (nuclear), the weak force (gravity), electro-magnetism, and radiation will all suddenly disappear into one force, gravity. Furthermore, it also suggests that time disappears. My numerous problems with this come from these physicists stating that gravity, the weak force, will destroy all the other forces combining them into a single force. They also like the idea of a single force because most ascribe to the notion that just prior to the big bang there was only gravity which at the big bang mysteriously divided into the other three forces. Now, here comes part 2, big bangers also state that within the first few moments of the universe’s existence it expanded almost instantaneously into a universe that was maybe a billion light years wide. Anyone see the problem with that? I do! It would mean that the entire universe had to expand in those moments at a speed many times the speed of light.
All right then! Scientists generally agree that the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years old. I have no problem with that, they’re probably right. But, here’s the next problem, the measure the universe as extending some 40 billion light years in any one direction, and up to 100 billion years in all directions. Really? Well, let’s go back to the speed of light, that barrier that nothing can exceed, and explain how anything can be more than 13.7 billion light years away. You have to remember that a light year is the distance light will travel in one year.
Next we have the composition of light. No one knows although scientists like to say light is a “wave” or a “photon”, one or the other. Most scientists like to suggest that light has no mass but they really don’t know. Well, let’s go back to our black hole. These same scientists describe a black hole as something that not even light can escape. Interesting! I have a problem with that, not that light cannot escape, I think that true, but that light probably doesn’t have mass. The problem is, the last time I looked gravity only affects things with mass.
There is even a further problem with our black hole. If this singularity exists that means that when stuff hits the “event horizon” of a black hole, all the laws of physics are suspended and some new set of laws take over. Why is that? Einstein’s general law of relativity, defined by E=MC squared cannot be true. Within that law is the law of conservation of energy. That is, enery can be neither created nor destroyed. It simply changes form. From this all matter and energy exists. But, and this is one huge but, the singularity of a black hole destroys energy/mass.
I have a general belief, man’s greatest shortcoming is his never ending devising of stories to fit the as yet unexplained. For example, the Greeks created their gods of the heavens to give explanation to the rising of the sun, movement of the moon, what stars were. They did it for pretty much everything else too. We have journeyed past a geo-centric universe to a much better explained one now. But, I have serious problems when scientists devise mathematical formulas to explain things. For example, they state that 4+3=7 and that is the only explanation of 7 because they know exactly what 4 and 3 are. They are not quite sure of 5 and 2 and still haven’t discovered 6 and 1. They are using 4+3 to explain everything past the event horizon of black hole, and many other as yet unexplaned phenomena. I take issue with that. I would much rather hear them say, “we really don’t know and we can only guess at the answer.”