Louis Nielsen
Quantum Cosmology
With
Decreasing Gravity
Unification of Micro and Macrocosmos A New Theory About the Universe
Conditio embryonis omnia determinat
Treatise
© Copyright 1996 Louis Nielsen
Quantum Cosmology With Decreasing Gravitation
Coupling of Micro with Macrocosmos
by Louis Nielsen, Senior Physics Master, Herlufsholm, Denmark
Comments are wellcome on Email to:
Louis Nielsen
1. Introduction
In this treatise I shall forward a theory which gives a unification between microcosmos and
macrocosmos.
I shall introduce an elementary length and an elementary time. My discovery
of the connection between elementary length, the actual extension of the universe, gravity and
electromagnetism leads to the consequence that gravity in the universe is
decreasing. A formula showing how Newton's gravitational "constant" is decreasing with time is
deducted. Formulas giving connection between the total matter/energymass of the universe,
its age and actual extension and the relative variation in time of the gravitational
"constant" will also be deducted.
The decrease of gravity gives a logical explanation of the expansion of the universe and its
structure with galaxies, stars and planets. As a natural consequence of the deducted formulas,
I shall postulate as follows: The total universe has been contained within a geometric space
with an extension equal to the elementary length. This "embryonic" state of the Universe
I shall call The Cosmic Embryoton. This theory does not operate with singularities.
The universe was 'born'
within the first cosmic quantum time interval. 'Simultaneously' with the 'birth' of the universe,
the first laws of nature appeared  in quantum 'jumps'. The first super physical law was the
entropy law (the law of changes). This law 'demands' that a system changes from a less
probable state to a more probable state. Or, in other words: The universe develops
from more compact states to scattered and less dense states. The gravity law was
'born' with a strength about 10^{42} times greater than in our epoch. With a still
decreasing gravity, the gravity law follows the entropy law.
The formulas will comprise a very fundamental, extremely small mass.
The formulas show that this mass decreases, simultaneously with the increase
of the space of the universe and the decrease of gravity.
This mass must be considered to be
the smallest quantum of mass in the universe – the elementary mass.
This elementary quantum of mass I will name 'a uniton'.
The universe ends up to disintegrate
down to quanta without structure and interactions, in accordance with the entropy law. The present
theory shows that electric charge is fundamentally connected to gravity in the embryonic
universe, actually it is shown that electromagnetic phenomena are of gravitational nature!
The gravitational phenomena can be described by a 2vector field theory, where the two
gravitational fields obey equations analog to the Maxwell equations.
An interesting result of the theory is a cosmological theoretical deduction of the 'fine
structure constant' of atomic physics. The value of this quantity has never before been
fundamentally theoretically explained. It will be shown that this quantity is also decided by the
conditions of the embryonic universe. These embryonic states are thus conclusively
deciding how the universe will develop. Conditio embryonis omnia determinat!
Most physicists and astronomers have for many years known that Einstein's general theory of
relativity (which is also a theory for gravity) is not consistent with quantum physics and the
other theories for interaction between particles. Many have expressed that physics and
astronomy have been 'cornered'. In order to proceed in the search for the ultimate secrets of
nature and desires for at holistic theory for microcosmos and macrocosmos, many things
seem to show that Einstein's general theory of relativity must be abandoned. It is a
mathematically beautiful, but complex theory, seeking to geometrize the universe. With
fascination, customary thinking and authority, it has been taught from one generation of
physicists to the next. Nobody will let it go.
The real physical consequences, which can be deducted from this theory are few. It is mainly:
1) the Mercury perihelium anomaly, 2) gravitational bending of photon paths,
3) gravitational wave length shift, and 4) gravity waves.  To this come some
mathematical solution models, interpreted as 'black holes' or other super dense objects.
The four above mentioned effects can be explained much simpler, for instance by the present
gravity theory. The mentioned possibilities for the structure of systems of matter can also be
understood by the present theory, showing that gravity at the 'birth' of the universe was about
10^{42} times stronger than today. In the accepted astro physics it is presumed that
the super dense objects are final conditions of very heavy stars. In the present treatise the
assumption is that the super dense objects are primordial states for coming stars! The
universe goes from more structured conditions to less structured, according to the entropy
law!
If we demand that the nature laws shall fulfil the 'principle of simplicity', this will degrade
Einstein's general theory of relativity. You may compare this development with the
Ptolemaeic epicycle model for the movements of planets. It became more and more complicated, until
it was abandoned, and Copernicus', Kepler's and finally Newton's theories were accepted.
Then the descriptions became much simpler.
Even logically it is possible to argue against the validity of Einstein's gravity field equations.
They can certainly, with mathematical complicity, be used for great matter/space areas, but
are useless for microcosmos, i.e. in the atomic world or what is smaller, not to speak of the
conditions in the early universe. The explanation for the limited validity of the theory is that
Einstein's field equations contain only macrocosmic quantities, such as Newton's
gravitational constant and the velocity of light. Furthermore these constants are not even
present in the original equations, but are introduced in the theory in order to describe realities
of the universe. The reason why the theory can not be used for microcosmos is due to the fact
that the theory does not contain atomic physical quantities, such as Planck's constant, electic
charge or elementary particle masses. The theory is not quantum physical!
A 'firework' model for the formation of the universe is proposed, with protogalaxies and
protostars formed by expansion
processes, caused by the very rapid decrease of gravity in the very young universe.
Also a new theory for the production of the chemical elements and release of energy in stars
will be set forth.
This new theory of stars is based on the existence of super nuclei, i.e. nucleonic systems with extremely
high nucleonic numbers, decaying while creating the known elements and causing production
of energy. A new theory is given for the formation of the planets and their moons. The theory gives an
understanding of the planets' composition of elements and relative sizes. Finally
considerations will be given regarding the evolutions of the laws of nature.
2. Elementary Length and Elementary Time. Quantization of Space and Time
A question is: Does there, in our universe, exist a physically smallest length,
r_{0}, and a physically smallest time interval,
t_{0}?
Based on considerations of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, I shall reply yes to this
question and postulate, that r_{0} and t_{0} are given
by:
(2.1)
(2.2)
where h is Planck's constant, c_{0} is the volocity of light in
vacuum, and M_{0} is the total matter/energymass of the universe.
M_{0}, h and c_{0} are supposed to be
constant in space and time. With known values for c_{0} and h
and a calculated value for M_{0} =
1.6 · 10^{60} kg (see later), we get:
(2.3) &
Any physical finite length is
decided by a natural number
, the space
quantum number, multiplied by r_{0}. A finite time interval is quantized
as a time quantum number
multiplied by
t_{0}. Thus we have:
(2.4) &
The value of time is a quantity introduced by man, in order to practically describe a
change in a physical system. Without change in the state of a physical system,
there is no possibility to define a value of time!
r_{0}, the absolute cosmic space unit, can be called a spaton, and
t_{0}, the absolute cosmic time unit, can be called a
tempon. These elementary values are absolute in the sense that they are
invariant to a relativistic Lorentz transformation. r_{0} divided by
t_{0} is equal to the velocity of light c_{0}, which thus
understandably also is Lorentz invariant, and thus measured to have the same value to all
observers.
Elementary length r_{0} and elementary time t_{0}
shall not be considered as mathematically exact figures, but on the contrary to be 'blurred'
physical figures with the interval lengths r_{0} and
t_{0}. Principally they give the physical smallest uncertainties, by which
it is possible to measure distances and time intervals. Heisenberg's uncertainty relations are
thus a consequence of the more fundamental relations given by (2.1) and (2.2)!
3. The Extension and the Age of the Universe. Decrease of Gravity.
»Die Weltformel« or the CosmoHolistic Formula
Let us consider the extension of the universe given by R = c_{0} · T and its
present age T. According to (2.4) we have:
(3.1)
(3.2)
Inserting in (3.1) and (3.2) the presumed values for R and T, we get:
(3.3)
Interestingly the cosmic quantum numbers n_{R} and n_{T} can be
written:
(3.4)
where:
(3.5)
N gives the present value of the ratio between the electrostatic and the
gravitostatic forces between a positron and an electron, or between to electrons. G is Newton's gravitational
"constant" in our epoch. See later. k_{c} is the Coulomb constant,
e the elementary charge, m_{e} the gravitational mass of the
electron, and m_{p} the gravitational mass of the positron.
Equations (3.1) and (3.2) can now be written as:
(3.6)
(3.7)
Presuming that the relations (3.6) and (3.7) are valid, not only in our epoch, but generally for
the universe in all its quantum states, perhaps except its final quantum state, we see that as the space
of the universe is gradually increasing, i.e. when the cosmic quantum numbers 'tick' upwards,
one or more of the quantities G, k_{c}, e, m_{p}, m_{e}, h,
c_{0} or M_{0} must vary with R or
T.
Assuming that k_{c}, e, m_{p}, m_{e}, h,
c_{0} and M_{0} do not vary, the only possibility for
variation is G. Astronomical and experimental observations must show whether this
is the case!
Formula (3.6) gives a unification of microcosmos with macrocosmos, and consequently it is to
be called 'Die Weltformel' or 'The CosmoHolistic Formula' (from Greek Kosmos: Order and Holos:
Whole).
Variation of G with R and T gives:
(3.8)
From (3.8) we see that as G decreases following the expansion of the universe, or in
other words, G decreases with cosmic time  the actual age of the universe. As
no physical times exist 'before' the first cosmic quantum interval, we can from (3.8) calculate
the value of G at the 'birth' of the universe, as at this time we had T =
t_{0}, i.e. G = G_{0} viz.:
(3.9)
We can thus write (3.8) as:
(3.10)
, n_{T} = 1, 2, 3 etc.
This shows that gravity was about 10^{42} times greater at the 'birth' of the
universe than today. (3.10) is seen to be a quantum law. From (3.10) we get the
variation of G in relation to time:
(3.11)
Equation (3.11) is one of the interesting results of the present theory, giving a very simple
relation between the actual age T of the universe and the relative variation of
G. A very accurate measuring of this variation is highly desirable, as we thus have a
very simple method to calculate the actual age of the universe by the equation:
(3.12)
More researchers have during time investigated a possible variation of G.
The methods include studies of the evolution of clusters of galaxies and of the Sun,
observations of lunar occultatins, planetary radarranging measurements and laboratory
experiments.
They all
have found an extremely small variation and conclude that gravity does not vary, interpreting
a variation found as uncertainty of measurements.
(References: Dearborn, D. S. and Schramm, D. N., Nature, vol. 247, 441443, (1974).
Chin, C. W. and Stothers, r., Rhys. Rev. Lett., vol. 36, 833835, (1976). Morrison, L. V.,
Nature, vol. 241, 519520, (1973). Van Flandern, T. C., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vl. 170,
333342, (1975). Shapiro, I. I., Phys. Rev. Lett. vol. 26, 2730, (1971). Braginsky et al.,
Phys. Rev. vol. D15, 204768, (1977).)
From (3.11) it is seen that G in our epoch decreases extremely slowly. One of the
newest analyses is based on the obervation of the double pulsar system PSR 1913 + 16 and
gives approx.:
(3.13)
Inserting the value in (3.13) in equation (3.12) we calculate the present age of the universe
to:
(3.14)
This age is in agreement with the newest age analyses, based on measurements done by the
Hubble Space Telescope. These analyses estimate that the age of the universe is between 8
and 12 billion years.
4. The Mass of the Universe Calculated from the Cosmic Decrease of Gravity
From equations (3.7) and (3.12) we can deduct a formula giving a connection between the
total mass M_{0} of the universe and the relative variation of G.
We get:
(4.1)
This equation can also be written as follows:
(4.2)
Inserting the values in equation (4.2) we get for the total energy/matter mass of
the Universe the following value:
(4.3)
This value gives a possibility for a huge amount of both visible and dark matter systems, and
it is this value which is used in the calculation of the values of the elementary length and the elementary time.
5. The Elementary Mass of the Universe — the Mass of a Uniton
A question is: Does there in our universe exist a physically smallest quamtum of mass? In the
affirmative: How great is this mass? The expression in equation (4.2) gives the possibility for
a very interesting answer! The value of the great paranthesis namely represents a positive
mass, the value of which will decrease when the Universe expands in quantum jumps. This mass must
simply be interpreted as the physically smallest mass in the present universe. It is the
smallest mass of the universe  the quantum mass. Inserting known values in (4.2),
we get:
(5.1)
From equation (4.2) we see that the universe started with an elementary mass, equal to the
total mass of the universe. The universe was 'born' as one quantum mass: The Cosmic
Embryoton.
It can easily be shown that m_{u} can also be expressed in the following
way:
(5.2)
In equation (5.2), T is the present age of the universe and R is the present
extension. The expressions in (5.2) are identical to the mass of a photon with 'wavelength'
R corresponding to a 'frequency' 1/T.
From equation (4.2) we see that m_{u} is connected with
gravity, as its value is decided by the relative variation of G.
This fact leads us to the following: m_{u} is the actual
mass of a uniton. Within the 'time of
birth', inside the first cosmic
quantum time interval of the universe, the mass of the uniton was equal
to the mass of the
Cosmic Embryoton. Gravity decreases as the mass of the uniton decreases.
The present
extremely small value of the uniton mass explains why it is so extremely difficult to
demonstrate graviton rays (gravity waves).
6. Electric Charge as a Gravitational Quantity
Equation (3.9) gives a direct connection between electrostatics and gravitostatics. By means
of this equation we can express the electric elementary quantum e by gravitational
quantities, as follows:
(6.1)
We see, interestingly, that we have both a negative and a positive value, in accordance with
observations of electrical phenomena. Both attracting and expelling forces exist. We can thus
conclude that the electric charge of an electron  or a positron  is attached to its gravitational
mass m via the initial gravity constant of the universe,
G_{0}. It is hereby shown that electrical forces, which have hitherto
been considered as an independent forces, in reality are 'frozen' gravitational forces, with the same
strength as when the universe was 'born'. As magnetic forces can be shown to be special
relativistic corrections to electrical forces, we can ultimatively conclude: Electromagnetic
phenomena are in reality gravitational dynamics!
Of course we can use the usual electromagnetic concepts in our daily work. All
'electromagnetic' phenomena can be described by the four Maxwell equations, combined
with the 'electromagnetic' Lorentz force. These equations can be written as follows:
(6.2)
(6.3)
(6.4)
(6.5)
(6.6)
In these equations is the electric field strength vector, is the magnetic field strength vector, is the electric charge density and the electric charge current density vector. is the electromagnetic force on a charge, q, moving with the
velocity . is the divergence operator and the rotation operator.
It can be shown that Maxwell's equations are a consequence of Coulomb's law for
electrostatic forces and the transformation equations for forces as given by the special theory
of relativity. As Newton's law for gravitostatic forces is mathematically identical to
Coulomb's law, a similar mathematical deduction will result in the validity of a set of
gravitational equations, similar to Maxwell's equations, meaning that besides the
gravitostatic field it will be necessary to operate with a gravitational rotation field, existing
around moving gravitational masses. We shall handle this in a coming section.
The Coulomb constant k_{c} in equation (6.1) is due to the way we define
electric charge. By another definition it is possible to get rid of this constant.
As it is an experimental experience that the electric charge of a particle is Lorentz invariant,
i.e. is independent of the velocity of the particle, we see from equation (6.1) that the
gravitational mass is also Lorentz invariant. This has serious consequences for Einstein's
general theory of relativity from 1915, as this theory is based on the identity of (or
proportionality between) the gravitational mass and the inertial mass. These two quantities of
mass are only identical for a resting particle. The inertial mass is increasing with velocity,
according to the special theory of relativity. If the above considerations are correct we
must conclude that Einstein's general theory of relativity must be abandoned as being a
general physical theory and shall only be used as an alternative theory, within a limited area
of experience.
The question is: Does electric charge exist in nature? Or are electrical – and gravitational
forces (and all forces) pure mechanical forces exerted by unitons? See a later section in my
treatise about this.
Finally, it seems to appear from the formulas of the present theory, that everything consists of
unitons. If this is correct, it may be a philosophical satisfaction for our intellect!
7. The Quantum Cosmological Basic Equations. The Cosmic Evolution Quantum
Number
Let us resume the quantum cosmological basic equations – all derived from the
cosmoholistic formula – describing the quantum evolution
of the universe. The equations can be written:
(7.1)
Cosmic quantization of space.
(7.2)
Cosmic quantization of time.
(7.3)
Quantized mass/energy disintegration.
(7.4)
Quantum decrease of gravity.
(7.5)
Differential equation for the decrease of G, within the continuous
limit.
(7.6)
Cosmic Evolution operator.
In these equations N can be considered as a cosmic evolution operator.
N³ defines a Cosmic evolution quantum number n_{e},
as:
(7.7)
Cosmic evolution quantum number.
It is to assumed that the equations are valid form the first cosmic quantum time interval
of the universe and until its 'death', when the total energy will be
split up in countless extremely small structureless quanta. From these cosmologic basic
equations we can derive formulas which will permit us to calculate the present extension
R, the present age T and the present matter/energy mass of the universe.
In order to calculate the values of these quantities, we need an exact value of the present
relative decrease of G. The formulas are:
(7.8)
(7.12)
The results given in (7.8) and (7.12), being a consequence of the quantization of the universe,
shall contribute to prove the validity of the present quantum cosmological theory.
It may be claimed that the value of the mass of the universe, given by equation (7.12) is on
the high side. The explanation is that in equation (7.6) I have chosen to let
m_{p} be the rest mass of a positron, not of a proton. I have done this
from the  philosophical  viewpoint that I consider the positron as more fundamental than a
proton.
If you in (7.6) replace the rest mass of a positron with the rest mass of a proton, N
will be 1836 times smaller, which will result in a mass of the universe being 1836³
times smaller, i.e. M_{0} = 2.6 × 10^{50} kg.
Such change of N will not affect the values of R and T. The
value in equation (7.12) gives the possibility for the existence of an extremely high amount
of 'dark matter'. Future observations and analyses must show the realities.
As it will be seen, the quantum cosmological equations are quite simple. This is quite
acceptable, as it is not strange that simple systems are described by simple equations.
Gradually, as the cosmic embryoton is broken up in more and more parts, and these parts
are moving relatively to each other, then more and more complicated equations are needed
for description of the system. As the cosmic evolution operator N can be considered
already to contain Newton's law for gravitational forces and Coulomb's law for electrostatic
forces, we can by means of the special relativistic transformation equations deduct Maxwell's
equations for electromagnetism and the analog gravitational equations, whereby it should be
noted, that electromagnetism is just gravitational dynamics!
I have hereby – together with the connection between the electric charge and the
gravitational mass of the electron in equation (6.1) – discovered the unification of
electromagnetism with gravitation!
8. Cosmologic Calculation of »The Fine Structure Constant«
The quantity called the fine structure constant plays a significant role in atomic physics. It is
defined as follows:
(8.1)
This constant is totally empiric, as nobody has been able to give any theoretical reasons for it.
I shall now, based on my quantum cosmologic theory, give a theoretical
calculation of the value, showing that this value has to do with the embryonic
condition of the universe, the elementary length and the total mass of the Universe. I shall use:
(8.2)
Using the expression in equation (6.1) we can write:
(8.3)
This equation can be written as:
(8.4)
The expression in (8.4) shows that
, and thereby the
fine structure constant, is decided by conditions in the embryonic universe, namely as
follows: is decided by the
gravitational potential energy between two electrons,
spaced by the elementary length, divided by the total energy of the universe! Or, in other
words, the fraction of the total energy of the universe 'used' for electromagnetic processes
is about 0.12 percent.
From the above we see clearly the fundamental coupling between microcosmos and
macrocosmos. G_{0} is the initial gravitational constant, which can be
calculated by equation (3.9).
9. A Twovector Field Gravitational Theory with Variable Coupling
»Constants«
In 1972 the authour of the present treatise proposed a twofield gravitational theory, which in
its mathematical structure is identical to Maxwell's equations in electrodynamics. An article
was published in the magazine GAMMA no. 9, February 1972. This magazine is published
by the Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen.
Besides the gravitostatic 'Newtonfield' around a relatively resting gravitational mass, a
dynamic rotation field is 'created' around gravitating masses in relative movement.
This dynamic vector field shall
together with the gravitostatic vector field satisfy the following differential equations:
(9.1)
(9.2)
(9.3)
(9.4)
In the equations is the divergence
operator, the rotation operator, is the gravitational mass density and the gravitational mass current density vector.
K is the coupling »constant« to the dynamic field. We could call K the gravitational permeability.
The relation between K and G is given by:
(9.5)
This is the value in our epoch, and we see that it is extremely small. This explains why it is
very difficult to observe the effect of the field.
The force law, pertaining to the fields and , is given by:
(9.6)
where is the force acting on a gravitating mass
m_{g} moving with the velocity in a
combined and field.
The gravitational equations predict directly the existence of gravity waves.
It can be shown
that Maxwell's equations are a consequence of Coulomb's electrostatic force law and the
transformation equations for forces as given by the special theory of relativity. As Newton's
law for gravitostatic forces is mathematically identical to Coulomb's law, a similar
mathematical deduction will result in the validity of the gravitational equations (9.1) to
(9.6).
With the Maxwell analog gravitational equations I have – together with the connection between
the electric charge and the gravitational mass of an electron – discovered the unification
between electromagnetism and gravitation. Both electrical – and gravitational forces can be
physically explained as uniton mechanical forces. (See a later section).
An analysis of the development of the universe, based on these equations, would be highly
interesting, as it will give the possibility for an understanding of its structure as we actually
observe it. Especially it would 'explain' galaxy structures, and also information received form
objects in the outer universe, such as quasars, would give us information about structures in
the early universe.
The interesting is that K decreases with G. At the birth of the
universe, K was about 10^{42} times higher than today. The initial value
was:
(9.7)
This gives the possibility for a totally different cosmic structure than the structure based on
the field alone. It is well known today that
the galaxy structure of the universe is far from homogene. On the contrary it shows a very
irregular 'net structure'.
As the coupling 'constant' K to the magnetogravitational field in our epoch is extremely small, K = 9.2
· 10^{ 27} m/kg, it will be very difficult to observe the field's effect on gravitating particles. It will not be
observed 'by accident', as when H. C. Ørsted (17771851) discovered electromagnetism in 1820.
In the early universe, when the gravitational mass current densities were high and the
gravitostatic field varied faster, and K simultaneously war greater, much stronger
fields were generated. These fields have,
together with the gravitostatic fields, been deciding for the geometric structure of our
universe. In accordance with the present theory, a galaxy is created by an expansion process,
as an extremely dense system of matter with a small extension  a galaxy embryoton  has
spewed up to several hundred billions smaller parts of matter  star embryotons  out, caused
by the rapid decrease of gravity. From the star embryotons the stars were formed. As the
galaxy nucleus, the remains of the galaxy embryoton, has a quick rotation and a relatively
great mass density, it will create a magnetogravitational field, in which the protostars move. These protostars, and the later
formed stars, will in this field move in spiral
orbits. Quite analog to the orbits of an electrically charged particle in an inhomogenuous
magnetic field. The magnetogravitational
field thus explains the spiral structures of the universe!
This theory has been supported recently by the Hubble Space Telescope, photographing some
of the earliest galaxies (about 1500). The pictures show galaxies with very regular spiral
structures, so old that they can not have been formed by condensation processes, but were
created when the field was much
stronger.
An analysis, based on the proposed twofield gravitational theory, would be highly desirable,
especially an analysis of the dynamic conditions shortly after the 'birth' of the universe.
In the very early universe, both the field and the field were extremely strong. When rapidly changed, and the mass current densities were very great; it is
evident from equation (9.4) that a very strong field was created. As it will be seen, it follows directly from the
gravitational equations that gravitational waves will be created. The density of the energy of
the gravitational waves, generated just after the 'birth' of the universe, were extremely high. As
the universe expanded, the density of the energy decreased. It must be presumed that the
universe is filled by this gravitational cosmic background radiation, quite analog to the
electromagnetic background radiation. I propose that this cosmic gravitational background
radiation should be looked for by the projected LIGO detector (Laser Interferometer
Gravitationalwave Observatory). Joseph Weber from the University of Maryland
reported in 1969 that he had registered gravitational waves from the center of our galaxy. This may
have been enormous gravitational processes, from the remnants of a galaxy embryoton. A
galaxy embryoton, the fetus particle of a galaxy, is a very concentrated 'lump' of energy,
emanating from the cosmic embryoton, while gravity still decreased very rapidly in the very
early universe!
10. Cosmic Firework Model. Galaxy Embryotons and Star Embryotons
Continuing the considerations in part 9, the following firework model for the
universe can be set up. The total universe was created by the Cosmic
Embryoton.
During the first quantum time interval after time t_{0}, when gravity was
decreasing extremely rapidly, a great number of galaxy embryotons were slinged out.
They were the fetus particles for the galaxies. During the still rapid decrease of gravity, from
each of the galaxies were spewed billions of star embryotons. From these star embryotons the
stars in our universe were formed.
Regarding the formation of basic elements, the above considerations lead to the following
hypothesis: The elements, especially elements heavier than iron, have been created by
disintegration, natural fission and decay of superheavy nuclei, with extremely high nucleus
numbers. The elements were created according to the physical conditions ruling in the
expanding universe. The galaxy embryotons were explosionlike slinged out from the
cosmic embryoton, rotating relatively to each other, so that the total angular momentum was
zero. These rotating galaxy embryotons have  caused by the still rapidly decreasing gravity 
emitted star embryotons. A galaxy is under formation! The angular momentum of the galaxy
embryoton is divided among the created stars, partly as an orbit angular momentum, partly as
an eigen angular momentum. The outermost stars in the galaxy have been thrown out with
the highest 'sling' power, which results in a relatively higher galaxy orbit velocity than the
last emitted star embryotons. This galactic pattern of movement has been observed in many
galaxies. Thus the hypothesis regarding existence of 'cold dark matter' is not needed!
The quasars, situated billions of light years from us, have also given problems of
understanding, especially due to the enormous radiation of energy from relatively small
spaces. The explanation may be, that a quasar is a galaxy under development, and that the
center of the quasar is the remnants of a galaxy embryoton. As they are objects in the outer
parts of the universe, we see, via the electromagnetic radiation, the physical conditions as
they were in the young universe, where gravity a.o. was much greater. The remnants of a
galaxy embryoton possibly correspond to what the established cosmology calls a 'black
hole'.
Measurements made by The Hubble Space Telescope in November, 1994, show that in the
outer space  thus in the earliest 'childhood' of the universe  super dense objects and galaxy
structures exist. This is completely in contradiction with accepted theories.
Let us consider formation of stars from a star embryoton. As gravity decreases, the star
embryotons disintegrate and at a certain time they are converted to extremely heavy, rotating
'lumps' of neutrons  balls of neutrons rotating in the universe. From these balls the stars are
created  if not all stars, then the oldest. These neutron balls are presumably identical to some
of the pulsars we know today.
Around the fast rotating neutron ball a strong magnetic field is created. As a result of this
strong magnetic field (and maybe the quantum mechanical tunnel effect) clusters of neutrons
and single neutrons are 'blown' out from the surface of the neutron ball. Some of the neutrons
are converted to protons, electrons and antineutrinos. The extreme conditions will cause the
creation of a hight amount of super heavy nuclei (a better expression may be macro nuclei),
defined by extremely high nucleus numbers, not present i our epoch.
11. New FissionFusion Model for Stars with a Central Core of Neutrons
The following describes a new model for the sun and other similar stars. As an example, let
us consider the construction of the sun and the processes taking place within it. Generally the
sun has a stratified structure and function. The central part consists of a relatively small
rotating neutron ball, consisting exclusively of neutrons. This rotating neutron ball is the
source of the primary magnetic field of the sun. Around the neutron ball is a zone of super
nuclei, with different, very high nucleus numbers. These super nuclei have 'evaporated' from
the surface of the neutron ball, assisted at the escape by the strong magnetic field and
possibly by the quantum mechanical tunnel effect.
Within this zone of super nuclei, decays take place by spontaneous and induced fission and
by ,
,
and processes. These processes produce
energy, and simultaneously the heaviest elements are created, down to iron, which is the
most stable nucleus we know. Neutrons,
particles and lighter elements, created by
fission and decay of the super nuclei, are 'blown' outwards in the sun by the pressure of
radiation and particles. The neutrons are converted to protons, electrons and antineutrinos,
by which hydrogen atoms can be built.
particles give the possibility for production
of helium atoms. In the zone of super nuclei, the abundance of iron is increasing as the
disintegration of super nuclei takes place. Hydrogen, helium and some of the lighter and
heavier elements will be 'placed' in two zones around and outside the super nucleus zone. In
the inner hydrogen/helium zone, where temperature and pressures are high, fusion processes
take place, producing energy and lighter elements. The second hydrogen/helium zone is
identical to the outer layer of the sun and consists, as spectral analysis shows, of hydrogen,
helium and lighter elements, mixed with a small amount of heavier elements. These super
nuclei can, under certain physical conditions, disintegrate and decay by different types of
reactions. A certain super nucleus can decay a.o. by successive multifissions  natural as well
as induced 
,
,
,
and decay.
By decay is meant all other than
, and
decay. Possibilities are emissions of nuclei
of carbon, oxygen, silicium, sulphur etc. By the disintegration processes, energy is released,
in the form of kinetic and radiation energy. The pressure from particles and radiation causes
an 'inflation' of the system of matter. An active star is formning! Regarding the
possibility for the existence of super nuclei, the condensation of a multiparticle system was
theoretically predicted by Einstein and Bose about 70 years ago, and in 1995 such
BoseEinstein condensate was successfully produced for the first time. So, in the vast
universe, where all possible physical conditions may occur, everything is  almost  possible.
The star model can now be resumed as follows:
 At the core: Rotating neutron ball:
 A relatively fast rotating neutron ball, source of the primary magnetic field of the star
and also source of the super nuclei, emanating towards the surface.
 Next follows: The Super nucleus zone  Fission zone:
 A zone
consisting of super nuclei, disintegrating and decaying with release of energy and
simultaneous production of elements heavier than iron.
 Third layer: The Iron zone:
 A zone with relatively high abundance of iron, and with balance between fission and
fusion processes.
 Fourth layer: HHe zone 1  Fusion zone:
 A zone consisting primarily of hydrogen and helium, with fusion processes, releasing
energy and creating lighter elements.
 Outer layer: HHe zone 2  Fusion free zone:
 A zone consisting of
hydrogen, helium and lighter elements, mixed with some heavier elements.
The outer layer we know quite well from studies of spectres. On the contrary, information
from the other zones are presently difficult to analyze. The studies of neutrinoflux, magnetic
fields and helioseismology must confirm or reject the present model. The theory may
possibly be confirmed as follows: the inner, rotating neutron ball with the strong magnetic
field will cause radiation of pulsarlike radio waves, emitted in a cone centered around the
magnetic axis. This radiation will, however, be distorted on its way out, passing the
secondary magnetic field, created by the movement of electrically charged particles.
In order to confirm the present theory regarding production of energy and creation of
elements, measurements must be made of the neutrino flux leaving the sun. This has been
done with the result that only about 1/3 of the amount to be expected from the calculations
on the accepted fusion model were registered. This is a great enigma, maybe the solution is
the present model? The specific reactions for the disintegration of super nuclei are not
presently known, therefore it is not possible presently to predict the emitted neutrino
flux.
The present theory is more than current theories in accordance with the entropy law,
predicting that a system will change to a condition with higher probability  greater disorder.
Fusion processes result in a more structured system, and thus actually contradict the entropy
law. Locally and temporarily, the entropy may decrease and be kept constant, even if it
totally seen always will increase. It must be presumed that nature always 'choses' the simplest
and most direct processes. Guarded and dictated by the entropy law, the whole universe will
end as a 'soup' of structureless particles!
12. New Theory for the Formation of Planets and their Moons
Matter from which planets are created has been spewed out from an already active sun, in
which production of energy and creation of elements are well under way.
The preplanetary matter has been 'rotationally' slinged out by a twostep explosive
mechanism. The outer planets, with the lowest density, have been created first. The inner
planets, with the highest density, have been created last. The outer planets, Neptune, Uranus,
Saturn, and Jupiter, are thus the oldest. The inner planets, Mars, Earth, Venus, and Mercury,
are the youngest. Let us first consider the creation of the outer planets. At a certain time, an
unstability has arised in the active Sun, starting an explosion process. The outer layers of the
Sun, rich in hydrogen and helium, have been slinged out in space and have gathered to a
rotating, preplanetary ring of matter. Due to the gravity of the Sun, this matter is attracted by
the Sun. This results in two effects: partly that the original disk of matter is divided in more
separate ring systems, partly that the amount of matter has been highest nearest to the Sun.
During time the different rings of matter condense to the different outer planets. The greatest
planet, Jupiter, nearest to the Sun, and then outwards with decreasing magnitude, outermost
Neptun. (Pluto is possibly a planet which has gone astray and ended up in the outer parts of
the solar system). Today it is known from analyses that the outer planets mainly consist of
hydrogen and helium, mixed with few heavier elements.
After the initial solar explosion process, the outward pressure from radiation and particles
have decreased. This has resulted in a gravitational contraction of the outer layers, which
now have obtained a much higher abundance of heavier elements, especially iron.
A second solar explosion (in time presumably much later than the first) slings matter out,
much more abundant in heavier elements, especially iron. From this matter the inner planets,
Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, and the asteroids, are created. But furthermore, the moons and
rings of matter around the outer planets from Jupiter and outward, also consist of this matter.
The matter has simply been captured by the gravity of the planets and has started orbiting.
Hereby is explained why these moons and other matter, orbiting the outer planets, consist of
elements similar to the elements of our Earth. Matter between the Sun and Jupiter,
orbiting the Sun, is exposed to two gravitational forces, one from the Sun and one from
Jupiter. This has two effects: partly that the disk of matter is divided into 5 disks, partly that
the disks nearest to the Sun and Jupiter are 'leanest', and the disk in the 'middle' between the
Sun and Jupiter is 'thickest'. From this latter the Earth has been created. The smallest planets,
Mercury and Venus, and those containing the heaviest elements, especially iron, have been
created nearest to the Sun. From the rings of matter nearest to Jupiter, Mars and the asteroids
have been formed. Due to the high gravity of Jupiter, the ring nearest Jupiter has not been
able to form a planet. The same would be valid for a possible ring of matter between the Sun
and Mercury. Inside the orbit of Mercury it is possible that smaller and bigger lumps of
matter orbits the Sun. Due to the intense light from the Sun, observation is extremely
difficult. The existence of such lumps of matter could give an explanation of the Mercury
perihel anomaly! Einsteins theory thus would not be necessary. It is also
understandable that Mercury is practically a ball of iron, orbiting the Sun.
Information from the probe from the spacecraft Galileo, which in December, 1995,
penetrated the atmosphere of Jupiter, support the above theory, as it showed that the
atmosphere contains much smaller amounts of helium, neon, carbon, oxygen and sulphur
than expected according to the theories, hitherto accepted by the astronomers. As seen above,
my theory claims that the outer planets primarily consist of hydrogen and some helium.
The Galileo probe has furthermore measured the content of water in the jovian atmosphere to
be similar to the content in the atmosphere of the Sun, which is also support for my theory.
Further the probe has confirmed what has been measured earlier, that the planet Jupiter emits
more energy than can be explained by known processes, such as reflected sunlight. This can
be explained by presuming that Jupiter  and other big planets  in its inner parts contains
macro nuclei, i.e. super nuclei with an extreme number of protons and neutrons. The
possibility for the existence of such 'condensed' nucleonic systems requires an enormous
pressure in the inner of the planet. Macro nuclei under less pressure decay to smaller parts
with release of energy, in the form of kinetic energy and photon energy. This energy is
transported out through the planet and results in the measured radiation of energy.
13. Super Fundamental Nature Constants of the Universe and Evolution
Parameters
In the human search of truth questions are: Who are we? From where do we come? To where
do we go? Who, what, and how is our universe guided or controlled? In physics, where it is
the goal to find the most systematic and objective replies to the above questions, the
existence of a set of physical constants, controlling coupling and strength of the processes in
a system, has been discovered. They are the nature constants, e.g. the velocity of light in
vacuum c_{0}, Planck's constant h, Newton's gravitational
constant G, the electric elementary quantum e, the mass of the electron
m_{e}, Boltzmann's constant k, etc. The questions
are: 1) Are these constants independent of each other, or is there a dependence?
2) Are they the most fundamental in our universe, or does there exist some super
fundamental nature 'constants', from which other can be deducted? 3) Are they really
constants, or does any of them vary with the expansion of the universe?
In my opinion, the nature 'constants', which we use in our theories today, are constants at a
higher level than the most fundamental. They can be deducted from super fundamental
nature constants. Which constants are then super fundamental? They are: The total mass of
fields and matter in the universe, M_{0}, elementary length,
r_{0}, and elementary time, t_{0}.
Furthermore of an evolution parameter, 'responsible' for that the universe exists and that it is
undergoing an evolution. This evolution parameter is N and powers of
N.
The number of particles in the present universe is of the order N². The
absolute entropy of the universe is a function of B. At time
t_{0}, the 'birth' of the universe, the entropy was zero.
One of the main results of the present theory is the coupling between microcosmos and
macrocosmos  it is a holistic theory. The determining, and most fundamental figure in our
universe is the mass M_{0}. M_{0} is, together
with elementary length and elementary time, deciding for the value of the coupling constants
of the physical laws. It must be presumed that the physical laws undergo an evolution
like everything else, so that some are 'born' with possibilities for later 'mutations', while
others 'die', so that the 'strongest' laws will mainly decide how the evolution and the structure
of the universe will take place.
Information about the structure of the nature laws are already present in the embryonic
condition of the universe.
Conditio embryonis omnia determinat!
Ultimatively all laws will terminate!
Louis Nielsen
Mejerivej 25A,
DK4700 Næstved
Denmark
Comments are wellcome by Email to:
Louis Nielsen
Translated to English by Carl Salking
Next article
Main entry
