This video welcomes visitors and introduces Louis A. Del Monte, author, physicist and the Chief Executive Officer of Del Monte and Associates, Inc. It briefly introduces Del Monte’s new book, “Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries,” available at Amazon.com https://amzn.to/STe9fW. For more information about Louis A. Del Monte visit https://louisdelmonte.com.
While it is widely accepted by the scientific community that the universe resulted from the Big Bang, the origin of the Big Bang remains one of the greatest mysteries of modern science.
The Big Bang theory stipulates the universe evolved from an infinitely dense energy point that suddenly expanded 13.7 billion years ago. Significant cosmological evidence supports this theory. However, the Big Bang theory does not explain the origin of the infinitely dense energy point.
Two recently published books, available at Amazon.com, tackle the question head on. They are:
In essence, both books attribute the formation of the infinitely dense energy point to a quantum fluctuation in a super-universe. This begs two questions:
A quantum fluctuation is a theory in quantum mechanics that argues there are certain conditions where a point in space can experience a temporary change in energy, such as an increase in energy. When this occurs, the increase in energy can give rise to virtual particles.
A super-universe, sometimes referred to as the “Bulk” or the multiverse, is type of universe capable of giving rise to quantum fluctuations resulting in one or more universes.
The theory that a quantum fluctuation in the Bulk gave rise to the infinitely dense energy point is similar to a phenomenon we observe in a laboratory vacuum. According to the U.S. Department of Energy: Newton: Ask a Scientist, “Quantum Fluctuations,” 2004, “Particles can ‘pop up’ out of a vacuum so long as they do not have too large a mass or do not last too long.”
The significant difference between the theories forwarded in the aforementioned books is that Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries argues that the formation was not a single infinitely energy dense particle (a “singularity”), but a particle pair (a “duality”). The particle pair consists of one single infinitely energy dense particle of matter and another of antimatter. The Big Bang occurs when the particle pair collides in the Bulk and initiates the Big Bang. Hence, it is named the Big Bang Duality theory.
Numerous observations about virtual particles suggest a “duality,” but there is no scientific consensus that virtual particles always appear as a matter-antimatter pair. However, this view is commonly held in quantum mechanics, and this creation state of virtual particles maintains the conservation of energy.
The Big Bang Duality theory is compelling because it allows us to explain the almost complete absence of antimatter in the universe, a mystery that continues to baffle modern science. This mystery is unraveled in Del Monte’s book and will be discussed in a future article.
The entire concept that it is possible to get something from nothing is counter intuitive. Indeed, it may sound like a new science fiction story. However, it was Paul Dirac, a British physicist and Nobel Prize Laureate, who first postulated in 1930 that empty space (a vacuum) consists of a sea of virtual electron-positron (matter-antimatter) pairs, known as the Dirac sea. This was experimentally confirmed in 1932. Modern-day physicists, familiar with the Dirac-sea theory of virtual particles, claim there is no such thing as empty space. They argue it contains virtual particles.
This is hard, if not impossible, to believe. Our entire universe came from nothing. Welcome to the edge of science, where physics and meta-physics blur.
Philosophers have been pondering the nature of time for at least the last 2500 years. The key question boil down to: is time real or is it a mental construct?
We often equate time with change, such as sand flowing through an hourglass. However, imagine if there were no change. Would time still exist? To address this question, let us take an example from Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries (2012), by Louis A. Del Monte (available at Amazon.com). The example will be a thought experiment. We do not currently have technology that permits us to perform this example in a lab, but performing it in our minds will illustrate the point.
Consider an atom frozen at absolute zero. All motion in the atom would stop. I am aware that this thought experiment violates the laws of thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. However, please remember it is a thought experiment to illustrate point. The purpose of this thought experiment is to allow us, conceptually, to separate existence from change. From the standpoint of the atom, there is no change. All motion has stopped. Yet, the atom continues to exist.
This raises the question: what does it mean to exist? One possible scenario is to equate existence to movement in the fourth dimension. If the atom were to move in any of the typical three-dimensional spatial coordinates, the atom would have kinetic energy associated with that movement. Similarly, one could argue that an atom moving in the fourth dimension would also have kinetic energy.
In Einstein’s special theory of relativity, the typical three-dimensional spatial coordinates are what we experience in everyday life, namely height, width, and length. The fourth dimension is also a spatial coordinate, but is equal to ict, where i = , c is the speed of light in empty space, and t is time, representing the numerical order of physical events measured with clocks.
If we want to express movement in the fourth dimension, we would need to use the mathematical discipline of calculus. If we want to calculate the kinetic energy associated with that movement, we would use the relativistic equation for kinetic energy. These calculations have been performed and are documented in aforementioned book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries. For the sake of brevity, I will only present the result here. The kinetic energy associated with moving in the fourth dimension is:
KEX4 = -.3mc2
Where KEX4is the energy associated with an object’s movement in in the fourth dimension X4, m is the rest mass of an object, and c is the speed of light in a vacuum. I have termed this equation the Existence Equation Conjecture.
What does it mean? My interpretation is that existence requires negative energy. In fact, even for a small object like a cupcake, the negative energy would be enormous, typically about equal to an atomic bomb, only negative.
In my book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries, I used the equation to explain the physics behind time dilation. I will just briefly describe here that I compare the kinetic energy required to extend the life of a muon (a negatively charged fundamental particle about 200 times heavier than an electron) to the energy required to satisfy the Existence Equation Conjecture for that extended life. Correlation of the experimental results of accelerating a muon (i.e. adding kinetic energy to the muon) to increase its existence (known as time dilation) are within 2% predicted by the Existence Equation Conjecture.
Many of you may wonder why I added the word “Conjecture.” I have only one solid data point and feel the scientific community should weigh in on the validity of the equation. Therefore, I consider it a conjecture at this point.
If the equation continues to hold up under scientific scrutiny, then we have a new insight into the nature of existence.
It is hard to believe or even imagine that the simple state of being (existence) requires negative energy. Welcome to the edge of science, where physics and metaphysics blur.
Ever since its discovery by Fritz Zwicky (California Institute of Technology) in 1933, scientists, philosophers, and laypeople have pondered: what is dark matter?
Let us start by delineating the nature of dark matter based on current scientific observations:
The most popular theory of dark matter is that it is a slow-moving particle, which travels up to a tenth of the speed of light. Scientists call the mass associated with dark matter a “WIMP” (Weakly Interacting Massive Particle).
On the surface this would seem to be a reasonable theory, but two issues raise serious concern about the existence of the WIMP particle:
In my book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries, I suggest a new line of research and theoretical enquiry. I posit the theoretical understanding of dark matter lies in M-theory (the unified theory of all string theories). I am not suggesting we abandon our current research, but rather broaden it.
Consider these hypotheses.
In my book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries, I suggest experimental methods to determine the validity of the above hypotheses.
It is hard, if not impossible, to believe that most of the mass in the universe has eluded detection and may not be mass, but energy.
Welcome to the edge of science, where physics and metaphysics blurs.