Gravitational Genesis

[Cygnus47]

According to current theory, shortly after the Big Bang there existed a Super force which embodied all the different forces including gravity. This took place even before the formation of matter, only energy existed at this stage in universal evolution. If this theory is correct, gravity existed before any matter did. This leaves us with a problem concerning the Standard Model. Because at present, science believes that the presence of larger and larger concentrations matter increases the strength of the gravitational field. In effect, what they are saying is this; Matter is responsible for the generation of gravity. If this is true, where did the gravity come from when no matter existed?

 

The only explanation is that gravity, along with the other forces creates matter. I believe that the universal fabric of space time creates matter thru the interaction of all the forces of which gravity is also one. I realize this is counter to contemporary belief so I ask the question:

 

"If gravity existed before matter, how can matter give rise to the gravitational effect?"

[Pincho Paxton]

According to current theory, shortly after the Big Bang there existed a Super force which embodied all the different forces including gravity. This took place even before the formation of matter, only energy existed at this stage in universal evolution. If this theory is correct, gravity existed before any matter did. This leaves us with a problem concerning the Standard Model. Because at present, science believes that the presence of larger and larger concentrations matter increases the strength of the gravitational field. In effect, what they are saying is this; Matter is responsible for the generation of gravity. If this is true, where did the gravity come from when no matter existed?

 

The only explanation is that gravity, along with the other forces creates matter. I believe that the universal fabric of space time creates matter thru the interaction of all the forces of which gravity is also one. I realize this is counter to contemporary belief so I ask the question:

 

"If gravity existed before matter, how can matter give rise to the gravitational effect?"

 

In pseudo-science, and speculations there are a lot of people who have gravity theories. This question then becomes quite different for each person who responds, and for me, and my theory it was one of the questions that I had 20 years ago, and then gradually answered for myself. Gravity has to be evolved, and all of physics have to be evolved.. slowly.. from nothing. And I did that, and it worked for me. I am happy with the way I progressed my theory without cheating.. I didn't add anything that I couldn't evolve. In current science Gravity is a cheat that my science would not allow.

[Realitycheck]

How can gravity or any of these other forces predate matter? Matter has been there since the Big Bang, to the extent that gravity has.

[Schrödinger's hat]

I don't pretend to understand current cosmology, but as I understand it, the proto-matter stuff, whatever you want to call it would still contribute to the stress energy tensor, and as such would produce gravity.

 

It would do this in much the same way photons do.

 

We talk about matter inducing gravity largely because that is the only thing with significant energy-momentum (and the other components of stress-energy). If you had enough light, or anything else with energy it would have the same effect.

[Cygnus47]

I don't pretend to understand current cosmology, but as I understand it, the proto-matter stuff, whatever you want to call it would still contribute to the stress energy tensor, and as such would produce gravity.

 

It would do this in much the same way photons do.

 

We talk about matter inducing gravity largely because that is the only thing with significant energy-momentum (and the other components of stress-energy). If you had enough light, or anything else with energy it would have the same effect.

Thanks Sch......hat;

 

Sounds reasonable but that leads to another question: If matter, "proto-matter" produces gravity, or in this case the Super Force which contains gravity along with the Strong, weak, electric, must we then assume that matter produces all four?

[pantheory]

Cygnus47,

 

The only explanation is that gravity, along with the other forces creates matter. I believe that the universal fabric of space time creates matter thru the interaction of all the forces of which gravity is also one. I realize this is counter to contemporary belief so I ask the question

 

"If gravity existed before matter, how can matter give rise to the gravitational effect?"

Of course this is all theory. Although gravity is its own theory, how it relates to a Big Bang beginning or the beginnings of matter is hardly better than a hypothesis since I can't think of how such a model might be supported by observation. But I agree, there seems to be no sensible answer relating to your question. If I were you I wouldn't give much credence to any such proposals other than considering the possibilities as you have.

 

My own model proposes that gravity comes first, then next black holes, being a compression of field material (such as dark matter), then matter particles are created from the torque forces upon field material surrounding black holes, which eventually results in a galaxy -- next stop the observed universe.

//

Edited September 21, 2011 by pantheory

[Daedalus]

I also agree with Pantheory. My belief is that a universe cannot exist without mathematics and that mathematics would not exist without the universe. I have given a more detailed explanation of that statement in my theory of temporal uniformity on page 2 posting #37. The point of the statement is that all things mathematical must have existed at time zero or before the birth and expansion of our universe. Since everything in Physics is based upon a mathematical model, gravity must have also existed at time zero or before our universe came into being.

[Cygnus47]

Cygnus47,

 

 

 

 

If I were you I wouldn't give much credence to any such proposals other than considering the possibilities as you have.

 

My own model proposes that gravity comes first,

 

//

Thank you Pan, and I agree with your perspective. This is precisely why I asked the question, to get people to think rationally about the alternatives............................Cygnus47 Edited September 22, 2011 by Cygnus47

[Pincho Paxton]

Thank you Pan, and I agree with your perspective. This is precisely why I asked the question, to get people to think rationally about the alternatives............................Cygnus47

 

My theory evolves gravity from spherical particles with a hole in the middle. The hole has the opposite properties of mass, it breaks mass apart, but so long as it is spherically centred inside mass, it remains in that safe spherical state.. entropy safe. With sphere, and holes you can get 3D chains, and bonding. When mass interlocks with the holes it pulls part of the mass away. The mass then creates a figure 8 in the two overlapping bodies with a cross section that is lens shaped. The figure 8, and the lens can then get locked with new particles. Once you have a row of particles you get trapped holes pulling apart the matter into complex swirls. The complex swirls create vectors of motion which head towards ever increasing numbers of holes. That is Gravity. Both matter, and holes (anti-matter) equal a total of zero, and so are the major fundamental particles of the Universe.. they are nothing. And in English.... Gravity evolves from a total of combined Aether. Matter, and Anti-matter first, gravity second.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Pincho Paxton