Ultimate fate of the universe

Ultimate fate of the universe

One way to explain the Universe
Posts  1 - 3  of  3
Ultimate fate of the universe discussion

My opinion about our Universe is presented in the short article "One way to explain the Universe" from searchwarp.com


The creation and evolution of our Universe, including its accelerated expansion, can be explained through the following logical reasoning:

The photons, resulted after Big Bang, each of them having a kind of "graviton" with it (in other words, the smallest gravity unit being associated with a photon), have started to join each other, when they were "close enough" to each other, so that the smallest elementary particle can be considered the one formed by joining two photons, which were "close enough" to "connect" each other.

Next, this first elementary particle, was coming in contact with other photon and formed the second type of elementary particle, also two first elementary particles joined together have formed the third type of elementary particle and so on ... in time ... all the today's known elementary particles have been formed.

Therefore, by forming the particles of matter as mentioned above, the resultant of the joined "smallest gravity units", around each particle, have generated the gravity as we know it today (more elementary particles are in a celestial body, bigger/stronger gravity field is around it).


As a conclusion, all forces known in our Universe (including all forms of matter manifestations) are results of these elementary particles behavior/interactions, function of their type (how many photons are containing), their rotation around themselves (including their gravitational field rotation in the same sense) and their position in space (how close they are one from each other), having the initial moving, given by the Big Bang, influenced (changed) continuously.


The accelerated expansion of the Universe can be due to the "gravitational glue" becoming weaker while the distances between galaxies increase, and some possible huge black holes from other "close enough" Universes around our Universe, attract the matter from the margins (along the borders) of our Universe (therefore we may not need any "dark energy" to explain the accelerated expansion of our Universe, like the today's astrophysicists are supposing).

The ending of each Universe can be a huge black hole, which, if its mass is big enough, in time may produce a new Big Bang, giving birth in this way to a new Universe.


One of the most important results from my theory is that any subatomic particle has its own gravity field, rotating at very high speed in the same sense with the particle’s rotation, so that ALL other forces/interactions, electromagnetism, strong interaction and weak interaction, are generated by these high speed rotating gravity fields interactions (obtaining the "Grand Unified Theory" or the so called "Theory of Everything").

As I have explained into my article, function of the rotation sense and the distances between particles, they can be attracted one to each other (in a quite similar way with the celestial bodies attraction) until a specific distance, or they are repelling each other, when their gravity fields are interacting from opposite directions (the same charges particles case).
That is why the Coulomb's law, which describes the interaction of electric charges, is similar to Newton's law of universal gravitation.

I am using the comparison with tornadoes (or hurricanes) for these high speed rotating gravitational fields around particles (bigger/stronger or smaller/weaker function of how many photons have each particle), to better describe their interactions.

Sincerely yours,
Mihail Vrapcea
replied to: mihvr
U should grow a chooper mosstage
replied to: mihvr
I have a completely different way of looking at the Universe than what we now have. You might call it the theory of everything, but I choose to call the theory "The Is Machine". Because in my mind we as human are experiencing that which is and as a result put the is to work for us.I believe I am on the right track because in 1979 I theorized what is now called C60 and is now called "Fullerenes". I could see this when I studied fuller geodesic domes. and the trigonometry of the structure. I have been particularly interested in Chaos and found my theory partially mathematically explained in the Fractal discovered by and called the Lorenz attractor, once again it told me I was on the right track and knew that this structure had to exist. I had no Idea that this structure and my theory and the Fullerene, would be the basis of "nano-Technology.

Frankly my theory scares the hell out of me because I am scared what will be done with this knowledge. The latest look into the center of our galaxy and sees the egg shaped energy pattern that exist there along with the discovery of Gamma Ray Burst. This further convinced me our Galaxay and all galaxies are Mass / Energy Machines. This is now being proven to me in my concept thought of over 35 years ago. When I saw hubbles picture of certain Galaxies I believed my theory is close but it has some loose ends, but I believe we will soon complete the puzzle,and I am noture that I haven't. The clouds of creation further convinced me that i am right. Scared to be called a Charlatan I waited to see if further evidence proved that I am at least partially correct. The release of a Neutrino and Electron to form a neutron into a proton for noew has clouded the theory a bit.I decided not to write a paper on my theory which has been partially proven out over the years since I first conceptualized the Idea. The fact that the agreement says this will be "my" paper I have elected this forum and your answer to give the scientific world some new Ideas albeit very contrarian to what is now believed.

I could not find the questions on fullerenes again at this site and the question where they might exist naturally. My theory says they must exisst somewhere in the spiral reaches of our galaxy most likely forming in the clouds of creation seen by hubble. I theorized this years ago before hubble in the early 1970's. What hubble sawonce again tol me my theory was holding up.

I think that I can answer that question, but first I want to bore you with a sliver of my over-all theory by explaining the formation of C60. This I believe should interest the scientific world or at least you.

I have decided at the age of 67 it is high time I write about it and get some kind of credit for my obscession with "The Is Machine". My theory explains the formation of C60 in both the star formation pattern and a product of stars themselves. If my theory is correct heavier atoms are formed as a result of the Kaleidoscope of any possible figure due to the geometric formations possible by covalent theory. My theory said they had to exist in the massive star formation and building blocks of our Galaxie.

I predicted the Ultimate black hole existence at the center of Galaxies way before anyone knew it was there. To me this blackhole and eddy currents of smaller black holes seemed inevitable in our galaxy and all Galaxy. Because, and I want to own this Statement, All Galaxies are "Inefficient Mass Energy Machines". They are inefficient because we can see light that is not captured during the formation of stars and the system's inefficiency. Like a nuclear chain reaction eventually all visible and invisible light and matter are processed by all of the Galaxies in their centers and eddy currents to form, but it is an ongoing process. I further believe that Einstein had the answer but took it to the grave with him because he saw the implications of the theory, maybe not, but as a theorist I can see why he might not want to reveadl it because of what his formula and letter to Franklin Roosevelt kicked off.

Einstein said that "Imagination is worth more than knowledge", and I know this to be true, but we can only Imagine what "IS" and copy it and apply it to mankind and the human condition. Thus is the story of the fullerene. Discovering that which naturally exists and applying the discovery.

Perhaps I am wrong but unknowing about what the uses are I could see clearly and it made sense to me. Like Bohr's model of the atom it fit Covalent Theory but could not explain the strong and weak nuclear force, which I firmly believe are the same and can be explained by simple magnetic motion. The hysenberg uncertanty theory tells us we can only theorize and see if it makes sense and if it does it has to fit into the puzzle as the theory of everything. I believe the complexities shown in colliders can be simplified and explain how it all happens and why the Galaxies are "inefficient Mass Energy Machines.