Blogs of Professor(Dr.) Pranab Kumar Bhattacharyya MD(calcutta.Univ) Pathology; : What if the "Big Bang" was not the beginning point...

Blogs of Professor(Dr.) Pranab Kumar Bhattacharyya MD(calcutta.Univ) Pathology; : What if the "Big Bang" was not the beginning point...:   What if the "Big Bang" was not the beginning point  of our observable universe? Authors By  * Rupak Bhattacharya ,BSc (Calcutta...

What if the "Big Bang" was not the beginning point of our observable universe?

 What if the "Big Bang" was not the beginning point  of our observable universe?

Authors

By 

*Rupak Bhattacharya ,BSc (Calcutta University), MSc (Jadavpur University) ,of residence  7/51 Purbapalli, Post office -Sodepur, District 24 parganas ( north) Kolkata -110, West Bengal, India Theoretical physicist ।( No institutional affiliation )

** Professor Dr Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya MD (University of Calcutta) ,FICPath, WBMES (Retired), a Retired Professor and Head of Pathology from West Bengal Medical Education Services cadre of Department of Health and Family Welfare of  Govt of West Bengal , India **Upasana Bhattacharya, a  4th semister student of B.DES ( Fashion Design course )UPES university, Derhadoon, uttarakhand, India , ***Ritwik Bhattacharya, B Com ( Calcutta University) ****Aiyshi Mukherjee , a BSC Biotechnology students of Kalyani University, West Bengal ***Rupsha Bhattacharya BA honors student of West Bengal State University Barasat , ****Debasish Mukherjee BSc (Calcutta University) ****Dalia Mukherjee BA honors (Calcutta university)  ***Hindol Banerjee BA (honors) West Bengal State University Barasat north 24 parganas West Bengal India

*** Of residence 7/51 Purbapalli , Post office --Sodepur, district 24 parganas

( north) Kolkata -110 ,West Bengal, India

(No institutional affiliation)

**** Of residence Swamiji Nagar, South Habra, District 24 Parganas ( north ),West Bengal ,India(No institutional affiliation)

Corresponding author -: Professor Dr Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya MD university of Calcutta FICPath WBMES Retiered

Email profpkb@yahoo.co.in 

 mobile phone number +91 9231510435

Copyright of this Manuscript belong primarily to Prof. Dr. Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya and to authors as per serial orders under strict Copyright acts and laws of Intellectual Property Rights of World Intellectual Property Rights organisations ( WIPO) , RDF copyright rights acts and laws and PIP copy right acts of USA 2012 where Prof Dr Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya is registered member.

Strict Terms and conditions for publishing the manuscript in any open access journals by the author when accepted by peer reviewers ( when and if sent for publication in any open access journals)

  1)

There must not be any kinds of APC ( in the name of articles processing charge or article publishing charge or article review charge or for any Doi charge ) from the end of authors in any form whatsoever it is by the editor/ editorial board members even if it is an open access indexed journals . If APC is charged please don't send request for publication in your journal

2) That the full copy right of the article manuscript, if once accepted by external peer reviewers and next published  must belong to authors in chronological orders as per all copyright acts and laws of Intellectual Property Right IPR of WIPO and RDF copyright laws of authors only। No one else from journal's Editor or editorials board members will ever enjoy the copyright of the article even  if it is published in journals and the copyright must be mentioned in the published articles in journals page as per above. 

3) minimum one free copy of the article published in pdf  must be mailed to all authors given e mail and he/ they can use the article in whatever manner he /they wants or like or share

4) link of the article published in the journal and access to the article by all the authors must be there forever, once it is published in that journal

5) There must not be any kind of dispute about authors qualifications , affiliations and orders from the end of journals editorial board members. No change of authors chronological orders  qualifications and affiliation as mentioned in the manuscript will be ever entertained at all on any requests

6) only if you agree on these terms and conditions ,  only then proceed for peer reviews if you consider it suitable for and if accepted for publication proceed &  if you don't agree then please let the authors know that you are not agreed and immediately erase the sent article manuscript from your all kinds of possession for future, so that author can send the article to next journal he likes to send

Declaration by corresponding authors

The undersigned as authors declare that he is sending the article to journal…..

For publication and the article has not been sent and considered for publishing in any other journals so far

Signature of authors and consent form will be sent once the article manuscript is accepted after peer review and journals editorial board gives consent to publish without any kinds of charges as APC as told above terms and conditions

Introduction-: 

The greatest discovery in the history of science is that there was a day without a yesterday. The Universe had not existed forever. It was born? Or It was created by some creator ? Or it was just be ?  All matter today what we see , all energy in the observable universe, space , all voids and even time, bursted out  into being in a titanic fireball we call the moment of  the Big Bang the "planck's epoch" ,and that is estimated did happen approximately 13.82 billion years ago. The fireball then expanded in all directions and, out of the cooling debris , dark matters ( both cold and hot or mixed dark matter) , there congealed all nebulas ,all galaxies – great islands of stars and mixed dark matters ; two or three trillions of them, of which our spiral Galaxy "Milky Way " is but not only one spiral galaxies, there are so many spiral galaxies we know it today.

Whatever way you look at it, the idea of the Universe popping into existence like a rabbit out of a hat is bonkers. For this reason, scientists had to be dragged kicking and screaming to it. The last thing they wanted to answer was the very awkward scientific questions : what did happen then before the Big Bang? Was there really a Big Bang? Was there only one BigBang or were there multiple Big Bangs? Was there only a single observed universe or there are multiverse buble universes??

In recent decades, the idea has taken hold that the Universe began with an ultra-brief burst of a massive Blackhole ( a singlarity)  with super-fast expansion and the expansion is now forever . So violent was this ‘inflation’ that it’s been likened to the explosion of several few thousands Hydrogen-bombs compared with the mere stick of dynamite of the more sedate Big Bang expansion that took over when inflation ran out of steam.

So next questions comes automatically to authors like us 1) where did the Big Bang actually took place in time'lines ? 2) Why didn’t the Big Bang produced  equal amounts of matter and antimatter? 3) where then  did antimatter disappear ?4) is there another universe made of antimatter or mirror matter? 5) were there multiple buble universes one of which is our universe? 6) Does white whole exist as gate way to another universe ?

Big Bang or Big Bounce or other?

Did the universe start with a BigBang  orgin or was it a Big Bounce—or something else entirely? The question of our origins is one of the thorniest in highest quality physics, with few true answers and lots of speculations and strong feelings. The most popular theory by far is the Big Bang Singularity with inflationary theory of Alan Guth (This Big Bang theory brought so many Nobel p rizes in physics since 1901  that very few scientists are found  now against the theory) , the notion that the cosmos blew up in size in the first few fractions of a second after it was born in a Big Bang epoch. But an underdog idea persist that the birth of this universe was not actually the beginning—that an earlier version of spacetime had existed and contracted toward a “Big Crunch" then flipped and started expanding into what we see today. Now a new study suggesting a twist on this “bounce” scenario has supporters excited and inflation proponents newly inflamed over a “rival” they say they have repeatedly disproved, only to have it keep bouncing back.Inflation has many admirers because the rapid expansion it posits seems to explain numerous features of the universe, such as the fact that it appears relatively flat (as opposed to curved, on large scales) and roughly uniform in all directions (there is roughly the same amount of stuff everywhere, again on large scales). Both conditions result when regions of space that ended up very far away initially started out close together and in contact with one another. Yet the latest versions of the theory seem to suggest—even require—that inflation created not just our universe but an infinite

landscape of universe in which possible type of universe with every possible set of physical laws and characteristics formed somewhere. Some scientists like this implication because it could explain why our particular universe, with its seemingly random yet perfectly calibrated-to-life conditions, exists—if every type of cosmos is out there, it is no wonder that ours is, too. But other physicists find the multiverse idea repulsive, in part because if the theory predicts that every possibility will come to pass, it does not uniquely foretell a universe like the one we have.

Was it a Big Bang or Big Bounce ?

"The Big Bounce" concept started in 2017 -2018 remain still a hypothesized cosmological model for the origin of the observed universe and is under active investigation now. It was originally suggested as a phase of the cyclic model or a kind of oscillatory universe interpretation of the Big Bang, where the first cosmological event was the result of the collapse of a previous universe existed in forward time scale . Actually such a conceptual persisted beforehand,  but the very concept receded from serious consideration in the early 1980s after the inflation theory emerged as a solution to the horizon problems of the universe, which had arisen from advances in observations revealing the large-scale structure of the universe. In the early 2000s, inflation was found by some theorists to be  much problematic and unfalsifiable in that its various parameters could be adjusted to fit any observations, so that the properties of the observable universe are a matter of chance in Big Bang model . Alternative pictures including a Big Bounce may provide a predictive and falsifiable possible solution to the horizon problems 

The concept of the Big Bounce envisions the Big Bang as the beginning of a period of expansion that followed by a period of contraction. In this view, one could talk of a Big Crunch ( another singlarity) followed by a Big Bang, or more simply, a Big Bounce. This suggests that we could be living at any point in an infinite sequence of universes, or conversely the current universe could be the very first iteraction. However, if the condition of the interval phase "between bounces", considered the 'hypothesis of the primeval atom', is taken into full contingency such enumeration may be meaningless because that condition could represent a singularity in time at each instance, if such perpetual return was absolute and undifferentiated.The main idea behind the quantum theory of a Big Bounce is that, as density approaches infinity, the behavior of the quantum foam changes. All the so-called fundamental physical constants, including the speed of light in a vacuum, need not remain constant during a Big Crunch, especially in the time interval smaller than that in which measurement may never be possible (one unit of Planck time, roughly 10*−43 seconds) spanning or bracketing the point of spanning or bracketing the point of inflection.

But now, we authors are so questioning the inflationary orthodoxy and advocating a fresh look at alternative models in which the Big Bang was actually a ‘Big Bounce’ from an earlier, contracting, phase of the Universe or not . “Crucially, my co authors  and I are proposing an observational test capable of distinguishing between the possibilities,”

The Big Bounce describes the idea that the Universe's rapid expansion was a reaction to a period of rapid contraction 

The Big Bounce describes the idea that the Universe’s rapid expansion was a reaction to a period of rapid contraction  

Inexplicably big gaps

One cosmic observation that any scenario must explain is why the Universe is so remarkably uniform: specifically, why the temperature of the heat afterglow of the Big Bang is pretty much the same everywhere and why the number of galaxies in a given volume is also the same everywhere.

This is yet a big puzzle to us because if the expansion of the Universe is imagined running backwards to the Big Bang, like a movie playing in reverse, it becomes clear that regions of the Universe that today are widely separated were not in contact with each other at the beginning. In other words, there has been insufficient time since the birth of the Universe for any influence travelling at the cosmic speed limit (the speed of light) to pass between them. How, then, could heat have passed between such regions in order for their temperatures to equalise?

The standard explanation may be that the Universe was far smaller early on than we imagine if we run that movie in reverse. If it was smaller, then bits of the Universe that are today widely separated would have been closer together. But, if the Universe started off smaller earlier on, it must have expanded faster in order to reach its current size in 13.82 billion years.

Such a period of super-fast expansion, occurring in the first split-second of the Universe’s existence, was also proposed by the Russian physicist Alexei Starobinsky in 1979 and the American physicist Prof Alan Guth in 1980. This inflation was driven by the vacuum. Not the vacuum that we see around us today but a super-high-energy version. This was because the ‘inflationary vacuum’ contained a so-called scalar field, which, in common with the Higgs field, discovered at the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva in 2012, had a non-zero energy everywhere. Was it Dark energy?

Dark energy is hiding in our Universe: 

here’s how we’ll find it Radical ideas was : The number that holds the Universe together is changing. The super-high-energy inflationary vacuum had however some remarkable properties. First, it had repulsive gravity, which caused the universe to expand – and the more of it there was, the greater was its repulsion and the faster it expanded. Second, when the inflationary vacuum doubled its volume, it doubled its energy; when it tripled its volume, it tripled its energy and so on.The phenomenon can be explained in following ways.  Imagine if you had a stack of banknotes between your hands and you pulled your hands apart and the result was the creation of more banknotes. Physicists, not surprisingly, refer to inflation as the ‘ultimate free lunch’.But the inflationary vacuum, which contained only energy but not matter, was a ‘quantum’ thing (quantum theory is our best description of the microscopic world of atoms and their constituents). And quantum things are fundamentally unpredictable. So, at random locations all over the inflationary vacuum, bits ‘decayed’ into normal, everyday vacuum.

Picture it as a vast ocean in which bubbles form constantly. Inside each bubble, the enormous energy of the inflationary vacuum had to go somewhere. It went into creating matter and heating it to a ferociously high temperature – in short, into creating a big bang. We live inside one of these big bang bubbles in the inflationary vacuum.

Inflation decays at different rates in different locations, leading to ‘bubbles’ in the inflationary vacuum, in other words, creating the potential for a multiverse, the Big Bang is then not a one-off event. Big bangs are going off like fireworks across the inflationary vacuum. And all this could have been started by a small piece of inflationary vacuum – with a mass-energy of as little as a kilogram – popping into existence out of nothing, which, incredibly, is permitted by the laws of quantum theory. Inflation, once started, goes on forever since new vacuum is created faster than it’s eaten away.

But, according to us authors, the inflationary scenario has still many problems. though awarded many Nobel prizes in physics “ Even After 42 years of proposed theory of inflation by Prof Alan Guth , we have yet no evidence of the existence of the ‘inflaton’ field decay  that drived inflation, as we do find of the Higgs felid in Higgs particles decay,” Also, there is an infinity of ways in which the inflaton field can decay, exiting inflationary expansion and starting Big Bang expansion. Physicists imagine a mathematical ‘potential’, rather like a ski slope, down which the inflaton field slides, reducing its energy to zero. But the ski slope can have a different shape in different locations. “This means to us that inflation will continue for longer in some places than others, greatly changing nature of the resultant space-time,. “Inflation therefore predicts the existence of an infinity of domains, each with different physics – a ‘multiverse’.”

Inflation decays at different rates in different locations, leading to 'bubbles' in the inflationary vacuum, in other words, creating the high potential for a multiverse

Now the problem  stands within us that our Universe doesn’t have the properties of a typical member of the multiverse. “Our universe is exceedingly dilute in vacuum energy relative to a typical region in the multiverse,” We are therefore forced to explain its special properties, such as dark energy, with the topsy-turvy logic of the ‘anthropic principle’: that we live in the domain we live in because, if we didn’t, the physics would not have given rise to stars and galaxies, and physicists to describe them. “This gives inflation no explanatory power,”  “It’s an infinitely flexible framework capable of fitting any data. To my mind that means it is not science.”

 According to ‘the father of inflation’ Prof Alan Guth of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “The comment that inflationary cosmology, as we currently understand it, cannot be evaluated using the scientific method seemed so far removed from reality that 32 leaders in the field of cosmology, including five Nobel Laureates, and I wrote a letter to the editor categorically disagreeing with the statements made by this article about the testability of inflation.”we  think that inflation, like ‘string theory’ (a candidate for a theory of everything) has evolved over a long time in the absence of serious experimental tests of its fundamental ideas. “It has therefore created a culture in which supporters believe the theory need not pass the same stringent tests as other theories to prove its rightness,” .

From Bang to Bounce?

One alternative to us is that the Universe didn’t begin with a burst of vacuum-driven inflation but instead underwent a previous contraction phase. The Big Bang would therefore not have been a Big Bang but rather a Big Bounce. There are a number of possibilities, one of which is the ‘cyclic Universe’  in which the Universe might undergoes repeated bounces, possibly an infinite number of them, and therefore has actually no beginning at all.

Crucially, though, a long pre-Big Bang phase provides plenty of time for properties of the Universe to equalise, just as a long time allows a bath of cold water to come to an even temperature after hot water is added.

Did a tiny star had the power one of the biggest bangs in the Universe is a big question to solve for Big Bounce?

Scientists created strange matter that once filled Universe. The Standard Model of particle physics describes the fundamental ‘fields’ that make up our Universe. An electron is a ripple in the ‘electron field’, a photon a ripple in the ‘electromagnetic field’ and so on. The Standard Model, however, is only an approximation of an as-yet-unknown deeper theory.

 we  authors say  it will contain new fields with new massive subatomic particles. These will oscillate in the early Universe, imprinting a telltale regularity on the temperature variations of the cosmic background radiation. “This ‘periodicity’ is potentially observable,”  “And the crucial thing is that it’s different for a Universe that underwent an inflationary expansion and one that underwent a contraction.”

The largest temperature variations were set in place first in an expanding scenario but lasted in a contracting scenario. And since the size, or amplitude, of the temperature variations grows with time, it is possible to tell which scenario was first.

The new test is not the only possible test of inflation. An experiment at the South Pole called BICEP2 is looking for the imprint on the cosmic background radiation of ripples in space-time (gravitational waves), created in the violent turmoil of the early Universe. “If the imprint is found, it will prove"  Big Bang inflation,” . “But if the imprint is not found, it will be possible to find an inflationary model where the imprint is undetectable. This is what we want to mean about the theory being infinitely flexible and scientifically unfalsifiable.”

We of course do admit that the detailed physics of a cosmic bounce is as unknown as the detailed physics of inflation. But  this is inevitable because of the state of our knowledge of fundamental science. The two towering achievements of 20th-Century physics are quantum theory (which describes the world of the very small) and Einstein’s theory of gravity (which describes the very large domain of the Universe).

In the Big Bang, a very big Universe was very small and therefore it is necessary to unify quantum theory and Einstein’s theory of gravity in order to predict what went on. Such a unification has so far proved elusive. “The stark truth is that, without a quantum theory of gravity, we can never really be sure how our Universe began..

Xxxxx

What others say about Big Bounce theory?

Now the breakthrough may come on origin of universe.  Thanks to both theories. 1) Inflation theory through quantum chromodynamics and scalar field  and 2) Big Bounce.  One was to use the most nascent and still-not-complete theory of quantum( QCD) cosmology—a mash-up between quantum mechanics and general relativity—instead of classical general relativity to describe our observable universe. The second theory was to assume that when the cosmos was very young , matter there behaved like light in that the laws of physics that describe it did not depend on any scale. For example, light acted the same regardless of its wavelength. The physics of matter, on the other hand, usually vary from small to large scales. “We know that in the first 50,000 years the universe was essentially just filled with radiation,. “The normal matter we see now was not really very significant then. I think a scaleless early universe is actually very much suggested by our current measurements.”Under those conditions Turok and Gielen found that the contracting universe would never actually become a singularity—essentially it would rather “tunnel through” the worrisome point by hopping from a state right before it to a state right after it. Although such sidestepping sounds like cheating, it is a proved phenomenon in quantum mechanics. Because particles do not exist in absolute states but rather hazes of probability there is a small but real chance they can “tunnel” through physical barriers to reach locations seemingly off-limits to them—the equivalent, on a microscopic scale, of walking through walls. “The fuzziness in space and time and the matter conspires to make it uncertain where the universe is at a given time,”

Turok explains. “This allows the universe to pass through the singularity.”

Other big bounce proponents say the work is a significant step. “By making those two plausible assumptions, they find a very interesting result, which is that a bounce can occur,” says Princeton physicist Paul Steinhardt, one of the founders of inflation theory who has more recently become one of its sharpest critics of inflation theory of Big Bang. He is in opinion. “It shows that in principle a singularity can be avoided.” Steinhardt and Ijjas have been working on another way to mathematically demonstrate the possibility of a Big bounce, by introducing to the universe a special type of field that causes the contraction to turn into expansion well before space gets small enough to become a singularity. Their solution uses classical general relativity as opposed to quantum cosmology. “It means that classical, nonsingular bounces are also possible,” Steinhardt told . They reported their work in a paper posted June 28,2021 to the preprint server arXiv.org. Both studies are still preliminary. Turok and Gielen were able to calculate the bounce only for the case of an idealized universe that is completely smooth and lacks the small density fluctuations that lead to the formation of stars and galaxies in the real cosmos. “The cases that we can actually solve exactly are very simple universes,” Gielen says. “The question you always have is, ‘Will that still be there if you go to something more complicated?’ That’s what we’re working on at the moment.”the universe bounced once, a natural question is whether it will again. But not all bounce theories suggest we are destined to cycle forever through contractions and expansions—for example, even if our universe bounced before, we have no indication so far that it is heading for another contraction. The dark energy thought to make up the largest chunk of the cosmos’ total mass–energy budget seems to be pulling our universe apart at an ever-accelerating rate. What is truly in store for the future is a very open question—about as open, in fact, as the issue of how it all got started.Many advocates of inflation are highly skeptical of any bounce model, especially because they say proponents had repeatedly claimed in the past to be able to calculate bounces without singularities, only to be disproved. “I’m not happy that they do not admit that all their earlier papers should be disregarded,” says Stanford University physicist Renata Kallosh, who calculated errors in previously proposed bounce models. “They now make a new claim, and this new claim I don’t believe.” Alan Guth, a pioneer of inflation based at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, agrees. “Ihe says. “I would like to wait and see how it develops. If they have succeeded in what they claim they’ve done, I do agree it’s very important—even if it’s not the best model for the history of the universe.”

Some inflation researchers are more forgiving, though. “I think that this is a very intriguing line of research,” says Marc Kamionkowski of Johns Hopkins University. “The bounce scenarios, although not yet developed to the level that inflation has been developed, are promising, and it’s imperative to try to develop them further. This paper provides an interesting mathematical result, in a toy model,” he adds, referring to the idealized universe the researchers worked with.Turok and other critics of inflation have their own problems with the dominant theory. They charge that inflation requires unlikely circumstances to get started (a claim proponents disagree with) and that it does not resolve the specter of a singularity at the moment of the big bang itself. Furthermore, “inflation leads to this nightmare scenario of a multiverse,” Turok says, “which for some strange reason is surprisingly popular.”He suggests that the heated debate in the field and the heavy scrutiny new ideas receive will help scientists ultimately converge on a better theory of our origins. “People hold very strong opinions,” Turok says. “I freely admit I do and I freely admit my opinions aren’t shared by 95 percent of cosmologists. I’m actually critical of all these theories, including the ones I invented. But today we have spectacular observations pointing us at incredible simplicity in the universe. To me that means that all of our existing theories are way too complicated. The observations are pointing at simplicity and it’s our job to come up with a simple theory that will hopefully explain those.”

Warning for readers
Please note it very care fully that the manuscript

 What if the "Big Bang" was not the beginning point  of our observable universe is the original concept of authors and  belongs primarily to Professor Dr Pranab kumarBhattacharya MD(calcutta university ) FIC path(Ind) WBMES ( retired) and to other authors in serial orders mentioned in the manuscript  , as per copy right rules of IPR 1996 applicable in India-2006 under sections 307/ 306/ 3D/107/2012 and PIP Acts of US 2012, SPARC authors amended Copy Right rules-2006  of US  when & if accepted for any other blogs, as a reference, or publication  or Research  or  reference material  or published as paper or article in any open access journals as a commissioned peer reviewed article  and then  also this article will be under RDF Copy Right rules of IPR of Prof Dr PK Bhattacharya.

 No person from any states of countries including the  country India or any citizen of India or of Indian origin are for ever  authorized by Professor Dr Pranab kumar Bhattacharya to use  any  scientifically meaningful  syllables/words  /sentences from any of those published blog articles in the Blogs of Prof Pranab kumar Bhattacharya MD(cal) ,FIC path(ind.), WBMES ( Retired)  in Blog spot.com  without his / future copy right  owner ‘s written permission  & copy Right clearance, even for any one’s personal or for his/her fair use even/ dissemination of   any information ( Will be considered  then as Plagiarism) , [except such all permission is always remain granted to other authors ,their first degree blood relatives in what ever manner they want to use this article  for ever from the date of publication in ProfPranab Kumars Bhattacharya 

MD(cal) FIC path(ind)  Blog at blog spot.com   or for digital preservation of  the article in National Level Science Library(NSDL) US or of other countries.

- by declaration- 

SD/ 

Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya MD( university of Calcutta)FIC path WBMES ( retired)

Retired Professor and Head Calcutta School of Tropical Medicine Kolkata 73 West Bengal India

Equivalent officiating Ranks was special secretary to government of West Bengal India