- #1
Czarnian
First, I have no idea where to post something like this so I apologize if it's in the wrong forum.
Second, Hello.
Third, I was wondering if someone could give me a little guidance regarding what seems like a very dubious claim for the existence of the universe.
Basically the person is trying to overwhelm me with math. Math is not my strong suit, but the equations look dodgy.
His basic claim is that before the Big Bang the universe existed as an uncharged pion which spun off into two charged pions and then the universe was created. (I've already explained the orders of magnitude difference between a pion and the estimated mass of the universe. He's sticking by his proof.)
I guess the best way to explain what he's trying to explain is to post it.
I can't make heads or tails of what he's trying to show and he's trying to use that as some sort of vindication of his hypothesis.
Again, I apologize if this is the improper forum. Any help would be appreciated.
Second, Hello.
Third, I was wondering if someone could give me a little guidance regarding what seems like a very dubious claim for the existence of the universe.
Basically the person is trying to overwhelm me with math. Math is not my strong suit, but the equations look dodgy.
His basic claim is that before the Big Bang the universe existed as an uncharged pion which spun off into two charged pions and then the universe was created. (I've already explained the orders of magnitude difference between a pion and the estimated mass of the universe. He's sticking by his proof.)
I guess the best way to explain what he's trying to explain is to post it.
the first particle, before the event of the Big Bang was a neutral pion of Plank density. It split into two opositely charged pions of half the Planck density. Each one of these created a universe, of net positive and negative matter respectively.
Let M = the mass of a universe.
Let m = the mass of a charged pion
One can determine M in simple relation to m, if we assume the Hubble Constant to be:
H = [G*m^3*c]*pi/h^2 = 2.2044E(-18)s^(-1) = 67.98 (km/s)/Mpc
This agrees with experimental results, to better than +/- 10%.
v = H*R --> v/H = R Hubble's Law
Using a simple substitution into Einstein's equation:
0 = (1/2)*H^2*r^2 -(G*M)/r -(1/6)*[-3/r^2]*c^2*r^2
0 = (1/2)*H^2*(c^2/H^2) -(G*M*H)/c +(1/2)*c^2
0 = c^2 -[G*M*H]/c
[G*M*H]/c = c^2
M*H = c^3/G
M = [c^3/G]*(1/H)
Recall that we are letting H = [G*m^3*c*pi]/h^2.
M = (c^3/G)*[h^2/(G*m^3*c*pi)]
M = (h^2*c^2)/(G^2*m^3*pi)
QED
I can't make heads or tails of what he's trying to show and he's trying to use that as some sort of vindication of his hypothesis.
Again, I apologize if this is the improper forum. Any help would be appreciated.