One of the most puzzling questions in modern cosmology is why the density of matter and energy appears to be find tuned to the value that allowed life to evolve.
For example the density of mass to energy in the early universe must have been very close to a specific value to explain how stars could have evolved because if their concentrations were not it would depart rapidly from the one that would allow them to form over cosmic time. Calculations suggest that it could not have departed more than one part in 10^{62} from that value. This leads cosmologists to question how the initial density came to be so closely finetuned to this ‘special’ value that would have allowed stars and therefore life to evolve.
This has come to be called the flatness problem because the density of matter and energy which affects the curvature of spacetime must have very specific value to give it the flat geometry required for stars to form and life to evolve. In other words if the energy of the universe expansion was much larger it would have overpowered gravity preventing the formation of stars while if gravity was to strong they would have formed to quickly thereby not give life as we know it time to evolve. `
The problem was first mentioned by Robert Dicke in 1969.
The most commonly accepted solution among cosmologists is cosmic inflation or the idea that the early universe underwent an extremely rapid exponential expansion by a factor of at least 10^{78} in volume, driven by a negativepressure vacuum energy density.
This solves the flatness problem because the act of inflation actually flattens the universe. Picture a uninflated balloon, which can have all kinds of wrinkles and other abnormalities, however as the balloon expands the surface smoothes out. According to inflation theory, this happens to the fabric of the universe as well.
However, many view the inflationary theory as a contrived or "adhoc" solution because the exact mechanism that would cause it to turn on and then off is not known.
Yet, if one defines energy/mass density of our universe in terms of its spatial properties instead of the temporal ones of four dimensional spacetime one can explain and predict why it has the correct proportions to cause its geometry to be hospitable to life as we know it by extrapolating the laws of classical physics in a threedimensional environment to one of four *spatial* dimensions.
Einstein gave us the ability to do this when he defined its geometry in terms of a dynamic balance between mass and energy defined by the equation E=mc^2 because when he used the constant velocity of light in that equation he provided a method of converting a unit of spacetime he associated with energy to a unit of space he associated with mass. Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his spacetime universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.
In other words by defining the geometric properties of a spacetime universe in terms of mass/energy and the constant velocity of light he provided a quantitative and qualitative means of redefining his temporal properties of a spacetime universe in terms of the spatial ones of four *spatial* dimensions.
However, doing so makes easier to understand the mechanisms responsible for creating a flat universe that would enable life to evolve because flatness is associated more with the properties of spatial environment than those of a temporal one.
For example it would allow one to derive the momentum and the gravitational potential of the universe mass components as was done in the in the article “Defining potential and kinetic energy?” Nov. 26, 2007 in terms of, oppositely directed curvatures in “surface” of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. In other words if one can define the gravitational potential of mass in terms of a depression in its “surface” one could derive momentum of its expansion in terms of elevation in it.
This differs from Einstein’s theoretical definition of energy in that he only defines mass or its gravitational potential in terms of a temporal displacement in a four dimensional spacetime manifold.
This difference is significant to our understanding of the shape or flatness of our universe because it allows one to define the geometry of its mass component in terms the spatial properties of a "downward" directed curvature in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a four *spatial* dimensions while defining its energy component in term an upwardly directed one.
Additionally Einstein’s equation E=mc^2 and Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us there would be a dynamic relationship between the curvature created by the gravitational potential of the universe’s mass and the oppositely directed momentum of its expansion. In other words because that law tell us that energy flows from area of high density to low; if the energy density was too high in the early universe it would have been channeled into creating more matter while if the matter component was excessive it would have been converted to energy.
Granted it also tells us the curvature caused by its energy component is c^2 greater than that caused by mass but it also tells the one caused by mass would be more concentrated and therefore deeper than the one caused by energy. However the deeper curvature associated with mass would be offset by the shallower and more draw out curvature associated with energy thereby make the universe flat and therefore hospitable to life as we know it.
This process would be similar to what happens to interstellar gas as it collapses to form a star. The gas heats due to its contraction which causes energy to be created by nuclear reactions in its core converting mass to energy which opposes further gravitational collapses. If too much energy is created it will escape from the star allowing gravity to take over again.
After a given about of time the creation of energy is exactly offsets gravity and the star enters a period where the curvature in space associated with its energy exactly matches the oppositely directed curvature associated with its gravity and no further change takes place making its spatial geometry be flat because the curvatures counteract each other. Additional this geometry would be frozen in time until the star evolved to new stage in its life.
Similarly the equation E=mc^2 tells us in the early universe there was an interchange between energy and the creation of mass in the form of baryons and the components of dark matter. Additional as was the case in the formation of a star the second law of thermodynamic tells us that energy flows from areas higher density to lower ones while E=mc^2 tells us if the energy density was too high in the early universe it would have been channeled into creating baryons and dark matter while if they were too abundant they would have been converted to energy.
In other words second law of thermodynamic and E=mc^2 tells us as the universe evolves it would move towards a flat geometry because as was just mentioned if its energy density was too high it would have been channeled into creating mass while if its mass were to abundant it would have been converted to energy. This geometry would become frozen in time when the universe cooled enough for its mass and energy components to become stable.
This shows why one does not have to assume that a complicated change of events must have occurred such as inflation to give our universe the geometry needed to support beginnings of life because as was shown above that story is told by the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Einstein’s equation E=mc^2.
Later Jeff
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016
Anthology of 
The Reality of the Fourth Spatial Dimension Paperback $9.77 Ebook $6.24 

The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s 
The Imagineer’s 

The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s 

Here is an amazing fact: The matter we know that makes up all stars and galaxies only accounts for 5% of the content of the universe. The rest is called dark matter. It does not interact with the electromagnetic force and therefore does not absorb, reflect or emit light, making it extremely hard to spot. In fact, researchers are only able to infer its existence only from the gravitational effect it has on visible matter, which outweighs the visible matter roughly six to one, making up about 27% of the universe
The search for this missing mass has focus on three different types of particles or objects that would be invisible or would not interact with electromagnetic energy while at the sametime influence the gravity forces of the visible mass component our universe.
The first or Axions are very light particles with a specific type of selfinteraction that makes them a suitable CDM candidate. Axions have the theoretical advantage that their existence solves the Strong CP problem in QCD, but have not yet been detected.
The second or MACHOs or Massive Compact Halo Objects are large, condensed objects such as black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, very faint stars, or nonluminous objects like planets. The search for these consists of using gravitational lensing to see the effect of these objects on background galaxies. Most experts believe that the constraints from those searches rule out MACHOs as a viable dark matter candidate.
Finally, WIMPs or Dark matter which is composed of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles. There are no currently known particles that have its properties, but many extensions of the standard model of particle physics predict such particles. The search for WIMPs involves attempts at direct detection by highly sensitive detectors, as well as attempts at production by particle accelerators. WIMPs are generally regarded as the most promising dark matter candidates. The DAMA/NaI experiment and its successor DAMA/LIBRA have claimed to directly detect dark matter particles passing through the Earth, but many scientists remain skeptical, as null results from similar experiments seem incompatible with the DAMA results.
However, Einstein suggested another possibility in the speech "Aether and the theory of Relativity" he made on May 5th 1920 at the University of Leyden Germany where he indicated The General Theory of Relativity predicts that "space is endowed with physical qualities"
"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the General Theory of Relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists Aether. According to the General Theory of Relativity space without Aether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time, nor therefore any spacetime intervals in the physical sense. But this Aether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts, which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."
However, Einstein only endowed space with the field properties of a spacetime dimension and not the physical qualities of mass. Therefore, if one accepts the validity of his theory the physical properties he was referring to must be a result of those field properties not those of mass in its particle form. This suggests a portion of the missing mass found by Fritz Zwicky may be related to those field properties is not what most associate with the mass of objects or particles.
Yet it is difficult to form a clear picture of how a field consisting of spacetime can have the physical properties of Dark Matter because as was shown in the article "Defining what time is" Sept. 20, 2007 time is not perceived by most as matter but as an irreversible physical, chemical, and biological change in physical space. Therefore, it is hard to understand how the physical properties Einstein associated with space can interact with the nonphysical properties of a time or a spacetime dimension to create mass.
But Einstein gave us the ability to solve this and develop more direct understand how and why the field properties of spacetime can be responsible for Dark Matter when he used the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light to define the geometric properties of mass in a spacetime universe. This is because that provided a method of converting a unit of time he associated with energy in a spacetime dimension to unit of space associated with mass in four *spatial* dimensions. Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his spacetime universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.
The fact that one can use Einstein’s equations to qualitatively and quantitatively redefine the field properties of a spacetime environment in terms of four *spatial* dimensions means as was done in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 that one can also define the gravitational properties mass in terms of a spatial displacement in field properties of four *spatial* dimension.
Therefore, according to Einstein if the continuous field properties of a threedimensional space manifold were displacement with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension a gravitational field would be created which because it is not made up of particles would not interact with light and therefore be Dark.
In other words, a portion of the gravitational forces associated with Dark Matter may not be the mass associated with particles but with the physical qualities Einstein in his speech "Aether and the theory of Relativity" tells us that a displacement of space must have
However, this contradicts the current worldview shared by most physicists and cosmologists that gravitational forces can only be created by mass in its particle or quantized form. This is true even though observations tell a different story.
For example Louis de Broglie was the first to predict mass is made up of the continuous field properties of space when he theorized that all particles have a wave component because according to modern theories that is the only thing that can support continuous properties of a wave.
Additionally the electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer provides experimental confirmation of this because that one can observe the transfer of momentum from a particles wave component to the electron caused by that interaction.
In other words, the mass we associate with particles must be composed of the oscillation in the field properties of space because that is the only thing that could be responsible for their wave components. Therefore, those fields must also have the properties associated with mass.
If this is true why then do we only observe its particle properties?
One can understand why by extrapolating the laws of governing resonance in a threedimensional environment, as was done in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 to the field properties of the wave Davisson and Germer observed particle to be composed of to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
Briefly, it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in one consisting of four spatial dimensions.
The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give the continuous field properties of space or as was shown above mass the ability to oscillate on a "surface" between a third and fourth *spatial* dimensions thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.
These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital. This would force the "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold to oscillate spatially with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.
The oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or "structure" to be established space.
Therefore, these oscillations in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or "structure" in fourdimensional space if one extrapolated them to that environment.
Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.
Hence, these resonant systems in the field properties of space would be responsible the mass and therefore the gravitational potential of particles.
However, there are at least two reasons why we are unable to directly observe the field properties of the mass component of space. The first is because all observations require an exchange of energy between what is being observed and the observer. Yet the most effective way for nature to transfer information to our instruments is, as was shown in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?“ in a resonate system made up of the field properties of mass. Therefore, in all measurements the particle properties associated with its resonant system will always be predominant over its field ones.
This is why as mentioned earlier its field properties are only observable in terms of the interference of the wave properties particles as was demonstrated by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer.
The second and probably the most significant is that to measure a quantity there must be a physical difference between what is being measured and what is doing the measuring.
For example, one cannot measure the force on the walls of ship lock created by the changing level of water from a ship in it by measuring how high it is above its surface because it is changing at the same rate.
As was mentioned earlier Einstein tells us a displacement in the continuous "surface" or field properties of a threedimensional space manifold which are displaced with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension would result in the creation of a gravitation field.
However, as it was with a ship one cannot measure the gravitational force on the "walls" of our universe generated by the mass associated with a displacement in a "surface" of threedimensional space manifold because we and all our instruments are floating on that "surface".
Yet as mentioned earlier we can determine the mass component of space by measuring how the inertial properties of its field components interact with crystals in experiments such as those conducted by Davisson and Germer
It should be remember Einstein’s genius allows us to choose to define all environments in either spacetime or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined their geometry in terms of the constant velocity of light. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories by making them applicable to both the quantum and field properties of space thereby giving us a new perspective on physical make up of dark matter
Later Jeff
Copy right Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016