Space-Time Fabric

Let’s assume that the space-time fabric is situated within our entire closed universe and matter is scattered throughout like small insects trapped on a giant spider web.  And let’s also assume that the space-time fabric along with the matter is in constant motion, either accelerating because of gravity since they are the same thing (Einstein’s principle of equivalence), or decelerating because of entropy, or shrinking because of dark energy, which quite possibly may be found in the quantum world.

So, finally let’s assume that dark energy is scattered about everywhere in the universe, fighting to overcome the original expansion from the Big Bang and matter and dark matter’s gravitational attraction in an effort to pull everything in back on itself to finally collapse into a Big Crunch.  And mathematics tells us that dark energy has about three times as much force as dark matter and all visible matter, so shrinking may well be the strongest force in the universe.

From our perspective, the matter probably would appear to be expanding at increasing speeds.  Yet, if the fabric were alternating back and forth between expanding and contracting, we might not be able to recognize the difference between expansion and contraction from our perspective.  It might look exactly the same to us on the planet earth.

The matter in the universe would warp the space-time fabric and perhaps, vice-versa, but we would not detect these variations from our perspective.  So, what can we surmise from our perspective?

Let’s again assume that the Big Bang was the start of expansion of the space-time fabric when all matter was very close together and should have slowed down time.  As the space-time fabric expanded, it would have also expanded the distance between mass in the universe, thus causing time to speed up.  Let’s assume that we would not detect this time difference, just as we would not detect it in a spaceship traveling toward Mars.

So depending on our position and speed, time can appear to move faster or slower to us relative to others in a different part of space-time.  The phenomenon is called “gravitational time dilation.”  In a nutshell, it just means time moves slower as gravity increases.

A time reversal may simply be caused when the expansion away from masses becomes a contraction back to an increase in gravity from the narrowing of the distance between the matter in the universe.  Time would initially move faster as everything expanded, but would move slower as everything contracted.

Again, we could not detect this time reversal or the increase or decrease in time.  However, we could see the effect of time going backwards by examining ancient galaxies, whose light passed by us billions of years ago.  When we can actually see those galaxies which existed billions of years ago, it is only because we are in a time reversal headed back toward the Big Bang, which will be more aptly named the “Big Crunch” for our future.  Otherwise, we could not see the sight of these old galaxies, which would have zipped by at the speed of light never to be seen again.  Just count your lucky stars that you cannot see the Big Bang… yet.

We Are in the Middle of the Universe

When you examine our universe from the smallest scale, which is the Planck length (1.6×10−35 meters) to the largest, which is the observable universe (91 billion light years across), we are in the middle.  And when I saw “we,” I am talking about our cells, or in effect, life as we know it.

It might seem strange, but the living cells inside a human body are smack dab in the middle between the smallest and largest things we know.  Whether that’s luck of the draw or a requirement for life or some other requirement for balancing the universe, we don’t know.  But we do know that generally things are positioned in the universe with design and reason and less by random selection, except for things found in the quantum world.

So, let’s speculate on why life is found in the center of the universe.  It may be the “goldilocks” zone for life to exist.  In other words, it may be the area that is just right for life to survive.  We know that the earth is in a “goldilocks” zone for protecting us from radiation and other hazards within our galaxy.  Our solar system situated about three quarters of the way outside the center of the Milky Way is in a fairly safe and habitable part of the galaxy.  And our earth is in a perfect location within our solar system for life to exist.  Perhaps, the same can be said about the location of our cells within the universe.

The center of the universe might be the safest zone as it is in the middle of two extremes.  Extremes, as a general rule, do not bode well for a fragile life form.  It might be the safest location for life forms.  Life, which would be susceptible to death from extreme environments, must have a safe nest for birth, growth, and development.  Cells and molecules appear to have that nest in a perfect location in the middle of the universe.

Now as the space-time fabric expands, the center of the universe does not change.  Life stays in between Planck length and the observable universe, no matter how much the universe expands.  It would be like placing a line in the middle of a balloon and then blowing up the balloon, watching the line remain in the center as the balloon increased in size.  The same could be said about the universe if it contracted; life would remain in the center if the space-time fabric decreased in size.  If we were on that line, we couldn’t tell if the universe were expanding or contracting.  Only observers from outside our universe could tell which direction it was going.

And whether our universe is contracting or expanding may not matter much for a majority of the time.  However, it may be important if we form a Big Crunch at the end of the contraction period.  That may be a point when life can no longer survive until we go from the Big Crunch to the Big Bang again.  This seems to suggest that the universe is a perpetual motion machine, which makes sense in a closed universe.

Speculation is permitted in a situation when our senses cannot provide us the information we need to answer life’s questions.  Because being in the center of the universe may block us from seeing the whole picture.

Time Reversal

We know very little about deep oceans and the center of our planet.  Clearly, we know even less about our solar system and even far less about our galaxy.  Guess how insignificantly little we know about our universe.  So, how will we ever know what is going on within our universe?  It seems that only our imagination saddled with logic has a chance to succeed in solving this mystery.

For a starter, it is possible that everything in our universe is interconnected.  Einstein’s space-time fabric encases the stars, planets, and other mass, including black matter.  This fabric connects solar systems and galaxies to form our universe.

But the next step requires a giant leap of our imagination.  What could make this space-time universe perpetual?  After the Big Bang, wouldn’t entropy cause the expansion to slow down?  Yet, we know that galaxies are moving away from each other at increasing speeds.  If we do not use our imagination, we can only visualize our universe expanding forever until solar systems end up in a Deep Freeze off somewhere by themselves.  But this would describe an open universe that expands forever with no boundaries, which does not seem likely.

What does appear to be more probable than not is that the galaxies are shrinking away from each other at an increasing rate.  Deflation could also cause a “red-shift” effect as the galaxies were shrinking away from each other.  But how did our space-time fabric go from expanding to contracting?  Well, if there were a significant force, perhaps dark energy, that could cause the space-time fabric to reverse direction, then our universe would be a perpetual motion machine, moving back and forth in time.  Remember, I said this required a giant leap of our imagination.  The space-time fabric would be similar to a balloon that inflated and then deflated.

It all depends on your perspective.  From where we sit, time reversal sounds impossible.  But from outside our closed universe, this movement would appear to be a simple expansion and contraction of the universe just like lungs that first fill up with oxygen and then deflate as the oxygen exits the lungs.  Einstein introduced time as the fourth dimension.  So, the dimension of time could easily move up and down as it expands and contracts.  But like I said, from our perspective, it would appear to be going forward in time and then reverse going back to the past.

Even though this sounds a little bit extraordinary, it may be the best theory we can come up without more evidence.  Here’s the bottom line:  there is no other explanation for being able to see an ancient galaxy, no longer sending out light, that was formed about 670 million years after the Big Bang.  The light from the ancient galaxy would have traveled at the speed of light and thus would have passed us by billions of years ago, never to be seen again.  The light from this ancient galaxy which died billions of years ago would have zipped past our field of vision, since expansion, as a general rule, would have propelled us at less than the speed of light.  In other words, how could we possibly see this light through the Hubble telescope unless we had reversed time and were headed back toward that original light?  When we finally see the Big Bang, it may not be a good thing for us.

Of course this sounds like science fiction, but when you consider time as being part of a fabric, it is logical to conclude that the fabric can expand and contract.  Time reversal may be nothing more than moving from expansion to contraction.  And dark energy, which currently is only a mathematical creation, could be a likely candidate to cause this reversal.

Again this is only speculation, but it is possible that dark energy is intertwined in the space-time fabric, so that it can twist one direction until entropy takes over and then it turns around like a rubber band to unwind in the other direction.  And dark energy could be powerful enough to keep this fabric twisting back and forth forever, first expanding and then contracting.  Even though there is little evidence to support this hypothesis, it is logically creative.

You might wonder why we don’t also reverse our aging or go backwards in time from the 21st century to the 20th century.  The answer is because the time reversal occurred billions of years ago.  We probably have been deflating the space-time fabric in a past-future direction for eons.  Basically, you would detect no difference between aging in the present-future or the past-future.

So, why would we ever be able to see the light from ancient galaxies as we moved back in time?  I don’t have a perfect answer, but I believe that we may be able to see light from ancient galaxies and even the Big Bang itself since that light is encased in the time-fabric.  In other words, as the space-time fabric collapses, our universe will be miniaturized so that we will be able to see the light from current galaxies, ancient galaxies, and even the Big Bang, which then may become the Big Crunch.

This theory of expansion and contraction of the time-space fabric would also comport with this being a closed universe, which is most likely the case.  It is not probable that our universe with its mass interconnected by a space-time fabric has no boundary.  Interestingly enough, quantum theory may assist us at this point.  Even though atoms may not appear to have well defined borders, there is an end point where other atoms come together as building blocks for matter.  As strange as the quantum world is, there still probably are boundaries.  And it may well be that the boundaries between the quantum world and the relativity world explain why we cannot reconcile these two worlds.

Even in living things, cells also have membranes at their outer perimeter that contain everything within.  Separations within our universe and between universes, if others exist, may be quite normal.

Our universe is very likely closed, so why would we limit our imagination to our universe just expanding from a Big Bang?  Contraction also must be considered, which may lead to a perpetual Big Bang-Big Crunch theory.  In effect, we could bang and crunch forever.

Creation of Supermassive Black Holes

Cosmologists have been offering theories as to how supermassive (SM) black holes, typically found in the center of galaxies, were created.  But they are analyzing creation from the standpoint of evolution.  In other words, they are starting with dying stars, which become black holes, and then having black holes eat other matter including cannibalizing other black holes, and through accretion over the years, they evolve into SM black holes.

This is an interesting approach to creation; however, it seems more likely that SM black holes have been in existence long before any evolutionary process could have created them.  In fact, scientists have discovered SM black holes very early after the Big Bang.  So, there was not enough time for stellar black holes to accumulate to form intermediate or very massive black holes, which later became SM black holes.

Even if Population 3 stars, which had short lives, collapsed into quasars and these merged, there was not sufficient time to create the multiple-billion solar mass that each SM black hole would have required.  Experts argue that it would have taken one out of every five stars currently in the Milky Way Galaxy to create the mass for its SM black hole.  Thus, it is more likely that the SM black hole for each galaxy was created when the galaxy itself was formed.  And not from stars within the galaxy, but from something else, perhaps the Creator Himself, that made the SM black hole an integral and critical part of the galaxy.  In fact, the galaxies probably would not function without the SM black hole in the center like the nucleus of a cell.

It is interesting how we examine both evolution and creation as a continual growth process, moving forward in time always toward something bigger and better.  But we fail to think about entropy, a powerful force that can put the brakes on expansion and may even be able to reverse its direction.  What if SM black holes, created after the Big Bang, were the seeds for galaxies?  What if all the black holes and our visible universe were one-third of the universe’s mass and dark energy were the other two-thirds?  What if the 1:3 ratio remained the same between the matter in our universe, but the entire universe were shrinking?  If you were looking at other stars, you would not notice the shrinking since all matter would remain in proportion to the other mass.

In effect, God is the Creator of this amazing perpetual-motion machine called the universe.  I may be wrong, but I believe that it is very possible that there are two major cycles in this mechanism:  (1) expansion when the matter expands like a balloon and (2) contraction when the matter deflates and shrinks in size.  In both these processes, SM black holes remain as the centerpiece for galaxies.  Even though SM black holes do grow through consumption of other mass, they also expel mass, so the theory that they are evolving over billions of years probably has little value.  However, the fact that SM black holes may be shrinking in the second cycle makes sense since we are seeing light from ancient galaxies that we could not see other than moving back in time to that event.  The light from the dead galaxies, otherwise, would have passed by us billions of years ago.

Edge of our Solar System

Voyager I has traveled 11 billion miles toward the edge of our solar system and has not reached the boundary yet.  Maybe it will be difficult to define where this point is located.  Scientists have been looking for a clear break between our solar system and interstellar space, but there may not be something that obviously separates the two.

Certainly, Voyager has detected a substantial increase in the level of galactic cosmic rays, which could be evidence that the spacecraft has crossed through a small zone called the heliopause, into a new zone where plasma bubbles have been blown outward by the solar wind.  Think of the tear-drop bubbles blown by children which are captured and then transported by the wind.  This might be a good analogy as to what our solar system looks like, but it does not explain the mystery of its edge.

A year ago, Voyager passed the termination shock, where the solar wind of charged particles abruptly slowed down, indicating Voyager’s entry into an outer region called the heliosheath.  Then last August, the Voyager entered an unknown “magnetic highway” where magnetic fields inside and outside the heliosphere connect.

However, even though Voyager has penetrated into the Kuiper Belt, it has not reached the Oort Cloud, which might require another 11 billion miles.  And who knows what lies ahead for our steadfast traveler.  Quite frankly, Homo sapiens may not be around by the time Voyager reaches what could have been considered by our species as the end of our solar system.

One may speculate that the matrix of the universe is such that dark energy and dark matter form the skeletal structure with our solar system connecting to other solar systems like cells in our body, forming galaxies.  Then the galaxies will merge into other galaxies so that the entire universe is interconnected.  If that is the case, the edge of our solar system and galaxy will have no more meaning than the boundary where one cell in a biological organism touches the next.

Then is there an edge to our universe?  There should be if there are no other universes.  The edge of the entity that surrounds us, which we call the universe, began with the Big Bang.  The universe, which had boundaries early in its existence, still must have these borders.  Scientists claim that this universe is expanding, but there can be no increase in diameter unless there is an edge for the diameter.  In other words, how can the universe expand unless it has a boundary creating that entity which is increasing in size?  If our universe had no edges, then it would be headed toward infinity, not expanding in a finite system.

But it seems quite useless to argue that our universe has no edge since we are aware of something we call the “universe” that contains all the galaxies.  And we can mathematically show the amount of mass within this closed universe.  And we can show the percentages of dark energy, dark matter, and visible matter within our universe.

We may not know much about our solar system, much less our galaxy, even to a lesser extent our universe, but we do know we are part of its contents and we have edges.  At least we appear to be confined within one skin and not floating about.  Do you believe that gives us an edge when we speculate that the universe has a boundary?

Fabric of our Universe

The very fabric of our universe is comprised of dark energy.  Even though we don’t know what dark energy is, we know mathematically that it exists, and we believe we know that by definition it is that thread of fabric that holds our universe together.  As it weaves through the universe, it seems to cement dark matter and the visible universe, which is approximately the other 24% of the mass.

We can only speculate as to what causes dark energy to control dark matter and the billions and billions of stars in the universe.  Our speculation is limited substantially by our lack of knowledge about this major force in our universe and our many limitations about what dark matter is and our perspectives of the visible universe.

For example, if we consider the ancient galaxies that no longer exist as part of our visible universe because we can see them, we must ask why.  Why would we consider matter that no longer is in our universe to be part of our visible universe?  Does it still have mass if it only exists in a telescope?  And are all of our ancestors that have evolved from ancient galaxies into old galaxies into today’s galaxies all counted as part of the visible universe, so that we are duplicating our present mass through addition of past mass?

And why can we still see the light from an ancient galaxy whose light went out billions of years ago?  In other words, why didn’t the light from that galaxy zip past us at the speed of light billions of years ago, never to be seen again?  Even if you argue that our universe has been expanding about the speed of light, we should be able to see the entire past or evolution of our universe.  As far as I know, we cannot see the Milky Way galaxy evolving in stages from infancy to its present stage, but we can see ancient galaxies that are no longer with us.  Why is that?

Again, we can only speculate, but we have to get way out of our scientific boxes… so far away from our box that we aren’t even using the scientific tools in that box.  Perhaps, we even turn to a bit of science fiction, which is another way of saying: “We will be using our imagination to propose a solution to this riddle.”

When we consider past events and matter to be part of our visible universe, we do this understanding that everything that we see in a telescope is something that happened in the past.  Even when you examine the moon without the aid of a telescope, you are seeing a past moon.  So, it seems that time must also be considered as being interwoven in our fabric of the universe.

Typically, we consider the past as history.  The dinosaurs have had their day and they no longer are useful in our universe.  But what if we expanded our imaginations to embrace everything that has happened, that is happening, and that will happen into the fabric of our universe?  What if time were not segmented into past, present, and future through the magic of dark energy?  What if these elements of time existed only in our minds as we managed our daily lives, but had a different context in the endless universe?

There are many ways that dark energy and dark matter can twist and turn time just like in a tornado.  Time might be bent or warped so that we could see ancient galaxies.  Time could also be reversed like a spring that pushes out and then bounces back.  Again, only our imagination can carry us to any of these conclusions.  However, these ideas are more plausible than those offered by those cosmologists today, who expect a “Deep Freeze” in our universe’s future.

What is the answer?  I don’t know.  Only God knows and He is not telling you until you reach the other side.  However, I consider the afterlife to be the most exciting of times… to be able to explore the wonders of God’s universe behind the scenes.  It will be the best of times to be able to see how our universe was created.

Are We Something or Nothing?

Many of us spend hours contemplating our lives and then ultimately we worry about our deaths.  So, do we go from something in life to nothing at death?  Or were we nothing all along?  Or are we still something after we die?

We must rely on our senses that tell our brains that we are something.  But if our senses play tricks on us, how do we know we are something or at least the something that our eyes perceive?  And if our senses evaporate after death, then how will we know anything?  Could we be something if we have no sensations?  Or is the absence of our senses the definition of being nothing?

The fact that we think is something, so I cannot logically argue there is nothing as long as thought exists.  And it is much more than my or your thoughts.  It can be any animal that is thinking at any time, whether past, present, or future.  So, there will always be something even after we die… and even before we were born.  Thus, there never can be nothing.

It is similar to the question of whether a falling tree makes a noise in the woods if nobody is there to hear it.  And the answer is a definite “yes” because something has been, is, and always will be there to hear it.  Just like there can never be nothing because even if the universe imploded or exploded, the fragments still would be something.  And new somethings will appear since the Creator will always be around to create.

Individuals cannot be so presumptuous as to believe that if they are not present, then no noise will be made by the tree in the woods.  People have placed too much importance on themselves.  They are not the Creator.  They do not understand the inner workings of the creative universe.  They are temporal, while the Creator is infinite.  And infinity means that there will always be something.

If you examine the universe with its billions of galaxies and each galaxy with its billions of stars, it seems impossible to imagine without design.  The universe, with dark matter forming a weblike structure and with dark energy perpetually powering expansion and contraction, is like an eternal living creature.  It seems interconnected and very much that something we discussed above.  And could something come from nothing?  It does not seem likely.  Something must come from a Creator that is also something.

Of course, you can always ask, “Where did the Creator come from?”  Or as some ask, “What came before the Big Bang?”   We do not have an answer.  Yet, we can surmise that there was always something and creations can occur anywhere and at anytime, creating more somethings.  The fact that we don’t know very much about the universe and the Creator is not sufficient reason to believe there is no Creator or nothing.  Because if you believe in something, then you are something; and you can take that belief with you into the afterlife.

Limitation of Imagination

We all have congratulated others on being very creative.  We know of artists, musicians, or even scientists like Einstein, who were creative geniuses.  Their imagination seemed to know no bounds, yet it did.  Their limitations were primarily based on their knowledge.  The more we know, the greater our imaginations become.

Unfortunately, we know very little about ourselves and where we live: our solar system, our galaxy, and certainly our universe.  We are still struggling to understand the earth and the depths of the ocean.  We don’t know how the sun and its cycles are impacting our weather patterns, so we blame it on global warming.

We don’t know where our solar system ends.  We see only about 10% of our universe in the form of planets and moons, so we know very little about the Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud.  And we also know very little about the billions of galaxies with their billions of stars, yet this is only about 4% of our total universe.  The other 96% is called dark matter and dark energy, which we know practically nothing about.  And don’t even mention quantum mechanics.

So with so little information, our imaginations are extremely limited.  When cosmologists state that they believe our universe will continue accelerating into a Deep Freeze, I counter with the fact that their imaginations are in a deep freeze.  The truth is that we will never know how the universe works because we are limited on our facts and imagination.  Only God knows and He is not showing His creative hand… at least while we are alive.

I give cosmologists a good deal of credit for coming up with the idea about Phase Changes as a possibility for the end of our universe; however, this idea is a spinoff of what we know about the different phases of water:  liquid, solid, and gas.  Again, our imagination is fairly limited to what we know.

For example, scientists have no idea what dark energy is, so let’s utilize our imagination and see what we predict.  Dark energy may be a force that is repelling the rest of the universe and thus causing an acceleration of separation between galaxies.  But this is based on our understanding of magnetism when like charges repel each other.  If you were to question cosmologists about dark energy, they would have to tell you that they have no idea what it is and their imaginations are stymied.

Even when we let our imagination go to areas that are declared to be science fiction, it is still based on what we know.  For example, if I were to say that the red color that we expect to see as a property enters the event horizon of a black hole, could be the same as the red shift that Hubble discovered decades ago.  Then if I were to extrapolate the reversal of time at the event horizon with a reversal of time with Hubble’s red shift, my imagination is still restricted to facts that we know or think that we know.

This is an interesting analogy though since most cosmologists believe that the red shift indicates that the galaxies are moving away from each other at increasing speeds.  My theory is that the galaxies are stuck in a time-space fabric that is shrinking at accelerating speeds.  But again, my imagination is limited just as much as others on earth.

Can we create something different from what we know?  Well, we can imagine new combinations of what we know.  For example, we might speculate that life on a planet, which is light years away, has a creature with ten legs and five eyes, but we are still working with legs and eyes.  We can even paint an unrecognizable animal, but we will borrow from things that we know to create this beast.

So, clearly we are not even close to the Creator, our God.  In order to be with God, we must unify with Him.  We must trust Him and defer to His omniscience.  Only God could create the universe from nothing.  Scientists do not have a clue.

Fabric of Spacetime

Would we understand our universe better by thinking of it as a web of spacetime that either: (1) bends around itself or (2) expands first into a macroworld and then contracts into a microworld until it is ready to expand again?

Einstein in his theory of relativity discussed space and time or “spacetime” as if it were a single interwoven continuum.  By combining space and time into a single entity and additionally marrying a three-dimensional universe (length, width, height) with a fourth dimension (time), we create Minkowski space.  And even though Einstein was disappointed that he never could unify the supergalactic universe of gravity with the subatomic world of quantum mechanics, this fabric might well extend from the macroworld into the microworld.  The Big Bang probably is the best example of this nexus.  But we probably leave the four dimensions behind when we journey into the subatomic world.  The quantum world could be ruled by dark energy.  We just don’t know.

Many cosmologists propose that the universe is expanding so that billions of years from now, earth will push into a dark corner of the universe with no sun or other stars in the sky, since our corner of the universe will settle into a “Deep Freeze.”  Of course, this makes no sense if you believe we exist in a closed universe.  A closed universe would probably have edges that were elliptical like orbits within galaxies or the orbits within atoms.  A closed universe also portends an infinite spacetime that could bend around an orbit or could expand and contract forever.

So, the first significant question is:  Is our universe closed or open?  Well, if you believe in the Big Bang, and there certainly is sufficient evidence to prove that event, you must argue that the universe is closed.  Why?  Because an event like the Big Bang had an event horizon, similar to the one predicted at the fringe of a black hole.  In other words, there is another side of the black hole and the Big Bang that we can never see.  Spacetime may stop at this point.  This separation creates an edge or event horizon that could not logically exist in an open universe.

If the universe were closed, then the next significant question is: Is perpetuity served by a curved spacetime or by constant expansions and contractions?  Or is it a little of both?

We know that the strength of a gravitational field can slow the passage of time for an object seen by an observer from a distance.  We also know that time speeds up for space travelers and even for those who reach the top of the Empire State Building.  Those of us, who remain on the ground, age slower.  If we were able to travel to a black hole, as we approached the event horizon, we would probably circle the dark matter close to the speed of light; however, observers on earth would think we were barely moving as time slowed down.

In effect, spacetime would be compressed near the event horizon.  And spacetime might even stop at the entrance of a black hole.  Logically, this may be the portal to a microworld where gravity goes wild and turns the reins over to quantum mechanics.  An example on a smaller scale could be when a star expands into a red giant, then contracts into a white dwarf, shrinking into a black hole, and finally explodes into elements that will eventually come back together again through gravity.  The Fusion-Fission cycle sounds like a miniature Big Crunch and Big Bang, doesn’t it?

And how does the curvature of spacetime come into play?  Well, we know that light bends around large objects like black holes.  We also know that objects bend the spacetime fabric.  We don’t know if the bending of spacetime is such that it encloses itself.  For example if we examined the earth from our perspective on earth, we might think it were flat.  But if we were in space, we would see the curvature of the earth.  That same principle may apply to our perspective of the universe.  We might view the universe as flat from where we are, but if we could see a larger segment of the universe, we might see it as being circular.

The temporal and spatial aspects of spacetime may be part of a unified fabric, but they may also operate on different principles.  In other words, space may move back and forth like an accordion, while time may travel both forward to the future and then back to the past.  The spatial movement is more in line with what we can understand using something like a coordinate grid to define where objects are in relation with each other.  The temporal movement is a more abstract manifold defining when events occur.  It would be difficult for us to imagine that time could move backward into the past.  However, there may be proof that it is doing just that.

We are able to see the light from ancient galaxies, dating back to the earliest galaxies in our universe.  How is that possible?  The light from that galaxy would have zipped in front of us billions of years ago.  Since the galaxy hasn’t existed for billions of years, it hasn’t emitting light for eons.  So, how can we view the light today?

Well, you might argue that spacetime is not regulated by the speed limit of light.  And that probably is true, but remember that there are two parts of spacetime.  Space may expand faster than the speed of light, but this probably occurred for only a short period of time after the Big Bang.  Time, on the other hand, may slow down and then reverse itself.  We are very familiar with spatial reversals of the north and south poles and other reversals that are part of the nature of our universe.  But it is difficult to imagine a temporal conversion that starts heading into the future and then backs into the past.  Quite frankly, it is a concept reserved for science fiction.  However, what else can explain the sighting of ancient galaxies?

Furthermore, we know that the older galaxies have a red shift that evidences an increasing acceleration.  Why would they be moving at increased speeds since gravity would have less of an impact on their movement due to entropy?  Well, it might be because of the additional aspect of time moving backwards.

An increased red shift of ancient galaxies viewed from our perspective may be caused by:  (1) a shrinking of the galaxies in a spatial movement away from each other or (2) a reversal of time creating the synergistic appearance of spatial and temporal movement in multiplying effects.  In other words, if you were to measure the distance from A to B and then include time constriction in that equation or consider the repetition of that movement from A to B by first going forward and then backward in time, your red shift might increase.

It is interesting to note that a red shift could be detected if two galaxies were shrinking just the same as if they were expanding away from each other.  The spacetime fabric may have billions of galaxies embedded in this fabric, so that an expansion of the fabric could also expand the galaxies.  The galaxies would be glued to the fabric and thus would not be flying away from each other.  It seems more likely that the galaxies that currently exist are either being drawn to each other by gravity, like the Milky Way and Andromeda, or they are slowly moving away from each other with only a minor red shift.

So what would explain the significant red shift among galaxies that are further away, who either are no longer in existence or would have very little gravitational tug on the other galaxies?  It might be caused by a mixture of temporal and spatial movements.   Since a contraction of the fabric may have the same effect on the galaxies, the galaxies might be shrinking in a proportional manner so that it would not be detected from our perspective.  As the galaxies got smaller, they would pull away from each other which would increase the red shift.

It appears to be more likely that a red shift would be evidence of a contraction rather than an expansion, since a proportional expansion, in theory, would be like slowly filling a polka-dotted balloon.  Those dots, signifying galaxies, would not separate very much as the balloon gradually expanded.  However, the dots would quickly reduce in size as the air came rushing out of the balloon with a time reversal.  When you add in the potential for time reversal, then the case for a shrinking universe in both space and time becomes more attractive and may explain the substantial increase in the red shift as we view ancient galaxies.

If we can look back and see ancient galaxies, why can’t we see the Big Bang.  Well, it is likely that we will never see anything except the results of the Big Bang.  In other words, we should be able to see the smoke from the gun, but not the gun itself.  And we may have stumbled upon this smoke.

There is an anomaly within the universe which is about 1.8 billion light years across and is located around three billion light years away from our solar system.  Currently, this is the largest structure we have found in the universe.  Little energy emanates from this circular area, which contains about 10,000 fewer galaxies than in other areas of the universe.  In effect, this anomaly has about 20 percent less matter inside it.

This cold spot within our universe has perplexed scientists since 2004, when it was discovered as an oddity in the otherwise homogeneous cosmic microwave background radiation.  This cosmic microwave background which can be traced back to the Big Bang is spread evenly throughout our universe except this area, which is about 2.7 degrees K cooler than the average temperature in the universe.  This anomaly could be the smoking gun for the Big Bang.

One other point that should be mentioned is:  There is a proportion of 3:8:24 that seems to consistently act as a foundation of our universe.  Mathematically we know that about 3% of our universe is visible matter, 24% is dark matter, and 72% is dark energy.  This division of matter and energy in the universe is a ratio of 3:8:24.  This same proportion applies to hydrogen, helium, and all other elements.  This could be a coincidence, but it is not likely.

But what about the missing 1%?  Our formula only accounts for 99% of the universe.  What accounts for the other 1%?  I can only guess, but it could be the ignition or the unknown force that keeps the universe constantly moving from expansion to contraction and back again.

And how does this apply to the closed universe?  Well, we know that neither matter nor energy is created or destroyed in this universe.  The proportionate division makes sense in a closed universe that is balanced for the most part, but needs that 1% to reverse the polarity so that our universe is a perpetual time and recycling machine.

Scientific Evidence in Jury Trials

I have noticed that scientific evidence introduced by the prosecution, which is countered by scientific proof provided by the defense, becomes a “wash” with the jury.  If there are competing scientific witnesses, the jury typically will disregard all the scientific evidence.  At that point, it adds little value to parade in more scientific experts than your opponent.  There is already reasonable doubt in the jury’s mind, and most jurors do not have a scientific mind that will further analyze the science.

This “hung jury” on the scientific evidence can occur even when there is overwhelming DNA evidence.  If the prosecution finds DNA samples at the scene of the crime, the defense can offer an alternative theory as to why the DNA was found.  For instance, the defense may argue that the DNA of the defendant was from a consensual sexual relationship.  Or the defense may have a scientist who shows that the DNA sample was contaminated.  It is a more difficult defense arguing that the police or a third party planted the defendant’s DNA sample, but it has been employed with success as in the OJ Simpson trial.

I have seen cases that attempt to match bite marks on the deceased’s breast with the defendant’s teeth fail as soon as the defense’s scientific expert shows that the bite marks do not match.  When jurors were questioned after the trial, they indicated that the scientific testimony regarding the bite marks was completely ignored in the deliberation room.  The jury reached their verdict based on something other than the science.

I was selected to sit on a medical malpractice trial before I attended law school, and I had the opportunity to see up front how a jury operates.  And each jury is different, but this jury completely ignored all the medical evidence provided during the lengthy trial.  The jurors did not understand it, so they dismissed it.  As long as both the plaintiff and the defendant offer some medical evidence to support their side, the jury will ignore all the medical evidence.

So how did this jury reach their decision?  Well, the foreman picked up a picture of the deceased that was taken about a week before he was seen by the physician and passed it around for everybody to see.  The plaintiff’s attorney had introduced the picture to enlist the sympathy of the jurors since the man looked sick and emaciated.  However, the foreman shook his head and announced, “Can’t you see?  The man was going to die no matter what the doctor did for him.  He was going to die anyway!”  And that’s how the jury made its decision for the defendant physician.

So what’s my point?  It’s simply that science will not convince the average person to believe in dark matter or dark energy or even a Creator.  The reason why the typical individual will believe in something is based on the emotion that carries the day.  This is why crowds are fickle.  One day, they may forgive your actions, but the next day, they may string you up.

The world is becoming more polarized, reducing the size of moderate, middle-of-the-road civilizations.  Extremists are always emotional non-thinkers.  That makes them very dangerous because you cannot reason with them.  And once the majority of world citizens are polarized into two major sides, both hating each other equally, and sometimes not knowing or caring why they hate each other.  Once the fire of hate starts feeding on that emotion, all rational thoughts will go up in smoke and the only thing that will matter will be to continue feeding the fire.  At that point, the only government that can control the emotional chaos in the world will be a totalitarian government.

A thinking person might wonder if this were the plan from day one of a small group of conspirators who created the polarized planet for a totalitarian world controlled by them.  Members of this group who want to take over the world may have sat in jury rooms themselves or perhaps they just understand human nature, which is to ignore science and reason if there is any conflict and rely on emotion to make decisions.