**Does the universe have to include all the strange particles, quarks, photons, quanta and strings of all kinds in order to assemble it? Is it necessary for all the existing collection of forces: gravity, electricity, magnetism, strong, weak and more?
Is it even possible to develop a simpler theory to explain the complexity of the universe?
We will leave nail polish**

Yehuda Sabdarmish

Direct link to this page: https://www.hayadan.org.il/simpleunivers.html

Introduction: The basic assumptions of the universe theory

At the base of every scientific theory are always a number of basic assumptions, on which the theory is based. The author of the article will first present a number of basic assumptions on which the two most well-known scientific theories are based: the first is the theory that explains the structure of the universe based on 19th century theories and mainly Newton's theory, and everything that was added to it until the beginning of the XNUMXth century. The second is the theory that explains the structure of the universe based on the theories of the twentieth century: Einstein's theory of relativity, and everything attached to it such as: quantum theory, strings and more. A comprehensive analysis of the elemental properties is far beyond the scope of this article. You can easily fill several encyclopedias on this "toddler" topic. Therefore, to simplify the matter, and for our purposes, the author of the article will limit himself to only three elements on which any theory that tries to explain the structure of the universe is based:

1. The properties of the particles according to each of the above theories.

2. Laws according to which the particles act.

3. The number of dimensions from which the universe is built.

The choice of these three elements is not accidental. In the essence of the above two important theories, as well as in any other theory dealing with the structure of the universe, particles exist. These particles are what build the universe in all its dimensions, and this, according to the laws of the theory.

Later, the author of the article will present an interesting challenge based on this analysis.

Let's start with the 19th century.

Newton's laws dominated our world until the beginning of the XNUMXth century. The appearance of the theory of relativity "somewhat" pushed Newton's theory aside. Nevertheless, even today we prefer to use Newton's laws in ordinary calculations in our day-to-day life. We do this because of their simplicity and the small error that results from them at low speeds.

The theory of the universe according to Einstein and his theory of relativity were the result of difficulties that were discovered in explaining various experiments that were done at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century. Since then, for nearly a century, the theory of relativity has been established as the leading theory in our universe. Everyone is supposed to behave according to its laws, especially the macroscopic (large) parts of the universe. It was joined by quantum theory, which deals mainly with the small particles.

We will then examine the three elements in the theories of the twentieth century.

1. The properties of the particles

It is true that a particle has the properties of mass, dimensions, and motion, (sections A, B, C, in Newton's case), but contrary to Newton's explanations, these quantities change in Einstein's according to the speed at which they move.

Regarding section D, gravity was transferred from a property of the particle in Newton, to a property of a four-dimensional space in Einstein.

In addition, in the twentieth century:

A. A particle must not "forget" that it is essentially also a wave.

B. The relativistic-Einsteinian world, in which the particle moves, is also full of other strange "creatures", such as:

Redundancies, quantums, virtual particles, and more.

2. The laws.

In the twentieth century, the laws are: Lorentz transformations, the laws of special and general relativity, and quantum theory.

3. The number of dimensions in the universe according to Einstein is four (or more).

So far I haven't updated you, the reader, anything. You have learned these rules many times.

Now, if you, the reader, have a spark of "innovative scientific adventurism" (as the readers of this publication surely have), the author of the article offers you a challenge, with very interesting material for thought.

The challenge is: building the simplest possible universe.

Wait, don't panic, we will only do this theoretically, and we will do it with a minimum of formulas.

So please, please sharpen your intuition and common sense, here we go.

First we must forget all the laws and particles known to us from the world of physics and chemistry and stay only with the really simple principles which we will immediately define.

We must also ignore various restrictions imposed by known physics, such as:

A. The speed of light is the maximum possible.

B. Every mass has weight.

third. Mass and energy are the same, etc...

These restrictions, which arise from the positions of Newton or Einstein, etc., may not be required in the simple universe that we will build, or they will be applied in a different way.

That means we have to start building our universe right from the beginning. Such a universe is called: a simple universe

How to build the simple universe

In the first step we will take the minimum features and principles for its construction. Only if during construction we notice that we are missing a figure, without which it is impossible to continue explaining the natural phenomena, we will add it. In this way of building we will be sure that we use the minimum required..

Even in the simple universe there will of course be the three elements that appeared in the universes according to Newton and Einstein and they are:

The definition of the simple universe-

Inside a huge space, tiny elementary particles move at great speeds, linearly and rotationally (around their axis), in all directions. These particles will have mass and volume only. They lack gravity, electric charge, magnetism and any other charge. For this reason, and also due to being tiny, the elementary particles have a huge penetrating power. An entire star will hardly stop them.

Everything that these elementary particles exert on their environment is due to their movement, valve, and dimensions. These particles are called: elementary particles.

The laws that work in the universe - simple - Newton's three laws and the laws of ideal gases.

The similar and the different in the three universes/theories

The foundations of the universe and theories in the 19th century Newton in the 20th century Einstein, quanta, strings, etc. A simple universe

1

Characteristics

the particles. A. Mass.

B. Dimensions,

diameter and volume.

third. traffic,

Linear and rotary.

d. gravity,

built into the particle.

God. Electricity and magnetism in some particles.

A. Mass,

Professor of speed.

B. Dimensions ,

diameter and volume,

Professor of speed.

third. traffic,

Linear and rotary.

d. A particle that is a wave.

God. special particles in space.

A. Mass.

B. Dimensions,

diameter and volume.

third. traffic,

Linear and rotary.

2

rules.

A. Three rules

Newton.

B. The gas laws

the ideals.

third. The law of gravity

The global.

d. Electrical laws

and magnetism. A. transformations

Lorenz.

B. Laws of Torah

Private relativity

and the general

third. Laws of Torah

the quanta.

d. gravitation,

(built in space). A. Three rules

Newton.

B. The gas laws

the ideals.

3

dimensions.

3 dimensions.

4 dimensions (at least)

3 dimensions.

It is very possible that the sharp-eyed among the readers have already noticed that in fact a simple universe is a universe made of ideal gas or gases, since this is exactly the definition of the ideal gas: a collection of tiny particles moving in every direction in every direction, with the only forces acting between them being those arising from their movement and their mass.

In the definition of the simple universe we take a maximum reduction in the selection of its properties. At first glance it is difficult to describe what we are able to do with so little data.

But, if you, the reader, think that a simple universe is also a boring universe, you are in for a surprise very soon! It is easy to prove that in a simple universe, if we take an elementary particle of the right size, moving at the right speed, we will get the following interesting properties:

A.

B. The background temperature of the universe is 2.73 degrees Kelvin.

third. speed of light-

d. And....Newton's law of universal gravitation, including the formula, including the universal gravitation constant!. That is, the property of gravity will be a consequence of the opening data that we will take without the need to "wear" this property on the mass.

And in addition we will get:

God. Correction of Newton's gravitation formula for very large distances.

and Solving the problem of the inflationary universe: the speed of light prof. to the root of the background temperature of the universe.

G. Difference between inertial mass and gravitational mass.

H. black holes

ninth. the big Bang.

J. The mourning constant.

XNUMX Explain the movement of galaxies and the missing mass in the universe.

XNUMX. The connection between gravity and the expansion of the universe.

And more.

Well, for the purpose of proving things, we will move to numerical calculations.

We will mark everything related to the universe simply with the letter S

The writer of this article chose the following numerical data for mass and velocity:

(The method of choosing the numerical data was not a guess and it was done by placing the speed of light and the background temperature of the universe in the appropriate ideal gas equations.

The author of the article preferred to calculate beforehand the mass of the elemental particle and its speed, and enter them as data, and show how from them it is possible to obtain the elemental data such as: the speed of light, gravity, background temperature and more.

The author of the article does not rule out the possibility that another researcher will find other numerical data that roughly correspond to the existing universe.

Of course, a simple universe can stand on its own as a mathematical creation and not be bound to one group of numbers or another, but it is very interesting if by choosing a special group of numbers there will be an overlap between the simple universe and the existing universe!)

. The mass of the elementary particle is equal to: =

B. Its average speed:

First we consider two numerical data that will help us later.

1 . The average speed squared:

2. Average of the velocities squared:

(The statistical significance is presented without proof)

In the last formula, first the velocity must be increased by the square of each particle and then the squares must be averaged. This size is correct for kinetic energy calculations of an elementary particle.

Immediate conclusions from these calculations:

A. What is the kinetic energy contained in the particle

How about marking this size in parentheses with the letter C and we'll get it

That is, it is the kinetic energy contained in the elementary particles.

B. We will check the background temperature of the simple-universe.

It is known that in an ideal gas the formula expressing the kinetic energy of the gas particle is:

From here:

We will see this for a pair of particles of masses m1, m2 that are in the first stage at a distance r (case A) The size of the "attraction" force is determined by the apex angle A of the infinite cones H1, H2. Only the elementary particles coming from the direction of the opening of the cones and hitting the masses m1, m2, affect the force of gravity acting between the two masses. Elemental particles arriving and hitting from another direction are neutralized by counter-particles.

Let's move on to case B. The distance between the masses is doubled to a distance of 2r. We immediately notice that the angle of the cones is two times smaller than A/2 and hence the opening of the cones is four times smaller and the flux of the elemental particles that hits the masses is also four times smaller and hence: the force of "attraction" is four times smaller. That is: increasing the distance by two times reduced the force of "attraction" by four times.

In general we can say:

If the distance between two masses increases by N times, then the force of attraction acting between them will decrease by N times

Hence:

The force of "attraction" acting between two masses is directly proportional to the product of the masses and inversely proportional to the square of their distance. That is:

(Here is the formula that appears at the beginning of the article)

where G is the global gravitational constant.

It goes without saying that while Newton deduced the formula from measuring the motion of the stars, here the entire formula derives from the basic data we took on the simple universe!!! But Newton himself also believed that gravitation must be done by a "messenger" particle, but he did not know how it was done!

This gravitational force will unite elementary particles in groups, like water droplets condensing from a large cloud. Step by step, all the particles that make up the atoms we know, the molecules, will be created for us, and these will accumulate into stars and galaxies, earth and universe!

for your attention-

While Newton's gravitation formula is the same for any size of mass, at any density and at any distance, the development of the gravitation formula in the simple universe will be "slightly" different for very dense bodies or very close particles. In some cases, an element of repulsive force (!) will even be included in the calculations, but more on that another time. What we did do this time is:-

God. Testing the force of gravity at great distances.

If the distance between the masses that activate the force of gravity is large, there is a fear that an elementary particle that activates the force of gravity will in the meantime collide with another elementary particle that is also moving in space and as a result it will deviate from its course and its effect will be canceled.

be the mean free path that an elementary particle travels until it collides with another elementary particle.

Find out what is the fraction of the elementary particles that remain without deviation.

(The calculation is similar to the calculation of the half-life period in radioactive decay)

If the mean free path is and the distance between the masses is r, is the number of particles of the initial element that participated in determining the force of gravity and is the number of particles of the element that remained without deviation, then: and hence:

when expressing the fraction of the elementary particles that remain without deviation from their orbit.

Therefore the global gravity formula will take the form:

Since the free path is probably on the order of thousands of astronomical units at least,

It is easy to see that at very small distances the formula will take the form of Newton's formula,

Because then: aspires to zero, therefore aspires to one.

However, at large distances of a few tens, gravity actually resets!

and The problem of the inflationary universe

The simple universe theory gives a logical explanation, different from the conventional one, for the problem of the inflationary universe.

Let's first explain the problem.

In the time of seconds after the big bang, when the universe was at a temperature of , a huge expansion took place in the universe. In less than a millionth of a second, the dimensions of the universe have multiplied. As a result, many points in the universe moved away from each other at a speed greater than the speed of light. And hence, information, which could move at no more than the speed of light, could not pass between all parts of the universe. A conclusion from the fact that large parts of the universe had to be different because of the lack of contact and bond between them.

Nevertheless, the visible universe today is very uniform in appearance, density and temperature.

The question arises: how did this happen?

The currently accepted explanation is that although information cannot travel faster than the speed of light, the universe as a whole can expand at a speed greater than the speed of light.

The explanation given by the simple universe theory is: the speed of light was then greater! *

* Einstein's decision that the speed of light is constant everywhere in the universe and at all times was probably too "overwhelming". The reason is that it is difficult to draw this conclusion from the Michelson-Morley experiment which was done as is known to everyone in the region of the Earth and on a date about ten billion years after the big bang.

The attempt to justify a speed greater than the speed of light of a mass in the universe by transferring the problem to the expansion of the entire universe at a speed greater than the speed of light seems to the author of the article to be a bit "artificial" to say the least. On the other hand, the explanation given by the simple universe theory is based on its principles! A simple ideal gas universe requires that the speed of the waves in it be proportional to the temperature.

proof

According to the formula for the speed of waves in ideal gases:

= The ratio between the heat capacity at constant pressure and the heat capacity at constant volume and its magnitude in gases is between 1.3 and 1.7. We will take it as an average of 1.5

From here we will place and get:

They are: eighteen billion billion kilometers per second !!!

At such a speed, information had no problem reaching all parts of the ancient universe.

It should be noted that according to the theory of the simple universe, information is able to move at an even greater speed, which is the speed of the elementary particles, whose size at that time was approx.

G. Difference between inertial mass and gravitational mass.

The situation in the simple universe is that there is a difference between the two types of masses mentioned above.

When we come to the acceleration calculations of a mass, all the elementary particles of the mass participate in the acceleration, even those that are hidden or concealed. However, when we check the force of gravity arising from that mass, (or alternatively: acting on it), the elementary particles that are partially or completely hidden by other particles will not fully participate in determining gravity. We will add and say that the size of the gravitational mass contained in a certain body changes according to its density, size, shape and more.

In everyday life the differences are tiny and not surprising if we treat them as equal sizes, but always:

The gravitational mass is less than or equal to the inertial mass.

It goes without saying that both Einstein and Newton deny any difference between the two types of masses.

H. black holes

Regarding black holes, the simple universe theory eliminates the possibility of infinite gravity in the universe. What does exist is a maximum gravitational force that results from the maximum pressure that can be exerted on a unit area by the elementary particles of the universe.

Suppose, for example, that the Earth was a very massive body that every elementary particle could not pass through. At this moment, Newton's well-known apple will only be hit by particles from above, from the direction of the top of the tree, and no particle will come from below, from the direction of the Earth.

If this happens, it will be the maximum possible force of gravity that can act on the apple, there can be no greater force of gravity than that, but surely this force is not infinite.

ninth. the big Bang

As in everything that the simple universe deals with, the explanation here is simple:

A huge primordial gas cloud, located in empty space, spreads in all directions as a result of its internal pressure, which does not encounter any resistance from the emptiness outside. Only at (relatively) small distances, and within it, can the gas particles move from any direction to any direction, without a significant effect of the particle's free path factor, and in the process create the gravitational force.

In addition, in the past the universe was smaller and hotter. It will always spread, and it will get colder. He will never shrink!

J. The mourning constant

The expansion of the simple universe corresponds to the "expansion of grief", that is:

Hubble's constant in the simple universe increases as a function of time (there is an acceleration in the expansion of the universe)!

Explanation: At the beginning of the expansion, only the outer layers of the universe began to move outward, the inner layers are almost unaware of what is happening outside, meaning their expansion speed: zero! After a certain time they also start to move, first slowly and then... with increasing speed! In other words: since in the inner layers of the universe the pressure is greater than in the outer layers, then there will always be a force acting to increase the speed of expansion.

That is: the mourning constant started from zero and is increasing!

Question: Will the speed increase indefinitely?

Answer: Of course not, the speed cannot be greater than the speed of the outer layers, which is finite!

XNUMX Explain the movement of galaxies and the missing mass in the universe

A galaxy has two types of motion: rotational motion and linear motion.

First, we note that gravity has a very partial ability to explain the rotational motion of a galaxy. For this, the mass of the galaxy needs to be five to fifty times larger!!

But according to the simple universe theory the explanation of the movement is not due to gravitational forces which do not actually exist at great distances (Section XNUMX). The movement of the galaxy results from the differences in temperatures and pressures that exist in the huge gas cloud that makes up the simple universe. The galaxies themselves swirl like huge clouds in three-dimensional space (at least).

Examining the speed of winds at different distances from the center of whirlwinds (hurricanes, cyclones and others) reveals a great compatibility with the speed of stars within galaxies. The velocity in the center (the eye of the storm) is zero, it increases up to a certain distance from the center and then decreases slowly just like in galaxies.

According to the opinion of the author of the article, the chances are that there is not a black hole in the center of the galaxy, but rather the opposite! This region will be almost as clear of stars as the eye of the storm is clear of clouds.

A difference in temperatures and pressures will also explain the linear movement of the galaxy, for example: the cluster of galaxies of the Virgo group, which includes the local group of galaxies, moves entirely in a certain direction, not because there is a huge mass in that direction, but because the pressure in that direction is lower.

Let's summarize and say:- The movement of the galaxy has nothing to do (almost) with gravitation!

Therefore:- the decision about the missing mass in the galaxies or the universe is unfounded!

XNUMX. The connection between gravity and the expansion of the universe

The universe is expanding, so the number of elementary particles per unit volume is getting smaller, so the gravitational force created by a smaller number of particles will be smaller.

In other words, we got: the force of gravity is inversely proportional to the expansion of the universe!

This also explains why the planets that move in the gaseous universe and whose speed is necessarily small due to friction, why they do not eventually fall into the sun. The reason: their smaller speed corresponds to the smaller gravitational pull of the sun.

In addition, we reach new conclusions that are different from what is accepted today in the universes according to Newton or Einstein. They will make it possible to verify the simple universe.

A. Two masses standing one behind the other attract less than two separate masses!

The reason: in an adjacent state, some of the particles in the material hide each other and do not participate

In determining the "attraction" force.

B. A body moving at speed exerts a greater force of gravity than a body at rest. The reason - the movement of the body interferes more with the elementary particles passing through it.

third. Gravitational force moves in space at a finite speed whose speed is the speed of the elementary particles.

d. Because of the movement of a planet, the force of "attraction" does not act in the direction of the center of gravity of the sun, but to the point required by the combination of the speed of the star and the speed of the particles. The biggest deviation will be in the fastest planet - Mercury!!.

God. The number of particles per unit volume of space varies in different regions and at different times of the universe.

and. Conclusion from section XNUMX: various constants, which are accepted today as a constant quantity throughout the universe, are not such. For example:

The speed of light, the universal gravitational constant, and even the elements and the entire periodic table.

G. Bodies that move at high speeds will encounter the problem of a supersonic boom just as fast planes encounter the problem of a supersonic boom, conclusion: it will be difficult to move close to the speed of light!!

H. There is a maximum gravitational force acceleration. It will be when the elementary particles fail to pass through a sufficiently massive star. This gravitational acceleration is enormous, but finite.

T. Another conclusion from section XNUMX - there are no black holes in their known meaning (!)

And more.

In conclusion

We started from a fundamental starting point that says only one thing:

The universe is made of moving particles.

Without making any additional assumptions, the author of the article received interesting explanations for all the phenomena he treated. There is still a lot of work to be done. There are many things and phenomena in the simple universe that we have not dealt with that could be an explanation for the phenomena and things in the existing universe. Spin of an elementary particle, and the possibility of elementary particles of different sizes may be explanations for the phenomena of electricity, magnetism, and nuclear forces. It is worth noting that the nuclear force formula contains the term where y is a function of distance, just like in gravity.

for your attention

To make the calculations easier, there are data that were not included in this article that certainly have an effect on the level of accuracy in the results. For example:

No data was entered regarding the rotation of the particle around its axis, vortices, the shape of the elemental particle, including whether all the elemental particles are identical to each other in shape or mass.

Also, in the proof of gravity, we only considered elastic collisions of particles.

This causes inaccuracy in the calculations but does not detract from the essence of the discussion of the simple universe.

Finally:

Not everyone who started reading this article finished it. Many must have gotten a peak in the thighs when they saw the particles in the simple universe flying at a speed faster than the speed of light. The majority were frightened when I canceled the gravity of the material in general, and of "Mother Earth" in particular. Suddenly we became at the mercy of random particles flying through the space of the universe. "Mother Earth" is no longer what it used to be.

I am turning to you readers, the open-minded, the people of space and astronomy, who have read my article to the end.

I would be very happy to receive your responses, both positive and negative, to answer your questions and to confront your opinions on the issues I raised in this article.

I will conclude this article with a response he wrote to the articles of Eliezer Steinberg, a computer lecturer:

If only a tiny percentage of everything you hypothesize in the simple universe theory is true, then that's a coup!

I agree with him.

Finally, I thank all those who took the time to respond with their interesting responses.

My address: Sabdarmish Yehuda

3 Eli Cohen Street, Apartment 8

Herzliya 46480

Phone: 052-570989

E-mail: sevdermish@surfree.net.il

bibliography

"Astronomy", Bitown Society, December 2000, "The theory of the simple universe".

Mechanics, sound and heat, the theory of light / Sears Zimansky.

Physical chemistry / Walter G. Mor.

Astronomy - a guide to knowing the sky / Yigal Fat-El.

The particle hunters / Yuval Neman and Yoram Kirsch.

Order from the random / Yuval Neman.

Twentieth century physics / Yuval Neman.

The Hebrew Encyclopedia: website, Le Saz.

The universe - fundamentals of astrophysics / Meir Midev, Noach Barosh, Hagai Netzer.

Cosmology / John Gribbin.

The Big Bang Theory / Piran

The universe and everything in it / Timothy Ferris.

Astrophysics / Meir Midev.

Modern physics / Uri Neta.

Modern physics / Yoram Eshel.

The Elegant Universe - by Brian Greene, Chapter 4, on Twists and Ripples.

The universe - fundamentals of astrophysics, Meir Midev, Noah Barosh, Hagai Netzer,

Open University Press, 2000 edition.

Chapter 15 – Galaxies, pp. 224-237.

Thoughts on reality - by Professor Yakir Shoshani.

Ministry of Defense, publishing house, 1999.

Yedan and in it a collection of Yehuda Sverdarmish's articles

https://www.hayadan.org.il/BuildaGate4/general2/data_card.php?Cat=~~~524996487~~~129&SiteName=hayadan

## 8 תגובות

Length, width, depth, time, and the fifth parallel dimension that corresponds to length, width, depth and is different in time with mutual effects to the dimension we are familiar with. Also, there may be more than one parallel location in a different time sequence.

4th, 5th dimension parallel universes

Mamon, also remind him, gently, that in the meantime they managed to add another number to cell phone lines.

money

It's a theory of who signed above, Sabdarmish. Please respond to him gently, because the theory is questionable.

Is the article translated? (write all the time the author of the article),

If so, where is the source?

Zvi and Roi,

Feynman's words on the subject came up a long time ago - in fact, at the moment when I encountered Yehuda's theory for the first time.

You are welcome to follow the discussion that starts here:

https://www.hayadan.org.il/could-antimatter-be-powering-super-luminous-supernovae-1612072/#comment-28162

You can find a place for the multitude of rebuttals here:

https://www.hayadan.org.il/max-plank-and-first-days-of-quantoms-physics-1111083/#comment-137730

Roy,

When you say that Feynman described the aforementioned theory, the reader may conclude that this is a confirmation of the possibility of its truth. It should be noted that Feynman presents the theory as an example of an incorrect theory and even explains simply why.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SrHzSGn-I8

The 8th minute.

Richard Feynman describes your theory