Kai: I'm a bit confused. At present, the speed of the universe's expansion is increasing. So, how is it right to say that cosmic inflation has "stopped at the right moment"?

Der Marcus,

Sorry that I have confused you. Indeed the Inflation is only the Short period of hughe and rapid Expansion of our cosmic bubble shortly After the Big Bang. After this Periode the Expansion Gose much slower. Therefore it is allowed to Speak from the stop of cosmic Inflation. That means the Moment of change from Explosive (Rapid) to Slow Expansion of Space.

Best regards from

Kai

Der Mr. Gupta,

Nice idea, but I think that is Not possible to cremte matter by only thinking. In my opinion matter is Energy, but thinking is Not Energy.

Best regards

Kai

Hello, Kai!

Thank you for a very interesting essay question focuses on the problem of the "beginning" and "inflation." I speak in the contest a second time not as a physicist but as a lyricist. Lyricists on the planet Earth most of them also do not care of what is the Universe. Of the universe (the Greek Cosmos - «order») people interested in the history of its formation as homo sapiens sapiens. The problem is not only in the "inflation" (from her, we were tired in the economy), but also that, when the "laws of nature"?. I have a question: «What is more logical reasoning and in line with our intuition, experience and thousands of years of tradition:" In the Beginning was the Logos ... "or "In the Beginning was the Big Bang?" I also invite you to read my essay ...Regards, Vladimir

    Kai,

    If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

    Jim

    10 days later

    Dear Prof. Dr. Kai-Olaf Henkel,

    After your clarification in response to Mr. Hoang cao Hai question that, "The time starts together with the existence of gravity." I realized that you had reached relatively the same conclusions that I have. The empirical evidence (not opinion) obtained in the recently concluded 12 year experiment I have conducted substantiates your position stated.

    You are not alone in your assessment!

    Best wishes,

    Manuel Morales

    msm@physicsofdestiny.com

      6 days later

      Dear Kai,

      Nice work and original. I've never bought the classical view of inflation, so welcome anything that questions it. Very interesting. Do you think this suggests It or Bit as more fundamental? I think you're initial point that it is far more likely that classical inflation stops at an unfavourable point rather than when it seems to have is good!

      If given the time, please take a look at my essay.

      Best wishes for the contest,

      Antony

        7 days later

        • [deleted]

        • Post #19

        Dear Kai,

        A new way of looking at cosmology. Well done!

        You can check my essay and rate if you like it.

        Best regards,

        Akinbo

          Dear Vladimir,

          The Universe, that we can observe is the Space bubble, that was created by the Big Bang. That means, the final question is the nature and the begining of the Thing in this our Space bubble expans. Maybe this is a Logos. Today only some spekulatives are possible.

          Der Kai

          Dear Mr.Hoang cao Hai,

          Well, today nobody knows what gravity is. I think it is a Special Interaction of quantas in the Space. For Example, it is possible that two quantas are conected in shape of a fourangle. The area inside this fourangle describes the gravity.

          I am Not sure.

          Kai

          Dear Manuel,

          Thank you for your comment. I am happy, that I stand Not alone.

          Thank you again,

          Kai

          Dear Akinbo,

          Thank you for your comment.

          Best regards

          Kai

          Dear Antony,

          I think the stop of the cosmic Inflation is determined by the Energy Level of seperating gravity. That means the occurence of time in our Space bubble. Therefore the Inflation has to stop at the right Moment. Finally, maybe it is possible to say the it (Level of Energy) createds the Bit. Because for realising the Message of a Bit the existence of Time is nessecary.

          Best regards.

          Kai

          6 days later

          Dear Kai,

          Thanks for the reply. Nice approach that time becomes necessary. Great way to answer the question!

          Best wishes,

          Antony

          I've lost a lot of comments and replies on my thread and many other threads I have commented on over the last few days. This has been a lot of work and I feel like it has been a waste of time and energy. Seems to have happened to others too - if not all.

          I WILL ATTEMPT to revisit all threads to check and re-post something. Your thread was one affected by this.

          I can't remember the full extent of what I said, but I have notes so know that I rated it very highly.

          Hopefully the posts will be able to be retrieved by FQXi.

          Best wishes,

          Antony

          Dear Dr.Kai,

          I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

          Regards and good luck in the contest,

          Sreenath BN.

          http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

            Dear Dr. Kai-Olaf,

            You have clearly explained why 'cosmic inflation theory' is to be accepted rather than the 'inflaton field theory'. The hypothetical particles called 'inflatons' produced as a result of inflation is summarily rejected by you and giving good reasons for that. The problem of the existence of space and time is solved in your model and it is this which is responsible for the stop of inflation approximately shortly after the big bang at the energy level of about 10^15 GeV. Your conclusion then is "Time begins with the end of cosmic inflation and not just after the big bang". Your derivation of the cause for inflation from the second law of thermodynamics is imaginative and hence is based on solid ground. I appreciate the effort you have put behind in writing this essay in spite of the fact that you are busy in practicing your profession. For this great effort of yours, I will give maximum rating to your well thought out essay.

            Please go through my essay also (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827) and express your comments on it in my thread before the dead line of 7th Aug.

            All the best,

            Sreenath

            Kai,

            You asked me above to post my essay to you to read. In case you haven't read and scored it, it's here;

            http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1775

            Do ignore the dense Abstract that some have said first put them off, the blog comments include; "groundbreaking", "clearly significant", "astonishing", "fantastic job", "wonderful", "remarkable!", "deeply impressed", etc.

            I hope you can get to it before the deadline. I'm sure you will like it.

            I'm pleased to confirm I was able to score yours well. Very well done.

            Very best wishes

            Peter

            Kai,

            Your essay contains an original thought and I have rated it accordingly.

            On page 4 you wrote: "time is a form of energy". That is new to me, I have never heard that before. There are several known substantival approaches to space, but time is usually not viewed as a substance.

            Other points in your theory are problematic. Here are some issues:

            1) On page 2 you write that "...all forces have fused to primal energy". But 'force' and 'energy' are different concepts. The unit of force is the Newton, in SI units you get [N] = [kg.m.s-2]. The unit of energy is the Joule, and in SI units you get [J] = [kg.m2.s-2]. You have to elaborate on how you get from Newtons to Joules during the fusion process.

            2) From your first formula and you third formula it follows that gravity = mass. Now suppose we take two objects of 1 kg; we then let one of them drop 100 meters above the surface of the earth, the other 100 meters above the surface of the moon. Your theory then says that in both cases gravity is the same (namely, 1 kg), while other theories of gravity (Newton's, Einstein's) say that gravity is not the same in these cases. Could you comment on that?

            3) The SI unit of mass is kg. From your third formula, we get [kg] = [m3.s-1]. I find that hard to believe. Can you elaborate?

            Best regards,

            Marcoen

            Dear Kai

            For some reason the link I posted was dead. You may have found it, or try this.

            The Intelligent Bit

            You may have rated it but if you liked it and haven't; a high one before the deadline would be nice, or if it's a low one then after the deadline is better! The astronomy paper I referred to is here; Cyclic Galaxy and Cosmology Paper

            Do give me your thoughts.

            Best regards

            Peter