Top page (correct Bohr model including helium. )

Gravitational wave is doubtful.

Big Bang theory is wrong.

*(Fig.1) Faster-than-light universe expansion = inflation is real ? or "illusion" ?*

The recent news say the proof of cosmic inflation and gravitational waves have been found , as shown in various webnews ( this, this, this, this ).

But unfortunately, it is **impossible** to conclude that "**fantasy**" inflation actually happened ONLY from this indirect observation.

"Inflation" means our universe expanded much faster-than-light just after ( or before ) Big Bang.

And it is quite **unnatural** that very faint polarization (= B-mode, only **0.4 μK** ! ) about **13.7** billion years ago, remains **intact** as it is until now.

*(Fig.2) "Inflaton" caused faster-than-inflation !? What is "Inflaton" !?*

As shown on this page,
during very short time of 10^{-34} seconds just after Big Bang, very tiny space like a virus expanded to that as large as "galaxy".

So this inflation speed reached more than **10 ^{22}** times the speed of light !

They try to explain this

Of course, this inflaton is only speculative concept, which cannot be detected at all.

Bloggers and web (TV) news sites just **blindly** believe (← NOT science but "religion" ) this "**fantasy**" inflation.

This tendency is very **harmful** for "gullible" ordinary people.

Physicsworld is better than other webnews sites, because some **opposing** opinions are seen.

*(Fig.3) Cosmic microwave background (= CMB ) is uniform among faster-than-light area !?*

This "**ad-hoc**" inflation theory was introduced to explain horizon problem in uniform cosmic microwave background (= CMB ).

According to the current Big Bang (= expanding universe ) theory, our universe is **only** 13.7 billion years old.

Considering the maximum light speed "c", the light (= microwave ) **cannot** go beyond 13.7 billion light-years area ( see also this site ).

But this CMB (= microwave ) from the **opposite** sides (= 13.7 × 2 = 27.4 billion ) is also **uniform**, so some faster-than-light **interaction** is indispensable for this homogeneity (= horizon problem ), they insist.

As you notice, if we **reject** the ad-hoc expanding universe, the **limit** age of 13.7 billion can be **removed**, so faster-than-light relation does **NOT** need to be used.

As shown on this page, we can naturally explain uniform CMB using **ether**-like matter and **tired**-light theory.

*(Fig.4) Ether was denied → virtual particles, dark matter, energy, Higgs.. = ether ??*

Though they rejected "ether", relativistic quantum field theories need **infinite** virtual particles, dark matter, dark energy and Higgs **filling** all the vacuum.

This idea is completely **inconsistent** with special relativity, which denied "ether".

In fact, the kinds of "ether" have been **increased** much more in relativisitic quantum field theory !

And as shown on this page, special realtivity includes **fatal** paradoxes (= Ehrenfest, trouton-noble, right-angle lever.. )

If we accept **one** kind of "ether"-like matter from the beginning, we can explain **uniform** cosmic microwave background (= CMB ) and dark matter , **without** artificially increasing the **kinds** of ether.

And as I said many times, if various academic organizations are **hiding** fatal paradoxes of relativity from students, it is clearly one of **frauds**, vicious crimes.

*(Fig.5) Inflation = "fantasy" multiverse and 10 dimensional string theory.*

If faster-than-light expansion of our univserse is accepted, we need to believe "fantasy" **multiverse** (= many-worlds ) and **10**-dimensional string theory.

But as most people feel, these multiverse and extradimensions are completely **out of** touch with reality.

So "inflation" itself **cannot** be accepted at all.

As shown in this news and this news, they argue, when the universe inflated **faster** than the speed of light, the expansion ripped the vacuum of spacetime into separate pieces, or **multiple** universes.

Can you **really** believe this **ad-hoc** theory ( = "**fantasy**" ) ? Probably NOT.

*(Fig.6) Our universe ( and "inflaton" ) can move faster-than-light through outer space !? *

According to this site and this site, even if the **spacetime** itself moves faster than light, there is **no** violation of special relativity.

( Only if some information propagates faster-than-light, it's violation, they insist. )

But this logic is very **artificial** and **too good** to be true.

If this inflation is true, our universe ( and "inflaton" particles ) **can** move faster-than-light with respect to **outer** space **around** the universe.

And what is the **boundary** between our universe and outer space **made** of ?

Why this boudary **doesn't** let anything through, even when it is stretched ? This is strange.

*(Fig.7) The earth is moving with respect to CMB (= ether !? ) at 400 km/s !*

Of course, in **relativistic** world, the concept of Newton's **absolute** space (= **ether** ) is inhibited.

But observation of CMB indicates the earth is actually **moving** through CMB at the velocity of 400 km/s, as shown on this site, this site and this site.

This speed is faster than orbital speed (= 30 km/s ) of the earth around the sun.

CMB is uniform microwave background **filling** all over the universe.

This anisotropy in CMB spectrum clearly shows CMB is "**ether**" like matter.

And this result is completely consistent with "earth ether" **moving** with the earth, as shown in Michelson-Morley experiment.

( **Inside** this earth ether, light speed is constant "c". )

*(Fig.8) Very faint B-mode polarization is really left as it is, during 13.7 billion years !? *

As most people feel, it is **impossible** that very **faint** ( CMB ) light polarization is **left as it is**, during as long as **13.7** billion years.

This is clearly **fatal** defect in this Big Bang theory.

But various bloggers, webnews sites and even top journals ( Nature, Science ) do **NOT** try to refer to this fatal defect. This is very strange.

So at this moment, these things are **NOT** science, but just some "religion".

As you see the disastrous fact that 10-dimensional string theory is **dominant** in the present physics, the **basis** of physics is completely **distorted**, because of **wrong** assumtions (= many-worlds, relativity ).

*(Fig.9) Question: What caused B-mode ? → 1. inflation, 2. inflation, 3. inflation ... !?*

As you see various webnews sites, they **too easily** jump to the conclusion that the curling pattern of light polarization proves the inflation in early universe.

But the observed CMB IS the **current** ( NOT early universe ! ) microwave.

The most serious problem is that even academic organizations do **NOT** try to refer to **other** more probable reasons such as various **radiation** from infinite stars and space matters during extremely **long** period.

These problematic attitudes are very similar to those **blindly** believing spin, even though weak spin is **inconsistent** with experimental results.

It's like a **failure** of some detective stories, in which police is chasing **ONLY one** suspect, from the beginning.

*(Fig.10) The state (= polarization ) of CMB is the same as that of early universe !? Really ?*

The universe began with Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago.

Faster-than-light **inflation** followed immediately, which produced high-amplitude gravitational wave, they insist.

According to this site and this site,
about **400000** years after Big Bang, the universe expanded and **cooled** enough for protons and electrons to form **neutral** hydrogen, opening up a path for light to travel freely.

That first light **persists** today as the CMB, which has been **stretched** to microwave wavelength.

At that time (= 400000 years after Big Bang ), the temperature is as high as **3000 K**, which means very **fast** fluctuation of lights.

So it is natural that this very fast fluctation at 3000 K **cancelled** out faint polarization information at that time.

*(Fig.11) Electron remains as it is. Why ONLY photon particle becomes "Big photon" ??*

The present Big Bang theory is based on the idea that cosmological redshift is due to the elongation of "**photon**" by the universe expansion.

This means only point-like photon becomes much bigger (= **Big photon** ) ?

Though this big particle have **NOT** been observed.

Of course, if **all** particles included in the universe expanded in the same way, we could **NOT** notice the universe is expanding.

As you know, the quantum mechanics insists **all** particles such as electrons and protons have **wave**-like properties (= de Broglie wave ).

Then why other particles such as electrons, protons, various atoms and molecules did **NOT** expand, though **photon** particle did. (= Photon is **NOT** a particle ?? )

So the present **ad-hoc** Big Bang theory includes **self-contradiction** from the beginning.

*(Fig.12) CMB lights are scatterd (= last scattering ) about 400000 years after Big Bang ?*

As shown on this site and this site, the lights experienced **last scattering** about 400000 years after Big Bang.

This last scattering was basically ( classical ) Thomson scattering, which generated E-mode polarization.

If there are some gravitaional waves generated at inflation, this polarization is distorted, to be B-mode.

But this explanation relies on **too idealistic** assumtions .

It is natural that the spase at that time had **already** contained **infinite** kinds of polarization patterns.

So B-mode pattern (= curl ) can be caused by combination of natural ( **NOT** gravity wave ) scattering.

*(Fig.13) CMB polarization pattern in early universe are really preserved ?*

But as you see the cosmic rays in the current universe, **almost all** atoms are **ionized** into protons and electrons flying at light speed.

So they insist neutral atoms experienced reionization (= about 200 million years after Big Bang ), in which some high energy source ionized all atoms.

Do you think this Big Bang theory is **too good** to be true ?

If there were so high energy sources, it is **inconsistent** with the formation of neutral atoms before that, when CMB is emitted.

And it is **impossible** that faint CMB polarization **keeps** as it is, even in these **strict** circumstances, which is filled with high energy sources.

*(Fig.14) CMB polarization can survive for as long as 13.7 billion years ? ← Impossible !*

As a result, from **realistic** (= scientific ) viewpoints, it is completely **impossible** that very faint CMB polarisation can keep its information "**intact**" for as long as 13.7 billion years.

So the current cosmic microwave background can **NOT** prove the existence of "fantasy" inflation at all.

*(Fig.15) Faster-than-light inflation, 10-dimensional string theory .. ← Physics ??*

So, believing this inflation is as unrealistic as believing **10-dimensional** string theory.

The physics was completely **distorted** in the wrong direction in 1920s.

The current physicists are **too familiar** with imaginary ideas.

This is **disastrous** for development of science.

*(Fig.16) Equivalence principle → Gravitational waves are cancelled out !?*

It is said that the B-mode polarization and pulsar indirectly proved the existence of **gravitational waves**.

But in fact, this gravitational waves are completely "**fake**" waves.

Tensors describing gravitaional waves are **NOT** true tensors (= pseudotensor ).

There are **two fatal defects** in this gravitational pseudotensors.

One is, that the form of this pseudotensors are **NOT** unique.

So, we can artificially choose some **convenient** pseudotensor for experimental results.

Two is, that this energy-momentum pseudotensors completely **vanish** in some coordinate, which **contradicts** relativity.

On this site p.2 and this site p.5,

-----------------------------------------------

The disadvantage of pseudotensor t^{αβ} is that it is **NOT** unique.

Various forms have been proposed for t^{αβ}, each being based on certain specific consideration ....

There are **many** possible stress-energy tensors and pseudotensors.

----------------------------------------------

On this site (p.2) and this site (p.2-3).

------------------------------------------------

Gravitaional waves, pseudotendors globally **vanish** in some coodinates.

In consequence, they give in these coordinates "NO gravitational energy and energy flux".

It is important that the quantities t^{ik} do **NOT** constitute a tensor. They depend on the choice of coordinates.
There are **many** suggestions for the pseudo-tensor

-------------------------------------------------

*(Fig.17) "21000" light-years away ! → Can you believe this result ??*

They insist gravitational waves were **indirectly** proved by observing the orbital period change of pulsar 1913+16.

General relativity predicts this orbital period decreases by **76.5 microseconds** per year. ( ← very small ! )

The problem is that this neutron star is as long as **21000** light-years away from the earth, as shown on this site.

It is much more **impossible** that we can predict accurately **all** influences caused by **unknown** things such as dark matter, quantum fluctuations included in **21000** light-years path !

So this test of general relativity is very **doubtful**.

It is natural these very slight change is due to some space **matter**'s oscillation along the **extremely long** way.

*(Fig.18) B-mode polarization is too weak (= 0.4 microK ) with respect to CMB (= 3K ). *

As shown on this site, B-model polarization is very weak (= about **0.4 × 10 ^{-6}** Kelvin ! ).

So it is extremely

As shown on this site, this site, this site, other polarization such as E-mode is about 100 μK.

So from the realistic viewpoint, B-mode curling polarization represents **only** faint lights emitted from stars or something ( NOT early universe ).

This means primordial gravitational waves are **unnecessary**.

*(Fig.19) E-mode polarization ?*

As shown on this site and this site, "E-mode" polarization is parallel or perpendicular to wave vector k.

And B-mode polarization is oriented at ±45^{o} to vector k.

The important point is that the cosmic microwave background is a **collective** lights of **various** wavelength and polarization ( **NOT** single photon ).

So it is quite **natural** that some slight porization asymmetry is seen inside unpolarized lights

*(Fig.20) B-mode polarization ?*

On this site,

------------------------

Take, for example, the radiation incident onto the electron from the left to be more intense than the radiation incident from the right, with average intensities ( of scatterd lights ) above and below (that's a dipole); it then suffices to **sum up all** contributions to see that **no net** polarization survives.

-------------------------

So the current CMB theory is based on average unpolarized lights in the early universe.

This condition is too special and **too idealistic**.

The problem is the wave vector k is also vague concept.

They do **Fourier expansion** on polarization distribution.

So this wave vector is **arbitrary**, which means various effects **other than** gravitational waves **can** explain B-mode.

*(Fig.21) Light waves.*

In this section, we represent polarization of E and B mode using Stokes parameters ( see this site, this site ).

In Fig.21, some electromagnetic wave is propagating in the (-)z direction.

So the polarization (= electric field ) must be in the x-y plane.

*(Eq.1) *

We could therefore break down the electric field into x and y components, as shown in Eq.1

"a_{1}" and "a_{2}" are light **amplitude** in x and y directions, respectively.

*(Eq.2) *

Here we consider simple linear ( not elliptical ) polarization.

So the phase difference (= δ ) between x and y directions are zero, as shown in Eq.2.

Here we define the following **Stokes** parameters,

*(Eq.3) *

where δ = 0.

And we can perform Fourier transformation on each parameter.

( So this wavevector is very "**vague**" and "arbitrary" mathematical concepts. )

*(Eq.4) *

We determine the parameters with respect to **arbitrary** wavevector k.

The parameters of Q and U in Eq.3 **change** under the rotation in x-y plane.

So we need to think about the rotated coodinate in which some "k" vector turns in new x' direction.

( The angle between this k vector and the original x axis is "φ" )

In this coodinate, a_{1} and a_{2} transform like

*(Eq.5) *

Using Eq.5 and Eq.3, new Q parameter in this x'-y' plane becomes

*(Eq.6) *

where we use

*(Eq.7) *

And new U parameter in x'-y' plane becomes

*(Eq.8) *

These new Q' and U' in x'-y' plane ( in which **arbitrary** k vector is in x' direction ) are called "**E-mode**" and "**B-mode**", respectively.

*(Eq.9) *

When we consider the case in which the angle φ = 0.

( So, k wave vector is in x direction from the beginning ).

Substituting φ=0 into Eq.9,

*(Eq.10) *

When E-mode is NOT zero, and B-mode is zero,

*(Eq.11) *

When B-mode is zero, either of a_{1} or a_{2} becomes zero.

*(Eq.12) E-mode polarization.*

As shown in Eq.12, in E-mode, polarization is parallel ot perpendicular to x axis (= k vector ).

*(Eq.13) B-mode.*

When only E-mode is zero, absolute value of a_{1} and a_{2} become the same.

*(Eq.14) B-mode polarization.*

As shown in Eq.14, **B-mode** polarization is oriented at **±45 ^{o}** to x axis (= k vector ).

When we consider all direction of k vector, E and B mode polarizations become

*(Eq.15) E-mode polarization.*

*(Eq.16) B-mode polarization.*

*(Eq.17) Thomson scattering = classical mechanics.*

According to the inflation theory, the **current** CMB polarization is the result of the last scattering about 13.7 billion years ago.

( This precondition is **impossible** from the realistic viewpoint. ).

As shown on this site and this site, when low-amplitude (= cold ) light comes from upper, and high-amplitude (= hot ) light comes from the left.

The net amplitude of light scattered ( by shaking electron ) becomes vertically polarized, as shown in Eq.17.

Basically, they don't think about various polarization patterns and compilicated scattering in this infation theory.
So this assumption is **too idealistic** and **too simple**.

*(Eq.18) *

Here we calculate Stokes parameter U and P of total scatterd lights from all directions.

In Eq.18, some incident light comes toward the electron at the origin in "-n" direction.

*(Eq.19) *

ε_{1} and ε_{2} are unit vectors which are perpendicular to "n" vector.

So this insident light is polarized in these directions.

ε_{1} vector is in the same plane including both "n" and z axis.

And ε_{2} is perpendicular to this ε_{1} vector.

*(Eq.20) *

ε_{2} vector can be gotten by rotating x unit vector by φ+π/2 on x-y plane.

To get ε_{1}, we first rotate x unit vector by -θ in x-z plane.

And then we rotate it by φ in x-y plane.

*(Eq.21) *

This light is supposed to be scatterd by the electron at the origin toward z direction (= observer ).

So the polarization (= ε_{out} ) of scatterd light is in x-y plane.

This amplitude is given by inner product of "in" and "out" polarization.

Parameter Q is related to a square of amplitude.

*(Eq.22) *

Here, we suppose total intensity of incident light is "S".

And each intensity in ε_{1} and ε_{2} direction is supposed to be 1/2S.

*(Eq.23) *

Using "Q" of Eq.3 and summing all components of this incident light, we obtain parameter "Q" of the scatterd light, as shown in Eq.23.

*(Eq.3) *

In the same way, parameter "U" of the scatterd light becomes

*(Eq.24) *

From Eq.20 and Eq.21, we have

*(Eq.25) *

Substituting Eq.25 into Eq.23 and Eq.24, we have

*(Eq.26) *

where we use

*(Eq.27) *

We add up incident lights from all directions.

So integrating Eq.26 over entire spherical surface,

*(Eq.28) *

where

*(Eq.29) *

Integrating Eq.28 over the surface, you find all these parameters become **zero**, because lights from different directions **cancel** each other out.

( This assumption is **too simple** ! )

*(Fig.22) Gravitaional waves stretch ( and contract ) space itself ?*

Next we think about the case, in which some gravitational waves propagate in z direction.

This wave is expanding ( or contracting ) space itself in x-y plane.

The large "X" and "Y" is in x-y plane, and they are oriented at ±45 degree with respect to x axis.

*(Fig.23) In x-y plane.*

Like the previous section, incident light comes towards the origin in "-n" direction.

Here we suppose, this **gravitational waves** extend the space in X direction, and contract it in Y direction, as follows,

*(Eq.30) *

From Fig.23, we have

*(Eq.31) *

And we suppose one light wavelength (= λ_{0} ) is given by

*(Eq.32) *

This light wavelength is changed by space **distortion** by gravitational waves.

Substituting Eq.30 into Eq.32, we have

*(Eq.33) *

Supposing h_{X} is very small value, we neglect second-order effect of h_{X} in Eq.33.

From Eq.33, the light frequenccy (= ν ) becomes

*(Eq.34) *

Substituting Eq.31 into Eq.34

*(Eq.35) *

where Eq.32 is used.

The change of light frequency means the change of temperature (= T ), as follows.

*(Eq.36) *

According to Stefen-Boltzmann law, the radiated energy (= light **intensity** "S" ) is proportional to the fourth power of temperature T.

*(Eq.37) *

Substituting Eq.36 into Eq.37, we have

*(Eq.38) *

Substituting x, y components of Eq.19 into S' of Eq.38,

*(Eq.19) *

We have

*(Eq.39) *

Her we use the following results of the previous section.

*(Eq.28) *

where

*(Eq.29) *

Substituting Eq.39 and Eq.29 into Eq.28,

*(Eq.40) *

So, parameter Q becomes zero.

On the other hand, U becomes

*(Eq.42) *

and

As a result,

*(Eq.45) *

From Eq.9, we find B-mode polarization is NOT zero by gravitational waves.

But as I said, it is **impossible** that faint CMB polarization 13.7 billion years ago remains as it is.

*(Fig.24) Equivalence principle → Gravtational waves are cancelled out !?*

On this page, we derive the following relation of Einstein energy momentum tensor (= T ),

*(Eq.46) *

The important point is that covariant derivative of general relativity is completely **different** from ordinary derivative ( see this site and this site. )

*(Eq.47) *

In usual energy-momentum tesnor, the following conservation law is satisfied.

*(Eq.48) *

But the covariant derivative (= ∇ ) of general relativity is very complicated,

*(Eq.49) *

As a result,

*(Eq.50) *

where Christoffel symbol (= Γ ) is

*(Eq.51) *

where

*(Eq.52) *

Here we use the following relation

*(Eq.53) *

On this page, we obtain

*(Eq.54) *

Using Eq.54 in Eq.53, and comparing it with Eq.51,

*(Eq.55) *

Using Eq.55 in Eq.50,

*(Eq.56) *

As you see Eq.56, only the first term satisfies energy conservation law of tesnors.

So the energy and momentum of Einstein tensor are **NOT** conserved.

*(Eq.57) *

As you see one example of pseudotensor of gravitational waves in Eq.57, this pseudotensor **vanish** in some coordinate such as locally inertial frame.

(= first order derivative with respect to metric tensor "g". )

So the interpretation of pulsar's decreased period by gravitational waves is **meaningless**.

*(Eq.58) *

In most textbooks, the distrubution of CMB temperature is expanded using spherical harmonics, as shown in Eq.58.

*(Eq.59) *

Eq.59 is the coefficient representing temperature (= light intensity ).

2014/3/25 updated. Feel free to link to this site.