WMAP Update

Wondrous Kea has suggested comparing predictions of $\Omega_b$ and $\Omega_m$ with the latest WMAP results. Data comes from Spergel et al., Seven-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP1) Observations

Our 4-dimensional spherical Space has a finite volume given by:

V = 2 $\pi$^2 R^3

Where R is radius, with dimensions of length. The very gravity which causes Space/Time to be curved would cause the sphere to collapse, unless it were already expanding. We can express the expanding Universe simply:

R = ct

Again R has dimensions of length and c has dimensions of distance/time. For an expanding Universe, it is axiomatic that R is some multiple of t.

The Universe can't expand at the same rate c forever, for gravity slows it down. We do some math and get:

GM = tc^3

Where GM combines mass of the Universe with its gravitational constant.

Together these simple expressions form a solution to the Einstein-Friedmann equations with stable density:

$\rho$f = (6 $\pi$ G t^2)^{-1}

Here we encounter an interesting difference. If an initial mass M is distributed among this spherical volume V, we get an initial density $\rho$i of:

$\rho$i = M/V where M = (tc^3)/G

$\rho$i = (2 $\pi$G t^2)^{-1}

The difference is made up by the matter we are made of. When the Universe is "underweight," quantum mechanics predicts that matter will appear via pair production. The amount of this matter is the difference between $\rho$i and $\rho$f, or 4.507034%.

Prediction: 4.507034%

$\Omega_b$ 4.49 ± 0.28 (Prediction correct within 0.6 standard deviations)

$\Omega_m$ is the amount of "dark " mass. By Theory, this could be made up of microscopic singularities, Black Holes formed shortly after the Big Bang. We can create models to predict how much this would be:

Prediction: 23.87%

$\Omega_m$ 22.2 ± 2.6 (Prediction correct within 0.6 standard deviations)

This also predicts a changing speed of light, which can be seen in Type Ia supernova redshifts and laser ranging of the Moon. Why does this work not get more attention? New ideas, especially ideas ahead of their time, take time to be accepted. The inefficient neural net of humanity contains many old nodes that refuse to accept change. Thanks to talks and this blog, Theory is now known worldwide. The genie has escaped the bottle!

Five Year Mission

After a very long wait, Year 5 results from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe have been released. We can test Theory's predictions with the data:

$\Omega$b is the proportion of baryonic matter-the protons, neutrons and electrons that humans are made of.

$\Omega$b = 4.6 +/- 0.2% (Prediction = 4.507034%)

$\Omega$m is the proportion of other mass, the "dark" mass that surrounds the galaxies in haloes and sheets between them.

$\Omega$m = 23.3 +/- 1.3% (Prediction = 23.87%)

The remainder was once called "dark energy," but bloggers like Steinn now say "No Clue." Hint: Look at the voids between sheets of galaxies. The vast majority of the Universe is contained within those voids, and they are far from empty.

Remainder = 72.1 +/- 1.5% (Prediction = 71.62%)

The 4.507034% prediction was published (after a very long wait) in the very short paper of 2004. This slide was prepared for the London conference a year ago. As we can see, predictions match the data for all three parameters within less than half a standard deviation. There are no error bars for a prediction, for mathematics allows us to calculate as many decimal places as we like. These results, and their close fit with the predictions, show why a better Theory of the Universe is slowly spreading.

Eye in London Pt. 2

(The good news is that the abstract was accepted and put on the schedule as a talk, despite pressure from communists who don't even do research. There will be another day.)
Before formation of matter, initial density for a given mass M is just M/V. That number is less than this number, and the difference is 4.507034% precisely what the WMAP spacecraft has measured. Location of the first acoustic peak shows that density (Omega) = 1 as predicted. You can also model proportions of the Universe’s other components. The CMB provides an indication of change in c. The average temperature is the same over large areas. Even at this time of recombination 300,000 years after the Big Bang, c was much faster.

We can search the CMB for signatures of inflation. (Thank you Dr. Cline for the graph.) The old paradigm says that density fluctuations should be the same at all scales. Inflation’s predicted power spectrum is ruled out by both COBE and WMAP. Here is the prediction of Unified Space/Time. When predictions fit the data this closely, perhaps there is something to the theory. CMB data was initially interpreted to indicate that the universe is flat, like the Earth. When changing c is a factor, it is curved with radius R = ct as predicted.