Janus Cosmological Model

Untitled Document

Janus Cosmological Model

December 16, 2014 January 7, 2015 January 10, 2014 February 26, 2015 March 6, 2015

****April 24, 2015: Fourth goal scored

I stopped updating my website a year ago, almost to the day. There is a very simple reason. I began a battle to publish scientific work.

For several days now, "new ideas have been making waves."

There are essentially two:

• Canadian researchers have recently launched a "revolutionary," "shocking" idea that is making international headlines.

Michel de Pracontal comments on this research in Mediapart, dated December 13, 2014:

We learn that at the Big Bang, not one universe but two were created, and time in this second universe flows backward.

Internet messages show that this idea excites people. Yet it is not new. The first person to publish an article on this topic was Andrei Sakharov, in 1967.

A.D. Sakharov, ZhETF Pis’ma 5: 32; JETP Lett. 5: 24 (1967)

A.D. Sakharov, ZhETF Pis’ma 76: 1172 (1979); JETP 49: 594 (1979)

A.D. Sakharov (1980).

Cosmological Model of the Universe with a Time Vector Inversion

. ZhETF (Tr. JETP 52, 349-351) (79): 689–693

Personally, I discovered this work only in 1982, with great surprise, in a book entirely in French, published by Editions Anthropos, titled "A.D. Sakharov, Scientific Works." The publishing house has since disappeared. You might find this book in a library. In fact, it was a translation of the English edition published by the Library of Congress:

The second introduction of such a startling idea corresponds to the two publications below, from 1977:

J.P. Petit:

"Enantiomorphic Universes with Opposite Proper Times"

, CRAS of May 8, 1977, vol. 285, pp. 1217-1221

J.P. Petit: "Universes Interacting with Their Image in the Mirror of Time"

, CRAS of June 6, 1977, vol. 284, series A, pp. 1413-1416

I had mentioned two ideas. The second refers to the concept of negative mass. This work has just been published, on November 14, 2014, in a highly prestigious journal: Physical Review D. Here is the reference.

Negative mass bubbles in de Sitter space-time

. Saoussen Mbarek, M. B. Paranjape.

Journal reference: Phys. Rev. D 90, 101502(R), 2014

Nov. 14

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.101502

Report number: UdeM-GPP-TH-14-235

The articles, if you attempt to download them from the journal's website, are paywalled (around twenty dollars). But there is a preprint online site, arXiv. If you click on this link, you will immediately have access to the article:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.1457

Again, this article has attracted numerous comments on various blogs around the world. For example:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/negative-mass-might-not-defy-einstein

In September, two articles appeared in two high-level journals, Astrophysics and Space Science and Modern Physics Letters A:

J.P. Petit and G. D’Agostini:

Negative mass hypothesis and the nature of dark energy.

Astrophysics and Space Science (2014) 354: 611-615, September 20, 2014, DOI 10.1007/s10509-014-2106-5 Abstract:

The observed acceleration of the universe raises a puzzling question. What is the nature of a dark energy that would cause this phenomenon? We recall the arguments against the existence of negative matter based on General Relativity. These arguments vanish if the universe is considered as a manifold M4 associated with two coupled metrics, solutions of a coupled field equation system. We build a non-steady solution where the positive species accelerates while the negative one decelerates. Thus, dark energy is replaced by (dominant) negative matter action.

J.P. Petit and G. D’Agostini:

Cosmological bimetric model with interacting positive and negative masses and two different speeds of light in agreement with the observed acceleration of the Universe.

Modern Physics Letters A. Modern Physics Letters A Vol. 29, No. 34 (October 24, 2014) 1450182 (15 pages) DOI: 10.1142/S021773231450182X Abstract:

An extension of a previously published model of a bimetric universe is presented, where the speeds of light associated with positive and negative mass species are different. As earlier presented, the asymmetry of the model explains the acceleration of the positive species, while the negative one slows down. Asymmetry affects scale factors linked to lengths, times, and speeds of light, so that if spacecraft mass inversion could be achieved, interstellar travel could become non-impossible, at a velocity less than the speed of light corresponding to the negative sector, possibly much higher than that of the positive sector.

______________________________________________________ T | ranslation:

First paper: J.P. Petit and Gilles d'Agostini: Bimetric cosmological model with interaction between positive and negative masses, associated with two different speeds of light. Model consistent with the observation of cosmic acceleration.

Abstract:

The fact that we have observed a phenomenon of cosmic acceleration remains a puzzling question (this discovery was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2011). What could be the nature of this "dark energy" supposed to be the driver of this acceleration? We begin by recalling the arguments, derived from General Relativity, which oppose the existence of negative masses in the universe. These arguments disappear if we consider the universe as a four-dimensional manifold (M4) equipped with two metrics, solutions of a coupled system of field equations. We construct an exact, non-stationary solution of this system, showing that positive-mass species (us) accelerate while negative-mass species decelerate. Thus, the "dark energy" effect is replaced by the action (dominant) of negative mass.

______________________________________________________ S | econd paper: J.P. Petit and Gilles d'Agostini:

The negative mass hypothesis and the nature of dark energy.

Astrophysics and Space Science, September 20, 2014.

Abstract:

This is an extension of the previous paper, referring to a bimetric description of the universe, but where different speeds of light are associated with positive and negative mass species. As presented earlier, this model explains the observed acceleration of positive masses. We find its corollary: negative-mass entities decelerate. This asymmetry affects not only the speed of light limits, but also scale factors (distances) and the flow of time. This suggests a possible technology where interstellar travel could be envisaged by inverting the mass of a vehicle, allowing it to move, "under this aspect," at a subluminal speed higher than the speed of light in the negative sector, possibly much higher than that in the positive sector.

It is not possible for me, as was the case with the article published in Physical Review D, to direct the reader toward a file on the arXiv site. Until 2014, I had been able to upload several articles: (http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.0067, http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.1477, http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.1362, http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.1423). For a reason I do not understand, I have not been able to post a single preprint on this site since the beginning of 2014. When I activate my account and download the PDF file, the announcement of online posting appears within hours. Twenty-four hours later, the article does not appear, but is put "on hold" (suspended). The reason given is "that one or more moderators are reviewing the document and will decide later whether to publish it." For information, to date (December 15, 2014), I have seventeen preprints on hold on arXiv, the earliest attempts to post dating back over eight months, a delay that seems excessive for a moderator to make a decision. It should be recalled that the arXiv site does not include the scientific expertise of the submitted documents. Over 700,000 documents are currently downloadable on this site. It is a scientific communication tool of which I am thus deprived, for inexplicable reasons. The questions addressed to the "anonymous moderators" remain unanswered. arXiv is, in principle, the structure that allows a researcher to post an article before it is accepted or rejected by a journal, thus "securing priority," while also disclosing the content of their work. With seventeen articles "on hold," I find myself in the opposite position.

I had posted, as soon as the phenomenon became apparent, a request addressed to astrophysicists (and/or cosmologists) and theoretical physicists, asking to be "endorsed" (or "sponsored") on this arXiv site. But this request remained unanswered. It remains valid and should target the following two specialties:

• Astro-ph (Astrophysics)

• Gr-Qc (General Relativity)

Retired, I also asked to be "hosted as an unpaid collaborator" by an astrophysics laboratory or observatory. Same failure. It is a disadvantage to approach journals without being able to provide an email address:

instead of a laboratory email address.

Let us set this aside for now. There is another site enabling exchanges between researchers. It is the site:

https://www.researchgate.net

There, I was able to be sponsored. My articles can therefore be accessed by members of the scientific community (and non-members). Here are the relevant links.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263045885_Negative_mass_hypothesis_in_cosmology_and_the_nature_of_dark_energy

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269464559_Cosmological_bimetric_model_with_interacting_positive_and_negative_masses_and_two_different_speeds_of_light_in_agreement_with_the_observed_acceleration_of_the_Universe

But you can also simply download the PDFs of the articles directly from my own website, using the links:

Negative mass hypothesis and the nature of dark energy ** Cosmological bimetric model with interacting positive and negative masses and two different speeds of light in agreement with the observed acceleration of the Universe.**

These articles represent the first and only coherent modeling of this observed cosmic acceleration phenomenon, which has been known for ten years and earned the Nobel Prize in 2011 for Saul Perlmutter, Adam Riess, and Brian Schmidt.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accélération_de_l'expansion_de_l'Univers

For newcomers, a few explanatory words.

Prior to this major discovery, the cosmological model directly derived from the work of the Russian physicist Friedman, which could be summarized in a very simple differential equation giving the law R(t) for the variation of the "characteristic dimension" of the cosmos as a function of time t, starting from a time t = 0 supposedly referring to an instant called the Big Bang.

R² R" + a² = 0

From this equation, we immediately draw a conclusion:

R" < 0

The second derivative of the function R(t) is fundamentally negative. This cosmos can only decelerate. The three researchers cited based their deductions on a very meticulous study of the expansion velocities of very luminous objects, allowing measurements at very great distances: supernovae. Their conclusion can be summarized in a single inequality:

R" > 0

The cosmos is not slowing down; it is accelerating! ... which is in complete contradiction with the Friedman model, even enriched with "cold dark matter."

To understand the dynamics of the Friedman models, refer to page 65 of my comic book Big Bang.

To explain this cosmic acceleration, rather than resorting to terms like "dark energy" or "quintessence," I introduced negative mass into the cosmological model, which implies a complete paradigm shift, quite difficult to grasp, even for scientists.

First, why was it so problematic to imagine that the cosmos could contain particles with negative mass? The question was considered by cosmologist H. Bondi in 1957. One must understand this: until the publication of our article in September 2014, the cosmos was represented by a four-dimensional "manifold," equipped with a single metric obeying Einstein's equation:

Before trying to convey this concept to the reader, let us go directly to Bondi's result. When we "inject" positive masses into Einstein's equation, it produces (in what is called its "Newtonian approximation") an interaction law. Know this:

Newton's law is contained within Einstein's equation

Bondi then attempts to "inject" both positive and negative masses into Einstein's equation. In his "Newtonian approximation," the equation "responds" by providing the interaction laws below:

• Positive-mass particles attract everything, meaning both their counterparts and negative-mass particles.

• Negative-mass particles repel everything, meaning both their counterparts and positive-mass particles.

Very, very problematic. Indeed, place two particles with opposite masses together. The negative-mass particle will immediately repel the positive-mass particle, which will flee. But since it attracts the negative-mass particle, the latter immediately chases after it, and the pair becomes caught in a uniform acceleration motion. This phenomenon has been called "runaway." Where does the energy associated with this uniform acceleration motion come from? From nowhere. The kinetic energy 1/2 m V² is conserved, since one of the two masses is ... negative.

Unbearable...

This analysis by Bondi had the effect of prohibiting the use of negative masses for fifty-seven years. There were indeed my articles from 1994 and 1995 (in Nuevo Cimento and Astrophysics and Space Science), but they passed completely unnoticed, remained unheard of, and received "no citations."

Let us set aside any discussion about the priority of such or such idea (including that of two universe branches with antiparallel time arrows) and, even if it means resetting the clock, focus on these September 2014 articles. How can we introduce negative masses into the cosmological model?

With the Einsteinian model, this is simply impossible. In the article published by Physical Review D, the authors ... attempt to put two feet in one shoe. Their ambition remains modest and is limited to trying to describe the universe's configuration in a very primitive stage, such as revealed by the COBE satellite, which reports only fluctuations of one ten-thousandth. Everyone knows the following image, which represents the "cosmic face" in its most primitive stage.

The primitive universe, with contrast accentuated by a factor of ten thousand

This image is misleading and shows strong inhomogeneities. In fact, these are obtained using "false colors" by multiplying the contrast by a factor of ten thousand. In reality, the primitive cosmos is extremely homogeneous, to within one ten-thousandth, and a more realistic portrait would be:

The primitive universe, without this artificial accentuation of density contrast.

This paper published in November in Physical Review D attempts to justify these small inhomogeneities by considering that in this primitive cosmos, positive-mass and negative-mass elements could have coexisted, in the form of aggregates or "bubbles" of very modest relative value, since globally the universe's mass would still remain positive.

Let us return to the way of introducing negative-mass particles (and negative energy E = - m c²) into the cosmological model. We must then consider that the universe does not obey a single field equation, Einstein's equation, but two coupled equations of the same type:

Petit's equations

If I am right, and I believe I am, cosmology, for the "matter-dominated" phase (and astrophysics) will henceforth have to be based on these two equations, not on Einstein's equation, which is merely an approximate form.

It is this pair of field equations that is presented in the two articles mentioned at the beginning of this page. When we introduce two systems of positive and negative masses into this pair of equations, the Newtonian approximation produces totally different interaction laws:


A completely different interaction scheme.

The runaway phenomenon is gone.

A different Newtonian-type interaction scheme represents a different astrophysics, which I have been developing laboriously for nineteen years. In passing, for specialists, this system of field equations arises from a Lagrangian derivation, currently under publication.

Thus, positive and negative masses repel each other. Therefore, where positive mass is dominant, near our solar system, negative mass exists in negligible amounts. However, these distributions of both matter are governed by these two tensors:

which appear in the right-hand sides of the two equations. Near our solar system, the second tensor is nearly zero. The system of Petit's equations reduces to:

.

Near the solar system: at the top, the equation becomes Einstein's

(with a zero cosmological constant)

Thus, the model aligns with all classical verifications of General Relativity.

Why propose a system of two equations replacing Einstein's equation? Because it allows explaining this phenomenon of cosmic acceleration, something Einstein's equation cannot do. And this phenomenon is far from minor. The cosmos is accelerating full speed. To justify this phenomenon, we are forced to introduce a new component: 70% dark energy. A completely mysterious ingredient.

I recall, according to the current "standard" view, the supposed composition of the cosmos:

Current estimate of the composition of the "cosmic soup"

What about "dark matter," contributing 26.8%? Its nature remains a mystery. We are in "dark science." Deep in mines, researchers hunt for "astroparticles," supposed components of this dark matter, which we now admit is invisible. Among the most sought-after candidates are the neutralino.

I believe these hypothetical ingredients, dark matter and dark energy, can be effectively replaced