4,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Elbwood Verlag
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
The first edition of the Ens Thesis was published in 2008, exactly on the author's birthday. At that time, there were no images from the James Webb Space Telescope, and everything seemed to be in order for science. Since the beginning of the assumption of a Big Bang, there have been those who could not reconcile with this idea. The author of this book, who was a long-time supporter of the Big Bang theory, also began to have serious doubts and started a piece of work that accompanied him for several years. It was not enough for the author to simply be justified against the Big Bang; he wanted to work out for himself how the cosmos could have originated alternatively. It was only when he understood that the question of a beginning might be the completely wrong question that everything moved in the right direction mentally. After the publication of the uncorrected and unedited first edition, the Ens Thesis divided the public. Some found the approach exciting and praised it, while others mocked it but could not find any devastating counterarguments. In 2015, the author published the second edition, which was better corrected, formatted, and edited. In 2018, a supplemented third edition was published. When the first images from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) were released on July 11, 2022, the author could not believe his eyes and ears! What these images showed corresponded exactly to what should be seen according to the assumptions of the Ens Thesis. After wiping away a few tears of joy, the author understood that his work was far more than the confused ideas of an autodidact. This fourth edition has been freed from a few more errors and supplemented with the crucial part about the deep field images and their implications for the assumption of a Big Bang. Those who have already read the third edition of the Ens Thesis will only receive these new additions. This is mentioned here out of decency and fair play. The name of the thesis has also changed. The formerly lowercase "ens" is now represented as "Ens" in the overall name Ens Thesis. Anyone who has never read the Ens Thesis and is not familiar with any of the previous publications will now be presented with the fruitful result of a long and hard journey! Enjoy and have an exciting read!
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024
Ähnliche
The Ens-Thesis
A Cosmos Without the Big Bang
The data from the
James Webb Space Telescope
confirm this thesis!
Author: Chris Wolker
Notes on the Translation and Images:
The translation was created with the help of Copilot by Microsoft. Co and I developed some tricks to optimize the translation. We also created a glossary with terms that are often capitalized in scientific publications on this topic. This careful preparation helped ensure a precise and consistent translation.
The images were partly created by Copilot by Microsoft in collaboration with DALL-E 3 by OpenAI and are signed accordingly. Other images are public domain images from NASA and are also appropriately signed. All other images are by the author and are not signed.
Horst Kaltenhauser
Heininger Str. 87
94036 Passau
Germany
Tel. +49 (0) 851 966 1 227
Email: [email protected]
ISBN: 9783759262059
Ludit in humanis
divina potentia rebus
"In human affairs, divine power plays.“
Ovid
Artistic representation of Microsoft Copilot with Dall-E 3 by OpenAI.
Table of Contents:
Preliminary Information and Dedication
Pages 1 to 8
Chapter 1
What Does a Game Designer Have to Do with Cosmology, Astronomy, and Astrophysics?
Pages 9 to 24
Chapter 2
Beginnings, Endings, Boundaries, and Optical Illusions:
Pages 25 to 36
Chapter 3
The Weaknesses of the Big Bang Theory:
Pages 37 to 90
Chapter 4
Now We Ask Different Questions and Examine the Answers with Logic:
Pages 91 to 100
Chapter 5
The Self-Discussion About Infinity:
Pages 101 to 102
Chapter 6
Eternal Infinity?
Pages 103 to 120
Chapter 7
God is the Eternal and Creative Infinity!
Pages 121 to 134
Chapter 8
A New Postulate for the Big Bang!
Pages 135 to 142
Chapter 9
Is the Cup Still Full? If So, Then “Black Holes” and Other Factors Help!
Pages 143 to 204
Chapter 10
A Journey into the Past:
Pages 205 to 208
Chapter 11
The Ens-Thesis:
Pages 209 to 276
Chapter 12
The 3K Background Radiation:
Pages 277 to 282
Chapter 13
The Cycle of the Universe and the Predictions of the Ens-Thesis:
Pages 283 to 298
Chapter 14
Big Bang vs. Ens-Thesis:
Pages 299 to 316
Chapter 15
Errors in Einstein's Theories
Pages 317 to 342
Chapter 16
A New Gravitational Thesis, “Particle Physics,” and a New Perspective on the Abstract Concept of Time
Pages 343 to 390
Conclusion
Pages 391 to 392
Other Books by the Author:
Pages 393 to 396
Dedication:
This book is dedicated to the following people:
To my physics and chemistry teacher, Mrs. Neumann, who once told me that I should definitely deepen and write down my ideas.
To Prof. Dr. Harald Lesch, who provided me with a broad basic knowledge through his TV shows and encouraged me to delve much deeper into the subject.
To my good friend David John Hughes, who was immediately enthusiastic about my ideas. He ultimately encouraged me to put my thoughts into book form, finish the book, and publish it.
To my beloved son, who said to me, "Dad, I don't like it!" - when I explained the Big Bang Theory to him in a childlike manner.
All these people contributed in their own way to the creation of this book. For that, I am deeply grateful!
Chapter 1:
What Does a Game Designer Have to Do with Cosmology, Astronomy, and Astrophysics?
Dear readers, you might expect such a book from a renowned astrophysicist, cosmologist, or theologian deeply involved in various natural sciences. I cannot offer you these titles and designations. To give you an idea of who wrote this book and why, let me introduce myself.
Since my early childhood, I have had a burning passion for astronomy. In my teenage years, astrophysics and cosmology were added to my interests. This interest became a very time-consuming hobby, and I devoured all the books I could find on the subject. I attended countless planetarium lectures, bought special magazines and films, watched documentaries on TV, exchanged ideas with experts and laypeople, and always kept up with new findings in these fields.
Prof. Dr. Harald Lesch from the Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics at the University of Munich became a virtual teacher for me, providing foundational knowledge on most of the core topics of this book. On this basis, I continued to learn and deepen my knowledge.
In my humble opinion, Prof. Dr. Harald Lesch has the excellent ability to convey foundational knowledge in an exciting, entertaining, and above all, concise manner, making the underlying concepts clear and understandable. This acquired knowledge is very well suited to be expanded through one's own studies.
Dear Prof. Dr. Harald Lesch, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you.
I noticed very early on that, compared to the views of recognized astronomers and cosmologists, I came to completely different ideas regarding the phenomena in the zones of the universe. This was solely because I asked different questions and included other sciences in my considerations.
For example: psychology, anthropology, biology, biochemistry, neurology, and of course, logic.
However, imagination and my inclination towards almost everything creative were crucial for my ideas.
The language of astronomy and cosmology is mathematics. This language is by no means foreign to me. However, I believe that many connections cannot be satisfactorily described with mathematics alone. On the contrary! This language is so inflexible and restrictive in many respects that it leaves too little room for mental creativity on a large scale. I always like to compare mathematics to a rosebud placed in a tightly fitting glass tube before it fully blooms. It can be seen that there is something beautiful inside, but the casing prevents the bud from fully unfolding its true splendor. At least it cannot do so without breaking the tube.
This glass tube is mathematics for me. It can offer a certain transparency and represent the core of the matter, but there is very little room left for poetry, imagination, creativity, and artistic creation. Therefore, I will largely avoid the syntax of mathematics in this book. You will notice that logical representations and easily understandable examples are not only sufficient but also very well comprehensible for everyone.
Nowadays, it is truly no art to copy entire collections of formulas on a specific topic from the great online encyclopedia Wikipedia and name the sources. Then the formulas only need to be inserted at the appropriate text points, and the scientific community would be satisfied. However, I am writing this work for all interested people and not just for those individuals from the scientific fields who predominantly and gladly deal with the syntax of mathematics.
Another Reason for This Book:
I am familiar with all the common theories, theses, and so on that attempt to explain the universe regarding its origin and development. I believe that many astronomers, astrophysicists, and cosmologists are currently on the wrong track. Therefore, I dare to share my thoughts here. What I want to offer you are new ideas, questions, and answers. These new answers could only arise because I asked new questions.
In many books, documentaries, and scientific articles on the core topics of astronomy and cosmology, various postulates, hypotheses, theses, and theories are repeatedly treated as if they were absolutely proven and already actual irrefutable knowledge with the value of truth.
Black Holes, the Big Bang, Dark Matter, dark energy, and other definitions are often spoken of as if they were irrefutable and clearly proven truths, known as well as one's own pocket. However, the fact is that many currently widespread postulates, hypotheses, theses, theories, and thought approaches build on older ones, creating a tangle. In my opinion, this tangle is too often sold as truth by some people (not all). The consequence is that this tangle is then accepted by other people, considered the truth, and spread as such. However, since they are postulates, hypotheses, theses, and theories, this is not correct.
With the Ens-Thesis, I want to show that what we can see today and largely know for sure allows completely different conclusions. These conclusions, in my conviction, are far more coherent than the Big Bang „Model“. I view the phenomena of the universe from a different perspective and thus come to different results.
Let yourself be surprised as you learn how the mind of a game designer interprets the "universe."
The currently most widespread and predominantly accepted thesis regarding the development of the universe is the Big Bang thesis. For many decades, it has been mistakenly referred to as the Big Bang Theory. Since this thesis is not proven and its most essential core statements cannot be proven, the designation theory is simply wrong. Parts of this thesis may indirectly predict something that some experts believe can be seen, but what is seen can have completely different causes. Therefore, in the interest of correctness, it cannot be claimed that the Big Bang thesis is a theory that reflects an actual slice of reality. Since I am not particularly friendly with this thesis after careful examination, I want to present a different thought model in this book. My model leaves far fewer open questions than all other approaches. For this reason, I do not want to withhold these thoughts from all interested people.
Please do not understand me as thinking of myself as the pinnacle of creation or hoping for the Nobel Prize. No, certainly not. However, I see the current state of cosmology as the following quote from the amateur psychoanalyst Horst Kaltenhauser makes clear. I am well aware that I do not have the complete professional depth in all areas of astronomy and cosmology. However, it is often the case that it is a stranger who walks past an advanced chess game and immediately recognizes the right move, while the two players are so deeply engrossed in the moves that the best idea remains hidden from them.
I once read a quote attributed to Albert Einstein.
It reads:
"Imagination is more important than knowledge, for knowledge is limited."
A quote from the British philosopher, logician, and mathematician Bertrand Arthur William Russell reads:
"Even if all are of one mind, all may be wrong."
And finally, the previously mentioned quote from the amateur psychoanalyst Horst Kaltenhauser:
"Those who ask the wrong questions should not hope for the right answers."
As a game designer and developer of complex game systems, I possess a lot of creative imagination and extensive knowledge in astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology. Albert Einstein's quote gave me the courage to write and publish this book. Bertrand Russell's words are absolutely fitting because, with this book, I contradict the claims of many scientists.
I am honest with you and myself and admit that I am not infallible. However, I have the courage to acknowledge my mistakes and learn from them.
My ideas regarding the Ens-Thesis did not come to me overnight. They emerged through a long intellectual development process closely linked to my profession as a developer of complex game systems.
Today, I am firmly convinced that I would never have come up with the Ens-Thesis without my path as a game system developer.
Only through specific and necessary knowledge and approaches from the logical field of game development could I arrive at the result of my model regarding the "universe."
Important elements in the development of game systems are neurological, psychological, and anthropological knowledge, as well as a pronounced logic for pattern recognition and the linking of interacting program elements.
To explain what game development has to do with my new model regarding the "universe," I need to present this to you precisely at this point.
In the early days as a hobby game developer, I noticed that people always reacted very similarly or exactly the same to certain game content. I also noticed that certain shapes, colors, keywords, and sounds always led to very similar or identical reactions among players. This initially amazed me, and I wanted to know why this was so. This thirst for knowledge led me through the exciting and astonishing realms of the various sciences mentioned earlier for many years. I learned, created documents, conducted experiments during test game phases, analyzed, and came to conclusions because certain results were repeatedly confirmed. I actually filtered out how the individual human functions in certain situations and why it stubbornly clings to its programmed behavior patterns and "truths." When I recognized these facts, it was very easy to develop games in the right direction. These insights allowed me to progress very quickly in game development and achieve success in all market segments. When I understood that it was primarily the knowledge of psychological structures and the latest findings in neurology that advanced me so quickly, I wanted to know even more about it.
One evening, as I pondered all my information regarding astrophysics and cosmology, I realized that the Big Bang seemed like an absolute disruptive factor to me. Then I proceeded schematically, as I do when developing a game system if a significant element does not yet appeal to me. I asked a new question.
This question was:
What evidence is there for the Big Bang?
The answer was:
There is no evidence for the Big Bang, only weak indications that also allow for other conclusions.
These thoughts were the beginning of a lot of work. The result is in your hands.
Before I can delve deeply into the core topic of the book, I want to share a small part of my knowledge that is important for the overall understanding of the Ens-Thesis. Please take the time to read the following pages. It will be worth it and directly related to the core topic, even if it may not seem so at first glance. The first glance can be very deceptive. Often, it is thoughts that deceive us and appearances that mislead us.
When we examine a profound topic like the "origin and development" of all things, we must understand what it is that contemplates it. It is the organism formed from stardust and laws of nature, which in our language area is called a human. You may smile now and think that this is irrelevant to the result. Believe me when I say that it is essential for the result. Humans have certain thinking and behavior patterns based on various laws of nature.
These behavior patterns can significantly influence an outcome if they are not considered in advance.
Let's take a closer look at ourselves as humans. We are equipped with a brain that, according to our understanding, is very powerful in many ways. However, a clear weakness of this brain is that it can be manipulated and programmed with almost any content. This means that it can also be programmed with information that is not true but is accepted as true. Do you already know that this is the case? If you don't know yet, you will be amazed and understand what I mean.
Have you ever wondered why people in very different regions of this still enchanting planet believe in very different gods, why they practice completely different customs, and why they are allowed to do things in one society that are severely punished in another? Often, one group of people naturally maintains old customs that another group finds repulsive, reprehensible, taboo, and incomprehensible.
Why is that?
The answer is simple. It is all a matter of brain programming. In different cultural areas, people are programmed differently from childhood. The result is people with very different beliefs and worldviews. The differences are often so drastic that it is clear that brains predominantly accept and consider true and/or acceptable what they are programmed with. This works until contradictions arise. By contradictions, I mean new observations or other information that clearly contradicts these programmed pieces of information.
Observations and other information are also a form of programming because we receive input from the outside.
If a person is programmed from childhood with certain values and information, it shapes that person. If the brain does not receive contradictory information over time, it will hold on to the initial information. For example, if a brain is programmed to believe that the Earth is flat and never receives other information in the form of contradictory observations or statements, it will be convinced of this until its last day of function. Only when strong doubts about the previous programming arise through other information can this state change.
Astronomically speaking: "The current information base and the actual truth can be light-years apart."
The Status of the Big Bang in Astronomy:
Let's now consider the status of the Big Bang thesis in the societal spaces where astronomy and cosmology are "far" advanced.
Although there are other theses about the origin and/or development of the universe, the Big Bang thesis is still the predominant and most widely accepted thesis among astronomers, astrophysicists, and cosmologists. Is this because the Big Bang thesis can fundamentally, meaningfully, and smoothly explain the development of the universe without open questions? No!
The Big Bang thesis is so strongly represented because it has so far fit relatively well into a framework of other postulates, hypotheses, theses, and theories. Therefore, in this book, I do not intend to attack those astronomers, astrophysicists, and cosmologists who still adhere to this thesis.
An astrophysicist, astronomer, or cosmologist has a much harder time professionally declaring the Big Bang thesis as incorrect than I do. The group of experts has another problem. The Big Bang thesis was programmed into them during their specialized studies.
They received good grades for understanding and reproducing the information about this thesis.
The Big Bang thesis is like the Holy Grail of these sciences regarding the development of the universe.
Many astrophysicists, astronomers, and cosmologists know that the Big Bang thesis is severely flawed in many ways, but it is the best theoretical model that has emerged in recent decades.
I hope that this will change with the Ens-Thesis.
As a game designer, book, and game author, I have more creative freedom when I dissect this non-professional topic and present a much more coherent counter-thesis than the Big Bang „Model“. I have the freedom to openly and loudly say what I honestly think without fearing professional disadvantages if my statements do not please a specialist with a different opinion.
I even assume that my perspective will not be well received by representatives of some religious communities. The Big Bang „Model“ offers those representatives who favor a monotheistic god at least some room for a creator. The reason is that the trigger of the Big Bang cannot be factually explained, and the representatives of these religions can say that God was the trigger. This trigger does not exist in the Ens-Thesis. Instead, I offer a solution that unites all religions with all natural sciences in this regard.
I want to provide new approaches to thinking in this book and examine some existing ones closely. By recognizing mistakes and analyzing them, we come to new solutions. If no one dares to openly share their ideas anymore because everyone is afraid of making a mistake and embarrassing themselves, then all ideas will remain hidden in the minds of those people.
Often, 1,000 attempts must be made before an experiment succeeds. But when it does succeed, a solution has been found, and 999 attempts are known not to lead to the desired result. A lot of experience has been gained, and a functioning result has been discovered that can now be used.
Only a pronounced pragmatism and innovative approaches with sufficient creativity will move us forward. If this is turned off, stagnation prevails.
Join me on a very exciting journey. It is a great honor for me to guide you through a world full of questions, ideas, and mysteries. Let us now take a closer look at the nature of "human" and its perceived environment so that we understand why it has certain thinking and behavior patterns.
Chapter 2:
Beginnings, Ends, Boundaries, and Sensory Deceptions:
A human is still predominantly born after a biological development phase from their mother's womb. Their life as a human has a fairly well-defined beginning. A human lives, constantly changes, and perceives constant change. Every human dies. The existence known to them as a human life form ends.
Beginnings, changes, and ends are events that have been observed and perceived by humans since ancient times, and nothing has changed about that to this day. These events have been programmed into the human brain because they are constantly perceived consciously and/or subconsciously. Birth, drastic changes, and death are profound events in all cultures I know.
Our brain accepts these information patterns as "truths," and through this imprinting, there is no doubt for us at first glance that EVERYTHING must have a beginning and an end. We constantly observe around us through our senses that something begins, changes, and "ends."
For example, beginnings and ends include:
Minutes, contracts, seasons, conversations, life stages, songs, movies, books, and so on.
I want to illustrate that "beginnings, changes, and ends" are deeply ingrained in our thinking structures.
It seems logical to most people that everything must have a beginning and an end because our senses perceive it that way. It is important to know that other living beings perceive the world very differently through their senses. They see the world differently, have a different sense of smell, hear different frequencies, and have sensory organs that we do not possess, such as whales, birds, and bats.
Different beings thus have different perceptions of the same world. Who can say which perceptions are correct? Are all correct? Are all wrong? Of course, the answer is that it is relative.
One thing is certain, however: every living being can only perceive the world individually as its senses allow. Humans have also developed devices to extend their natural senses. However, we must never forget that our genes have not internalized these devices. We can only use these devices, but they are not a biochemical part of our perceiving existence. At the moment we use an electron microscope or a reflecting telescope, we ultimately perceive the result with our senses. We see what our senses allow us to see through these devices and then interpret it from our own programming. If our programming is faulty, then wrongly asked questions combined with observations can lead to completely wrong answers.
A Thought Experiment:
Let's assume I hold a very thin and short needle in the air in front of a haystack and show it to twenty people standing around. Then I make a quick throwing motion towards the haystack with the needle.
Now I ask the question:
"Where is the needle in the haystack?"
Everyone rushes off and searches for the needle in the haystack. However, I was mean because I didn't throw the needle into the haystack but only pretended to. In fact, I secretly put the needle in my pocket after the throwing motion. For all observers, it seemed as if I had thrown it, and they searched, searched, and searched.
A particularly thorough searcher, who has already turned over every straw and looked thoroughly underneath, suddenly comes to me and says that the question "WHERE" can only be answered if I ask another question about the needle's location. And that until the needle is found. The searcher is very clever! She realized that my question, "Where is the needle in the haystack?" cannot be answered with an exact location because the needle is not in the haystack. It could only be said that the needle is nowhere in the haystack.
The clever lady demands a new question!
I now limit my new question about "WHERE" to the volume of my pocket.
Other searchers, however, convinced that I actually threw the needle into the haystack, continue to search there. Others believe that the needle landed in a parallel universe and bring me various formulas for a probable location of the needle in other dimensions and multiverses.
The searcher, who demanded a new question, immediately finds the needle in my pocket. The new question with the new location for the search thus led to the desired result. The wrong question did not, because it was associated with a deceptive appearance. Regarding my first question, everyone fell for a sensory deception. They were convinced that I had actually thrown the needle into the haystack. Errors arise so easily.
The misinterpretation of an observation thus led to false assumptions and results.
Only a logically analyzing searcher came to the correct conclusion and ultimately to the correct answer through a new question.
Sensory Deceptions:
We receive the information for the perception of a beginning, an end, and many other impressions through the eyes, ears, taste, smell, and touch. I want to illustrate how easily human senses can be deceived with a few well-known examples.
A good magician can deceive us a lot, and we often think for a while that he has actually performed this illusion as something real. This impression lasts until someone explains the corresponding trick to us.
Some people even firmly claimed that the great illusionist David Copperfield was an alien because some of his illusions seemed so real that extraterrestrial powers were suspected behind them. Hear, hear!
A few other examples:
When a person is in hypnosis, they can be given milk to drink, for example. It is suggested to them that it is orange juice. At a certain depth of suggestion, they will taste orange juice, even though they are actually drinking pure milk. The prerequisite for tasting orange juice is that the taste of orange juice is present in their brain as information.
Under hypnosis, familiar smells, tastes, sensations such as heat, cold, and weight can be perceived completely differently.
This has to do with the subconscious and the information programmed and stored in it, which can be accessed in a hypnotic state. In the hypnotic state, access to the subconscious is wide open. It seems that in this state, any information a person receives through suggestion is accepted as true and partially interpreted through bodily reactions. This can go so far that, for example, suggested heat later shows burn marks on the skin.
Do you know the phenomenon that you are quite sure from a distance that a person in front of you is a known person and only when you get closer do you realize that it is a stranger? This happens because our brain tends to orient itself to certain prominent and familiar recognition features. Even a few similarities can lead to an illusion. Observations can then lead to misinterpretations if only a few known patterns are assumed without being able to observe the entire object intensively.
When an optical indication of a beginning is seen, it can also lead to a mental misinterpretation if not all available data for finding the truth are used.
Have you ever heard of virtual reality? Various signals are converted into electrical signals through the eyes and/or other body points, which in this form deceive the brain into perceiving a world as a real environment. Through this technique, virtual flying, walking through fire, walking on a tightrope, and so on can be simulated so realistically that people often associate these virtual images with strong physical reactions, just as they would in their everyday reality. The perception of the received signals seems so real in the human brain that it is used, for example, to cure people of phobias such as fear of heights or claustrophobia.
We can be subject to all kinds of deceptions, that is a fact.
The longer and deeper we are convinced of something, the harder it is to detach from this conviction in the "normal state."
It is important to note that such deceptions, like experiments used as proof of an existing truth, can be repeated as often as desired. Repeatable scientific experiments only have the appearance of "truth" until they are disproved by another experiment or by solid facts.
If a brain were fed only with electrical stimuli from a virtual reality from the beginning of its existence, then this world would be reality for this brain until its destruction because it would not have known any other. It would even be the case that this brain would interpret what we call reality as a deception.
Ultimately, any perception is a complex process in which electrical signals are converted into sensory impressions through biochemical processes. This process has not yet been fully understood.
What is called consciousness seems to have more in common with what is called virtual than many scientists would like.
You will still learn what all these statements have to do with the Big Bang and my own thesis. Do you already suspect it?
We were all born into a world where there are also boundaries. Be it the boundary of the mind, a room, a house, a property, a city, a state, a country, a continent, the atmosphere, the optical possibilities to overlook the "universe," or the boundary of financial possibilities. Boundaries, boundaries, and more boundaries. Everything seems somehow limited at first glance.
Now you may be wondering why I mention this here. It is important that I bring this to your attention right now so that you can follow the further explanations, as this is very important to me in your interest.
All these sensory impressions have deeply shaped us since time immemorial. Beginnings, changes, ends, and boundaries are sensory impressions that are inherent in us.
They are programmed "truths" within us. Such imprints make it very difficult for us to accept or adopt other views than those already imprinted. What is deeply anchored and programmed in a person is rock solid! Yes, life shapes us, and if an individual is not careful, it will be shaped incorrectly.
Do you know the saying: "You look like counterfeit money right now"? Often people look like this in situations where something they previously believed to be true is disproved. A false imprint corresponds to counterfeit money.
Suddenly gaining a different insight, a new perspective, can have an uncanny effect, almost comparable to a kind of enlightenment. A lot has to happen for a person to let go of such old imprints and open up to thinking through and understanding a completely new perspective.
There is a very nice Swabian saying about this. It goes:
"What the farmer doesn't know, he doesn't eat."
It is similar with old, ingrained, and programmed "truths." Why engage in something new when the old has been sufficient for the purpose so far? I will not leave you without an answer to this question.
The new can enrich you immensely if it is better than the old.
Many years ago, a colleague told me a wonderful story. It was about a physics professor who flew to China to meet a Zen master. He had read some texts about Zen and wanted to understand what Zen is. Everything the physics professor had learned about it so far confused him, and much of it contradicted his programmed worldview as a physicist.
When he arrived in China and spoke with the Zen master in English, he briefly explained what he did for a living, how he saw the world, and that he wanted to understand what Zen was about. Then he asked the master many questions about the practical purpose, secrets, theories, and formulas of Zen.
The master just listened. Meanwhile, he took a teacup, slowly poured tea into it, and the professor saw that the cup was suddenly full and overflowing.
The professor panicked and exclaimed:
"Master, the cup is full!"
The master then calmly emptied the cup completely and said:
"Now empty your own cup, it is also full."
What did the Zen master want to convey to the physics professor? The answer is simple. The professor's brain was filled to the brim with physics and the associated worldview. Numbers, formulas, and so on dominated EVERYTHING. There was no room left for Zen. Only if he managed to empty his own "cup" would there be room for a completely new understanding. When the mind is full of programmed views, there is no room for completely new views. Mental conflicts would immediately arise because the physics professor would subconsciously compare any information about Zen with the content of his cup, i.e., with physics. However, the two would not fit together, and a mental confusion would arise.
If you feel that your cup is filled to the brim, then please empty your cup now. Open yourself to completely new approaches to thinking. Let me take you into a world that may have been closed to you until now.
Artistic representation of Microsoft Copilot with Dall-E 3 by OpenAI.
Chapter 3:
The Weaknesses of the Big Bang Theory:
According to modern cosmology, the Big Bang describes the beginning of the universe's development. There was no time before it! Some scientists assume that around 13.7 billion years ago, everything we observe today and beyond was concentrated into a tiny formal point, reached through extrapolation. A point, no volume!
I must mention something here. If the uncertainty principle of the German physicist Werner Heisenberg is applied, then the assumed Big Bang singularity could not have been a point. The result would be an area made of a kind of quantum and time fabric. Other forms are also conceivable in this regard, but not a point. At least, that's how I understand it. And if I want to work logically and precisely, which is my goal, then I must also consider the quantum field fluctuations that occur in any system according to quantum theory. Thus, the "area" would immediately take on a three-dimensional "shape." Fluctuations also mean change and thus time. So, we are already dealing with a four-dimensional space-time structure. I will address the uncertainty principle and quantum mechanics separately in this book. However, for the sake of order, I do not want to leave it unmentioned here. This note is important to me because all the books I know of speak of a formal point as the initial stage of the Big Bang. The term "singularity" is often used for this.
Because it is stated in these books, I continue to assume this point assertion. However, I consider it the wrong approach. I will describe the prevailing doctrine and not yet what I have worked out and think about it.
Continuing with the Big Bang:
This point without volume is said to have had an unimaginably high density and temperature. According to this theory, the natural laws we know today were not valid. This claim, that our current natural laws did not yet apply, is a crucial part of this theory.
