Around the Millennium, I worked really hard to show a Year Zero actually exists. I was successful and I measure that success by it still being mentioned on wiki. Many scientists are now agreeing that the Year Zero is real and would use it.... if only we had a normal calendar.
"This means that between, for example, 1 January 500 BC and 1 January AD 500, there are 999 years: 500 years BC, and 499 years AD preceding 500. "
That is my work on the following wiki page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_zero
So, let's reconstruct this. When the date for Jesus' birth was calculated, they found themselves the Year 1 to start counting from. Jesus was born (officially that is) seven days prior.
That's it. They did not add any years prior because they weren't interested in that.
Then, and my guess is that these are other historians but I did not investigate this, they started counting backward, and since they did not like the year 0, they had the year -1 stuck right next to 1.
This is not a scientific outcome; it is a historical outcome. Year Zero did exist of course, but it is generally not recognized, because... not included. The missing Year Zero is an omission based on an historical incorrect choice.
There is one group of scientists that does include the Year Zero: Astronomers. They don't want to be bothered to fix up the answer all the time when talking about something astronomical more than a couple thousand years ago. They want to keep it simple. They ignore the lack of that one year and they ignore having therefore just 999 official years in that one Millennium; they fixed the flaw because it is too much work to work with the actual calendar.
--
So, versatile as you are dealing with zero, let's get to the Big Whisper model. I hope you give the following the same respect you give the Big Bang model prior to the CMBR for which there is no solid data, no matter the model.
Instead of a Big Bang with just an outbound motion appearing from... whatever you want to call it, we have an inbound motion occurring first in... whatever you want to call it.
That is it, Bkuehlhorn.
The Big Bang is outbound only, and has a focus on the center as the beginning. That's the storyline.
The Big Whisper has a longer storyline. It is inbound first, and the center gets locked in place through tension and can therefore not be the beginning for matter. The source for what ends up becoming matter is much, much further out, but indeed on the boundary of that very tense center.
Wind up a toy until the mechanism breaks and you can see that it did not break in the center. The center gets locked in place too much, and while it would love to break, the surrounding tension keeps it in place. The break is not in the center. The break is exactly where tension is enormous and where there is no holding that area in a stronghold.
One look at matter, with neutron and proton in the nuclei of atoms, and the electron around it, then this already tells us all we need to know.
Warped original energy is the basis for the nuclei; the electrons the reaction from the non-damaged original energy.
I am going to leave it at this. I apologize beforehand, but I have to say again that you have not given me the confidence that you can envision this model. The questions you asked me tell me you do not understand that this is a model. You are asking for evidence while that is also not available in the Big Bang model. If you believe there is solid evidence in the Big Bang model prior to the CMBR, then you drank the cool-aid.
