Thank you for your interesting reply, John.
I have said it before, that if we do not use the correct model, then it does not matter how correct we are about the data/evidence. The model has to be right.
In the Big Bang (Lambda-CDM) model, physicists make one simple mistake: They are working with an original state that can be declared with 1, and then have it be changed to a subsequent reality also declared 1. Or, some of them start out with a state that is declared with 0, but they believe then still that the outcome can be described with 1.
In short, the model is too simplistic. They keep the mystery in the wrong spot. They do not have the original state brake down in a fundamental manner; they keep it intact somehow or do not weave it into the materialization process.
In the Big Whisper model, there is an extreme high density right before there is matter, just like the Big Bang model. Yet there is no super-hot state, and there is no need for the rather improbable cosmic inflation.
In the Big Whisper model, the center of things are different from the whole, too.
Let me explain the two versions of the model that we have in our universe today.
1. Immaterial, such as the Eye of the Storm.
2. Material, such as the solid inner core inside the Earth.
Both specific outcomes in the center are based on their larger settings. We get something 'extra', exactly because something goes missing.
This is easy to see with the Eye of the Storm. The entire Storm pulls on the center and creates a severe depression in that spot. We find no wind force in an environment created by wind force.
The Wall of the Eye is the spot with the greatest wind force. So, we have a 0 sitting in the middle and we have the maximum of 1 immediately next to it.
Let's discuss an important detail: At first opportunity when that pulling on the center by the wind force all around gets just the tiniest fraction of play, that is where the Wall is found, that is where all hell breaks loose. The worst outcome of wind force is right where the tiniest friction in that pull is possible. The pull all around caused the Eye without wind, and right next to it we find the worst of the winds, the strongest winds measured on planet Earth.
--
With planet Earth itself, the material equivalent of the model is shown, but we need to move inside the planet. It is the entire planet that creates the pressure that is experienced in the center. There, we find the solid inner core. There is no movement in the center (other than the entire solid center capable of moving collectively).
Immediately next to the solid core, we have the fluid inner core, near identical in material composition as the solid inner core, but wildly on the move.
At first opportunity, when pressure is just a fraction less than what is required to make that material solid, that is where all hell breaks loose. That is good for us, because it keeps our planet a warm planet. The fluid inner core churns.
--
When we look at our solar system, then we find star and planets in a larger nonmaterial setting. We see a circular motion, but it is fairly weak. Therefore, light weighted material was able to collect there (actually in large numbers). Our Sun collected lots and lots of hydrogen (and helium then, too). This is very similar to an eddy in a river capable of collecting light weighted leaves.
In a strong whirlpool those leaves would get pulled under.
When looking at a galaxy, the center is not spinning in a weak kind of manner. It is spinning a whole lot faster. All hell breaks loose the closer we get to the Wall of the gravitational depression in the center of a galaxy.
All these masses in a galaxy are pulling on that center, gravitationally, strongly so, or weakly so, but all are pulling on that center. Exactly in the center, we have an Eye of net-zero gravity. Yet immediately next to it we have the gravitational monster, the Wall of the gravitational depression. There is no greater gravitational expression in the entire galaxy than with that Wall of the Eye.
--
Let's also look at the materialization process.
The materialization process started with that already proposed extremely dense concentration in the original state of the universe. The concentration caused the center to get stuck in place due to that pressure. You will most certainly recognize the same model as described for hurricane and for the center of the planet: an Eye in which things are stuck, not moving, not budging.
Yet there will be a spot, just a fraction further out where that extreme pressure is not enough to keep all checked in place. That is where all hell breaks loose and this is where original energy is churned into quarks.
You may understand now why some have called the Big Whisper theory (named after Wilson and Penzias that discovered the whisper of the materialization process) the Big Blender theory instead.
Others have called it the Beach Ball theory because matter derived from that small layer that makes a beach ball material. The original material inside was stuck in place and it never got churned into matter. The inside remained therefore nonmaterial and only that 'small' layer ended up becoming quarks.
Due to this damage, everything (material and nonmaterial energy) catapulted outwardly. The extreme pressure of that concentration got expressed.
Once the quarks reached the area that we now call the CMBR, they immediately formed the neutrons and protons.
Because the protons have a positive charge, this pulled in the negative electrons (from undamaged energy). The universe remained neutrally charged therefore, while the subatomic level is charged indeed.
We have the building blocks for matter right then and there, at the CMBR, and this explains the formation of galaxies in the very early material universe. All material was available real early on.
--
Notice how the Big Bang model is truly too perfect to be useful. There is no storyline how we ended up with a diverse outcome. We need that fundamental break; we need the prior reality to break, otherwise there cannot be any matter as a result.
One can therefore say that physicists are too much in love with Unity. They can't break the egg inside their heads; they want a unified field of forces when the result tells us very clearly how that is a position that belongs to the original state of the universe, and is not found with the result.
--
Since we are talking how an accident took place, we have that fastest outbound action moving kind of straight-out. However, no accident is ever clean. Hence the circular motion accompanying the otherwise singular direction of all matter. On their outbound journeys, matter shows us in their collective behavior how strong the catapulting action was (because still ongoing), and how the break with the production of quarks was not a clean process. There will be plenty circular motion among matter.
Earth is involved therefore in four motions:
1. Mass and spin.
2. Revolution around the Sun.
3. Dancing along in the circular motion of the Milky Way.
4. That fastest speed together with the Milky Way, all going into the same direction.
#s 1, 2, and 3 are gravity based. #4 is not gravity based because it is that original catapulting action.
Then, in anything that is spinning around collectively, there is automatically a center spot in which the spinning action is variable, from that net-zero spot collecting light-weighted matter to that net-zero spot not-collecting any matter. Our planet Earth was not just collected due to gravity, but also due to the spin that existed among matter this far away from the center of the solar system.
John, this was a long reply, and I hope you can see the model I am working with. It is based on the absence of a unified field of forces. Only at the specific levels do we find material 'marriages', while the overall material universe tells us about the 'divorce' that took place some 13.8 billion years ago.
Said differently: The balance we see in nature is an established balance; it is not innate. Similarly, unity can get established, but it is not innate.
Thank you for being curious about my model. I recognize that you are working with the Big Bang model including still gnawing on what I call its flaws.
