The materialization process started in full earnest at the CMBR. In my view, that process was a collective process already with individualized outcomes at the CMBR, already fully established.
All that matter was moving at its fastest speed away from the origination area. It would not take all too long for proto galaxies to build up. Once we have fast-moving galaxies going in one direction, then we have a spinning action in that reality as well.
At the Exploratorium in San Francisco one can see a cylinder that contains water and silver slivers. One can make the cylinder spin and then make it stop. As a result, the silver slivers would continue to spin in the water but, while the water slows down, the silver slivers all collect in the center on the bottom of the cylinder.
What happens is that the silver slivers move about randomly in the rotating water, but the slowing rotating motion causes the center to widen as a 'dead zone'. In that center, there is a net-zero spot without much spin while the remaining water is still spinning. As soon as a silver sliver touches the 'dead zone' it will float toward the bottom. Long before the spin has subsided, all slivers are located in a heap on the bottom, in the center.
In a river, leaves can collect in a large slow-moving eddy, rotating in place forever so to speak. Our Sun is located in such an eddy of the Solar System. All material of the Sun is rather light (mostly hydrogen, helium).
In a strong whirlpool, nothing will stick. If a leaf ends up in a whirlpool, it will be dragged down, pushed away. The spin is too fast.
--
Once we have matter, since the CMBR, we will have collectives of matter all going in the same direction per each collective. Either the catapulting action itself provided some spin already, or the collective of masses all going in the same direction will start to spin collectively.
As such, we will get that strongest whirlpool motion in the center of all these masses. That center is not material itself, but rather based on the collection of forces coming together in that spot.
The analogy of the Eye of the Storm helps with viewing the process, though the environment is definitively distinct of course. Let me use the Eye of the Storm to explain that better.
The center of this center will contain a net-zero position, but the first location away from the center and first allowing friction among that force, that is where the force will express itself in the strongest possible way.
Wind force on planet Earth will be easy to understand for most people anywhere on the planet. Yet a person who has never seen a hurricane will not believe that there can be a special condition for wind force in which the center is actually without any wind. People will a hard time understanding the nature of that phenomenon.
The Eye is a phenomenon because the reason for the Eye is the wind force of the hurricane, yet the Eye itself actually has no wind force expressed at all. So, we have a phenomenon on our hands. We see something that is real (the Eye), but the Eye has no attributes of wind itself (until we hit the Wall of the Eye).
So, going from center to outer areas, we find as follows in wind force:
0 in the center, 1 right next to it, and then 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, 0.4, 0.2, 0.1, 0.0, in which 0 is no wind force and 1 is the maximum of wind force possible given the conditions. Minimum and maximum sit right next to one another.
A truck can get picked up by the Wall of the Eye of the Hurricane, but a butterfly cannot remain in place, long before the Wall of the Eye arrives.
So, photons moving toward the Black Eye will not make it to and through the Eye because the Wall of the Eye will have swatted the photons away already. Result: a Black Eye (because no photons passing through) and a donut ring of light (of photons pushed off their pathways, coming into our direction).
--
It is all about the model, David.
We can of course accept that Adam has an invisible mustache, but we can also say that it is Eve instead and simply forget about the mustache; there is none.
We need to discuss both models based on each their own specific details, and when need be we can use Occam's Razor. Note, however, that Occam's Razor will declare that the Black Eye model explains everything better without any unbelievable aspects such as the Black Hole idea that invisible matter collapsed onto itself.
--
Do you have other specific questions?
