You left one option out, Ethan, and that is the option of scientists not coming to the accurate structures how to deal with big picture structures.
You write well, but the four options you describe are all very linear solutions; they lack depth. There is a fifth option.
The presented structures are incorrect, not the data.
In the article above you can read that there are two groups of mathematicians. One group accepts that zero is a natural number; the other group excludes zero as a natural number.
Not only is there evidence that zero is always a natural number, but it also declares why there are uneven particles of matter and antimatter in the universe. To think they would be in balance is two-dimensional thinking; it is incorrect. Let me try explaining this (using my way of describing things).
— -
Before Universe 2.0, there was Universe 1.0 in which there was no matter.
If we look at the data, then we know we have zero evidence that time and space were created in the Big Bang process. Zilch. Nothing. A good scientist would NEVER declare that time and space were born in the Big Bang process because that would be an exaggeration beyond the known information.
We do not even have any evidence that energy was created then. So, Universe 1.0 is a decent place to start. Better than starting out with nothing. Naturally, nothing will play an important role but it is not the starting point.
At the end of Universe 1.0 something went awry, and that forced the creation of matter. Naturally, that is not a spot where everything was fine. To have an equal amounts of matter and antimatter coming out of the process simply cannot be possible. This is not a spot of equilibrium and perfection.
The egg got broken to bake the omelet.
— -
With Universe 2.0 as the outward event, it is very easy to envision the end of Universe 1.0 as having begun with an inward movement. (This option opens the door that we don’t need any cosmic inflation either.)
If we take dark energy as the energy present for Universe 1.0, and we envision a collective inward motion within that collective setting, then we know this inward motion cannot go on forever; the end result will be a collective outward movement because something had to give. And that was the end of that inward setup.
Not the center of the inward motion was involved with what went wrong. The center was probably like a fortress of pent-up energy, all stuck in place, no option to budge.
It was therefore at the edges that inward moving energy ended up doing something else, like moving sideways, simply because that was easier.
As soon as there are two actions in the field, the collective inward motion could not longer be maintained. The setup stopped being the setup. Tension is released. Everything catapults outwardly.
— -
With this option in mind, one can state that matter is self-based energy. That means that dark energy that moved sideways ended up being self-based energy. No longer part of a collective, that energy (and all energy that followed the same motion) became matter.
Let’s look at antimatter, because the reaction of antimatter would in this option never be the same as matter, because in the process in which it was created it was an after-reaction. It was the reaction to the original action and in no way could it create a reaction that was of the same magnitude as the action.
Like a major accident, the ambulance arriving at the scene is of a minor reality compared to the accident. The ambulance is not equal to the accident.
— -
Important to note is that nothing does play a vital role. It isn’t that nothing became something all of a sudden, but for dark energy that was involved in an inbound movement, the center that was fully stuck could not have been visible. It could have been a wall that was bumped into all of a sudden, and there was nothing the dark energy at that spot could do to enter the pent-up bulwark.
Here is the nothing occurring twice: The dark energy could not enter and going sideways was the only option (particularly if more dark energy was pushing on from behind). Let me describe that once more: could do nothing to enter, could do nothing but move sideways.
Additionally, the stuck center that also was catapulted outwardly after the setup fizzled and all pent-up energy was released, that center did also not materialize. In as far as the material end result is concerned, the pent-up bulwark of dark energy that did not move sideways had indeed nothing as end result.
Any energy that had not made the side-way step did not materialize.
Scientists must tell three-dimensional stories because our universe (2.0) is three-dimensional and not two-dimensional. The options to discuss must come from the big-picture level and cannot be based on known structures from the detailed level.
That’s why I added the article about zero being a natural number. Having a fundamental empty spot within the larger set automatically creates a three-dimensional structure for everything.
— -
The Universe is unique.
It contains two actions (0 and 1) for matter:
Divergent motion (this is the Big Bang outward movement).
Convergent motion (only for matter that is found in close vicinity).
Our universe has two levels. A before and an after fits right in.
— -
Thank you again for all your articles. They are always insightful. I hope you can gnaw on the option presented above.
