Reads: 266  | Likes: 0  | Shelves: 0  | Comments: 0

More Details
Status: In Progress  |  Genre: Non-Fiction  |  House: Booksie Classic

In this essay we first present an idealized model of the proposed initial gas cloud which (according to the model offered here) was present at the moment when the Big Bang started, and then
introduce some ideas to explain how we derived its vital statistics (size, mass, and density), and those of the tiny objects which theoretically composed it. We show that we can calculate the
approximate number of these tiny objects which were present in the large gas cloud at the moment of the start of the Big Bang, when the gas cloud suddenly became a fireball.

Submitted: March 04, 2018

A A A | A A A

Submitted: March 04, 2018



Sternglass Cosmology 101 --- Details of the Big Bang

By Mark Creek-water Dorazio,  Chandler, Arizona, USA, 16 August 2018



SUMMARY {“abstract”}  


Imagine for the sake of the arguments presented in this essay that there really was a “Big Bang” in the distant past, approximately 13.5 million years ago, as the standard model of cosmology teaches.  Imagine this “Big Bang” as a very very large hydrogen-bomb type of explosion, not only vastly larger than an H-bomb, but utilizing a much more efficient process to generate energy than an H-bomb.


Furthermore, imagine (for simplicity) that the "gas" in this cloud consisted exclusively of tiny electron-positron pairs [ep-pairs] of a particular (pun intended) size and mass, (details below), which reconfigured during a phase transition, forming neutrons and protons, and releasing the energy ("binding energy") needed to power the Big Bang.  


In this essay we first present an idealized model of the proposed initial gas cloud which (according to the model offered here) was present at the moment when the Big Bang started, and then introduce some ideas to explain how we derived its vital statistics (size, mass, and density), and those of the tiny objects which theoretically composed it.  We show that we can calculate the approximate number of these tiny objects which were present in the large gas cloud at the moment of the start of the Big Bang, when the gas cloud suddenly became a fireball.


Key words:  Big Bang, delayed mini-Bang, neutrons, protons, quasars, Sternglass;






Sternglass says that neutrons and protons are composed of (not “quarks” --- but) speedy electrons and positrons [Ref.#1].  If one needs a fancy word for “speedy” --- it’s “relativistic.” Note that nobody has ever observed any free “quarks” in a physics lab [pp.322-324, Ref.#2, p.67, Ref.#3].  


He says that every neutron and proton in our universe began its existence during a “phase transition” [p.11, Ref.#1] which started at the start of the Big Bang, or at the start of one of the “delayed mini-Bangs” which have happened, regularly, during all the time since the start of the Big Bang [p.211, Ref.#1].  


He says that the formation of neutrons involves five [5] ep-pairs per neutron, each of a particular (pun intended) size and mass.  Note that, in Sternglass's model, the outside part of both the neutron and the proton consists of four [4] of these ep-pairs, each identical to the other, arranged in the shape of an upper-case letter "H" ----- plus an odd and mis-matched pair at the center in the case of the neutron, or a single unpaired positron at the center in the case of the proton.  


Finally, please note that we have modified Sternglass's model so that, in the model which we offer here, the four ep-pairs around the outside of a proton or neutron are arranged in the shape of a tetrahedron [Figure 1, below], rather than that of an upper-case letter "H" [pp. 163 & 250, Ref.#1].





Drawing on the work of Georges Lemaitre [Ref.#4], Sternglass created a cosmological model of the Big Bang in which (as already mentioned) the initial fireball was due to the reconfiguration of zillions of tiny objects, each an electron-positron pair of a particular (pun intended) size and mass, in a “phase transition” [Sternglass's words, p.11, Ref.#1] which released a very large amount of binding energy, enough to power a big bang.  


Sternglass says that the large fireball at the start of the Big Bang was  “roughly the size of our planetary system” [p.247, Ref.#1]. He also says that, at the start of the Big Bang, only "a per cent or so of all the matter in the universe was [involved in] the formation of the first elements" [p.246, Ref.#1].  According to his model, the remaining 99% or so was dark matter, containing no protons or neutrons, and not [yet] able to undergo the phase transition which leads to the production of neutrons & protons. According to Sternglass’s model, the end products of the phase transition which drove the start of the Big Bang (and the many delayed mini-Bangs since then) are mainly protons and neutrons.  


In other words, according to Sternglass's model, the expanding fireball which follows the start of the Big Bang (or that of a delayed mini-Bang) becomes a proton & neutron factory, as most of the neutrons quickly decay, producing protons.  Thus the model explains the birth process of all the protons & neutrons which exist, as well as the source of the power for the Big Bang and the following delayed mini-Bangs [Ref.#1]. Note that, according to Sternglass’s model, these delayed mini-Bangs continue to happen, and astronomers have routinely observed them --- (and called them “quasars”) --- since 1963, as detailed below.  


In a previous essay [Ref.#5] we calculated theoretical numeric values for the mass and radius of the electron-positron pairs which form the outer part of protons and neutrons.  The key to this calculation is the idea that the calculated mass and radius make the object a “spin-2” object, the only Sternglass cosmological system for which this is possible.  Note that this object is not in “Table 1” as it appears in the book, but that one can calculate its possible existence somewhere in the region of the table which Sternglass would call “stage 27.”  


Using the numeric values calculated in this way [M = 4.055E-25 gram, R = 0.8676E-13 cm], one calculates a mass-density of approx. 2.51E14 grams/cc for each of the tiny objects, relativistic electron-positron pairs, assuming that they actually exist.  One expects the mass-density of the gas cloud itself to be less than that of the objects which compose it, but have no idea re how much less. As already mentioned, Sternglass says that the initial fireball occupied a volume roughly that of our planetary system, and that the mass of ordinary stuff was approx. 1% of the total mass of our universe.  If one use the radius of Neptune's orbit as the radius of our planetary system, then one obtains a mass-density for the initial gas cloud of approx. 1.58E56 grams / 4.19.(3 billion km)^3 = 1.4E12 grams/cc, much less than the 2.5E14 grams/cc mentioned in the previous paragraph. On the other hand, if one regard the radius of our planetary system as only approx. that of planet Jupiter, then one obtains a much greater mass-density:

M-D(cloud) = 1.58E56 grams / 4.19.(7E13)^3 = 1.1E14 grams/cc, comparable to, but less than, the mass-density of the objects which composed the "gas" in the initial cloud, just before ignition.

As already mentioned, one expects that the density of the gas cloud would be less than that of the objects which compose it.  


{ Note that Sternglass details his method for calculating the mass of our universe in Ref.#1.  The value which he gets, 1.581E58 grams, is larger by a factor of approx. 100 than some of the estimates which others have given, which is "consistent with the evidence that only about one per cent of the mass of the universe is in visible form" [p.210, Ref.#1] }  


As already mentioned, Sternglass says that, at the start of the Big Bang, only a per cent or so of all the matter in the universe was involved in the formation of the first elements" [p.246, Ref.#1].  The remainder of the matter in our universe at that time consisted of material which was not [yet] capable of undergoing the phase transition which leads to the production of neutrons and protons and the  releasing of binding energy. This is a major difference between Sternglass's model and the standard model. Another big difference between the two models is found in their explanations for quasars.








Sternglass details his ideas re the start of the Big Bang, as well as re the many "delayed mini-Bangs" [his words] which followed, in Refs. #1 and #6.  According to Sternglass, his model predicts that "delayed mini-Bangs" should be happening regularly during all the time since the start of the Big bang, and in fact have been observed routinely, by astronomers, since the discovery of the first "quasar" by Maarten Schmidt in 1963 [pp.198+199, Ref.#1].  According to Sternglass, the sudden explosion of a "quasar" is almost identical to the Big Bang, but just simply involves less energy and matter. Thus Sternglass's model affirms that our universe continues to evolve, in a way somewhat like the "steady state" model proposed by Fred Hoyle and others, in that there is a steady production of new neutrons & protons, by quasars.  One reckons that this might be the source of the ultra-high-energy protons found in "cosmic rays" which strike Earth's upper atmosphere [Ref.#7].


According to Ref.#7, while "the detailed physics are, naturally, incredibly complicated and not very well-understood ... active galactic nuclei are strong contenders" to be considered as the source of the "ultra-high-energy cosmic rays" which astronomers observe.  Please note that Sternglass provides a different explanation for the source of power of active galactic nuclei than that of the standard model of cosmology.  According to Sternglass, the “supermassive” object at the center of a galaxy is more like a “white hole” than a “black hole.” This is because, in Sternglass's model, nothing gets sucked in, and large amounts of stuff come out !!


While Sternglass regarded the heavy objects at centers of galaxies as "black holes" ---(and referred to them as such)--- he was very clear that they are not like the "black holes" in the standard model of cosmology.  For one thing, they are generally larger than a textbook "black hole" of equal mass, as we detail below.



Part 3:  STERNGLASS'S TABLE 1  . . .

. . . might be his most enduring contribution to our understanding of physics, because it provides data which supports the existence of a substance not currently understood or acknowledged by the standard model.  In it, Sternglass details "Masses, sizes, and rotational periods of cosmological systems predicted by the electron pair model of matter" [p.234, Ref.#1]. Note that when he says "electron pair" he means "electron-positron pair" ----- and that the mass of a "cosmological system" [cosmo.syst] might be as large as that of a galaxy, or larger, or as small as that of a pi-meson !!  We believe that, by "thinking outside the box" like this, Sternglass has found a pathway toward the truth which other truth-lovers might be willing to investigate further.


Using data in Table 1, one can derive a math formula for the radius of a cosmological system [cosmo.syst] in terms of its mass:

R(cosmo.syst)  = 2.G.[square root of (Mu.Ms)] / c.c (Eqn.1),

where "G" is Newton's gravitational constant, "Mu" is the mass of our universe, "Ms" is the mass of the system, and "c" is the speed of light.  Note that this is a modified "Schwarzschild equation" -----a term which one can google if one wants or needs to. Inspection of Eqn.1 reveals that, for every cosmo.syst, regardless of its mass or size, the radius of the system is proportional to the square root of its mass [p.225, Ref.#1].  Note also that if the system's mass is equal to or less than that of about ten protons then there is a factor of 137.036, (the inverse of the fine-structure constant), in the denominator on the right side of the equation, to account for the "relativistic shrinkage" which affects the tiny systems:

R(tiny cosmo.syst)  = 2.G.[square root of (Mu.Ms)] / c.c.(137.036) (Eqn.1a),

where 137.036 is the inverse of the fine-structure constant.  


Note that, according to the standard model, the radius of a "black hole" is given by:

R =  2.G.M / c.c (Eqn.2), where "M" is the object's mass.  Comparison with Eqn.1 reveals that the radius of a Sternglass cosmo.syst is larger than that of a "black hole" of equal mass, except in the case of the largest cosmo.syst, whose mass is that of our entire universe, and whose radius is equal to that of a "black hole" of equal mass.  "Although we hardly think of our world in this way, according to this model for matter, we live in a rotating 'black hole' from which no light can escape" -----Sternglass, p.205, Ref.#1.


Below is a replica of Sternglass's "Table 1" [page 234, Ref.#1], where he lists mass and size data for many different sizes of cosmological systems, some as large as a galaxy, or larger, and some as small as a pi-meson.  For simplicity I have ignored the rotational periods of the systems, which also appear in the Table 1 in Sternglass's book. Plus, I have filled in some of the details which Sternglass neglected in the section where the sub-atomic sized objects appear.  Interestingly, there is a sudden reduction of the radius by a factor of 137 when the mass is approximately that of ten protons, near the place which Sternglass calls "stage 27." There is a reason for this, which is too tedious and distracting to explain here.  Just remember this if you bother to check any of the data: at stage 27, the radius suddenly shrinks by a factor of approx. 137, from approx. 5.4E-11 cm down to approx. 3.9E-13 cm. As an aside, which I would be happy to discuss further, by email, I'll say that this sudden shrinkage is related to the nature of the everywhere-present medium-of-space, often in the past referred to as "ether."  



Table 1:  Mass and Size Data for Sternglass Cosmological Systems


Stage  / mass (grams)  / radius (cm, light-years)  / name/comment


0 1.58E58 2.35E30, 2.49 trillion entire universe

1 1.54E55 7.34E28, 78 billion super-complex of galaxies

2 1.51E52 2.24E27, 2.4 billion galaxy complex

3 1.47E49 7.00E25, 74 million galaxy cluster

4 1.44E46 2.14E24, 2.3 million large galaxy, such as our Milky Way (approx. a trillion stars)

5 1.40E43 6.68E22, 70 thousand small galaxy (approx. a billion stars)

6 1.37E40 2.04E21, 2.2 thousand "globular cluster" (approx. a million stars)

7 1.34E37 6.37E19, 68 star-cluster (approx. a thousand stars)

8 1.31E34 1.95E18, 2.1 average-sized star, such as our Sun

... ...

... ...

... ...

... ...


27 8.33E-24 3.94E-13 mid-way between the Upsilon-meson and the J/psi-meson

27.5 2.515E-25 6.99E-14 pi-meson




{Note that the pi-mesons in Sternglass's model, which (according to his model) form the basis of the structures of all the other kinds of matter, including protons and neutrons, are slightly heavier than the spin-zero neutral pi-meson, (which is known to have a mass of approx. 2.406E-25 gram).  This is because the pi-mesons in his model have a total angular momentum of one, not zero, as Sternglass details in the book [Ref.#1]. See Appendix A, below}


Note also that the masses and radii given in the table are those of the entire system.  For example, the mass given for our sun includes that of all the objects which orbit around it, as well as large amounts of gas and dust within the given radius.  In the case of our sun, this radius is given in the table as approx. 2 light-years, which is why the nearest star to us is approx. 4 light-years away. In other words, our solar system occupies an "inner space" [Sternglass's words] whose radius is approx. 2 light-years, as does the star which is our nearest neighbor in space.  In Sternglass's model, for every large object in space, as well as for tiny objects such as pi-mesons, each has an "inner-space" [his words] associated with it, whose size was determined before the big bang started, as he details in Ref.#1.





As one can see, Sternglass’s Table 1 predicts that the masses and sizes of large astronomical systems such as galaxies and galaxy clusters should differ by a factor of approximately a thousand, although some might differ by a factor of twice or half that.  In his book [Ref.#1] Sternglass explains why one might expect the large objects in space to show this pattern of quantization regarding mass and size; it’s related to the special kind of divide-in-half scenario which cosmological systems undergo as they divide in half, over and over again, without radiating any energy, producing more and more smaller and smaller systems, according to the model.  One can read more details re this process, (which I call "the count-down to the Big bang"), in Refs. #1 & #8.


A quick google-search reveals many references to quantized red-shifts which astronomers have observed during the past 50 years.  Additionally, Sternglass notes that “W. G. Tifft [Ref.#9] in 1976 [found] that the rotational velocities of spiral galaxies seem to be ‘quantized’ in steps involving integral multiples of 36 kilometers per second, since the masses of galaxies and all other astronomical objects are not randomly distributed … but differ by discrete factors of 2, 4, 8, 16 from the mean value” [p.236, Ref.#1, writer’s emphasis added].  One would expect that, just as quantized masses might imply quantized rotational velocities, as Sternglass details on p.236 of his book, likewise quantized rotational velocities might be expected to imply quantized redshifts, as astronomers have observed [e.g., Ref.#10].  





Following Sternglass, we say that, according to the model which we offer here, after approximately 270 generations of divide-in-half events, the cosmological systems are approximately the size of pi-mesons, as already mentioned.  Sternglass says that the pi-meson is the smallest cosmological system, and that four pi-mesons form the outside part of every proton or neutron. Alternatively, in the model which we offer here, we say that each of the four ep-pairs is more massive than a pi-meson, (by a factor of approx. 8/5), and that their radii are larger by a factor of approx. 5/4, so that the orbital angular momentum of each pair is twice that of a pi-meson.  Thus, the main differences between the proton/neutron model which we offer here and Sternglass's proton/neutron model are that, in the model which we offer here:

(1)  The ep-pairs around the outside of a proton or neutron are arranged in the shape of a tetrahedron.

(2)  They are larger and more massive, each with an orbital angular momentum twice as large.


According to the model offered here, five [5] of these ep-pairs, with a total mass of 5 x (4.0546E-25 gram) = 2.0273E-24 gram form a neutron and release some binding energy.  Given that the known mass of a neutron is 1.6749E-24 gram, this means that the binding energy released is the energy equivalent of the difference between the two masses, i.e., 3.524E-25 gram, equivalent to approx. 3.17E-4 erg, equivalent to approx. 200 MeV.  When trillions of the little rascals undergo this phase transition at the same time, (visualize an H-bomb), it’s enough to generate a temperature of > a trillion degrees, which is enough to drive the formation (one wants to say “creation”) of the first atomic nuclei, such as those of hydrogen and helium, and lithium.  


Note that the ratio of energy-released to mass-of-source is approx. 3.524 / 20.27, i.e., approx. 17 % for this exothermic process, while for an H-bomb it’s only approx. 0.6 % or so.  




Sternglass has developed a model which does not agree with some of the so-called “standard model” --- but which provides a “self consistent” [his words, by phone, to me, 2012] way of understanding the true nature of so-called “dark matter” and “dark energy” --- and the true source of the immense power of quasars.  Hint:  nothing gets sucked in, while large amounts of stuff come out.  Any researcher who is curious about the answers to some of the current mysteries in physics and/or astronomy might want to look at Sternglass’s work.  





1)  Sternglass, Ernest, book:  Before the Big Bang (1997, 2001).

2)  Kragh, Helge, book:  Quantum Generations (1999).

3)  Ford, Kenneth W., book:  The Quantum World (2004).

4)  Lemaitre, Georges, book:  The Primeval Atom (English translation 1950).

5)  Dorazio, Mark Creek-water, online essay:  "A Semi-classical Calculation Re Proton Radius,"

6)  Sternglass, Ernest, essay:  "The Origin of Black Holes in Active Galactic Nuclei," AIP Conference Proceedings 254 (New York, 1992);  also published in a book titled Testing the AGN Paradigm (1992) pp. 105-108.

7)  Sutter, Paul, online essay:  "High-Energy Whodunit: the Origins of the 'OMG Particle',"  (12 August 2018).

8)  Dorazio, Mark Creek-water, book:  What Are "Quarks" ??  Essays re the Work of Dr. Ernest Sternglass and Dr. Menahem Simhony (2016)

9)  Tifft, W.G., essay:  “Discrete states of redshift and galaxy dynamics --- Parts 1,2, and 3,” Astrophysical Journal 206: 38–56 (1976);  211: 31-46 (1977);  211: 377-391 (1977).  



########### << END OF ESSAY >> ###########

© Copyright 2019 Mark Creek-water Dorazio. All rights reserved.

Add Your Comments: