The main compliance requirements and condition of cosmological
model of reality
For any cosmological theory or cosmomodel’s test it is
suggested a test consisted of five points, in case of non
satisfy to even one requirement of which the given
cosmomodel is considered wrong, inconsistent to the
reality.
Here those requirements:
1. The first and the most important. our universe is
finite, local, physical system and belongs to a whole
similar physical systems’ class. Therefore, scientific
cosmology must study and describe such physical
systems with their finite parameters.
2. The cosmomodel which describes our universe must
explain the flat place/the time of occurrence of a
physical nature, the structure and the physical
results.
3. The cosmomodel corresponding to the reality must
describe and static, stationary and non-stationary
conditions or its unity of the firmness and the
versatility.
4. The scientific cosmology must solve the entropy’s
paradox, exclude the ‘’heat death’’ of the universe.
1. Cosmological theory, model
5. And finally the outermost condition, which comprises the
definitive purpose of the cosmology and the whole
physics. The scientific cosmology or cosmomodel must be
able to describe the recycling of matter in the
Metauniverse, which so ensure the final’s endlessness.
I suggest to all experts to check with this simple test and adjust
their cosmological imaginations.Surprisingly, but it is a fact.
Even the most verified, adjusted ΛCDM-cosmomodel, which
especially satisfy with experiments and the standard
cosmomodel of a whole collection of the facts achieved with
the reviews does not satisfy to no one of five requirements of
our test. Why? Maybe our test’s requirements are wrong?
Entirely. Being informed about the ‘’Armon structure of
Metauniverse’’ book, you will meet with the settlement details
of those issues. And here present the basis of those
requirement with total lines.
1. It is confirmed with astronomical reviews, that our
universal environment is expanding. It follows, that our
universe develops to a certain direction, is a finite, local,
physical system. It is differed of immortal universe (or
Metauniverse), which can’t develop to only one direction,
in which dominates the absolute roam of the time. The
new studies of background (relict) microwave radius also
say, that our universe’s space is finite. This means that the
requirement of being finite, local, physical system of our
universe has and experimental and theoretical basis, from
which emanate very important conclusions: our universe
must be characterized with finite, physical parameters,
it can’t be expanded or contracted interminably, it
can’t interminable say in a contracted and expanded
state. It must have ‘’external plan’’, so is in
interaction with the environment or with physical
systems like its.
And the most important: It can’t be unique, singular…
although tentatively it is impossible directly to prove
and ground the existence of a whole class of physical
systems like our universe, but historical development
experience of the cosmological imaginations shows,
that for a certain time the space agencies considered
exclusive, in the next round of astronomy
development, when are discovered like those, become
ordinary ‘’representatives’’ belonging to the similar
class. In the present stage it is a very important class,
from which it must do correct conclusions. Whilst the
supporters of ‘’Multuvers’’ today became modern (A.
Linde, A. Vilenkin, lee Smallin and others), considering
our universe exclusive, unique, believe that there are
many other universes, but with different physical laws
and and physical constants…
1
1. Scientifi cosmology must get rid of the endlessness and suspenses: It must exclude the
singularity , finite collapse and finite expanding: anticollapse.
This point of view is false and insufficient for the simple reason,
that doesn’t coincide and is against to the general, primary
direction of the physic’s ideological evaluation: Physic starves
go from diversity to the general, to the consistent, and Lee
Smallin refund us industry recognition of the finite diversity… In
the conditions of hegemony of this idea, I am bound just to
emphasize, that this point of view undergoes us to deadlock
and the only exit is the experienced path of the physics: ahead
with generalizations: towards to the new knowledges. Our
universe belongs to a whole similar finite physical system’s
class, which emerge, develop and destroy with similar general
regularities and which are described four universal constants
and changeable, and are differed of each other with
individuality and not with oneness.
On this occasion, me: philosopher must slate to expertsphysicist for gambling ‘’the antrop principle’’. That principle we
must view as a general philosophical orientation, and no more.
In cosmomicrophysics the appearance of ‘’antrop principle’’
witnesses about the deep crisis and the impending revolution
dominating in that scientific area. The cosmophysics must solve
its problems exclusively with physic’s experimental and
theoretical resources: experiments and reviews, physical laws
and concepts.
2. As from the cosmology’s point of view as from the
general physic’s point of view the most essential and the
mainest problem is the physical explanation of flat
space/time. Physics as a science can’t get to its
thoroughness and finality, whilst hasn’t solved the age-old
problem of flat space. And its solution, which surely, is a
revolution not only in the physic’s, especially in the
cosmology’s sphere, but also generally in the humanities’
world-perception, has already derived in 1998 with
astronomers’ so called ‘’dark energy’s’’ revelation. Just
that fact confirmed with reviews, the phernomenon hasn’t
still theoretically been salvaged, has not ‘’digested’’. It
stays incomprehensible dark energy’s physical character,
structure. It is only clear its physical result, affect: It begets
repulsion, general antigravitation, which has been
discovered with views. But, as always, for knowing entirely
a new physical phenonmenon, scientist try to explain and
describe it through the ‘’old’’ theory. All such experiments
of cosmologys’ are reprobated to failure, whilst they
continue stay in old physic’s: only and only in the physic’s
frameworks which studies mass/energy. It is impossible to
explain the dark energy with the gravitation theory of
Einstein and with his Λ cosmological concepts or with
quintessence.
1. Only free moving physical system or only having positive inert mass physical systems
which studies the classical physics.
It is necessary to make a new theory: A new theory studying
and describing the universal repulsion or antigravitation, which
with the gravatation’s theory it will have and general lines and
essentially wil differ of its… such theory must import, make and
put into circulation new physical concepts and laws. So has
been always. this is the regular course of the science’s historical
and logical development. As the history dedicates, promoting
new ideas and laws in such turning sage of science are being
accepting with great struggle and difficulty. These all are saing
for that, that it is also necessary new physical concepts and
laws for the explanation for dark energy and for the
antigravitation promoted by it (dark energy), which, of course,
shouldn’t break the ‘’principles’ compliance’’ and should be old
theories’ sequel and development.
Moreover, with my deep conviction, the new, general
physical theory, firstly, must describe the agreement and unity
of gravitations and antigravitations, so must give the physical
explanation of the time/flat space. And surely it is not
necessary to revive such fictitious concepts of the past, as are
the vacuum, the ‘’ether’’ with modern modifications: ‘’new
ether’’, universal vacuum and so on.
During last two ages the physicists did everything to deny
and not to accept the existence of negative mass.
1. Physicists’ negatory treatment concerning to the inert mass of the free physical systems is
adequate, but their negatory approaching concerning to the negative gravitational mass (or
gravitational charging) is not justified. Physics doesn’t prohibit us nor law or principle to draw to
the logical correct conclusion: If the physical reason of space’s positive curvature is the positive
gravitational mass (charging), then the physical reason of the space’s negative curvature is the
negative gravitational mass. What is here ‘’unnatural’’? Vise versa: it is and natural, and logical,
and the most important, such approaching give possibility to discover the physical essence of
the mass, to describe the meaning of having positive or negative mark of mass.
They were accepting the existence of flat space without any
explanation and proposition because of being outstanding of
results confirmed by its experiment, but as soon as they were
trying to find the essence and depth explanation of those
results, immediately they were clinging of factitious concepts:
emptiness, vaccum, ether. Even the scientist like Einstein, who
were standing nearer to the physical character’s revelation of
the flat space, also stayed under the influence of old
imaginations and with either size and comment were accepting
the ‘’ether’’ concept as a physical reality. While the universal
repulsion idea promoted by himself was requiring accept
negative (gravitational) mass’s existence. Here in these
circumstances my problem is, that not only describe and
substantiate the necessity of negative gravitational mass
(negative gravitational charging), but also to discover the
existence of not free, devoid physical systems of the six type
formation of prematter, as well as flat space’s/time’s formation
and generation of those negative and positive components with
combination and balance.
The Armons’ theory gives not only the flat space’s/time’s
physical explanation, but also explain inertia’s character, those
space/time’s physical results.
New observations say, that out Metagalaxy’s space is nearly
flat with 97% accuracy… It is conclusion doing in the standard
cosmomodel’s frameworks and as marks A. Chernin in ist ‘’Dark
energy and space antigravitation’’ article: «Но что если
изотропное пространство является не приближенно
плоским, а строго плоским? Никаким наблюдательным
данным такая возможность, как мы упоминаем, не
противоречит. Более того, сегодняшняя рабочая
космологическая модель как раз и использует вариант
плоского пространства (но не как строгий результат, а как
простое и очень хорошее приближение к
действительности). На случай строго плоского пространства
постановка проблемы в духе Дикке не распространяется; не
действуют в этом случае приведенные выше новые [206]
соображения; не работает [224] и инфляционная модель.
Если «проблема строго плоского пространства» когда–либо
бозникнет (не очень ясно, правда, как это могло бы в
действительности произойти), то к ней придется искать
какие-то совсем иные подходы». Here the Armons’ theory is
given by the physical explanation and proposition of the strict
flat space’s real existence.
Modern cosmology, denying static and stationary
cosmomodel’s idea (Einstein, Hoyle, Bond, Gold and others),
accepts only our universe’s evolution model. Generally, when
the science fall from one extremeness into another, that
dedicates, that given science hasn’t still gotten to the
perfection, hasn’t gotten to the truth, and the truth is always in
the unity of the apposite point of views and ideas. Past age was
a period of evolutionism’s overcoming, which greatly
stimulated to the development of the whole science’s area,
including also Cosmology. But to absolute of the evolution’s
development idea, generally denying, excluding static,
stationary condition’s idea it is intolerable. And that mistake
comes from the past age’s ‘’caddish’’ materialism’s
philosopher, when the great part of the soviet philosophers
argued, if the matter (consequently also Metauniverse) undying
develops. Whilst in a time Engels said, that the matter for
existing undying, must be in the circulation undying. So, the
matter’s undying existence is related not only to developing
evolution, which means change from clear to hard, from old to
new, from little to big, from part to all, from element to
system… from past to future and so on, but also with the
changes of its opposite direction. And the most important any
changing contains in its static or stationary conditions of
firmness, rest, stability. In a word, because we accept that our
universe is finite, local physical system, then we also must
accept, that it can be as in the static, stationary as nonstationary conditions in the case of appropriate physical
conditions. Those two conditions are reciprocally related and
interconditioned, and it is intolerable accepting and describing
the one, to ignore, to overlook or more to deny the other. Vise
versa, it is very important and contain great secrets the passing
from one condition to another. Consequently, scientific
cosmology must accept and describe our universe’s not only
the static but also non-stationary conditions.
And for that it is necessary to find such symmetrical
cosmological equations, which describe a new cosmomodel,
which can have and invariable, static and changeable, nonstationary conditions. On this occasion, I can’t not express my
negative treatment towards to the categorical point of view
spread by the famous cosmologists, if поиски статических
решений космологических уравнений кажутся
принципиально неправильными.” (Новиков и другие). What
is good that not everybody thinks so and therefore search static
or stationary solutions. He: Einstein stood on the magistral
direction of the physic’s ideological development. His
processed gravitation’s theory and its equations hadn’t
cosmological static solutions . And for this reason he tried to
reform those… without physical proposition he inserted Λ
constant symbolizing the universal repulsion, through which he
might provide the balance of world attraction’s and repulsion’s
strengths. But as it was cleared (with A. Freedman’s and other’s
efforts), Einstein’s cosmomodel’s being static and stationary is
deceptive, so Λ cosmological constant doesn’t serve to the
purpose. And that is why, that Λ is constant, and the most
important it has not got physical proposition, in the Einstein’s
equations (on the right side) absents physical resource, reason,
bearer of the universal repulsion.
1
1. By the way, Einstein wanted to reform his gravitational field’s primary equations, refine
not only coming out of cosmological problems, but also as he said` in order to describe
the matter.
Especially, after Hubble’s discovery, Einstein deviated from the
physic’s evolution’s magistral direction chosen by himself:
generally abandoning from the universal repulsion idea. Here a
concrete example, how sometimes the experiments, the
reviews can abandon, hinder to the scientific creation. From
that, the experiments create static cosmological models were
continued, but that’s all crowned failure, because form one
hand they were continuing to stay in the framework of the
General Relativity Theory, form the other hand accepting
absolute idea of being static, generally denied cosmological
expansion.
3. The cosmomodel corresponding to the reality must solve
the paradox of entropy. It must exclude our universe’s
‘’heat death’’ possibility, so it must provide, describe
thermodynamic extreme balance between the universe’s
positive and negative components.
For the modern physic is known only one general type of
thermodynamic balance, which may call ‘’ energodominant
thermodynamic balance’’, to which are drawing the physical
systems through thermal barter. The modern physics considers
that situation idealized concept… frequently fictitious, unreal:
not exists in the nature, physical situation… From one hand, it is
adequate: in the energodominant physical processes it is
impossible to draw to extreme zero temperature. That may
theoretically ground so: in the c physic: it follows from the
t •T ≥

k
inequality, that T
Gc-physical
T
c5
≥
t
Gk
≠ 0.
The same arisens form the
inequality. More T
≠ 0,
the temperature
from zero can have different digital values, and that means: a)
T>0 or b) T<0, positive and negative temperature’s availability.
Moreover T temperature’s sign strictly depends on heat carrier
m mass’s sign:
mc 2
T= k
.
So, we draw to a epoch-making conclusion which is very
important for physic’s theory, so our universe as a
thermodynamic system has complex nature: consists of
thermodynamic positive and negative components, those unity,
as a result: T =T +T = 0 is a physically real existing limiting
tot
pos .
neg
situation of thermodynamic balance.
1
1. The discovery and propositon of thermodynamic limiting
(zero) balance is one of important achievements of
General physical theory (Armon’s theory). In the
thermodynamic space it was marked with the discovery of
limiting symmetry, which has important meaning not only
for the cosmology, but also generally for physics. In the
source of the discovery of that symmetry was standing
professor Terletski.
I repeat, the T
pos
andTneg .
never can be zero separately , but hand
1
in hand always give zero temperature, moreover T
pos
= Tneg .
always, in any stage of cosmoevoluation. Now it stays to
brighten on what physical interactions’ expense the T = 0 zero
thermodynamic balance is obtained. From the begging we must
underline, that the situation is a type of a strictly special,
specific thermodynamic balance, for the reason that the
situation is obtained not commonly: through the heat
interchange/energy interchange, but through isolation,
combination and unity of the positive and negative thermal
components.
tot
1. The T
pos
andTneg
not only never can have zero value, but also
never can have endless big or endless little digital values.
From Planck’s m ≥ m mass for little masses T = 10 k is the
32
pl
n
pl
extreme big, maximal value, and the minimal value is
decided with Armon number. So it is related to positive
components.
As to negative components, then our universe’s negative
mass, which compose antigravities’ integrity, though it is
_
added during the cosmoevoluation (the quantity of g -s is
adding, but as that mass is negative with its nature, then it is
getting on, if m adds n times, then in pursuant to m
neg .
pl
dwindles n times. So the m is the maximal digital value of
pl
negative component’s mass. In the same way are the positive
and negative components’ temperatures. For example in the
case of n=1 T = _ 10 k , and T = 10 k . In the beginning of our
32
neg
32
pos
universe’s cosmoevoluation the T has maximal value, and
neg .
T pos . has
minimal, and in the case of n=Ա, vise versa