If the C-R theory is correct, and highly energetic ions are constantly whizzing around in the confines of outer space, there should be some measurable events and compounds. While it would not necessarily invalidate the C-R theory if this prediction is not fulfilled, I would predict that helium compounds should be detectably abundant. I would base this conclusion on several observations.
First, next to hydrogen, helium is the next most abundant element in the universe.
Second, there is an incredible amount of ionizing energy available, meaning Helium should be found in the ionized condition nearly as often as hydrogen.
Third, once the helium atom has chemically bonded, general conditions in space will remain suitably near-vacuum and low temperature enough that some amounts of Helium compounds should be able to accumulate.
Fourth, every so often, the helium should be displaced by almost any element which is more electronegative.
Fifth, when this event occurs, there should be a spectral emission detected from this de-heliazation of a molecule.
Admittedly, helium compounds could occur even if the C-R theory is totally full of gas. I would regard the detection of abundant amounts of helium compounds as an offshoot from the C-R theory.
C-R Theory: The Next Generation
or: `Mass Cooking to Feed the World
There has been speculation that the elements comprising our sun, as well as our beloved home planet, the earth, may be the result from the elementary particles left over from one or two earlier novas or supernovas. If so then all of the heavier elements composing our solar system are here because of our sun being a 2nd or 3rd generation star. The C-R theory would allow this.
The reason for the speculation has been that, a first generation sun, after the Big-Bang, powered by the fusion of hydrogen into helium, would not have possessed the sufficient compliment of heavy elements to allow the earth to exist. Current theories suggest that a minimum of one nova from an earlier generation star, if not two, would be required to allow the nuclear material composing our sun to have achieved or accumulated sufficient elements heavier than helium to create a workable earth.
Leftovers, Again!??
The C-R theory certainly does not deny that this new generation requirement could have been the case. Here is an alternate, possibly less unlikely scenario. Consider the matter left over from the Active Zone inside of the Black-Hole which underwent the Big-Bang. This undeterminably old, leftover matter would already be sufficiently enriched with heavy elements, that the planet earth could have already existed at the creation. (I point this out because it allows a scientific possibility that this could have been the case. Interestingly, the Bible claims that indeed, the earth did exist at the beginning of creation, and that the sun was created somewhat later. If anyone should KNOW the correct explanation, I would suspect that the Creator should.)
Broke Tomorrow
If the rest of the theory has seemed improbable to you: Here are two possibilities for what should well be the wildest possible speculations ever in print!
The C-R theory has concluded from observation, that our Universe exists entirely within an Active Zone inside of a very large Black-Hole. Let us raise this question; are we forever destined to remain trapped inside this recycling Black-Hole? Will there come a time in the very distant future where our descendants will face the ultimate temptation to actively try to avoid this fate?
This Universe Ain't Big Enough For The Both Of Us
Imagine our future progeny desiring to escape from the (up to 15-20 billion light years in diameter) confines of our cramped universe. At some distant time in their future, our species of humans may possess the knowledge, the ability, the foresight, and the desire to modify the nature of the universe.
Within a few 10 billions of years, our species may well be able to direct the motion of many solar and galactic masses outward in the universe. This would decrease the internal density of our active zone, and allow the outer boundary (the inner Schwarzschild radius) of the universe to expand outward. If this technique could be done, there are two distinct possibilities:
A Cosmic Blunder: Scrambling the Cosmic Egg
[If We're not too Chicken to Try]
or: Fouling Our Cage
The first possibility is that our perfectly recycling universe could be deliberately and irreversibly expanded beyond a point of practical recoverability.
Could our species ultimate fate or destiny be: to forever ruin our universe's infinitely engineered lifetime?
Would our rulers, our dreamers, and our scientists of the far future be responsible enough, capable of exercising caution, or wise enough about the foreseeable consequences of errors to gamble with the possibility of messing-up everybody's forever.
Springing the Trap: Opening the Cage Door
Creation or Evolution, Where's The Missing Link?
or: Unlinking the chain until it's missing
The second possibility is nearly as thought provoking. Could a natural reason for our species creation or evolution be: Our species is the intended "tool" of the universe to allow the universe to be expanded out of the Black-Hole phase. This would allow humanity and civilization to progress further distance-wise, than could ever be the case while we were still confined in our billions of light-year wide "cage". We would no longer remain prisoners, trapped forever inside a closed universe caused by a Black-Hole.
Is humanity the (un?)intentional and next-critical (missing) link in the chain of evolution for the progress of the universe?
Biological meddling with the physics inside of a Black-Hole is a viable alternative rivaling the need for our universe to acquire new cosmological forces. Compared to the need for the creation of a fourth or fifth basic force, human interference with the natural working of any ecologically balanced system which we can gain access to is a known fact.
Could this option hint at a deliberate or guided plan to use humans to overcome a basic design limit inherent in the universe?
Could our children's children's.....children be the creator's or the universe's own tool to escape the Black-Hole trap (or play)pen?) which we seem to be in?
Express Your Opinion, Vote Now
In either of the above two cases, will humanity, or the leaders at that time, possess the wisdom to select the proper choice? It is frightening to realize that: if it can be thought of, it may someday be able to be done. All of these inventions speak of the modern ability to grant the wildest wishes and dreams of peoples in earlier times. Fortunately, neither choice is of imminent concern.
Observation: Starting Conditions
or: Should We Just Start All Over?
Most conventional Big Bang theories suffer from an alarming condition: their predictions of the current basic properties of the universe are based almost exclusively on "chances" in the original starting conditions. If the original starting conditions aren't exactly right, the predicted conditions we would have now aren't very safe. Any small deviation in original density, temperature, cooling, compactness, or expansion tendencies could possibly drastically alter the current make-up of the universe.
The properties of the basic particles themselves are held hostage to those starting conditions at the Big Bang. Any small change at the start is predicted to alter any one or more of a number of factors.
What's A Wise Return on Investment?
How About Holding Properties For the Future.
Here are some of the parameters thought to be held hostage to the starting conditions as the Big Bang: the mass of the electron and the proton, the charge, and spin of those particles, too. The number of particles (i.e., total mass) in the universe, the speed of light, the relative strength of the basic forces, especially gravity. In short, there is almost no theoretical certainty as to which properties would be conserved.
If the initial conditions changed, would any of the above properties return unchanged, i.e., be allowed to remain constant? Which properties would change at the whim of a small change in the matter/energy, density, angular spin, charge ratio or a random change invested into the starting conditions?
One of the most remarkable of all the predictions from the C-R theory is that the theory virtually does not care about the starting conditions of the universe. The density, the amount of starting matter vs energy, the number of particles, and other 'conditions' do not affect the basic physics of the C-R theory. The explanation follows.
Basic Properties: To Stay Fixed is The Best Investment
The biggest reason that the C-R theory does not care about the universe's initial starting conditions is that all of the basic parameters are fixed. All of the starting materials were established forever ago (and they always were that way.)
At the Big Bang, the basic properties of the main particles never need to change, and have no easy (if any) way to change. Since some of these basic particles remain in their current [unchanging] state by occupying the main Neutral Zone throughout the Big Bang process, they retain their fixed properties. In addition, any matter/energy trapped in a neutral zone, although time inactivated, does not undergo sufficient stress to change any of the subatomic properties, other than the standard energy and momentum changes common to all particle interactions.
Because of these conditions, the C-R theory has no need for, and no way to change any of the basic properties of the universe, other than recycling and thus refreshing the balance of matter/energy. If the universe was designed to recycle as the C-R theory supposes, then the effective lifetime of these particles is infinite. Even if some few zillions are annihilated into pure energy, some few zillion others will be re-created recycling the left over energy, and the overall grand balance of things will remain constant.
That's Odd(s)
By the C-R theory, the contents of the universe do recycle. Each cycle will be remarkably similar, even if some ongoing changes or trends do occur from Big Bang to Big Bang. There is no reason to expect (re-)cycle #2 to be vastly different from #100 or from # googolplex (even if the # googolplex recycle took place long ago.)
The Matter of Choice
Because the C-R theory predicts the universe (re)uses the basic matter in the universe to recycle, the matter and the universe have a vested interest in remaining the same. While the C-R theory may not be as esoterically interesting as a conventional theory stating that all matter (re-)occurs from nothing at this one (if any more?) Big Bang, there is a comforting and intellectually profound simplicity to the prediction that the matter/energy which occupies this universe now has always occupied this universe, and always will occupy this universe.
Intellectuals may debate until doomsday whether it is more unreasonable to assume that all of the matter/energy which surrounds us happened this once by random chance, or whether this matter/energy has always been and will always be. Assessing the probabilities over infinity, the C-R way, the probability of existence is infinity over infinity, which divides roughly into a ratio of 1 over 1. With the conventional theory, the probability over an infinity of time for any singular Big Bang could be as low as a minimum of 1 over infinity.
Possibly, with a favorable element of chance, the non C-R Big Bang method could have it's probability as high as infinity over infinity, but strictly in a betting sense, these odds favor the C-R theory by a longshot.
A GUTS FEELING
Current theories depend on the assumption that this universe started from a singularity approx. 10-35 meters in width. Since all of the basic properties of the universe are held hostage by the "necessity" to emerge from this dimension, any potential theory is placed into a relativistically impossible straightjacket (by C-R standards).
The C-R theory would predict, regardless how correct the conventional theory is in describing reality, that theory must fall apart when the wrong starting conditions are imposed. By requiring our competing theories to account for creating starting conditions which the C-R startup Big-Bang never encounters, the results of the competition must be impossibly skewed in the C-R theory's favor.
A Shoehorn's No Help When Your "Shoes" are 10+47 Sizes Too Small
As a realistic guess, the C-R theory might suppose that the universe started out at least the size of 10+8 meters. This would be a minimum comfortable size for all of the matter in the universe to snuggle down into quark to neutron sizes, with a full active zone existing in the middle. Even at this "large" starting size, the inner active zone may not be content to exist this small. A much larger inner active zone is a distinct possibility, although the actual size of the inner active zone will make very little change in the conditions encountered in the universe today.
Since the C-R theory is predominantly based on the discovery of the "recycling-process" pathway, there is little, if any fine tuning of fudge factors needed to make the process work. Just as a waterfall only needs water, height, and gravity, so the C-R theory only needs a Black-Hole with some of the contents of the universe inactivated, a rather well-stocked neutral zone, an active zone at the center, (which is mandatory for any C-R type Black-Hole, anyway), and a triggering source.
With the above listed combination of ingredients, and a chain of events almost as simple as lighting the fuse to a stick of dynamite, the process is self-regulating. The triggering mechanism would be the hardest concept to iron out, and any external, orbiting gravitational body could qualify.
A Sort-Of [An] Explanation
The basic premises of the C-R theory would be that Black-Holes exist. Matter can fall into Black-Holes. Black-Holes can sort matter by mass; which also HINT, HINT, by default sorts by electrical charge. Black-Holes can inactivate the matter stored within, time frozen. What goes into the Black-Hole can eventually come out, given the proper circumstances.
Water The Chances of This Happening?
While the overall C-R theory may be hard to swallow, each of the steps seems somewhat realistic, and none are even fractionally as weird as some events suggested by competing theories. When viewed systemically, the C-R theory is only slightly more absurd than the hydrological cycle.
Let us suppose that the earth is 3 to 5 billion years old. Reason would suggest the hydrological cycle on earth could on average recycle most water molecules at a minimum of once a year for the entire suspected life of the planet. Current guesswork would suppose our planet's water molecules have survived through at least 3-5 billion water recycling reuses using this scenario.
Theoretically, the likelihood of a simple molecular compound (i.e., water) arranging itself for billions of recyclings must be seen as equally improbable when compared to a larger, older system where the contents of the entire universe have either come-up-with, or been designed-into a similar type-of recycling system.
The fact that the first example's probability for water-molecule reuse, over billions of years is allowed to be near 100% should not obscure the fact that the second alternative example should be no more improbable.
Physically, we would be hard pressed to allow a water-recycling process to occur billions of times successfully in a sub-system, and forbid matter/energy recycling from occurring in the universe system.
Our use of the hydrological cycle example does not imply that recycling must occur. We would be hard pressed to exclude total recycling as a possibility.
Elephant Eggs (and Their Ant-ics)
We should be able to see immediately that the C-R theory is not hamstrung by the same impossible initial conditions necessitated by the constraint imposed by emergence from the singularity. Just as there would be impossible developmental limits imposed on an elephant emerging from an egg the size of an ant's egg, so conventional theories have restricted their options unnecessarily. Once the space and size limit of the singularity are removed, conventional theories like superstrings or GUTS may finally be able to blossom forth.
The C-R theory demonstrates why some of the initial conditions of the universe are independent from the basic properties of matter and energy. The C-R theory is no longer constrained at the start of the Big Bang due to the conditions which exist today. The embarrassing necessity to create a full-fledged universe from absolutely, or nearly nothing, is also eliminated. At least 90% of the current extrapolations which physicists, astronomers, and cosmologists spend 99+% of their time worrying about will be found to be useless. Like an engineer calculating pi to 60 decimal places to create a new mold for a rubber ball; the majority of current high-density/high-temperature/early-time research may be similarly overcalculated/underproductive.
If the matter in this universe never was subjected to conditions even remotely approaching the conditions in a singularity, as speculated upon in current research; then almost the entire process and progress in research represents a Chinese fire-drill.
Our Competition is Whipped
Like the best laid-out plans for expansion/factory modernization of the turn of the last century buggy-whip manufacturers, the entire academic output of this generation of astronomers and cosmologists may have been wasted. The billions of dollars and thousands of man-hours invested in projects like the SSC and other high-energy physics research, designed in part to give insight into the creation of the universe, may only produce a few new esoteric, sub-atomic particles which none of the general public will ever use, much less, remember. Given the limited-magnitude increase of the range expansion of energy which these super-colliders can produce, over and above the current generation of colliders, is the expenditure worth, say, a billion dollars per new sub-atomic particle-type?
The C-R theory strongly hints that much of the current theoretical work in astronomy may be based on a false assumption, or a false guess. Let us only hope that some of the current research will be useful, if C-R does prove to be true.
UNJUSTIFIABLE SPECULATION:
This doesn't fit in with the C-R theory, and has no rational basis by any currently justifiable knowledge. The speculation is intriguing, and does cover a long range possibility. It is at least as outrageous as if Galileo or Leonardo daVinci predicted the Moon landing 500 years before it happened.
500 years in the Future
(A hot time will be had by all)
Dateline: Sol (or just Sunny, to you)
By 500 years in the future, I would expect to have a fully-operational, manned laboratory floating on the surface of the sun. To overcome the limitations of gravitational pull, the personnel could be immersed in an inner shell, containing some buoyant, oxygenated fluid. The outer-most shell would surround a large hollow space, to allow for the limited buoyancy of the solar fluid at the surface.
Whether the shell would be composed of a type of low thermal conductivity ceramic, a near-perfect energy reflector, or simply a proportionally super-cooled metal shell to plasma-heat-pump, 500 years of progress in research and development should suffice to solve the logistical cooling problem. Calculate the amount of obstacles which would have to be overcome. Figure the odds against each happening in your lifetime. Throw away the odds once you die, and figure that someone younger will come up with the insight and the techniques to accomplish the mission.
Obtaining the energy required to maintain the cooling-effect should represent no major challenge. If an adequate supply of energy can't be obtained on the surface of the sun to run a super-powerful but simple heat pump, then where? The only foreseeable problem could be the lack of a suitable heat differential to allow any engines to function.
Transportation to and from the site would represent the biggest challenge. Again, the surface of the Sun should possess sufficient energy density to power an adequate propulsion system to allow the visitors to return at their leisure. Energy for cooling could represent another challenge before the craft lands on the surface. Once on the surface, the fluid should be manipulatable enough to allow for adequate heat-flow and transport.
As to the why; why not? If pioneer explorers could face the extreme, life-threatening conditions at the poles with only protective insulation-type of clothing, certainly their descendants would be willing to brave the air-conditioned environment aboard a manned solar laboratory. If Neil Armstrong can be remembered as the first man on the Moon, what daring future individual wouldn't jump at the chance to be along with the first group to land on the surface of our earth's only practical source of stable, super-abundant energy.
If there are only things now which can be learned from man descending to the depths of the ocean, how much more significant will be the opportunity to obtain the first direct access to any star? Regardless of the risks, if the engineering challenges are solvable, there will be individuals clamoring and competing to be the first. I daresay the conquest of the Sun will be the last, and most potentially spectacular of all of the explorations of any frontier in the Solar system.
You may scoff if you wish, and you may shake your head and believe (maybe rightly) that I'm off my rocker, but mankind can prove remarkably inventive in overcoming a challenge with 500 years to utilize. One thing is for certain, if you believe it can't be done, you will succeed in your efforts not to do it. On the other hand, if you don't believe it can't be done, you stand a much better chance to succeed.
************
Large scale turbulence may make the above untenable even with 500 years to work out the bugs. An afterthought.
