YOU WERE THERE BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4_ElyNoQd0&feature=youtu.be

EX NIHILO- MOST COMPEX EXPLAINATION

Now exnihio is not a simple explaination you hve to explain how energy is converted into matter and then it explodes spontaneously without any cause that is material.

And ex-nihilo is just an instability in matter because energy converts to a unstable form of matter.

And this is just common sense if we are going to believe the big bang.

Because energy comes from another universe or dimension or brane.

And string theory is totally completely crazy because there are no branes.

And that is just it if you believe the clock theory Einstein is right and his equations can be converted into ten large dimensions but not six tiny curled up dimensions.

And if there is any way to convert Einsteins 4D space time into six tiny curled up dimensions then NASA does not know about it.But at the same time they cannot imagine a universe of ten large spacial dimensions and that is what we need to convert Einsteins equations into another dimension.

Maybe there are more than ten or maybe there are less than ten.But string theoy says that there are ten dimensions four large spacial and six tiny curled up.But when did they curl up.And that is a silly question because they were always curled up and they were never large spacial dimensions.So you see how appealing the idea of evolution really is.The extra dimensions evolved from large spacial dimensions but Nasa is sure that this is incompatable with string theory.And they could be 100% correct because the more complex solution that there are not ten dimensions is the solution that ex-nihilo proposes that there were only four dimensions in the begining.And that there were never six tiny curled up dimensions.And this possible because you can't convert EInsteins 4D space time into six tiny extra dimensions.And Nasa is certain they have done the math and they have not even begun to do the math.Because if evolution depends on their being six large spacial dimensions in addition to the four we know..

Then they will prove it and I believe they can prove whatever they want toprove by leaving exnihilo out of the computers calculations.But if we run Hugh Ross testable creation model then we have a big bang that happened out of nothing.

And it just does not make sense.And if it does not make sense then the bible is right.

Because the bible says matter was without form and void.And the idea of ex-nihilo is not in the bible.And I for one believe ex-nihilo I don't believe in the big bang and I don't believe in my won hypothesis of evolution.Mainly because it is a non contradiction that is ex-nihilo.

It does not contradict Einsteins equations.

But evolution of the big bang produces a contradictory equation for matter.

And it is contradictory for quarks and gluons to be in the same state in the same place at the same time.This means they are a super fluid and it might mean they are a super solid.

Something in between solid and liquid and gas and plasma.Something that is all four states.

And that is a contradiction of Einsteins equations.Because the answer to the universe is the dice two answers for everything and the dice is just too simple and answer. Quantum theory can be added to Einsteins thoery at the big bang and both answers are correct.1+1=2 is the opposite of 2+2=4 and both apply at the same time.

But opposites often do not apply at the same time.

Like electrons and protons in same space.They repel and electoweak force is stronger than gravity.Only in the big crunch gravity is stronger than in a supa nova and maybe not.

And electrons and protons do not annihilate in a supa nova according to NASA.

But what if they do then nuetrons are set free from the nucleus and electrons and protons cancel charges and also become nuetrons this results in a nuetron core in the supa nova.

We can't know for certain what takes place in a supa nova they are just too far away if they were not gamma rays would destroy the earth.And gamma rays do in fact result from annihilation according to dirac.They are two photons and if they are gamma then they are light.

And gamma rays may result from annihilation as well as photons but that is not in diracs equation as far as I know.I really need to look up the original equation but it is not that simple Oppenheimer proved it wrong and he is a genius.So no one believes Dirac was right to begin with.

But he was wrong then electrons and protons cannot annihilate.Not even when atoms are unstable in circular orbits because then gravity overcomes the electroweak force and the replusion between electrons and protons in overcome and they are in the same state and space at the same time.Because a teaspoon full of protons weighs a tonne and so do electons and neutrons.They are all supermassive because of the gravity of the big crunch.

and this is nonsense electrons and protons can never be in the same space.

And that may be the end of evolution.

Because we need to explain the singularity and singularities do not form except from collapsed nuetron stars.And they do neutrons form without exploding stars.

And stars explode when they are contracted into a small space.

And a lot of thermonuclear energy is released but does that cook the nuetrons and their energy is contained by the force of gravity until explosive force releases all of that energy at once like from a glass bottle.

A bottle of gravity.Contains the explosion of the thermonuclear energy until it is released all at once.

But does this recipie makes sense of is it pepsi chicken is there no way to know for sure.

And there really is not we cannot reproduce the conditions of the big bang.

If we could we would destroy the universe.

It is chicken that is not cooked to perfection with 11 herbs and spices it is not the Colonels secret recipie that is creation ex-nihilo.It is plan B it is God plan B that may apply in any one of 10^500 dead universes.

But without exnihilo creation matter cannot produce life.

Matter has to be protoplasm it has to be the right kind of matter for life.

That means it has to be quark gluon plasma.But what if they have it wrong about the big bang.

well we have to go by the computer since we cannot work it out ourslelves and we can work out that a solid that is a liquid and a gas is a contradiction.

And the evidence points to a contradiction in EInsteins equations at he begining.

But that is saying Einstein is wrong when we could say instead that Einsteins equations must hold true at the begining for a theory to be correct.

This very complex how can EInsteins thoery and quantum theory both hold true at the begining.

The answer is quantum theory does not hold true where gravity is very very strong.

And Einsteins theory does not hold true where gravity is very very weak.

So gravity is a contradiction and we don't know if it was strong at the begining when matter did not exist because if matter did not give rise to energy then energy gave rise to matter.

And energy produces gravity as well as matter.

And that is the theory of dark energy that it accounts for the expansion.

And it dark matter that accounts for the expansion.But no one has ever detected dark energy or matter.

So there is no proof that the universe will go on expanding............

If it eventually contracts then time will be reversed.And that is a complete crazy idea everything will run backward and it really is just common sense if you put a car into reverse it goes back over it previous steps so the universe run in reverse will go back to the big bang and before the big bang.

But according to Einstein there is no before the big bang.

And that is to make it clear that evolution is wrong.

But if evolution is right then Einstein is wrong about time time is a cycle of big bang big crunch.

And it is nuclear.Because it is a black hole and the penrose equation is the reverse of a black hole but according to harold Jeffreys it is too simple.

The big bang cannot simple be a black hole inside out.

If Hawking is wrong about the big bang then there is no mechanism for creation ex-nihilo.

If it is to be a part of the big bang.

Creaton ex-nihilo must have occured without a big bang singularity.

And it very possible that the big bang was not a singularity where time began.

And this is what you have argue if you believe Ockams rasor that time did not have a begining.

Or that it will not have an ending.

and maybe you can find reasons to believe time goes on forever.

But if the universe comes to an end one day as the bible says then the univese must have had a begining because God is the alpha and omega the begining and the ending.

So however the universe began God was there before the world began and He will be there will the world ends.

And if the world ends the universe ends only there is a new universe.

And that is a cyclical theory that God creates a new universe but it plan C it is created differently from a universe that does not last forever.

But what if that universe also has an end since it has a begining.

Then there would be an endless cycle of universes.

And that would they would loose energy.And wind down like a clock everything in them would slow down like a clock but they would not notice and they would loose energy so life would cease to exist.

And ex-nihilo means the universe was created with enough energy to not wind down and go back to a big crunch.

But the thoery of evolution means there was plenty of energy from neutrons which don't annihilate to produce energy.

And the energy was prior to the singularity so explain that NASA.

You can't because the energy was bottled up by gravity is my theory and it is a good one.

But is gravity like a bottle does it contain an explosion and why does the explosion eventually overcome gravity that is getting stronger and stronger.

The only answer that nuetrons compressed into the same state and space at the same time do exlode and the nuetron core is missing from some supa novas.

An a star can explode in a different direction this is a result of a second explosion of the nuetron core.But the question is why are there plusars why don't the nuetron cores always explode.

Things have to be just right for nuetrons.

And we don't know the recipie for pepsi chicken and that is the case with the thoery of evolution.

We don't know how the annihilation of electrons and protons provides the energy for the nuetrons to explode we know energy is produced and stored by gravity and it becomes exponential and it overcomes the force of gravity.

And that is too bad I have made a good case for evolution.

But I can make a good case for intelligent design because the universe is not just an uncontrolled explosion it is something that came out of a signularity and it did not it came out of nothing and a black hole reversed according to penrose is not nothing.

So we get an expansion because of creation exnihilo everything tends to expand when matter is created by energy.

And that does mean Hawking is right to reverse penrose equation.

Iam right to reverse penrose equation for a black hole in 10 large spacial dimensions universe with circular orbits. The result is an non contradiction for Einsteins equations.

and if that is the case then it is a singularity that is quite different to the one Hawking images.

I want you to write an essay on this topic and include all of the research so far on diracs equation and penrose equation and the mass energy equation for the big bang.

I want you to balance the equation for the big bang since it must balance for energy and mass to be correct and it must be complex enough to balance.,A great science paper starts with a blog so write an essay on my thoery of evolution.

PEPSI FRIED CHICKEN

Chicken that doesn't taste quite right...............not cooked properly not seasoned properly.

Anthropic principal opposite of descartes the intial starting conditions are not right in the simple evolutionary.

annilation of protons and electrons=nuetrons+ strongrgravity+ thermonuclear energy= singularity that gives rise to a big bang explosion of energy and matter...................

Something is missing how do you explain how a singularity can form that can explode can nuetrons explode even though some supa nova are missing nuetrons cores does that mean they exploded.

The recipie is missing the intelligent design to produce our fine tuned universe and our earth that is exactly right for life probably the only planet that is just right.

That is why we need to test an evolutionary theory of the big bang where everything is explained by an unbalanced contradictory equation and a testable creation model which everything is non contradictory.

Like Hugh Ross.......where the equation balances because energy is created from nothing rather than from something.The only way to get a universe where the net energy is zero.

THE GRAND DESIGN

Hawking said descartes said that the world would evolve the same regardless of the starting conditions obviously not so the starting conditions have to be just right if the big crunch did not produce neutrons there would not be a singularity if the universe evolved.

Is there a way of predicting the future from the past the clock and the dice togther don't produce the future from the past although they can predict the past by reversing the equation from our 4D space time and they predict a ten dimensional universe with circular orbits.

Quantum particles are unstable with circular orbits and so are stars and planets the opposite is eliptical which is stable.

We have to start with unstable stars planets and electrons and protons.

The anthropic principal is the opposite of descartes.

We have to have annihilation of electrons and protons to release neutrons- strongravity- thermonuclear energy to produce a singularity which will explode into a big bang.

A recipe of fried chicken that doesn't work is pepsi fried chicken the chicken is not cooked properly and does not taste right.

This evolutionary theory does not give us the earth we know from intial starting conditions maybe 10^500 other universes could have evolved but our did not.

The recipie is all wrong for our fine tuned earth.

The anthropic principal is the opposite of descartes.

The pepsie fried chicken is a universe that does not work to produce a tasty dish.

Like the earth...........If we work backward the earth must have been produced by a signularity that means nuetrons and annilation of atoms and thermonuclear energy but it is a rough recipie that cannot produce the universe as we know it there is something missing intelligent design.,.

A semiclassical approach to the Dirac equation

A semiclassical time evolution kernel and a trace formula for the Dirac equation. The classical trajectories that enter the expressions are determined by the dynamics of relativistic point particles. We carefully investigate the transport of the spin degrees of freedom along the trajectories which can be understood geometrically as parallel transport in a vector bundle with SU(2) holonomy. Furthermore, we give an interpretation in terms of a classical spin vector that is transported along the trajectories and whose dynamics, dictated by the equation of Thomas precession, gives rise to dynamical and geometric phases every orbit is weighted by. We also present an analogous approach to the Pauli equation which we analyse in two different limits. more...

Gravitation field in the Dirac equation

Since neutrons are spin half particles, one may consider that, in the absence of a magnetic field, their behavior should be correctly described by the Dirac equation. In the case with a gravitational field, described by a curved space-time, the Dirac equation is usually modified to the form derived independently by Weyl and by Fock in 1929, hereafter the Dirac-Fock-Weyl (DFW) equation. We can try to study the physical consequences of the DFW equation, naturally in the framework of its weak-field and/or non-relativistic limit, but the corrections to the non-relativistic Schrödinger equation in the Newtonian gravity potential are usually very small. For instance, in the experiments on gravitational stationary states, one uses ultra-cold neutrons in the Earth’s gravitational field . It has been shown recently that, in this particular case, the corrections brought by the DFW equation to the non-relativistic Schrödinger equation in the gravity potential are quite hopelessly negligible. Nevertheless, one may expect that, in the future, experiments (possibly using lighter neutral particles: massive neutrinos?) should be able to check this kind of corrections and, therefore, to distinguish between possible competing gravitational extensions of relativistic quantum mechanics.

HAROLD JEFFREYS THEORY OF PROBABILTY AND OCKHAMS RASOR

http://www.newton.ac.uk/preprints/NI08021.pdf

Harold Jeffreys said yesterday what he would say today that The simplist explaination Ochams rasor the simplist explaination that can make make mathematical predictions is not the most correct or probable.

So Einsteins dice may be the simplist idea that there are two answers to everything that can be added in tandem.

But the more complex idea of Einsteins that there is one answer to everything.

Is more probable and more correct.We can say that the planets revolve around the earth that is the simplist explaination but the more correct explaination is that the earth and the planets revolve around the sun.

In the same way we can say that everything is explained by 2+2=4 but the more probable equation is that 1/3 APPLE+ 1/3 ORANGE+ 1/3 ORANGE= 1 APPLE/ORANGE........

Just because we can explain everything as having two answers does not mean it is the correct explaination one is correct in this instance and one is wrong.