The Universe is created out of Nothing

BigBang is not necessary to explain the origin of the Universe. Dark matter and dark energy can be created everywhere in empty space – and can explain why the Universe is expanding with accelerating speed. This implies  how ever, the existence of both negative matter and negative time and consequently negative gravitation. The negative universe is invisible, but mirrored in our known universe. And the total amount of mass in the whole of the Universe is zero. 

Some thoughts by Ole Lotz,  Nov. 21. 2012 

List of content

The present paradigm

The whole of the Universe is created at one go 13.7 billion years ago in an enormous explosion. BigBang!

 This statement is documented both by more and more detailed observations and by use of the newest knowledge on quantum physics.

But spite hereof it is also a fact that the BigBang theory do not fit with all observations  - and worst of all - it  conflicts the most fundamental law in physics.  More about this later…

Dark matter is explained as particles, dust or the like which do not reflect light – and which therefore cannot be observed. But measurements of rotation speed in galaxies, among other things, show that there must be more matter than we can see. Dark matter is estimated to constitute 84% of the matter in the universe and 23% of the mass-energy. But much confusion prevails. 

Dark energy is still an entirely theoretical concept, but one of its characteristics must necessarily be that there must be something in it working as negative gravity. Otherwise, the observations of the still accelerating Universe cannot be accurate. Todays standard view is that dark energy stands for  73% of the energy density in the Universe. 

The observations and research of the last ten years offers so many exciting theories about the concepts of dark matter and dark energy and about the very far objects, that BigBang and the expansion of the Universe may be explained in quite another way. The following is an attempt to such an explanation. 

NB:To facilitate readability of the site please reduce the width of this window as much as possible and place it on the left side of the screen. This will make room for the following notes to the right - otherwise you cant see the notes, which you reach by clicking.

My main claim is, that the normal symmetry theorem on space, charge and time should be extended with mass/energy, and consequently with the acceptance of negative matter and reversed time.

My argument is further that the energy – and subsequently the mass – in the Universe is even distributed, and that it consists of precisely 50% positive energy and 50% negative energy (= dark energy)! With a average on zero! How big a part of it is dark matter has no relevance for the argumentation in the following

But as the concept of negative energy at the moment still is a very theoretical and non accepted entity, I will try in the following note to render it probable that the concept may be real.

According to the argumentation in this note there might exist at least 6 versions of matter: positive and negative normal matter, their corresponding antimatters and positive and negative dark matter. 

Artificial manufacture of antimatter in form of atoms was first described in the late nineties as a result from the experiments on CERN, and is now produced routinely. But still only in very few numbers. Collisions between stars of matter and stars of antimatter has not been observed directly, but it may be that some of the mysterious and gigantic discharges of energy in some gammaglimses can be explained thus. Both electrons and their negative partner, positrons, are common in the cosmic radiation.

Ordinary, positive mass/energy is overwhelming dominantly in our part of the Universe. With its positive gravity. Also the nearest galaxies are attracted by our own Milky Way. But those at bigger distances seems all to be pushed away from us.

Negative matter will never be observed directly, but is known in form of dark energy, which again only is known due to its impact on ordinary matter. Whether dark energy equals negative energy/mass is indeed not proved, but "if it looks like a duck, walk like a duck and raps like a duck, it most probably is a duck".

If my theory is right, matter can be created out of nothing, just only for a moment, as it will annihilated again almost immediately. Whether the creation of mass/energy out of nothing happens spontaneously – and perhaps as a consequence of the properties of the absolutely empty space, or if it happens by an extra supply of energy caused by random imbalances, or caused by interference from radiation, or maybe for quite other reasons, I cannot say. And I cannot contribute with much knowledge on quantum physic and its uncertainty and fluctuations. But the known Casimir effect confirms to some degree my suppositions.

I understand from the newer trends in theoretical quantum physics, that all energy perhaps can be interpreted as mass in movement. This might too include the cause to the strong nuclear force that keeps a proton together. These movements are described as leaps from something to nothing and back again. Of course with velocities near – or with – the speed of light, and with ultrahigh frequencies near or below plancktime.

To understand these entirely theoretical thoughts, a simple analogue comparison with water molecules which try to leave a water surface, might help to show how they could be interpreted. Here only molecules with a kinetic energy higher than average  can evaporate and escape the water. To make a particle escape from Nothing in the same way, a higher kinetic energy of the particle than average is demanded. And kinetic energy is synonymous with temperature. The creation of such virtual but subatomic particles have to happen uniformly everywhere in empty space, and the theory is therefore in direct contradiction with BigBang.

If by chance a similar escape from nothing to something happens nearby (in both time and space),  other particles with the same mass sign – but with no, or opposite, electrical sign – will be in a position to attract each other, and in this way gradually create bigger and bigger electrically neutrale, subatomic entities – and subsequently atoms, matter, dust, clouds of dust, stars, galaxies, clusters. And these objects are exactly what we observe. The particles with opposite mass signs will accumulate in corresponding negativ ”lumps”. But both the individual particles as well as the lumps will repel those with opposite signs. I think that this will inevitably results in the lumps growing bigger and bigger.

My argument that particles or objects each with positive or negative mass will repel each other may be questioned due to the simple math in Newtons laws. But Newton did not operate with negative mass, combined with negative time!

However, the explanation of how the newborn subbaryonic particles become atomic particles, I must also leave to the quantum mechanics. As equal amounts and uniformly are distributed quantities of positive and negative "lumps" will be created, and consequently an equal number of positive and negative galaxies, the galaxies will for the most part be driven from each other by the oppositely directed gravitational forces – and thereby offering a very simple explanation of both the expansion of the Universe and the formation of bigger and bigger units.

As mentioned above, negative mass/energy will be immediately annihilated on contact with material from our own, positive galaxy. And for the same reason, nor can we observe the negative light emitted from the negative galaxies. More over the cosmic negative energy – whether it is found in the shape of mass or radiation – will be repelled by the gravitation from our own galaxy, and consequently never come close to us

As shown on the text and picture in the note on big scale structures it is however possible to observe the "shadow" of the negative galaxies and clusters

Moreover, it is a consequence of the theory that the Universe seems to be static and unchangeable, while at the same time it expands (the “static”, of course, only means in the very long run – and does not include the ”small” local events, which may well evolve over billions and billions of years, and which include all that we can observe. Namely new mass being created, stars being born, develops and dies, and maybe ending up as black holes etc.). This is thus a revival of Fred Hoyle’s old theory of ”Steady State” – but in contrast to his, my theory offers an explanation of how new matter is constantly being created.

Fred Hoyle described the concept of BB ironic, since he too believed that the theory was contrary to the observable. In the same ironic way I use the word BigBangers for those who still stick to the theory.

The creation of new matter explains the expansion of the space between the objects. 


In addition to this “balloon” expansion, the positive and negative gravitational forces which will certainly collect uniformly signed objects in greater and greater entities, but which will at the same time repel those with opposite signs. This causes an always accelerating and outwards directed speed. The latest years survey of the visible galaxies just show such a structure, which can be explained by this theory. Even the galaxy clusters bunch together in large scale structures.

In accordance with the general relativity theory, every form of energy will influence the geometry of space – both in space and time. But as space - viewed as a whole - do not contain energy, questions about shape, age and extent of the Universe become meaningless. 

The theory explains unambiguously why the Universe expands, and why it happens with accelerating speed. It confirms that the Universe is ”flat,” that is, with no curvature in space and time, which means that light moves rectilinearly through space, except, of course, for the local ”gravity bumps” around the galaxies. It also contradicts the formerly accepted theory about the curvature of light back to the starting point of BigBang.

It explains why the Universe seems to be uniform in all directions. And it explains the observable big scale disorder. 


Why the BigBang cannot be true

My main objection against BigBang (BB) is that positive mass/energy alone can´t be created without violating the law of conservation. In all science this is the most accepted and crucial law, and which never can be broken.

The only possible and valid explanation on the creation of positive matter is a simultaneous formation of equal amount of negative matter – as described earlier.


When my theory rejects BB to such an extent, I must be able to offer some alternative explanations for the observations which today are taken as proof of the BB. 

First of all it is the fact that the Universe expands. This is interpreted as if originally it must have been gathered in one spot - the BigBang. However BB do in no way explains that the expansion happens with accelerating speed.


Some arguments refers to former reflections on different compositions of elements in new and old galaxies. And on their different morphologies and radiations. But many newer observations, made within the last ten years and with rapidly improved methods, contradicts.    

Today we can only ”look” about 13 billion years back in time. This is also taken as an argument for the Big Bang which must have started everything back then. But the 13 billion years is just a token of the fact that we cannot see anything further back, because the outward directed speed makes it impossible to see further. (The hubblehorizon).


But furthermore, it is taken as an important argument for BB that it is possible – by well known processes – to count back to BB through different epochs. But that is just not possible. At a certain point in time, perhaps only fractions of a second after the Bang, nothing more can be described. And an arithmetical or physical problem which has no defined premises can hardly be used as proof of anything. 

(A more modern interpretation of those considerations are that a very early epoch of BB included an extremely rapid and short periode of inflation, during which the embryos to the coming big scale structure was founded).


Until about 50 years ago, these were the most important arguments. But already then it was shown, that there must be remnants of those temperatures which ruled some time after BB, when the extreme temperature was cooled down to about a few thousand degrees – and where electromagnetic radiation became possible. Now –  about 13 billion years later – the redshift would have stretched this radiation so much, that it could be observed as a almost uniformly radiation corresponding to the heat radiation from a black body with a temperature on 2,7 deg. Kelvin.

About 20 years later, in 1965, this radiaotion was detected, known as the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). And taken as a final and full proof for BB. 

A beautiful and consecutive theory, which has convinced almost all cosmologists about its truth.



But it is not enough to have some parameters pointing to BB - even if they may seem to be strong arguments. As long just one observation or fact contradicts the BB-theory, it must be changed or modified. And I have pointed on at least three such factors: the violation of a fundamental law, the accelerating expansion and the existence of old and mature galaxies with an age very near to BBs.


It is not necessarily my task to give an improved theory for the CMBR. It is up to the BigBangers to explain the many factors which shows, that BB can not be correct.    And then to develop a new theory for the CMBR!

To help the BigBangers with this task, the following note describes my attempt on an alternative explanation on CMBR. 


Finally, my theory offer answers to issues to which the BigBangers do not engage themselves seriously:

What came before BigBang? - My answer: there is – and was – Nothing. 

And what may be found in cosmos outside the hubblehorizon? My answer: Exactly the same show as we can see from here.



 So - until further notice – I stick to the overall conclusions which follow from my theory

  • Matter is continuously created out of nothing, and the total mass and energy of the Universe is zero!
  • Simultaneous and mingled with the visible universe exist an invisible universe where both energy, mass and time have negative signs. 
  • Time and extent of the Universe are infinite. There is no beginning and no end.