Abstract-Just when we thought we had found enough missing mass of the
Universe to warrant a "closed" and therefore expanding and contracting
Universe, some critical piece of it goes missing. In Missing
Mass Found it was noted that if the Universe was closed (as finding the missing
mass would indicate), then from the previous "Big Bang" and the subsequent"Big
Crunch" there should be inrushing matter which didn't make it in time for the
following "Big Bang". The scientific literature makes no mention
of this nor does Hubble Telescope's increasingly accurate measurement of the background
radiation seem to detect any residual traces of excess unaccounted for energy or
matter.
If there is no inrushing matter from the previous "Big Crunch",
two possibilities exist:
First- all the matter in the Universe waited until every
last particle from the "Big Crunch" had arrived at the singularity before
it departed as the next "Big Bang". (very difficult to choreograph and
unsupported by any evidence). Second possibility- There was either no "Big Bang"
or no "Big Crunch". Plenty of evidence supports that there was some manner
of beginning at a central point and we have mentioned that there is a dearth of evidence
regarding a previous "Big Crunch". I choose no previous "Big Crunch".
But
if the Universe is "closed", i.e. it expands and then contracts (and we
have shown there is sufficient matter in Missing Mass
Found), then there is this logical cul-de-sac that says there was a beginning
point and matter was created. This implies a Creator. Of course the Creator was "created"
by his "Creator". Then again, this second-order "Creator" had
to come from somewhere and so derives this imponderable of infinitely recursive questions
of origin. These matters are presumably unknowable. The real question that can be
asked and hope to be reasonably pondered "is how far down the chain the unknowability
reaches?" Is it unknowable if there were preceding "Big Bangs and Big Crunches"
ad infinitum backwards? Is it unknowable if there is an outer limit to which the
Universe will expand and then contract of its own gravitational attraction? Just
as there is an event horizon at a black hole beyond which information, energy and
matter disappears and is lost (didn't say destroyed), it appears there is an "event
horizon" at the limits of the Universe. This is prescribed because barring the
Universe having a beginning and end temporally, there must have been something happening
all along and there appears to be the likelihood that something will continue to
happen. This temporal continuity must be assumed barring any logical foundations
to the contrary.
Therefore we are back where we started- with missing mass- but
different missing mass, i.e. the inrushing detrius from the preceding "Big Crunch".
As well we have a logical contradiction; there must be "Big Crunches" to
have "Big Bangs", but we have a "Big Bang" but no "Big Crunches".
How to resolve this. This author proposes an "Event
Horizon" at the outer edge of the Universe.
