Sie sind auf Seite 1von 48


By : Ramn Garza Wilmot
November 12 of 2016

1.- Units of Planck-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6
2. Some basic calculation of proton and electron properties and the fine structure constant. --8
3.- Gravity parameter and relation between the electromagnetic and gravitational forces.---------12
4.- Planck units and a different calculation method.--------------------------------------------------------------13
5.- Calculation of the Hubble parameter and the age of the universe ---------------------------------------14
6.- The mass of the universe and the number of protons it has.----------------------------------------------15
7. The temperature of the universal cosmic background radiation.---------------------------------------17
8.- The "r" the classical radius of mason.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------22
9.- The cosmological constant.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------23
10.- Quantitative relation between electromagnetic and gravitational forces and their change with
11.- Origin of the thermal energy of the CBR -----------------------------------------------------------------------28
12.- Variation of values with time.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------31
13.- Large numbers hypothesis.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32
14.- The Quantum Universe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
15.- Mathematical definition for each of 2 forces and G calculation -------------------------------------40
16.- Variation of the ratios D = mp/me and J = mn/mp with time. ---------------------------------------42


This work is the gathering and reviewing of my two other works which titles are:
Plus corrections and actualization of the values of the physics constants as well as a the possible
explanation of the results on the analysis of it.
This paper is an edition and replacement of a previous one I called Birth of a Universe and changed by
this Quatum and Big-Bang since I think I got better results and better analysis with this one, and
because this last name, I think is more appealing or related to the real purpose.
Here I decided to put both articles together and at the same time, to correct some mistakes and wrong
uses of equations, to change some of the values of the physics constants I used and consequently, the
results of the analysis and some new findings.
As I said before, this analysis attempts to make a research on the physics history of the universe on the
big picture, from the very first instants of its birth and up to now.
When I speak about the very first instants, I am speaking of the moment when the universe was born at
about 10^(-100)seconds (1/ 10^100) sec. after the moment zero. This means I recognize the Big Bang
ideas, but my results are different from the standard theories or has a different interpretation.
The pretension of saying that these results represents the actual universe and its birth, is mine. So I will
leave my options open by saying that these results are very alike the real universe and I leave to the
reader to decide if these are true or not, or at least, to decided how much it seems to be like the real
The method is very simple since I dont use high level mathematics. On the contrary, the math I use is
so simple that any high school student will understand it.
I use the same equations trough all the history of the Universe unless the calculus sheet of Office allows
me to do it since this program it is not good enough for more than 13 decimals in such a manner than
precision doesnt go far than this.
Two simple things took me to all of these. First one is that I found the way of calculate the Hubble
parameter by mean of some know constants of Physics, and the other was that I got the Gravitational
coupling constant by mean of also some simple physics constants, which calculated value is the one I
used for all the calculations.
This is an analysis without a theory to backup. It is a numerical analysis that is so close to reality (at least
speaking of the Hubble constant and the Cosmic Background temperature) that the numbers results are
very possible true. One of these results was already investigate by individuals of the size of Paul Dirac,
Edward Milne, Arthur Eddington, who also without a big theoretical support for their ideas, tried to
explain what now is called the Large Numbers Hypothesis. They were the first modern scientists that
tried to specified the universe as a whole, making calculations about its mass, the number of protons it
has, its dimensions etc.
It is worth mention that all of them, but apparently more with Eddington and Dirac, got involved on the
large numbers that the properties of the universe presents, even predicting it from empirical

Their idea was that it must be some kind of connection between the classical physics and the relativity
with, the quantum physics. Dirac was upset with the fact that there were 2 different physics without any
contact among them, pretending with his Fundamental Theory to get a connection among the quantum
Physics, relativity and gravitation. These lead him to found quantitative relations between the electrical
and gravitational forces for the universe as a whole. All based in a dimensionless very big number,
without exposing the physics reasons, except those that they were very similar to the ones found for the
Eddington also explore these ideas and more recently Paul Davies whit his very interesting book The
Accidental Universe
Dirac formulated a number without units this way:

Eddington, more accurate, formulated

Note: Ne from Eddington and Nd from Dirac.

We must make notice that the number Eddington found is approximately the square of the number that
Dirac obtained.
The Intention behind all this was that Ne represents the number of protons of the universe. Other
scientist saw this relation among the electrical and gravitational forces, had a fundamental importance to
relate Cosmology and quantum physics and had being searching that link, that so far doesnt seems to
be explained.
The results of this analysis take me to find equations that describe the whole universe since the BB and
up to now. We shall see that the properties of the universe, the basic particles, the photons and also the
gravitons as well as the CBT (Cosmic background temperature) are all quantized and are multiples or
submultiples of the initial values of the quantum values at time t1, the quantum of time. We will also see
that all of this depends of the number of the quantum times passed since the BB. Viewed as this, the
actual epoch is just a 2.443501428799E+116 times the quantum of time which value is
1.7542350311445E-99 seconds.
These initial results for the BB came by accepting that thermal energy of the universe is constant thought
all the universe history. I took this premise as correct, since I found that the temperature at the Planck
epoch (not the Planck time) is proportional to the actual temperature by a factor of the ratios of epochs
raised to the power, which is naturally depending of the volume (3 power) and the density of thermal
energy (4 power). In this manner, the idea of taking the CBT as result of annihilation of particles and
antiparticles is incorrect since is not capable of explain the origin of the energy of the universe.
The actual idea for the CBT is that at the BB there were 1 billion of antiparticles and 1 billion plus 1
particles without explaining from where they came from and why there where 1 particles more than
antiparticles. Then they said the particles and antiparticles annihilated each other leaving as result the
CBT and the actual number of particles.
My results say this is not necessary. Both, the CBR and the origin of the matter are quantum
phenomenon coming from the uncertainty Plancks principle. But not only that, since is capable of
predicting the existence of the graviton and its actual mass (and any epoch mass). I also found that the
value of the energy of the CBR has its origin in the value of the Plancks constant (with the same
absolute value of both) by mean of taking the real quantum units, being these, the first instant, the
smaller radius of the universe and the smallest value of the mass of the universe. By this mean, I also
found the energy value of the average photon, the photon which carries the energy of all the photons in

the radiation curves. By mean of equalizing the thermal energy density of the universe to the thermal
density of this photon in a spherical space which radius is the wave length of this photon.
On this paper, I present the reasons and the numbers I see for these relationships (that is, I try to
explain) that in fact, links quantum physics and cosmology, at least in quantitative form.
The results are numbers presented with high precision (up to 12 decimals) and they just depend of the
values of the physics constants I used to obtain them. In this case, the number I got is in fact the number
of particles of what I call mason and from which is very simple to get the number of protons of the
universe, knowing In this case, the mass of the mason as:

Yet, I consider more relevant, not the number of masons of the universe, but the proportion between
electrical and gravitational forces in a number that I identified as S which differs from Eddington on the
^2 factor.
This is a simple analysis of the relationships existing among different physics constants that allow us to
glimpse the properties of the universe as a whole. Starting from this and especially with the relationship
with what has being called Planck units, especially with the mass of Planck.
These Planck units are derived starting from what I call parameters of the gravitational and electric
forces from which are derived the Planck units with easiness.
Some algebraic basic knowledge and some simple equations of the classic and quantum physics will be
enough to reach the objective of this writing.
As I said before, I consider myself that the fundamental element which leads me to these results, has
being the determination of the Hubble constant starting from units which relates gravity and quantum
physics in a very simple manner. In fact, the result is that Hubble constant identify by H is just a
frequency of gravity which reciprocal is the age of the universe.
The analysis lead me to calculate the mass the universe, its radius, the number of nucleons that it
contains, the temperature of the cosmic radiation background, when these things happened and what
happened, and how do they change with time.
Also which are the values of the parameters of the forces through the time, what relationship are among
the parameters of these forces and how can we calculate them as function of the other. And everything
starting from the values obtained with the Plancks units that, after this, have a very clear meaning in our
time, which at the same time are derived from these and just these physics constants:
- The speed of the light in vacuum c
- The Plancks constant h
- The Boltzmanns constant K
- The gravitational constant G
We will also see that is possible to calculate the G Newton gravitational constant by knowing the
Plancks constant and the masses of the proton, the electron and the neutron. So It is also required the
value of the proton, neutron and the electron mass at the present time, although I don't consider them as
constants. Nevertheless its simplicity, it has allowed me to obtain some remarkable results of the
properties of universe in general , but fundamentally to be able to calculate with a high precision the
temperature of the cosmic background radiation and to explain the meaning of the so call units of
Planck. Such as the mass, the time, the temperature, etc. of Planck and its relationship with the
properties of the proton and the electron and neutron.
There is another important constant I got which is constant thorough almost all the epochs of the
universe. This is the actual mason radius which obtained from actual values, represents the radius of the
universe when the time was the Plancks epoch (no the Plancks time as it is known)

This dimension r has the value of 6.5762360983485E-15 cm.
I must add that this analysis will take me more, and more back on time of what has being called Planck
time that as we will see, does not represent an epoch back in time, but just the reciprocal of the Planck
frequency. This is why the term epoch, is referring to real time, and making a difference with the
Plancks. remembering what I said before that real time is a multiple of the t1 time
The whole result, will take us to know the values of the two of two of the fundamental coupling
parameters of the forces as function of the constants I mentioned with time, That is, I will be able to know
their value by just knowing the elapsed time since de B.B at any epoch, the actual, the very old past, the
first relevant instant which I call 1 , and the future, the far away future.
I also explain from where the thermal energy of the universe arose (which explanation is quite different of
the standard cosmology) and the origin of matter.
I will go far before the Plancks time. When time had a value of 1.7542350311445E-99 sec., which I
define as the moment when the first photon emerge, carrying with it all the energy of the cosmic
background radiation today and always, which value comes from the equation:

This epoch and this primordial thermal energy I got it because I obtain with high precision the actual
volume of the universe and the cosmic background temperature from some physics and mathematical
And with the help of masses and charge of proton and electron which I dont include as constants this
analysis has being possible.
This simple previous equation shows the origin of the cosmic radiation. It doesnt came from the
annihilation of particles and antiparticles as the standard theories say. It comes from nothing less or
more, than from a quantum leap that created the first super energetic photon from which all the rest of
photons come to be.
We will also see, that when this first photon began to exist, it also exist another kinds of energy that I
think are associated with particles of so very small mass that seems to be the origin of the actual mass
of the universe.
I will try not to speculate freely and I will let the numbers speak for themselves, That is, from the results, I
will try to explain the meanings. Note that I will keep the equations always the same at any time except
where the calculus capacity of Office Excel allow me and the small correction to the Wiens law at time
What could be happening, as it is seeing from the results, is that the initial photon breaks in sons
photons and these sons photons do that also, but with a difference in energy, lesser than the father
photon and so on.
Even so, this does not impede the creation of real particles do to the same cause, because the results
tells me that spontaneous matter creation or the increment on the number of massive particles is
happening since those moments.
Of course, these equations also solve the cosmic background radiation in any time of the universe and of
course on the actual time.
I define the Planck epoch not to what has being call Planck time but the real time when gravitational
parameter (or coupling parameter) had a unitary value.
All this data can be deduced from the equations of the section that defines all the parameters as function
of time and from which Plancks data can be obtained just by making B = 1

I will begin exposing the today known as Planck time and how it can be obtained without making the
analysis that Planck used.
For all these, I will begin exposing what I think are really physics constants in the sense of their
invariability with time to differentiate them from those which are not constant.
That comes from the fact that the real constants are not properties of matter but truly single conversion
factors among those properties.
Seen on this way, I enumerate again the invariable physics constants I will use:
- The speed of the light c that relates mass and energy.
- The gravitational constant G that relates the mass with the force of gravity.
- The constant of Planck h that relates the energy with time.
- The constant of Boltzmann K that relates the heat energy with temperature.
You must notice that I have NOT included as constants, the mass of the proton mp, and the mass of
the electron me or the neutron mass mn, and the fundamental electrical charge qe or just q
Although I took these values, as characteristic of the current age. (About 13,600 million of years after
the Big Bang).
Lastly, I manifest that all this is based on the cgs system of units, where the units are: the centimeter, the
gram and the second. The unit of electric charge is that of the electron or electrostatic unit of charge.
The temperature is shown in degrees Kelvin or absolute.
And to end this preface, I will also clear up that here, I have taken as postulate that the universe is tri
dimensionally spherical, since I use for its volume 4/3 R^3.. So at this time, I would do the calculations,
assuming universe it is flat.

1.- Units of Planck

And from Wikipedia:
The Units of Planck or natural units, is a system of units first-time proposed in 1899 by Max Planck. The
system measures several of the fundamental magnitudes of the universe as: time, length, mass, electric
charge and temperature, by making use of five universal physics constants of the chart to take the value
of 1 when equations and calculations are expressed in this system.
From: /
The use of this system of units brings several advantages. The first and more obvious is that it simplifies
the structure a lot of physics equations because it eliminates the constants of proportionality and makes t
the results of the equations does not depend of the value of the constants.
On the other hand, it can be compared more easily the magnitudes of a great deal of different units. For
example, two protons are rejected because the electromagnetic repulsion is a great deal more strong
that the gravitational attraction among them. This can be proven when seeing that the protons have a
charge of a natural unit of charge, but their mass is much smaller that the natural unit of mass.
It also allows, avoid enough problems of rounding, mainly in calculation. However, they have the
inconvenience of that when using them, it is more difficult the notice of dimensional errors. They are
popular in the area of investigation of general relativity and the quantum gravity.
The Plancks units usually are named in a humorous form by the scientists as units of God, because
they eliminate any anthropocentric system of units.
Expression of physics laws in Plancks units from WIKIPEDIA
Universal Gravitation Newton law


Using Plancks units

. The energy of a particle or photon with radial frequency on its wave function.


The famous mass-energy Einstein equation.


(As an example, a body has a mass of 5,000 mass Plancks units has an intrinsic energy of 5,000
energy Plancks units on its full form.


Plancks units system:

The previous system is based on assuming some certain constants equal to the unit (1) by agreement to
relate other magnitudes through it. However, one usually finishes wondering why these 5 if we really
speak of important constants at fundamental level or if they are the result of other more basic ones.
Then, so arise the intent to obtain a unit of longitude starting from the well-known longitude of Planck:

To get the coefficients , B we just create a vector which have as component the power to which it has to
be the exponents of meters, seconds and kilos each one and we set the system of equations.
This imply that:

Basic Plancks Units

Giving the value of 1 to the five fundamental constants, the units of time, longitude, mass, it charges and
temperature are defined this way:
Tabla 2: Unidades de
Planck bsicas
Equivalencia aproximada
en el Sistema Internacional


Longitud (L)

1035 m [1 ]

Masa de Planck Masa (M)

2.17644(11) 108 kg [2 ]


5.39124(27) 1044 s [3 ]


Tiempo (T)

Carga de Planck Carga elctrica (Q)

1018 C

Temperatura de Temperatura (ML2TPlanck


1.416785(71) 1032 K [4 ]

Notices: Up here, reference to the web pages mentioned ends.

2. Some basic calculation of proton and electron properties and the fine structure constant.
G Newton constant = 6.67191(99) E-8 cm^3/(gm. sec^2) (latest high accuracy from Nature 510,
518521 (26 June 2014) doi:10.1038/nature13433)
Yet, I will use my own calculation of the G constant (as I will show how I got it) with a value of:
G = 6.671850021543E-08 cm^3/(gm. sec^2)
As this value of mine and the value accepted by the Nature magazine are not quite different, the results
will be differ just a little if I use my own.
Except by the Newton constant, I will take these constants as true values from National Institute of
Standards and Technology in its last review.
h Planck constant = 6.6260700400E-27 gm-cm^2/sec
m mason = (mp X me)^(1/2) = 3.9034029281817E-26 gm
me electron mass = 9.1093835600000E-28 gm
mp proton mass = 1.6726218980000E-24
mn neutron mass = 1.6749274710000E-24
K Boltzman constant = 1.3806485200E-16
Z factor of Wiens law = 4.9651142317443
C Light speed = 2.9979245800E+10
q^2 squared electron charge = 2.3070775131E-19
or erg-cm

Next I proceed to analyze how to obtain the units of Planck, without appealing to reduce to 1 the 5 basic
units that he used. For these, I will use the cgs system of units (centimeter, gram, second) and the
electrostatic unit of fundamental charge.
The notation A^n will mean that A (the magnitude A) is rise to the n power.
A. Einstein deduced starting from the photoelectric effect that the light exists in discontinuous form, in
packages of energy of the so called quantum, on which the energy of this quantum is defined as
function of the frequency of the light and the constant of Planck.
This energy can be expressed in two like forms:
, h is the constant of Planck and w is the angular frequency of the light

in radians per second.
E can be also expressed as;

in this case f is the frequency of the light in cycles per second or Hertz
Of course, w = 2. f

and h is expressed in ergs-seg.

The photon doesn't have rest mass, nevertheless, as it poses energy it is possible to attribute mass to
it, such that:
Now then, the frequency and the speed of light are related by

and in consequence:

The same equation

is used to define the wavelength of quantum particles as the
electron and the proton, being defined as Compton wavelength of the particle. And then:
Before going ahead, I will write a very simple explanation of the uncertainty principle of Heisemberg
necessary to explain the following equations.
Without going into details, this principle says that it is impossible to know simultaneously the impulse and
the position of a particle both constant, in such a manner than the uncertainty of the impulse p multiply
by the uncertainty of its position x is equal or higher to /2.
p . x /2.
Going in a differential form we will have.
p X x /2
but p = mv and x = vt
so: p = (m. v + v m)


> differential

x = (v.t + t.v)

as m and v are constant, then :

(m. v) X (v.t) /2
m vv (/2)/ t
by integration of both sides and applying the limits for

0 < v < C and

T< t<


we get :


(/2) 1/ t

m. C^2/2 (/2)/T


m.C^2 ()/T

here, T is a period inverse to frequency so:



But in this case, the frequency W is in radians/second, which translated to cycles per second or F then
we have :

E . 2 F
E h. F

in the case of particles moving at light speed, energy is of course m.C^2 (where m is the mass- energy)
and F = C/ so: the last equation changes to:
m C^2 = h. C/
or :
= h/ mC

the De Broglie wave length for photons or like particles

This way, the following equations for the Hubble constant and the epoch implies the uncertainty
principle, with this frequency in cps (cycles per second)
The equation (2-1) is a particular case of the photon because in general and according to the
foundations of the quantum physics, the wavelength of a particle is defined for the speed of it. That is to
say for:

Then we have that:

As the Compton wavelengths of proton and the electron respectively, being mp and me the masses of
each one of the 2 particles.
Now, let us multiply among them the equations (2.2) and (2.3)

Signs + or just is a reference to positive or negative charges, not a sign properly.

Let us make now that
and we obtain a wavelength that I will
call wavelength of the mason being the mass of this mason the square root of the product mp x me :
Here I want to make notice that the mason m is not a real particle. It is an assistant particle to make the
calculations and that it is necessary to manifest some important properties of the Universe.
From (2-4) we obtain other very simple derived magnitudes, all corresponding to the mason:




As its seeing, they are just as they were defined, except that we refer to the mason in this case.
Let us enter now into other definitions, just as the so named classic radius of the electron. This is
defined for:

For the proton




As we did with the wavelength, let us multiply both radius among them and we obtain
In this case we use q^2 instead of
and of the electron are the same.
Now : let us divide the equation (2.4)

since the magnitudes of the electrical charge of the proton

with the (2.10)

and we obtain:

This magnitude,
receives a special name: fine structure constant . I won't stop to explain
what it means, except in the fact, it is a constant that defines the magnitude of the electric force and that
it is the same for the proton and for the electron, because they have the same magnitude in their charge.
The fine structure constant is generally defined with and not with h. but the difference is because the
system of units used. In this case, because the exposed reason, I will call it just as the parameter of the
electrical force, than we will see, it is not constant in reality. Therefore:
Where the value of this is approximately 861 (for the time being, this approach) and the reciprocal of the
fine structure constant is 2 pi / 861 1/ 137
From this we obtain:
Being r as it was explained, the classic radius of the mason, a longitude with a fundamental
importance for what is exposed next in this writing.
The electrostatic energy between a proton and an electron at the distance r (classic radius of the
mason) is:

qp correspond the proton and qe to the electron



Then the electric frequency f of the mason is:

It is important to keep in mind the mason radius r = 6.5762360983485E-15 cm which is an important
constant through the all history of the universe.

3.- Gravity parameter and relation between the electromagnetic and gravitational forces.
Now, studying the gravitational energy between a proton and a electron at the same distance r of the
previous item and in order to compare the magnitudes of the electrical force against the gravitational
one. I will define:

And if



being then F the gravitational frequency in cycles per second :


It may be noticed that on the previous equation, the product

is the potential gravitational energy
between an electron and a proton at the r distance.
It is also necessary to make notice that in this system of units, G the gravitational constant it is not
As in the case of the electrical charge, I here named parameter of the gravitational force B as:

that takes us to:


When multiplying one with the other:

Let us now divide the equation (3-3) by the (2-11) and we obtain a constant that it relates the
magnitude of the gravitational forces with the electric ones whose terms are:

I must make notice that the magnitudes of the parameters of the forces of are inversely proportional to
the magnitudes of the forces itself, and this way although B is bigger today than , the gravitational force
is S times weaker the electric one.
Deduced parameters:
Parameter of Electrical force
Parameter of Gravitational force
mason radius
mason Compton Length wave
Frequency of the mason

= 8.6102257635141E+02
B = 1.9540860433470E+42
r = 6.5762360983485E-15cm
= 5.6622877480952E-12 cm
f = 5.2945465037670E+21cps


gravitation / elect. parameter

= / = 2.2694945487114E+39

4.- Planck units and a different calculation method.

Let us enter into the subject: Let us accept the basic ideas of the Big-Bang in a remote past, two of the
fundamental forces (2) B and were unified (take this as true for the time being). Since the difference
among the magnitudes of these two mentioned are today very big, (as we have seen among B and ),
then we conclude that, in the past and by reason of this unification, the magnitudes of the parameters
were smaller than they are today. That is to say for example B would have tendency to be equal to if
we go back in time.
Let us take then in fact, that there was a time when Bp = 1 (by definition, is the mass of the mason at
Plancks epoch)
And by the definition of B we arrive to :

Where m1 was the mass of the mason when

Bp = 1
(the mass of Planck)


That is to say that the mass of Planck is that when B = 1 and it proceeds from the value of the mason.
Even more, it was the mason then.
Even if or mp are the square roots of
it doesnt mean that it exist a negative as there are
not a any negative m which come from the product mp x me, there is not the case ^2 = + X - (by
the way, I am not sure this is true, maybe in fact there was a negative )
Note that except for the use of h instead of , = mp is equal to the value of the mass of Planck but in
another system of units. The same thing happens with the other units of Planck of the chart 1, provided
is use the cgs units system. Also note that I call m1 the mass of the mason when B = 1
We see therewith, how we can obtain the values of the units of Planck without appealing to make unitary
the five units used by him.
and since


The B value is the value of the parameter at the any epoch when the mass of the mason was m in
other words, it is a general definition of B.
Therewith in mind, the data of the chart 1 are easily derived just making the substitution of h by

is the mass of the mason which current value is

lp is the Compton wavelength of
fp is the Compton frequency of
ep is the energy of
etc, etc.

In other words, I say that the mass of the mason is NOT constant. It has diminished from on the epoch
of Planck (and much bigger into the past). to m today. And in consequence the masses neither of the
electron and the proton are constant.
One of the consequences of the values obtained for the longitude of Planck, is that it acquires the same
value with different forms of calculation. On this way:

4.0506068636427E-33 cm
4.0506068636427E-33 cm


7.4011739004066E+42 cps

sec/cicle or period



5.- Calculation of the Hubble parameter and the age of the universe
Let us see the equation (3.2) with values:
F = 2.3329188020184E-18 cps
That corresponds to a wavelength L


1.2850531177537E+28 cm.

Also an energy

e = F.h = 1.5458083379807E-44 ergs

And a mass of

mx = e/c^2 = 1.7199437339023E-65 grams



It is to make notice, that this last mass of the gravitational energy between proton and electron possibly
is a virtual particle of exchange, whose life time is the age of the universe and whose Compton
wavelength is equal to the radius of the Universe. In fact, calculation of give us:

Is this last mass the graviton? (5.3) I think so. Mainly because the estimated mass of it according with
the last investigations is in order of 10e-65 grams . We can say that the radius of the universe is the
wave length of this particle. But the analysis of the results shows some relationship of it with the
electromagnetic force.
The interesting thing of the equations of this section and first of all, the (5.1), is that expressed in
kilometers per second by megaparsec, corresponds to the value of the Hubble constant measured at
this time, that is:
1 mega parsec = 3.08567758E+24 cm
1 km/sec/ 1 megaparsec = 100000/3.08567758 E+24 sec^(-1) = 3.24077929E-20 seg.
With easy we get : 2.3329188020184E-18 sec^(-1) = 7.1986352455936E+01 km/sec/mega parsec.
constant of de Hubble H = 2.3329188020184E-18 sec^(-1)




From this we can obtain the actual age of the universe as: = 1 / H = 4.2864758050509E+17 or in
years of 365 days equal to 3.1536E+07 seconds

About 13,592 millions of years, making clear that when I speak of current age, I defined it as epoch,
the time that has passed since the B.B. being the BB at time= t1
And the wavelength corresponds to the Radius of the universe


I cannot explain why the equation (5.1) represents the Hubble constant. But I can say that its value
coincides remarkable well with the most recent value of it. Maybe what the equation really represents is
that the mass m^2 = (mp x me) varies with the reciprocal of time and in fact, the Hubble constant is the
reciprocal of the universe age.
A direct implication of the previous is that the universe is expanding at the light speed at all moment.
One of the interesting things I got from taking H = 1/ and from (2.10) is:

which is not strange, since I got by using r
6.- The mass of the universe and the number of protons it has.
It must be notice that I can calculate the mass of the universe, its density, (the number of protons and
electrons will be calculated later because other data must be obtained before) easily with these values.
Just only with the values of the constant of the gravitation, the speed of the light, the constant of Planck,
the masses of the proton and of the electron and the fundamental electrical charge as the following
simplified way:

According with what I have seen, W has been use with different values depending of the theory in use.
In the case of Friedmann equation is:
If we consider a flat universe, with the constant of curvature zero and if the cosmological constant also
zero, W = 2 in such a manner that:
And this is supposing that the total energy of the universe is constant as consequence of an adiabatic
expansion (no energy supply), but on this case that I am proposing, universe energy is not constant, it
has being growing up since de Big Bang.

To decide which W to use on (6.0), I start from some simple assumptions and self-evident (At least for
- The universe is all there is and self contained.
- All form of energy is contained in the universe, including light and cosmic radiation.
- Nothing can escape from the universe, not even light. If something could get away, there the universe
would be. In consequence, the universe is a large black hole, the biggest one.
-On a black hole, energy from out coming photons is lost completely. Considering a photon with an
and considering also that gravitational energy on the surface of a black hole is GMm/R being
M the mass of the black hole, R its radius and m the mass trapped by the hole which in this case is
, then:

Then W = 1 and R is the radius for the universe, M is its mass which volume is:

Density = M / Vol = 3 C^2/(4 G) R^2= 1.9474412381220E-29



and then

If N (quantity of masons) = N


Since M

Np X mp and also

Without taking on count the electrons mass, which is 1/1836 times less than proton mass.
And if


is deduced that :

In consequence, the number Np of masons at Plancks epoch was:
Since B = 1 at that epoch.


That is, the reciprocal of the parameter of the electric force in the epoch of Planck.
I cant at this time calculate the number of protons and electrons until I find the ratio between them in
different epochs. This will be calculated later. But it will be possible at least at the Planck epoch by
specifying there were not neutrons. this will be shown when I calculate the Newton constant G.
We see then, that the values of the units of Planck, corresponds to the current values, just by using the
parameters of the corresponding forces, that is to say:
Remembering that in the time of Planck B = 1 and B = h.c / G.m^2 at any time, so:
becomes m
lp becomes
fp becomes f
ep becomes energy of m
rp = lp becomes r classic radius
Bp = 1 is transformed in the current B
Sp = becomes current S
Tp becomes current T
Notes: In the last case of microwave background radiation temperature, I will calculate it in the following
So the units of Planck have a very clear sense, they are the values of those units at the current time as
they were at the age or epoch of Planck
Note: Recent cosmological research speaks about an expanding accelerating universe instead of the
opposite as it should being expected because gravity, and that in the future, galaxies we can see today,
will be moving faster than light and we wont be able to see it any more.
In my personal opinion, these ideas are wrong. I dont consider myself an expert in this subject (by far),
but it seems than some of these ideas are in flagrant contradiction with what is already known.
I dont see any special reason to abandon the special relativity concepts about the limits for matter to
have a speed faster than light. It has been said (to avoid contradictions), that galaxies are not moving,
but is the space what is growing. But to me whatever they said, if the distance among galaxies is
growing, is because they are moving.
If I take without accepting that a galaxy could be moving at a speed above the light speed, light emitted
by that galaxy would be moving at the light speed and eventually will reach us. So this assert is
absolutely false.
So, never a galaxy will go out of the possibility of be seeing, because what I said and because as far as
it is in the future, Hubble constant will be smaller and so the product H.R will always be C.
7. The temperature of the universal cosmic background radiation.
Let us begin making notice that the temperature of Planck can be deduced from the energy of Planck, as
equal to the mass energy of the mass of Planck because its value comes from the following:
We know that, when two opposed particles interact, that is to say matter and antimatter, they disappear
leaving of radiation that carries the energy of both, the temperature of the process it is:
Law of Wien
Where b this defined by:
z is the solution of the equation
Z = 4.9651142317433

K is the constant of Boltzman, o it is the wavelength to which the emission of radiation is maximum in a
black body at the temperature T. fo is the frequency corresponding to that wavelength o, equal to


where mi is the mass of the mason.

is the maximum generated energy equal to


The one that applied to give us:

Equal to the temperature of the chart 1 except that this chart doesn't consider the value of 2/z.
This temperature has a value of
Now, from the definition of


Which means, B is equal to the Radius of the universe R in any time, divided by the classic radius of
the actual mason r Which I consider, without proving it right now, that it is universal constant.

Rp is the radius of the universe at the epoch of Planck. Also, since:

It is deduced that:
notes: qp is the unitary charge at the epoch of Planck

That it is the value of when Bp = 1

Then, as N = B^2/ (6.2) So:
That it is the quantity of masons at the epoch of Planck (not the Plank time)
I will leave undoubtedly that:
Defines the age of the Universe when m = and fp = Hp


Bp = 1

Defines the time Planck, that is the inverse of the frequency of Planck, NOT the age of the universe
when m =
Defines the age of the universe in any moment when it has been defined or specified the value of m.
Then the Mass of the universe in the age of Planck was:

I use Capital Letters in referring to the Universe properties.

The Radius of the Universe was
That is to
say equal to the classic radius of the mason, obviously a constant characteristic of the universe and Mp
is the mass of the universe in the age of Planck.
The temperature of Planck seems to be the temperature that would be generate by the annihilation of 2
. But this is not so, as we shall see. Yet it indicates relevance of the Plancks epoch.
This temperature will allow us to calculate the density of generated heat or thermal energy. This is
calculated with the formula of Planck, but in reality, this is not determinant since the same equation is
valid even for the very first instant, way back when the first couple of photons were born.
I will show that the equation I used to calculate Planck temperature and initial temperature and the actual
temperature is the same. (K2 constant) and that all depends of the epoch.
Density of thermal radiation energy at Planck epoch was:
With a value of


Being the volume the Universe in the age of Planck equal to

This would be:
And the total radiant energy in the age of Planck is equal to the density of this energy multiplied by the
Constant CBR energy trough the history of the universe.


Being established down, that this energy is conserved and is given by:


Or what is the same:



That is to say, when conserving the energy, the temperatures and the radius are defined for (7.8). So, if
we know the radius of the universe at any moment, we can know what was or will be the temperature of
the CBR at that epoch.
Then we can calculate the value of the temperature of current background radiation as consequence of
the conservation of the thermal energy as this:.

We can also see it of this other way:



Then do of (7.7)

And because according to (7.2)

And because

it is deduced that:

The previous equation is general and it is valid for any time in which B is known
Vg: in the Planck epoch when Bp = 1 the calculated temperature is precisely the Tp
From this equation we can get another that had being already obtained in another separated analysis,
but here I get it with better of support.

Note: that that m/B of this (7.10) equation is

mfo = 2.m/B^(1/4)

As we will see latter. Meaning the relation among the mass of mason with CBR temperature
And replacing B for its value gives us:
That it can be expressed as:


= 3.54977979090344E+38


Yet. the following equation is simplest and shown the relation between the temperature and time :
T = K1 / ^(3/4)
This last equation is the one I will use for the table I will attach.

The actual measured temperature of the background radiation it is 2.72548 0.002 Kelvin
Now then, since the temperature can be expressed as function of m, we can find an expression for the
temperature as function of the age of the universe.
Everything is a matter to combine the equations (7.13) with the (7.5) to get (7.15)
From where:
The result is


Where is the age of the universe in seconds and

Of course, is simplest to know K1 by just knowing T and

For example: for the time of Planck and making use of (7.16) when

And for the current age when

These equations are rater complicated. But there are several simpler methods of calculus for it:
T = K1/^(3/4)
T = mfo c^2/ ZK
T = 2m c^2/(ZK B^(1/4))
Where mfo is the mass-energy of a photon of the CBT of the Wiens law.
m is the mass of the mason and B is the gravitational parameter.
Any one of these equations are good to calculate the CBT.

According with the Wiens law, the photons on the peak of the curve which emits at this temperature,
have a wave length of : o = b/ T with a mass-energy of mf0 = h/o c
So, today:

o = 1.0585170572892E-01 cm
mfo = hc o = 2.0880334826842E-36 grams
For the actual temperature. Let me attach here a section of an article that I took from the Internet where
a Hindu scientist, measured the background radiation at such distance that the age of the universe was
2, 760 millions years.
For that, he used Measurements of the spectra of the coming light from gas clouds of intergalactic
carbon monoxide (CO). They revealed a temperature of growing CBR with distance. Srianand and other
[12] measured the temperature of the CBR when the universe had an age of 2760 millions of years (
redshift z = 2.418). The temperature could be determined analyzing the spectrum of the absorbing lines
in these clouds. The result of this measurement is a temperature of 9.15 0.7 degrees kelvin, which is
consistent with the value of 9.315 Kelvin that the theory predicts of the big bang for that time
OK, 2,760 millions of years are 8.7039360000e+16 sec. Those that applied to the equation (7.15) result
in a temperature of:

A temperature with a difference of 0.10 Kelvins. Quite consistent, regarding the measurements methods.
Where I differ of the standard theory, is that it says that at the 400,000 years after the BB the
temperature was of 3,000 Kelvin or decoupling temperature between photons and electrons and I obtain
at that age 6,850 Kelvins On my results, the decoupling happened until the 1,203,000 years of age, (or
3000 Kelvins) which is 3 times more , when the temperature was of 3000 Kelvin
I do believe that the results differ because the standard theory supposes that the temperature of Planck
was reached in the time of Planck, but I already show that this is not right, because it confuses the
inverse of the frequency of Planck with the age the universe when B was unitary. And also for the
accepted mass conservation idea which is not right in my case because it is variable. And I would not be
able to know what would be the decoupling temperature when the charge and the mass of the protons
and electrons were larger than what they have today. It is possible that it would be higher than 3000
Kelvin when the mass of the mason was bigger.
8.- The "r" the classical radius of mason.
A direct consequence of this is that when Bp = 1 in the Planck epoch, the radius R of the universe was
equal to "r", the classic radius of current mason and, and it would be constant, a very special constant.
As the value of the mass of the current mason does not have any special feature since it is variable, I
must conclude that "r" is a constant magnitude over time. This is provable just taking as true that the
total thermal energy of the background radiation is kept constant throughout the entire history of the
universe. Without knowing any reason why this should not be true. You just use the equation (7.7) that I
discuss a little before:

But according to (7.3), also:

we arrived at:


is reduced to:

9.- The cosmological constant.

Just as interesting note and without pretending otherwise, the cosmological constant of A. Einstein has
units of cm^(-2) and an estimated value of 1X10E-56. On the other hand the inverse of the square of the
universal Radius = 1.2850531177537E+28 cm
6.0556092087950E-57 cm^(-2) Can It be
speculated that?

If this previous relationship is true, it would explain the famous "inflation" but not as an introduction "ad
hoc" to Cosmology, but as an inevitable consequence of the fact that the radius of the universe was
initially immensely small and therefore the force exercised by the expansion in those first moments was
immense. Such a force would still exist, but with very low strength due to the current size of the universe,
its RADIUS. Since I have calculated that the radius of the universe when emerged the first photon was
of the order of 10^(-99), then the cosmological constant would be of the order of 10^(200).
It has being noticed by current Cosmology and the conclusions of A. Einstein which I believe are based
on assuming that the amount of matter in the universe is constant and on the basis of general relativity,
there is a number called the critical density of the universe, which is defined to compare it with the
actual, if the universe is closed or open or flat. In the sense that if the actual density is greater that the
critical, the universe is closed and will collapse in the future, if the density is less that the critical, the
universe will expand forever, and if it is equal to the critical is a flat universe that will expand also but will
stop at an infinite future. Description which I believe is something unreasonable, therefore does not
distinguish between the open and the plane. One says that it will expand forever, and the closed will stop
expanding after an infinite time. This critical density is defined by the half that I have calculated. But its
value depends of the square of the constant of Hubble and thus depends on a bad measurement of H
(for example a 10% error, give us an error in the density critical 19%).
The point here is that the observed density of the universe is insufficient for more than around 5% of the
critical (with the value currently measured H) the remainder (compared with the critical) is the problem
named "lost mass".
In truth, these classic concepts of Modern Cosmology seem to me that sometimes are very strange and I
talk more of the theorists than the experimental scientist. See these obvious cases:
-The radius of the universe expressed as R = K GM/C^2
How can they talk of expansion of the universe and at the same time maintain constant the mass with
this equation? It is obvious that if R is growing any of these things happens:
G grows, M grows, or C is reducing. But you can't keep constant parts of the 2nd member of the
equation and at the same time talk about expansion.
- How can we speak of a critical density if at the same time we recognize the expansion? If the universe
is expanding is evident that density has already undergone the closed case, the critical and will be open.
-How can we say that in the Big Bang matter density was infinite or very large if you want, without
explaining where this matter and this energy came? Or matter has always existed or not. If there has

always being why we talk about a B.B? And if it has not always existed, why they rejected the ideas of
Bondi on the spontaneous matter creation?
- If it weren't enough, now is added to the cosmology that the universe is larger than the distance that
light can travel in the time elapsed since the B.B. contradicting them self with infinite universes in size
and at the same time accepting the relativity equations, twisting relativity, by saying that the speed of
light as a limit does not apply to the space, using the constancy of the speed of light as it suits to them.
- Also now is added that the universe is accelerating due to the pressure of the cosmological constant,
but leaving aside that this acceleration is observed on very far away objects showing what happened
before, in the past. It was accelerated in the past. And if you want to know what happens today you
should think backwards. If it is seeing accelerated in the past, is slowing down in the present, and if it
slowing down in the past it is accelerating in the present.
If the cosmological constant is in fact the reciprocal of the square of the radius of the universe, then it is
decreasing and the universe is slowing down, but it will not do so completely unless the radius reaches a
maximum and the cosmological constant to a minimum. If it does not, it will go on expanding forever in a
flat universe.
I can only remember the childish problems of the middle ages, where the "wise men" of that time were
arguing over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.
Now, see the comment of Paul Davies and John Gribbin in their book "The Matter Myth" the paragraph
that I transcribe from the original translation when they talk about the origin of the matter in the universe:
Chapter 5 where has all the antimatter gone? (Free translation)
"At the beginning there was energy and energy created particles and anti particles." Because of the
asymmetry discovered by Fitch and Cronin, however, for every billion of anti particles that were created,
a billion plus one particle were also created. When the universe cooled, all anti particles annihilated with
their corresponding particles, and just left too much of a part in a billion particles unscathed. These
survivors were immersed in a sea of gamma radiation when the universe was young, with billions of
photons of gamma rays more or less for every particle of matter. When later the universe expanded and
cooled, this gamma radiation also cooled to degenerate into the normal hot radiation. In fact, the famous
cosmic microwave background that still fills the universe today is a relic of that primitive gamma
In this paragraph the shortcomings of the arguments are."At the beginning there was energy and energy
created particles and anti particles." Using something that they do not know where it came (primordial
energy), speculating about the creation of particles and antiparticles.
Because of this energy, it was created a billion (10^9)anti particles per every billion plus 1 particles. It
was annihilated a billion of anti particles with the corresponding billion particles and it was only 1 of those
two billion particle and anti particles which was left to explain the existence of matter today.
Again, the lack of reasons to explain. By which reason that imbalance? No reason at all, just that it was
necessary to explain that there are today a billion photons for every proton.
Annihilation energy supposed to be that of the microwave background. On the other hand, if it was
annihilated a billion particles and antiparticles, why all the microwaves background energy is not a billion
times more than the energy of the whole matter?
Although today there are one billion more photons that matter. Just compare the energies of the
microwave background temperature of 2.73 Kelvin in the whole universe with the total energy of the
matter and the great error will be noticed.
Anyway, back to the topic. If the experimental results (in which there is to be believe and taking into
account the possibility of measurement errors) show evidence of the existence of matter or dark energy
that can explain the structure of galaxies, the measured amount of matter or better said, observable
matter density is 8.46e-30 according to Wikipedia
Which compared with the value that I've calculated 1.9480218087E-29 grams / cm3 is only 2.3 times

lower and only 1.15 times lower if Einstein's equation is used. Then I would say that this is a problem
that does not exist. In any case it should be explained only 15% and not 95% mass loss. And this would
be distributed between protons and electrons created by the uncertainty principle as I explained
previously, scattered through space waiting to be integrated into nebulae and stars.
10.- Quantitative relation between electromagnetic and gravitational forces and their change with
Now then, let us see the relationship that exists among the 2 parameters of the forces, electromagnetic
and gravitational.
Follow these simple reasoning:

And from (5.5)


is a constant value in time, it is simple to see that depends only of the mass m so:


Which is the mass of m



when = 1

But it is also hC / q^2 or

this necessarily takes us to

This way, we can deduce the value of q in any time. The one on Planck age would be :

But also, as

then we would have that:

constant without units


Valid for any time.

Especially in the epoch of Planck when B = 1

For the current epoch it is also deduced since

according to (6-2) that:



In the epoch of Planck

And the total mass of the universe at that epoch would be :

Some of these numbers were obtained also in chapter 7
We can also here, calculate the mass of the mason No 1 that appeared in the Universe. So
1 = 1/K2^(2/3)

= 5.2407116306818E-25

B1 = K2/1^2 = 1/K2^(1/3) =





N1 = B1^2/1 = 1
m1 = /B1^(1/2) = 6.4130947905702E+01gm (10.8)
The mass of the universe was of course
Now we can calculate the values of and B when they were unified, that is to say when u = Bu.
this case
And since N = K2^2.^3


As N should be 1, then, unification happened before there was any particle

The mass energy of unification per particle would be:
then :

But, at this time (unification of and B) there were no any particle, since Nu is less than 1, then, what
was this mass-energy? The same as the total at the Plancks epoch, and mainly, the mass of the
graviton at that time and the total mass of the universe. (as you can see on the table of values trough
That it is exactly equal to the total mass of the universe in the epoch of Planck (10.5).
It is also possible to calculate the temperature of unification or equal forces with:
From (7.12)
We can calculate when this happened by making use of :




It is necessary to insist on the difference between the inverse of the frequency of the DeBroglie wave
and the age of the universe. In the case of the Planck units, the scientific tradition makes wrongly
Plancks time as age of the universe. This is not correct, that is why I want to clear it up. Time of Planck
is not the age of the universe. Then this is the reason why I represent the age with and the inverse of
Plancks frequency as 1/fp = t
There was one single moment when u = tu, that is in the unification, no on Plancks epoch.

and of course:

tu = u

Here is worth to stop in some especially remarkable result:

The mason No 1 ( N = 1) had a mass of 6.4130947905702E+01
This mass existed when


From the moment zero and till the current age of the universe equal to

4.2864758050509E+17 / 1.5880048536900E-37sec steps have lapsed of

jumps of seconds each one.


If we multiply this number of jumps by the mass m1 (the mass when N=1) it will give us a mass of
1.7310762993829E+56 gm
This last mass is the current mass of the universe and in consequence, we may conclude that on each
jump, 6.4130947905702E+01
gm / 1.5880048536900E-37sec = 4.0384604465588E+38
grams/second of mass is generated in the whole universe. Which is exactly equal to C^3/G = M/H
constant as the rhythm of matter creation.
But this mass of 6.4130947905702E+01 gm is not the quantum mass neither 1.5880048536900E37sec is the quantum time.
The quantum of time and mass came when the first photon was created at the initial jump of time
(quantum time) of 1.7542350311445E-99 sec when the universe mass was 7.0844087872449E-61
grams. And which ratio mass/time is still C^3/G as you can see on the attached table when the number
of photos was exactly 1.
1 (the quantum of time) comes from the thermal energy of the CBR (3.7771848825051E+72 ergs) as:
1 = h/Et
With this time jump, came a quantum distance of R1 = C. 1 = 5.2590643189652E-89 cm
And from this quantum of distance comes the quantum of mass of the universe as:
M1 = R1. C^2/G = 7.0844087872449E-61 grams


So, The universe continues repeating the initial prescription, the rhythm of creation of matter. Actually,
about 2.4131E+62 atoms of hydrogen per second in the whole universe, or 1 hydrogen atom each
3.681E+7 Km^3 /sec.
I could also say that 1 is the minimum time period that the nature admits for the spontaneous creation
of matter. Or putting it on this way: In shorter periods of time of 1.7542350311445E-99 sec mass is not
But here, we must understand the following.
- Using the 1 time quantum from the thermal energy, we get two different energies of the same
magnitude, The thermal and another one that I call Mx plus the small initial mass of the universe.
What is happening here and should not forget, is that energy is not continue. It comes in quantum jumps.
By knowing this, every time I speak of epoch, I am really speaking of a number of quantum jumps. On
this way, 1 second is in reality a number of 1/1.7542350311445E-99 = 5.7004904260039E+98 jumps.
This means that radiation and mass (Mx) was not created simultaneously but in two jumps. In the first
one radiation, in the second one Mx and in the third one M1.
How many jumps of distance there are in a cm?
1 cm = 1.901478931136E+88
As the speed of light is 2.9979245800000E+10 cm/ seg
The speed of the light in quantum of velocities is:
C = (2.9979245800000E+10)X(1.901478931136E+88) distance jumps / 5.7004904260039E+98
C = 1 quantum of speed
As C is a quantum magnitude, light speed cant be lesser than C, but it also implies that there could be
light speeds faster than C, provided they are multiple integers of it.

11.- Origin of the thermal energy of the CBR

So, the answer to the question From where thermal energy arose? Is explained
If we calculate the thermal energy along the history of the universe as a result of the density of this
energy multiply by the volume of the universe, with my equations, we find that this it is constant. That
once it was generated it doesn't increase neither diminish. Just the density and the temperature
diminished by reason of the expansion. This amount of energy that I calculated from the epoch of
Plancks which fortunately depends only of known physics constants which at the same time allow me to
calculate the today CBR temperature as the section 7 explains together with equation (7-11). And as I
took as good the result of that calculation, from it is that I decided that thermal energy is constant.
It is possible to calculate the number of photons in any time of the universe. It is of special interest the
moment when the first photon arose. Especial item that I will deal with it latter. For that I will use a very
simple equation of the quantum physics that says:
Also expressed as function of the total thermal energy by using thermal density Plancks equation would

And, as we know how T changes with time, we found how thermal energy was determined by the time
like this:
Nfot = 30 P Et/^4/ KT
Nfot = 30 P Et/^4/ K.(K1^(3/4)
P is


the factor (3) = P

(3) = P = 1+1/2^3+1/3^3+1/4^3 = 1.202056903159594is a constant named constant of

Actually, the average number of photos in the universe is: 3.70126689547470E+87 as (11.2) said.
On the other hand, there is another equation from quantum physics that deals also with the same item of
the number of photons. On this case the equation is:
Nf = 32 ^2/9 *(R/)^3 where R is the radius of an sphere containing the photons and is the wave
length of the photons on the peak of the Wiens law.
Which one is the right one? I dont know. In any case the difference in about 17 times higher the last one
than the other is not important for my purposes to investigate the number 1 photon in which case, these
last two equations are not important since they are for a large amount of photons and no for just 1. Any
way, the difference is 1.89382983859083 photons instead of 1 (which cant be right since there are not
fractions of an integer number for it). This tells me that my calculations are true or very, very close to it.
But any of these two result have a failure for a special case; the equation for the number of photons is
good for a big amount of it, but NO if there is only one or very few. Because of this, the factor for the
number of photons when they are a few, can`t be expressed with (11.2). So if the number of photons is
1, the factor should be another that must be calculated. Besides, another factor has to be taking in
account: The equation is for wave lengths much times shorter of the vessel where they are contained,
and I will add that the wave length of photons shouldnt be larger than the radius of the vessel.
But in general, is good enough to count on the average, the amount of photons in the universe.
Besides, there are chances of a good approach if we can calculate the mass-energy of the photons of
the maximum emission at a given temperature and suppose they (or it, if there is only one) belongs to
that category. I mean, if at the beginning there was only one photon, it will probably fit well with the
Wiens law. .
In any case, temperature is :

To know when this happened, it is just a matter of using the next equation:
Where Et =
4.2026849712442E+51 gm

ergs. We see on (7.6) or a mass (Mt) equivalent to

But, there is something special here. If I use this energy (3.7771848825051E+72 ergs) to calculate the
first initial moment or the moment when the uncertainty principle allows the creation of this energy I get
1.7542350311445E-99 sec. with this time and the use of the equations given, a temperature for the CBR
of 5.3502729176383E+87 kelvins is calculated.

With this temperature the equivalent mass of the Ner 1 photon at this time is 4.080741626064E+51 gm
smaller than Mt = 4.2026849712442E+51 gms
In other words, the number of photons Nfo = Mt/mf = 1.0298641263743 is greater than 1 and it is a
fraction. NO 1 photon as I was expecting. So What happened?
As the thermal mass Mt cant change, the mass equivalent of the photon should be the same and in
consequence temperature should be also higher or there is something wrong with the equations. The
difference is small, but needs an explanation.
It cant come from the temperature by kipping the equation for it as it is for all the other epochs (since I
depart from accepting the equations conservation)
Then I realize that the equation for the Wiens law is for a large amount of photons and at the BB there
was only one. In other words, Wiens law is for a spherical geometry, and that is correct for a lot of
photos spreading uniformly, but here I have only 1. Then Wiens law should be adjust to accomplish the
result. No changing the equation but the constants on it. This is solve if I add that factor
(1.0298641263743) to the zK term of the b in the Wiens law. Or changing the normal b
(2.8977729145262E-01) by (2.8137429397878E-01).
An important and relevant result of this initial time, allows me to see that the temperature obtained by
mean of equation (7-11) from which I previously obtained a mass of the mason at that time of
6.1016835787020E+32 gm is exactly the same as obtained by mean of the equation of temperature as
function of the thermal energy density or
(7-6) This tells me
that this temperature and this time are correct.
Because there is only 1 photon which energy is ALL the thermal energy in such a way that the formula of
Planck is completely fulfilled. Being this time the quantum time 1.7542350311445E-99 seconds.
Temperature is then:

At this point, is necessary to understand the meaning of equation:

From this we see that terms 2 m/B^(1/4) represents a mass equivalent to something, but
What?. Making the operation 2 m/ B^(1/4) in the present time, it results equal to 2.0880334826842E36 grams equivalent. Which is equal to what I call mfo that is the equivalent mass of that photon at T
today with a frequency fo of the Wiens law.
Clarifying again:
mfo is the mass-energy corresponding to the photon whose wavelength o is at the peak of the curve of
radiation. (Wiens law) mf is the average mass of all the photons of the total radiation curve.

mfo = 2.0880334826842E-36

Attached is a table with the results of the calculations for different important moments in the history of the
universe, including the moment in which it can be seen that all the thermal energy of the universe of the

background radiation came from this single super energetic photon that was subsequently "fractured" in
photons each time less energetic and growing on number.
The table and the figures obtained were calculated by using of Microsoft Excel with the equations that I
have outlined. In such a way that I just insert in the row of the , the time value and Excel calculates the
rest. Past, present and future.
The use of this table has many advantages. As an example: If you want to know when was the time
when the first mason emerged, you just start to give values at the time and see what happen with the
number of masons, until this number is equal to 1. So you keep on changing the time until you see in the
cell with the value you want. It is not hard once you get closer. So at first make big changes, and then
move the time, decimal by decimal and you will easily see whats going on. In 5 minutes or so, you will
reach the value of time that gives the preselected variable (N on this case). In general I made the
calculation up to de 12th decimal.
On resume: The CBR comes from the Plancks uncertainty principle by mean of the equation (11-4) as it
was explained in the section 2. Somehow, it seems only work on this case in a place with no space (at
least as we know it) at the very beginning, and once it was created the first photon, no other new one
was born (except by the splitting of the first one). Maybe that only happens where there are no photons
or any kind or particle of any kind in the space. If this wouldnt happen, the principle would be creating
more and more energy up to who knows how much. Maybe the nothingness is necessary for the creation
of something.
12.- Variation of values with time
Without presenting the easily obtained deductions, I do expose the equations of these, in relation to the
age the universe of ().
Of course, these are only a few, but the rest would be easily calculated with the rest of the equations
Evidently, if we replace = R/c we will have the values when the Universe had the Radius R. and if
we calculate the value that would be if we observe them at the distance L from us, then;

Then the value of that must be used is:

As an example: if we want to know the values of at a distance L from us, we have to use :

And if we want to know the local values t seconds ago, we would have to use:

It is also feasible that variations in the energy of the particles alter the value of these constants For
example, if energy is given to an electron that increases its mass, it is possible than the electrical charge
will also increases to maintain the reason q^2/m constant. An increase of q would mean a decrease of
or reducing its reciprocal.
I will include in the next sections how the ratio D = mp/me and J = mn/mp might change with time.
This is somehow speculative, but it fits with the actual values. The table includes these values.

13.- Large numbers hypothesis

The table attached includes other interesting moments. These interesting moments passed at the very
first instants of the universe. After those, the universe was boring since after the Planck epoch nothing
important thing happened with the exception of galaxies formation. Besides the events when B = 1 or
= 1. By mean of the table, I found other interesting moments. Like:
When N = 1
When the mass of the universe was equal to , the Planck mass, and equal to the gravitons mass.
Which would indicate that gravitons, were the universe, a little bit after the des unification of B and . I
say des unification moment, the moment when B start to be larger than . At this time, when M = the
real epoch was precisely the Planck time. This mean that if the Planck time was the epoch, the mass,
the frequency, the length. All them (except temperature) was nor for a particle, but for the all the
universe at that time.
Another thing to consider is this: If at any time the number N = M/m is less than 1, I may say there were
not massive particles since it can be fractions of it, then in all the positions where N < 1 the mass m
should not be there. This means that until the moment 1.588004853690E-37 sec, there were not
massive particles and only thermal radiation and gravitons existed. Also, as there were not massive
particles, the mass of the universe was only photons and gravitons. And from that moment and ahead (N
= 1) massive particles began to exist. In fact, total mass of the universe shall include not just masons
(protons and electrons and/or they mix) but also 4.2026849712442E+51 grams for thermal radiation and
also 4.2026849712442E+51 of gravitons.
The result of this analysis which practically all becomes from the fact of the finding of the Hubble
constant, from which other universe properties are derived using some physics constants and other from
I especially explain the origin of what Dirac named the large numbers hypothesis that he was trying to
know if there is some relation between the famous 10^40 and the universe. I have found here, this
number identified by me with the letter S and which calculated value up to the ten decimal figure is:
2.2694945487114E+39. This number comes mainly from the actual proportion among the electrical and
the gravitational forces between a proton and the electron.
In addition, this number also gives a relation among other properties, between the quanta properties of
the proton and the electron and those of the universe as a whole. I must make notice, this number has
not any fundamental importance because it is not constant in time which actual value is just an indication
of this epoch on which we are living in the universe history. I enlist some other related properties which
include it:


(N/)^1/2 =
(M/mg/a)^1/3 =
= 2.2694945487114E+39
to get the number P. Dirac found as: 2..c^ 5/ (G. h.H ^ 2) = 6.31818087E +121 by means of physical
constants is extremely simple. This comes from seeing the existence of a mass whose frequency in the
equation of Planck is the Hubble constant. This is:
And the mass of the universe is M = N . m where N is the number of masons of the universe and m is
the mass of the mason. In addition:

Where B is the gravitational parameter

So to get a number as large as you want just with physical constants has nothing special, except if this
number actually means something. For example, this number Nx, has at first sight no meaning other
than the proportion between 2 masses, one of it (mx) doesnt seems to have any meaning. It is not the
same case of N, which represents the number of masons and that in turn indicates to the definition of m
the number of protons in the universe (almost all of them).
However, going deeper on these mx and Nx, I found something interesting.
1.2.- therefore
3.- therefore:
4.- mx = (mass of Plank) when Nx =1
5.thermal mass of the universe at any time.
6.- And most important, mx at the first instant (1 = 1.7542350311445E-99 sec) was equal to thermal
mass or
at that time was the total thermal energy.


From the previous equations, it can be found the next:

But for the moment of the BB which I will call time 1 = 1.7542350311445E-99 sec the same equation
for the time 1 is:

= total thermal energy from the cosmic background radiation, which is constant and can be
calculated at any time by using the Plancks equation for radiation energy of the CBR if we know the
temperature and the volume of the universe.
Remembering that sub index 1 means the first time, the moment 1, the first moment. Do not confuse with
the epoch when B = 1
It is easy to see that all the values of the quantities calculated are depending in one way or the other of
the relations in time between the epoch in question and the quantum time 1.
This number is n = 2.443501428799E+116. Sometimes the relation is direct; in other cases is the
inverse of this number or some simple exponent depending mainly on the temperature exponents. These
are easy to comprehend when we know that any epoch is a multiple of the quantum of time 1.
My inference on this is that mx is or could be what it has being call the graviton, the cause of the
existence of m. And it is also seeing, that characteristics of the universe was defined at the moment 1
and from then and above, the rest was determined by time.
There is another comment that should be made, at time 1 in order to maintain the thermal energy and at
the same moment the photons should be a integer number (1 in this case).
By using the mass of the photon (remember: mf = energy of 1 photon/C^2) which comes from the Wiens
law, doesnt give the exact mass energy of the thermal radiation. This is because the wave length of the
Wiens law being the length with the maximum emission peak, it does not represent the total of the
energy or the average photon energy at any time. So this wave length is not good to represent the
energy of the photon Ner 1.
To know which photon represents the average energy of all of them, we must consider that the thermal
energy density of the universe and the thermal energy of the representative photon should have the
same value. That is:
Et/kR^3 =

e/k^3 = t

thermal density

Where Et is the total thermal energy of the CBR and R the radius of the universe.
e is the energy of the photon is its wave length, k = 4*/3
Universe thermal density Det = 8^5 (KT)^4/(15 h^3 C^3) (from 7.6)
e = Det. k^3 = 8^5 (KT)^4/(15 h^3 C^3) . 4/3 ^3
besides : = h/(mf. C)
we know from (7.11) that KT = mfo C^2 /Z

or (KT)^4 = (mfo C^2)^4/Z^4

Now, let us say for the time being, m = mfo.
must be found.

in order to make the proper transformation where

With this information, we get:

E = (32^6/45)( m C^2/(Z))^4 (1/ m C^2)^3
E = (32^6/45)( m C^2)/(Z)^4 = m C^2
And : (Z .)^4 = 32^6/45
As Z = 4.965114231744 coming from the Wiens constant b = hC/ZK then:
= 1.0298641263742
With this value, I found that e = mfo.C^2. , = o/
In other words, by using instead of o and m instead of mo, the density of the energy of this photon
will be the same as the density of the universe. All the calculations will be easier if instead of using b (the
Wiens constant) I use b/ = 2.8137429397878E-01 = b so this equation could be used:
= b/T
Which is the Wiens law but with a different constant.
Lets calculate the number of photons when the time was t1 = 1.754235031144E-99 sec.
At that time (the BB) temperature was (see the table) 5.350272917639E+87 kelvins,

= b/T = 5.259064318965E-89 cm

exactly the radius R of the universe at that moment

The energy of the photons was e = hC/ = m C^2 = 3.777184882505E+72 erg exactly the total
amount of thermal energy, therefore, the number of photons was:
N = Et/e = 1
All these means that e represents the energy sum of all the photons contained in a sphere which radius
is equal the length wave.
The total number of actual photons is : N = Et/e = 1.954381972474E+87
Which is also N = (R/)^3 the proportional difference with the total photons of all energies is 32^2/9
since this last number is (32^2/9) (R/)^3
Note that by dividing
M/=(h. Nx1)/(c.1)^2

we will arrive at :
= C^3/G = 4.0384604465588E+38



This is the matter creation rhythm depending only of the initial conditions of the universe, or what is the
same; of two constants.

14.- The Quantum Universe
So the important question is this: What is the cause of the matter creation and the Cosmic Background
By seeing the (13.2) equation there is simple reason but not the only one: The existence of these two
constants. C^3/G
And if we want to go deeper on this matter, the final answer should be on the reasons for the value of the
constants. And here is where the Big Question arrives. From where or how the values of the constants
How can the light speed exist if there were no light before time 1? And from where G came to be?
This is a wide open field to speculate, from hidden systems of universes, or from God. Or from the
absolute vacuum properties which will also require an explanation, the kingdom of the ineffable.
It should be remembered that these ideas does not maintain as constants the masses of the
fundamental particles, neither that of the universe through the time, and this makes a difference with the
standard theories that does not want to violate the sacrosanct law of the mass - energy conservation
which takes them hopelessly to the problems of the singularity of the initial universe and not to be able to
explain from where this energy came.
It is also necessary to make notice that the Hubble constant is not constant through the time (in fact, it
defines the age of the universe) and that the observations of the current astronomical calculations
reflects what today we can see and deduced of the universe, no what it was in the past.
Dont get wrong with my words, we can see the past of the universe, but altered by the current
properties of it. For example; to suppose that the mass of the proton is constant takes us to different
results than if it is variable. The same reasons applied for the electron charge and other constants. That
is to say, to evaluate the universe for what today we see could be an error, thinking that some
constants are constant.
It has been said that a small variation of the constants, for example of the fine structure, would make
impossible the existence of the universe for x and y reasons. And this is surely certain today, at this age
of the universe. But these objections should not be applied to the past, since the nature, wisely alters
other properties of the matter to maintain the existence of the universe. It is then unacceptable to
lucubrate about what would pass today with values of the constants in the past. Each moment has its
own characteristics that make possible the continuity of the existence.
What it is this analysis? Well, in a very simple way, it has being enough to look for the possible
combinations of 4 constants of nature and 3 pieces of information (the masses of the proton and the
electron and the fundamental charge) to deduce all this. I didnt introduced any unknown assumption,
except the one of knowing that the parameters of the electric and gravitational forces, should be smaller
in the past, so, going back in time, they reach the unitary value. The result can be proven with the
predictions from these calculations that can be made. The two better examples of this are the theoretical
calculations of the temperature of background radiation today and 2,760 millions of years ago according
to the references that I gave and some others no mentioned here.
It would also be possible to check this if we can check the increase of the fine-structure constant with
distance or what is the same, back in time.
Also I would like to add that these calculations can accommodate the famous theory of inflation, because
from these the inflation will be deduced ,not just of the dimensions of the universe, but of the mass, for
example, in the second 1, was reduced by about 10E+18 orders. On the other hand it was reduced more
or less the same order in 10E+17 seconds until the present age. And the same with the temperature,
which in 1 second was reduced in 10E+28 orders and took 10E+17 seconds longer to be reduced to the
magnitude at the present age.

On the other hand, I will say that this writing is not a theory of our universe, because I don't dare to say
this, but it is a theory of a universe. And yet, as theoretical analysis it is, allows me to speculate a bit
about its results. Do this universe fits our universe? Or How much it seems to be like our universe?
One of the most estrange is the last one, where I propose the spontaneous creation of light based on the
principle of uncertainty. This is observed in the creation of the first photon. It has being said that the
spontaneous creation of matter or energy is allowed provided that the distance of influence of the
created particle it is not larger than its wavelength and that also, this creation always goes accompanied
of its corresponding anti particle.
In the case of photon, the same photon is its anti particle, then it wouldn`t be strange their creation.
This wouldn`t never happen to the created photons since they never reaches a distance (R) equal to its
wavelength by reason of the expansion of the universe, since in each instant that the radius of the
universe grows, the wavelength is always smaller than the radius of the universe. I suppose that as the
universe grows, the wavelength of each new coming photon from the previous one fractured is quantified
and its wavelength is always a complete sub multiple of the radius of the universe in that instant.
Calculation is simple with the previous equations for a large amount of photons, but not for just one or
two (in which case, the wave length of the new photons is equal to the diameter of the wave length of it)
and the result is that, just after the first photon, the wave length is always equal or smaller than the
universe radius and therefore it doesn't violate the principle of uncertainty.
By looking at the attached table and seeing the direct relation between the crescent values of the main
factors of the universe with time, factors like the epoch, the length and the mass of the universe and
trying to understand the reasons for the value of the main constants, I realized something pretty obvious
once I saw it. The smallest values of time, mass and length of the universe are precisely those at the first
time lapse. In other words: the time, the length and the mass of the universe are the quantum minimal
values of a fundamental system of units. So I realize that actual values of the universal constants are
depending of the used system of units. But these actual systems of units are absolutely arbitrary, without
any special universal meaning. Then I saw that the time as I use it, is not really time but a multiple of the
initial time, and that all the times are that. So every time is in reality an integer multiple number of the
initial quantum interval, if this is time 1 or 1. When I said as an example, that 10,000 millions of
seconds, is really 10,000 millions divide by 1 intervals. At the very begging, near the BB, the number of
time jumps is close to 1 quantum time (qt) but as the time grows the relative time gets close to the
actual time, not to the difference from it.
All of these made me to think a little different about the magnitude of the constants as Planck did it, but
with a difference. For Planck the quantum units were the units at Planck time. But this is not so. I went
back many times before (relatively speaking) because for him it happens at 1.3511370134744E-43
seconds, and for me it is at 1.7542350311445E-99 seconds or 7.7021436095303E+55 quantum of times
So I decide to change the system on units as this: from the attached table.
Quantum of time = 1.7542350311445E-99 sec = 1 qt
Quantum of length = 5.2590643189652E-89 cm = 1 ql
Quantum of mass = 7.0844087872449E-61 gm = 1qm
Quantum of energy = 6.367149085825E-40 = 1 qe
1 second = 5.7004904260E+98 qt
1 cm = 1.901478931136E+88 ql
1 gram = 1.411550391898E+60 qm
1 erg = 1.5705616226676E+39 qe
qt is a quantum of time
qm is a quantum of mass

ql is a quantum of distance.
qe is a quantum of energy
Remember: these numbers were the time, the length and the mass of the universe at the BB and also
remember I got the 1 quantum time by mean of the known Thermal Energy of the CBR.
By doing this, I found the explanation for the magnitude of the thermal energy of the CBT and the real
values of the h, G, C and r (the classic mason radius) for this, I only replace the units of the constants by
its values in quantum units. So I got:
G = 1 ql^3/qm/qt^2
h = 5.932301618183E+111 qm. ql^2/qt
C = 1 ql/qt
r = 1.250457438718E+74 ql
M1 = 1 qm
1 = 1qt
R1 = 1 ql
V1 = 4 /3
E1 = 1 qm.(ql/qt)^2 energy of the mass of the universe
Et1 = 5.932301618183E+111 .(ql/qt)^2
Mt = 5.932301618183E+111 qm

thermal energy of the CBR

thermal mass equivalent

1 erg = 1.5705616226676E+39 qm.(ql/qt)^2 >>>>

1 erg = 1.5705616226676E+39 garzas
(garza) I just invented this unit.
And this is what explains the reason for the amount of energy of the CBR. The CBR energy of the
universe is equal in magnitude to the Planck constant expressed in quantum units. So the energy
is not arbitrary, has the magnitude of the Planck constant in natural units. And this leaves G and C as
secondary effect of the Planck constant.
Also K the Boltzman constant would be different if I keep the temperature units constant. The value that
will acquire is 4.336787159810E+23 qe/oK
If I change the classical Planck units to my new system of units, I found that all of it (t, , l) have the
same value of 7.702143609530E+55
and if we squared this number, we get exactly the Planck
constant in quantum units.
It can be see (as it is natural) that those numbers without units doesnt change. a, B, S N Nfo, R/o
The temperature is also quantized, mainly because temperature is at its maximum at that time, but if I
calculated the entropy for every period, I found it is always increasing from a very slow quantity (a
quantum entropy). But the quantization of entropy is not directly, because it depends on the inverse of
time to the power and because density depends on the fourth power of T, and depends on the volume

as the third power of the radius. On this case the quantum entropy is S1 = 1.1476154434964E+32
qm.(ql/qt)^2/oK. As you can see in the table, at the second quantum of time, entropy is 2,S1 and so on.
As entropy is :
S = Et/T
and energy of the CBR is constant, then we can say that the inverse of temperature
(1/T)^(4/3) is what is a quantum entity making the universe an open system in the sense that it wont
bounce back unless there is a minimum temperature , which at the same time means time itself has not
an end. (so far according with these results)
If the number of quantum times is n with a little of algebraic operations from the previous equations, is
found that :
T = T1/n^(3/4) being T1 the initial temperature at the BB and n = /1 , T is the actual temperature at
the epoch we want to know it. So, in this case, quantization is inverse to the flow of times ratios to the
(3/4) power.
All of these explain the CBR, the matter creation and all the rest of the global properties of the universe
as a manifestation of the Uncertainty Principle.
Then I thought ; maybe the results will be the same if I try the Planck units. So I tried to do the same with
the Planck units to see if I can get the same result for the Thermal energy using the value of the
quantum units, taking Planck units as the quantum units.
The result for the Thermal energy in the Planck epoch and the value of the Planck constant were
substantially different (3.793895767850E-37 for h and 4.7441051846299E+37 for the CBR energy).
Only for the time 1 = 1.7542350311445E-99 seconds or 1 qt, the value of h and the value of the CBR
energy coincides. This tells me I am correct and the quantum units are those that are mine, not the
Planck units.
The column where 1 = 1.754235031145E-99 requires more details.
a) With a single t1 interval, the amount of energy cant be nor lesser or higher than
3.777184882505E+72 ergs in order to accomplish the uncertainty principle.
The created energy, should include another one which is the result of the existence of a radius of the
universe. This additional energy comes from:
(M1).C^2 = R1. C^4/G = 6.367149085825E-40 ergs
It is so small at that time compared with the thermal energy, that contributes so little to any change in the
time calculus. In fact if I include it in the calculation of o = 1/Ho I found this:

Hp, is the reciprocal of the Planck epoch. Much lower than the H at the time 1. So it doesnt have any
This thermal energy, once it is created, will stay constant.
b) In a second interval of time 1, a new energy comes to existence. I call this energy Ex. This is
because on this second time interval, more energy of a different kind I added to the universe. So, at the
second interval, it is created another energy which has the same amount than thermal, but it is not
thermal, is Mx C^2. This energy of the second interval would be as the added table explains, will become
to be the gravitons or particles which today mass have the estimated mass for the gravitons (mass-

energy). I am supposing this particle is the graviton because its wave length has the same magnitude of
the radius of the universe.

15.- Mathematical definition for each of 2 forces and G calculation

What I present here, does not intent in any way to be a theory of 2 forces of nature. It is only an analysis
of the relationships between the size of the coupling parameters of the fundamental forces and its
change with time. I mean the electromagnetic force and the gravitational force.
The study is not based on any physical theoretical analysis. It is rather a study of the numerical
relationships between these parameters, the coupling parameters. It is highly speculative, but with hints
of truth on the basis of the results.
In this analysis we can get from the ratio of the mass of the proton to that of the electron and that of the
neutron to proton, the knowledge of the magnitude of the coupling parameters of the forces, or vice
versa. We will see how to calculate the gravitational coupling constant by knowing the mass of the
proton, electron and neutron.
The equations obtained with the values of "J" and "D" (ratios of neutron to proton and ratio of proton to
electron) are so precise, that believing in a coincidence of the considered results is highly unlikely.
Now we will get the values that are provided by the various measurements that have been made of
these forces, which will help as an initial reference.
A) The gravitational force:
It is simple to calculate it :

B 1.954068618890E+42

1.1 )

Remember that
B) The electromagnetic force:
This is the force known in more detail. Its coupling constant is calculated easily knowing the value of the
elementary electric charge in ues. (Electrostatic units)
(1.2 )
= 8.610225783333E 02
It should be remembered that this is usually represented as:
2 / 8.610225783333E 02 = 7.2973525495E-03
Again, these are the current values (the current era) that I'll use for these calculations:
c = 2.997924580000E+10 cm/sec
h = 6.6260700400000E-27 erg-sec
K = 1.3806485200000E-16 erg/kelvin
mp = 1.6726218980000E-24 grams
me = 9.1093835600000E-28 grams
mn = 1.6749274710000E-24 grams
From these are calculated :

m^2 = 3.9034029281817E-26 grams
J = Mn/mp = 11.0013784185193E+00
D = mp/me = 1.8361526737601E+03
F = D/4 = 4.5903816844002E+02
Auxiliary I will use G the gravitational constant measured recently, but its value will not be definitive
because it is one of which I intend to calculate. This has been accepted at least provisionally, taking G =
6.67191E-8 according to the article which is attached to the journal "Nature" that it seems to me that it
could be the wisest (from my poor point of view) of all the different measurements made.
It should be remembered that the units used are the ones from cgs system where it will be use the erg
for energy, that is the same as using: gm cm^2 / sec^2
a) Here I'm going to start with B:
Let's begin to see the value of G the Newton constant of gravitation. Here we have variation in its
measured value in a way that at first sight, it is not possible to determine with adequate accuracy which
one is the good one.
The most recent information that I have with regard to its value tells us that this can walk between
6.6709200000 and 6.6729000000E-08 avalue taken from the journal Nature in its web page that says:
About 300 experiments have tried to determine the value of the Newtonian gravitational constant, G, so
far, but large discrepancies in the results have made it impossible to know its value precisely. The
weakness of the gravitational interaction and the impossibility of shielding the effects of gravity make it
very difficult to measure G while keeping systematic effects under control. Most previous experiments
performed were based on the torsion balance pendulum or torsion scheme as in the experiment by
Cavendish2 in 1798, and in all cases macroscopic masses were used. Here we report the precise
determination of G using laser-cooled atoms and quantum interferometry. We obtain the value G =
6.67191 (99) 10- 11m3 kg- 1 s-2 with a relative uncertainty of 150 parts per million (the combined
standard uncertainty is given in together within). Our value differs combined by 1.5 standard deviations
from the current recommended value of the Committee on Data for Science and Technology. A
conceptually different experiment such as ours helps to identify the systematic errors that have supplier
elusive in previous experiments, thus improving the confidence in the value of G. There is no definitive
relationship between G and the other fundamental constants, and there is no theoretical prediction for its
value, against which to experimental test results. Improving the accuracy with which we know G has not
only a pure metrological interest, but is also important because of the key role that G you've in theories
of gravitation, cosmology, particle physics and astrophysics and in geophysical models.
To use this value of G to calculate B, I got for
B = 1.954068476703280E+42 (1.3 )
This is the first case in which I will take this approach as true. It follows that B should be exactly:
Then B would have the value of:
(1.5 )
Note the remarkable agreement between the value of B when we compare equations (1.3 ) with (1.5).
Well, this match for the purposes of this article, is not longer a coincidence, it will be equality. This
means that:

(1.6 )
1.954068476703280E+42 / 1.9540860433470E+42 = 1.0000089897790E+00 i.e. a difference of about 9
part in 1 million due clearly because the accuracy of G measurement is not good enough.
With this in mind, the value of G is simply :
(1.7 )
This is the value of G that I used on the first part of this writing. Of course, no because I got this value in
the second part, means that I cant use it on the first one. In fact I did this in order to solve the table with
the values through time using the calculated G not the measured one.
And this value is within the range of the measured value for G according to the article of "Nature"
mentioned. Obviously G also would be calculated as:
G = 6.6718500215431E-08 cm^3/gm.sec^2

16.- Variation of the ratios D = mp/me and J = mn/mp

with time.

One of the interesting consequences of this analysis is that it can be calculated with great accuracy the
mass of the neutron from some physical constants and the masses of the proton and electron. Let's see
how to do it which in fact it is a reverse calculation.

With these equations we calculate the mn (neutron mass) and mn as function of (the time).
For the actual time:
mn = ( 2^^4/(G.m^2.D^16))^(1/4) = 1.6749274710000E-24 gm


Noting that D does not depend on mn since D = mp/me and G neither, for it can be obtained from other
sources or measurement. You can also see this in reverse, i.e. calculate the value of G from the mass of
the particles, which in fact is what I did before. Whatever it is, what I want to show here is the relation
among G and mn.
Let's see:
As B is variable with time, so J or F or the two are also variable. Can even
be that both change simultaneously.
So I'm going to make a few assumptions whose results will tell me which one is the correct one.
The first assumption will be that F is constant with time. We must take into account that J must always
be equal to or greater than 1, i.e. the neutron must have an equal or greater mass than the proton, or
what is the same J 1 This should happen because if the proton would have a mass greater than the
neutrons, it would not be possible disintegration of neutron in a proton and an electron plus a neutrino.
Expressed mathematically this would be:

J = (2B)^(1/4) /F^4 1
The critical case is J = 1 then it should always be that: B F^16/2
But this is not true since B can take values much lower than F^16/2. For example when m = ( Planck
mass) and B = 1, because this would make F and D fractional or what is the same : mp> mn which
cannot be.
So this assumption does not allow F to be constant.
The second assumption is that J is constant and F is the variable.
As a result of the foregoing,



Of course, if = 4.2864758050509E+17 sec (the current era) D will be the current. D

Please follow me in detail to understand how I got this:

If B = J^4.F^6/2 And if B changes with time, obviously J or F or both changes with time. Lets see the
moment when B = 1 (Planck epoch)
J^4. F^16 = 2B = 2
(J. F)^4 = 2^(1/4) = 1.189207115003
As the first formed atom was the hydrogen atom and this atom doesnt have neutrons, to assume that in
that epoch there were no neutrons is probably right. Also because particles were formed by Planck mass
which has only protons and electrons. But we cant infer from this that J = 0 because if this were so, B
= 0 , no 1. So J should be equal to 1
Because of this, F = 2^(1/16) = 1.044273782427 as F = D/4 then D = 4.177095129710
Of course ^2 = p x e = D. e^2
Then e = /D^(1/2) = 2.669795778364E-05 grams and p = D. e = 1.115199094312E-04 grams
In general, J.F^4 = (2B)^(1/4)
So I know the product J.F^(1/4) but I need to know J at every moment to find F.
How I do that?
We know that J = 1.0013784185193 at the actual epoch and J = 1 at the Planck epoch. My guess here is
that J changes lineally with time. Seeing it this way, the increase on its values is proportional to the
increase in time between Planck and today epoch. So
J = 1.0013784185193 1.0000 = 0.0013784185193
= 4.2864758050509E+17 - 2.1935962439551E-25 4.2864758050509E+17 seconds
Then a constant K4 is established :
K4 = 0.0013784185193/4.2864758050509E+17 = 3.215738480739E-21 changes/sec.
As J = actual J 1


J = K4. + 1


Today values is : Jact = (3.215738480739E-21 X 4.2864758050509E+17) + 1 = 1.0013784185193

Planck epoch value was: Jp = K4.p + 1

= (3.215738480739E-21 X 2.1935962439551E-25) +1 1

Going ahead with F, I have.

J.F^4 = (2B)^(1/4)

F = { (2B)^(1/4)/ (K4. + 1) }^(1/4)


Lets try this equation for the actual epoch and for the Planck epoch.
4. Fact =

D = 1.836152673760E+03

4. F = D =


4.177095129710E+00 exactly as predicted.

Without solving the solution by mean of equations, but by mean of the attached calculus sheet, the
epoch when the mass of the proton and the mass of the electron were the same, was
2.5536821269850E-35 sec.
The next table is calculated with the previous equations with Excel from Office.
It shows the different values of the most important parameters of the universe and of the 2 forces as
function of time elapsed since de big Bang which last 1.7542350311445E-99 seconds until the first
photon was born. Since then, different epochs are shown. When and B were unified. The Planck time
when B = 1, the time when = 1 and lastly the actual time 4.2864758050509E+17 seconds.
Remember you can make by yourself these calculations by downloading the executable file in Excel
where you just have to write the time
in seconds.
As the table is wide, I write it down in two parts, going from the present time down to the past.
All the calculations were made with the equations of the article and the ones shown on the same table.
Ramn Garza Wilmot
In the following webpage is the calculus Excel sheet to make the necessary operations.
Excepting the first column which was used to know the Kn constants, all the other columns are copy of
the first one. In the last two ones, thermal density was calculated by hand, since Excel cant handle
exponents higher than 300.
The epochs in seconds should be written by hand and then make the calculations. As I explained, to find
the epochs, you must define what do you want to know and move the epoch until you get the number
you want. As an example: if you want to know about Planck epoch, move the epoch until B = 1, or if you
want to know in which epoch the number of masons was 1, move the epoch until N = 1 and so on .

b= hc/zK
K1 = T ^(3/4)
K2 = B/@^2
K3 = m^2*
K4 = (J - 1)/

Nx = /o
mx = h//C^2
C^5*^2/G = u

E= M C^2

mf=h*ff/ C^2


= 1



















b= hc/zK
K1 = T ^(3/4)
K2 = B/@^2
K3 = m^2*
K4 = (J - 1)/

Nx = /o
mx = h//C^2
C^5*^2/G = u

E= M C^2

mf=h*ff/ C^2


mx = = M




















b= hc/zK
K1 = T ^(3/4)
K2 = B/@^2
K3 = m^2*
K4 = (J - 1)/

Nx = /o
mx = h//C^2
C^5*^2/G = u

E= M C^2

mf=h*ff/ C^2

a= B

Nx = 1

Nfo = 1