0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

31 Ansichten13 SeitenMagnitudes of what existed before big bang.

Apr 12, 2011

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

Magnitudes of what existed before big bang.

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

31 Ansichten13 SeitenMagnitudes of what existed before big bang.

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 13

Columbus, Ohio 43228 – USA

E-mail: gaurodec@netscape.net

_____________________________________________________________________________

Abstract

Before big bang, something existed ("prebig"), whose magnitude and characteristics are

examined in the article. Using current data it is possible to estimate what amount of protons

would represent by equivalence the totality of mass and energy of nocer (the universe), and from

there one can arrive at alternative prebigs thought of as spheres, with sizes ranging from those of

a giant star to a small virus. The relative proportions of mass/energy and spacetime in prebig and

in a proton are estimated (much less than 99,999 % of proton's volume would be only

spacetime), as well as some possibilities of presence/absence of spacetime in elementary

particles. These could have different sizes in prebig and today, and this issue as well as some

characteristics of spacetime are also analized.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Key Words

Apex hypothesis -- Big bang -- Massen -- Nocer – Nozerinf hypothesis -- Prebig -- Proton --

Spacetime -- Universe

Terminology

D Accumulation apex for massen density

Cer Cerebration

Indivison Last indivisible unit of spacetime and/or massen

Massen Mass and energy

Nocer Noncerebration

Nozerinf Non existence of zero and infinity in nocer

Prebig What was prior to big bang

Vitae

The author is an Ecuadorian-American engineer.

THE SIZE OF PRE-BIG BANG

Gonzalo A. Ordóñez

1. Introduction

The basic view about the origin of the universe is the so called hot big bang, taken as implying a

sudden increase in the size of something, small and subject to extreme conditions, that existed

before such expansion 1 . We will call "pre-big bang" (prebig for brevity) to that something, and

the purpose of this philosophy-of-science article is to explore what the magnitude and meaning

of prebig could be, and to set out some questions.

A theoretical assumption we are doing, except if stated otherwise, is that the totality of the

present universe was originally in prebig, and the inverse is also assumed as true: it was prebig

that generated after big bang the totality of present universe. Throughout the article only protons

will be used, as representative not only of baryons in general but of all of prebig's massen. Note,

however, that we are not implying that prebig was as a matter of fact formed by, say, protons or

neutrons, but only that these provide an equivalence to work with. What we do assert is that

prebig was constituted by some kind of indivisible "particles".

For this paper's purpose we will consider a static universe because of the nature of magnitudes to

be examined.

Many of the ideas discussed here probably would need to be reconciled with general relativity,

quantum mechanics and cosmology.

As up-to-date data as possible has been used and a number of digits equal to or bigger than the

number of significant figures for experimental values have been employed in calculations. In the

text normally two decimal places appear. We will be managing a few numerical values, whose

compilation appears in the Summary (par. 8). The asterisk (*) denotes multiplication and the

slash (/) denotes division. When a magnitude carries signs < or > we will assume the sign = in

order to perform calculations.

This article will use the terminology and some results of [01]. Therefore,

1

Inflationary cosmology is the yet prevalent theory in the context of big bang, but many difficult, unsolved

problems plaguing that theory are nowadays raising the need of a deep rethinking.

Cer refers to the massless and energyless product (consciousness, mind, etc.) of a functioning

brain.

Nocer refers to everything that is not cer and is commonly called 'real world', universe, or

equivalent.

Nozerinf refers to the hypothesis which argues that mathematical zero and mathematical infinity

do not exist in nocer.

Density apex is the hypothesized limit for the density accumulation, which is conjectured to be

D >= 1,5*1028 kg/m3.

Indivison is a name I give to the smallest possible "particle" (thought of as a sphere) resulting

after a large number of subdivisions are performed in nocer (massen and/or spacetime), beyond

which no more divisions are possible. Mass indivisons might be, for instance, quarks, electrons

and neutrinos.

To our present knowledge the basic nocer components are spacetime (space-time) and massen

(mass-energy), two issues as yet poorly understood by science.

In general, prebig could have one of the following two incompatible conditions:

b) Finite massen's density, finite temperature and finite spacetime curvature.

Temperature and spacetime curvature are strongly related to massen's density, so in this article

we will focus on the latter.

In some way, postulating an infinite density for prebig is a bizarre idea because, regardless of

what exists in the universe, all of it is supposedly reduced to an almost "magical" singularity, a

mathematical zero-dimensional point of energy where the known laws of physics fail and all

kind of strange, mathematically very complex possibilities arise.

The nozerinf hypothesis [01] rejects the theoretical contention that prebig was a singularity with

zero dimensions and infinite density. Ergo, prebig has to be something with a finite dimension

and a non-infinite density. The finite density situation could derive from the existence of D, the

density apex [01, par.7.1], which would mark a limit to prebig's density. According to nozerinf, a

finite prebig has to be composed by discrete 3-D particles (indivisons) and not by a continuous

medium.

The Planck length (size) is 1,616258*10-35 m [02, chapter2]. Supposed as a diameter, a Planck's

size sphere would have a Planck volume of 2,21*10-105 m3= volu0.

The Planck mass is 2,18*10-8 kg [02, ch.2] = mass0.

According to NASA [03], average universe's mass density = 9,9*10-30 g/cm3= avdens,

equivalent to 5,9 protons/m3 = num1. These values (for a flat universe and corresponding to the

critical density within 1%) include atoms' mass (4,6%) 2 , or about one proton per 4 m3; cold dark

matter (23%), and dark energy (~72%).

According to Shu [04], the universe may contain in all some 1080 protons = num2, and another

1080 electrons, and it is estimated that nucleons have a volume of about 6 fm3= 6*10-45 m3.

For the sake of making some idea let's think we could focus on space only. The universe is

assumed to be spherical. The present universe's diameter might be some 92*109 light years [05]

and its volume, 3,45*1080 m3= volu3. Then, from volu3 and num1, the whole universe would

have 2,04*1081 protons = num3. Henceforth we will work only with num3.

3.5 Apex.

The density apex in nocer is, according to [01, par.7.1], D >= 1,5*1028 kg/m3= dens3.

3.6 Zero-point fluctuations of quantum fields and the energy of the vacuum.

The vacuum energy density is an issue not yet well understood. According to [6], it leads to a

conceptual "vacuum catastrophe" because when measured it has a very small value (about

10-47 GeV4 [7]), but is infinite when calculated by adding the energies of all field modes in the

vacuum state. Or, it needs an explanation on a gap of 120 orders of magnitude. The vacuum

energy is connected to Einstein's cosmological constant, and is considered to be the same as dark

energy [02, ch.19].

3.7 Neutrinos.

By an estimation [08], universe's total number of neutrinos is ~ 2*1088 . Considering volu3, or

3,45230130*1086 cm3 , this gives 58 neutrinos/cm3 . Let's take a representative neutrino mass of 0,1

eV [02, ch. 21]. We understand c=1 here.

Now: 1 eV/c2 = 1,782 661 7584*10-36 kg [02, ch.1]; therefore, 0,1 eV/c2 = 1,782 661 7584*10-37 kg.

Then total neutrinos' mass would be 2*1088 * 1,782 661 7584*10-37 kg = 3,565323516*1051 kg .

The baryon-to-photon ratio is 6,2317*10-10 [02, ch.2]. Hence, the total number of photons

(thought of as particles) in the universe would be num3 / 6,2317*10-10 = 3,2685428*1090 =

num4. That is, num4 / volu3 = 9,4677217*109 photons/m3, on average, or about 10 000 photons

per each cm3 of spacetime. Consider now num4 / volu31 (see par.5.2) = 1,43450328*1064

photons/m3 on average. This is, some 1058 photons/cm3 of spacetime inside protons in volu31!

2

In [02, ch.2] the baryon density of the universe is 4,44%.

See them in the Summary (par.8).

According to [01, par.7.1], average quark's mass = 7,84*10-30 kg = massQ, and assuming three

quarks per proton the proton's mass would be 2,35311348*10-29 kg. However, from [02, ch.1] the

proton's mass = 1,67*10-27 kg = massPr, and this is the value to be used. (It is 71,081214 times

larger than the previous one because it includes gluons energy). So, via protons the total massen

of the universe would be massPr * num3 = 3,41*1054 kg = massen0.

The result of multiplying avdens (scaled up to kg/m3) by volu3 is 3,42*1054 kg = massen1. Note

that massen0 and massen1 (both cover atoms, dark matter and dark energy) are essentially

equal.

As seen above, universe neutrinos' mass amounts to 3,565323516*1051 kg, or only about 0,001 of

massen1. So, we will not modify this massen. Neutrinos are one of the candidates to form part of

dark matter.

As said before, because of nozerinf we are ruling out the singularity idea for prebig, i.e. a zero

dimension, zero volume mathematical point. We put forward that prebig had a finite size and

volume, obeying physical laws not yet fully understood. We posit also that some kind of

elementary particles (indivisons) existed in prebig. The following four possibilities can be

proposed:

5.1 Prebig when mass indivisons are protons, and their size was the same as today's.

Let's say there were 2,04*1081 protons = num3, packed in a spherical shape.

Volume adopted for proton: according to [02, N baryons], proton's charge radius = 0,877±0,007

fm; let's adopt 0,8805 fm. Hence, diameter = 1,761 fm = 1,761*10-15 m, and volume = 2,86 fm3=

2,86*10-45 m3= voluPr.

When voluPr is multiplied by num3 the result is 5,82*1036 m3= volu1. From here, its diameter =

2,23*1012 m = diam1.

5.2 Prebig when mass indivisons are as in par.5.1 but dens3, the apex density, is applied to

massen1.

This way prebig's density would be limited to be the apex at most. The result of massen1 / dens3

is volu31 = 2,28*1026 m3, i.e. a diameter diam31 of 7,58*108 m.

5.3 Prebig when mass indivisons are quarks, with the same size as today's.

Number of quarks (on account of protons): num3 * 3 = 6,1105734*1081.

Then, volu1Q = 6,1105734*1081 * 5,24*10-58 m3 (= voluQ [01, par.7.1]) = 3,20*1024 m3.

Diameter = diam1Q = 1,83*108 m = 183 000 km.

Density dens11Q = prebig when massen1 is applied to volu1Q = 1,07*1030 kg/m3. This is

about 71,30834 times bigger than D and not allowed, according to the apex hypothesis, because

prebig's density would be limited to be the apex at most. So, acceptable dens11Q = 1,07*1030

kg/m3 / 71,30834 = 1,5*1028 kg/m3 = D.

volu1Q recalculated = massen1 / D = 2,28*1026 m3, same as volu31.

diam1Q recalculated = 7,58*108 m, same as diam31.

Planck's volume (volu0) is incredibly small. Consider, for instance, that the proton (size as

above) would be 1,29*1060 times bigger in volume. 3 (String theory posits one-dimensional

Planck-size vibrating strings as the basic subatomic particle, but 1-D objects couldn't exist in

nocer, according to nozerinf.)

Suppose now (although quantum mechanics does not allow it) that in prebig each of the num3

protons is the size of a Planck's size indivison. Then, the volume volu2 of prebig would be

4,50*10-24 m3 and its diameter diam2 results of 2,05*10-8 m.

Universe's average massen density, according to NASA [03], is equivalent to 5,9 protons/m3.

Assuming an average of 2,86 fm3/proton, massen in 1,00 m3 would occupy 16,87052921 fm3 =

1,687052921*10-44 m3. The remainder to 1,00 m3 is virtually 1,00 m3 anyway, which means that

in the universe practically all of it is space(time), and only an insignificant fraction is massen. It

follows that 5,92749633*1043 is the number of times in volume that space is bigger than massen.

5,927496223*1043.

The subject of this paper leads to enormously big or small numbers, rather difficult to

comprehend. For instance, the range from a Planck's size sphere to a universe's size sphere

encompasses maybe 185 orders of magnitude.

As told before, we are assuming the nozerinf hypothesis is true. In this case the contention of

prebig as a point singularity of infinite density is rejected.

3

This is about the same increase (60 orders) attributed to the classical inflation epoch. Coincidence?

7.1 Prebig's volume and density.

We have to turn to some of the finite size possibilities: volu1, volu2 or volu31.

volu1: this alternative is very logical because it involves the total universe's massen. It was

calculated with the amount (equivalent) of protons/m3 applied to the whole universe's volume

(see pars.3.2 and 3.4) and packed in a spherical shape. From volu1 is derived diam1 = 2,23*1012

m, i.e. the diameter of prebig when its volume is volu1. This diameter of 2,23*109 km is bigger

than Jupiter's orbit diameter.

volu2: this alternative means going to the tiniest imaginable extreme, at least from today's

physics perspective. It assumes that all of num3 protons have a Planck's volume. From volu2 is

derived diam2 = 2,05*10-8 m. An atom could be considered to be about 3*10-10 m in diameter,

so this prebig only 68 times larger is indeed very small.

volu31: it emerges when applying the apex density dens3 = D to massen1 (total universe's

massen). From volu31 is derived diam31 = 7,58*108 m, hence some 758 000 km, or a little over

half the sun's diameter.

Note that volu1 could be regarded as a "natural" volume in that it is imagined to be formed by a

tight assemblage of protons. In contrast, volu31 arises when volu1 is compressed as much as

possible, with D as the cutoff density point. In fact, volu1 is 2,5561408*1010 times as large as

volu31.

Alternatives volu1 and, especially, volu31, make sense because such a compact spheres

presumably could contain all of present massen (planets, stars, galaxies, interstellar gas and dust,

radiation, dark matter, dark energy, etc.) and all of present spacetime (inside protons; see

par.7.3). The big bang theory usually argues that the "explosion" occurred not in a given place

but simultaneously everywhere. This is hard to understand if prebig is a point-like, zero

dimension singularity, but could be more plausible when prebig is a finite size sphere where a

substantially homogeneous expansion can be said to happen everywhere in there. Likewise,

quantum fluctuations which are thought to have given rise to the large structure in the universe,

once amplified by the expansion, could develop throughout the sphere.

Consider now the densities corresponding to the three above volumes volu1, volu2 and volu31.

They are dens01 = 5,85*1017 kg/m3, when massen0 is applied to volu1; dens11 = 5,87*1017

kg/m3, when massen1 is applied to volu1; dens12 = 7,59*1077 kg/m3, when massen1 is applied

to volu2; and dens3 (the apex = 1,5*1028 kg/m3).

Let's refer only to dens11 (which is almost the same as dens01), dens12 and dens3. By

comparison with the apex, dens11 is very low, i.e. volu1 is too big, but dens12 is extremely

high, i.e. volu2 is absolutely too small.

Of course, volu1 could be recalculated assuming quark is the massen indivison instead of the

proton, and using num3 and massen1. Resulting density, adjusted to not surpass D, gives

essentially volu31 and diam31.

So, prebig was either the size of a giant star, or half the sun, or like a small virus (but not a point

singularity). The usual big bang tenet says that after inflation came a reheating period which

generated the known subatomic particles, presumably out of some continuous or discontinuous

medium. Now, continuity is disallowed by nozerinf, so if the medium had discrete particles, or

indivisons, they were born at reheating the same size as today, or smaller. In the latter case the

indivisons had to grow up to today's size, and maybe they are still growing.

If something like a big crunch originated prebig, a possibility to consider is that prebig's density

was growing until it reached D, at this point generating a big bang.

If the electromagnetic field appeared after the inflation era (which theoretically lasted some 10-35

seconds), then photons were not in prebig. Photons seem to have such an overwhelming presence

in spacetime (about 10 000 photons/cm3 of spacetime) that perhaps they are not only energy

inside it but a fundamental constituent of it.

Now I will examine some cases for the interplay between spacetime and massen.

Upon big bang, spacetime (more clearly, space) will expand or stretch. This expanding process

appears to continue, even at an accelerating pace.

For the "stretching" of spacetime (to simplify, a lineal amplification) let us consider how many

times prebig would have to expand in order to arrive at today's volume = volu3.

If prebig's volume is volu31 = 2,28*1026 m3, spacetime would have expanded up to now by a

factor of 1,52*1054 = stretching1.

If prebig's volume is volu2 = 4,50*10-24 m3, spacetime would have expanded up to now by a

factor of 7,67*10103 = stretching2.

These colossal figures mean that spacetime is something inconceivable "elastic". So, does the

stretching have a limit? What kind of a "substance" is spacetime? How can spacetime be

"compressed" to go into prebig? Can gravitational spacetime curvature explain away much of

this?

dimensions, i.e., spatial extension (as nozerinf claims), it seems clear that spacetime has to be an

essential part of massen. So, is spacetime just compressed inside massen indivisons, or else

spacetime and massen are intimately fused and constitute just one and only type of indivison?

The following naïve supposition arises: if spacetime expanded with the big bang, the

"expansion" event would correspond to the increase in the age of universe; the movement of

expansion would be the passing of time, and the irreversibility of time and increase of entropy

follow. It is thinkable that one of the time indivisons today would be much bigger in duration

than one of the time indivisons in prebig.

In a spacetime without massen, time shouldn't exist because the essence of time is movement, and

movement is not possible without massen.

This possibility would be ruled out by Case 1. Anyhow, here we would be on kind of a variation

of the "steady state" theory because spacetime would have always been there, out of prebig, and

did not take part in any big bang or big crunch. Big bang would then be exclusively a massen

event.

--If spacetime is within massen indivisons: upon big bang, spacetime expanded in parallel inside

and outside of them and, at present time, they would be hugely bigger; therefore, massen

indivisons in prebig would have to be enormously smaller than today's.

Assume that the quark has spacetime inside it. Quark's volume = voluQ = 5,24*10-58 m3[01,

par.7.1]. Now, let's arbitrarily choose stretching1 = 1,52*1054 times. Then, voluQ / stretching1

= 3,455753412*10-112 m3. This would have to be prebig's size of the quark in order to be

"stretched" to today's size after the big bang. It is close to 7 orders of magnitude smaller than

Planck's size, hence probably not allowed by quantum mechanics. Therefore, is the quark strictly

a mass indivison without spacetime inside it? Was its size in prebig the same as today's?

--If spacetime is not within massen indivisons: big bang occurred for spacetime, independently

of indivisons, and would have no effect on massen indivisons' size but only on their

characteristics and mutual proximity. So, spacetime for them would be only kind of a dynamic

frame to exist within.

Let's say the proton is a ball of massen and spacetime. What we want to do now is to estimate the

proportion of spacetime inside a proton, in contrast to the volume occupied by mass (quarks) and

energy.

Proton's volume = 2,86*10-45 m3(after [02]) = voluPr

Proton's mass = 1,67*10-27 kg [02] = massPr

Quark's diameter < 10-19 m [01, par.7.1] = diamQ

Quark's volume < 5,24*10-58 m3[01, par.7.1] = voluQ

Quark's mass = 7,84*10-30 kg [01, par.7.1] = massQ

Comparing diameters, proton would be > 17 610 times larger than quark.

Suppose proton is like a 30 cm diameter sphere, or about the size of a basketball. Then each quark

would be like the size of a speck of dust.

Take now proton's mass. For the sake of having a full comparison of volumes, let's imagine all

this mass is converted to quark mass:

massPr / massQ = 213,24 "quarks equivalent".

213,24 * voluQ = 1,1165416*10-55 m3 for all the "quarks equivalent". Therefore:

Percent volume occupied by the three quarks, i.e., only mass, inside the proton:

3 * voluQ = 1,570797*10-57 m3; (1,570797*10-57 m3/ voluPr) * 100 = 5,4934271*10-11 %.

So, percPr1 = 99,999999999945065729 % of proton's volume is spacetime + energy.

(1,1165416*10-55 m3/ voluPr) * 100 = 3,9047948*10-9 %.

So, percPr2 = 99,9999960952053 % of proton's volume is only spacetime.

From this is easy to infer that prebig, assumed to be the volu1 ensemble of protons, also has the

same proportion of massen and spacetime: 3,9047948*10-9 % massen only.

Consider again a 30 cm basketball-size proton: the volume equivalent of all massen inside this

proton would be like that of a very small grain of sand. It is really hard to understand how the

proton, with such an extremely tiny portion of massen, is however able to function as a particle

by itself.

In par.7.1 we saw that, assuming quarks are the essential mass indivisons and applying the

density apex D, result was volu31. But this volume is based in protons, hence a volu31 sphere

formed by quarks has percPr2 constituted specifically by spacetime, and the rest to 100% is

massen (quarks + energy). The detailed quantum-relativistic behavior of such a sphere would

indeed be a fascinating subject of study.

Following calculations in par.6, if today's universe was the size of the sun, the totality of massen

in it could be concentrated in a volume smaller than a human red blood cell. Indeed, the universe

is very flat.

Imagining that in prebig the elementary particles (indivisons) were Planck's size (volu2), let's

estimate the amount of growth these particles underwent to reach their present size. In each case

their shape is supposed to be spherical.

For electron, voluE / volu0 = 2,36960474*1050 times.

For quark, voluQ / volu0 = 2,36960474*1047 times.

Just for the sake of making some idea for the quark, let's think this growth as linearly distributed

along the time elapsed for the universe up to now. Subtract the initial volume (Planck's) from

final volume (quark's), and obtain the quark's increase in volume. Then, divide this by the

universe's age (13,69±0,13*109 years [02, ch.2]; let's adopt 13,69*109) and get the yearly rate of

growth in quark's volume. That is, 5,24*10-58 m3 minus 2,21*10-105 m3 = 5,24*10-58 m3.

(Because quark's volume has only 6 significant digits it does not change here when subtracting

Planck's volume, which in this case works as if it was essentially zero).

Finally, voluQ / 13,69*109 years = 3,82468225*10-68 m3/year. This enormously tiny lineal rate of

yearly increment is all that would be needed for the Planck particle to reach the quark size today.

Density of a sphere with a Planck's length diameter and Planck's mass ("PP particle"):

mass0 / volu0 = 9,85*1096 kg/m3= dens4 . This is larger even than dens12 or dens12'!

Possible meaning: in nocer a PP particle cannot exist.

(Mass of the universe imagining that all of it is full with PP particles: (volu3 / volu0) * mass0 =

3,4*10177 kg. This is, no doubt and by far, the most inconceivably huge mass that could ever

exist. But, of course, it doesn't.)

VOLUMES

volu1 5,8242151*1036 m3= prebig when each proton has a volume voluPr as measured

today, and using num3 protons.

volu1Q 3,1994901*1024 m3= prebig if indivisons are today's voluQ quarks.

volu1' 6*1035 m3= prebig when each nucleon has an estimated volume of 6 fm3, as

measured today, and using num2 protons.

volu2 4,5028905915*10-24 m3= prebig with Planck's size protons and num3.

volu2' 2,209647*10-25 m3= prebig with Planck's size protons and num2.

volu3 3,45230130*1080 m3= universe when radius = 46*109 light-years [05].

volu31 2,27851887*1026 m3= prebig when dens3 (i.e. D, the apex density),

is applied to massen1.

volu0 2,2107044446*10-105 m3= sphere with a diameter equal to Planck size.

voluPr 2,85941173*10-45 m3= proton's vol., after charge radius = 0,877±0,007 fm [02].

voluQ < 5,23599*10-58 m3= quark's volume [01, par.7.1].

voluE < 5,23599*10-55 m3= electron's volume [01, par.7.1].

MASS / ENERGY

massen0 3,40689243*1054 = prebig considering only protons after [02].

massen1 3,4177783*1054 kg = prebig considering NASA's average mass density [03].

massPr 1,672621637*10-27 kg = proton's mass [02].

massQ 7,8437116*10-30 kg = quark's mass [01, par.7.1].

mass0 2,1764411*10-8 kg = Planck's mass [02].

DENSITIES

dens01 5,8495306*1017 kg/m3= prebig when massen0 is applied to volu1.

dens11 5,86822128*1017 kg/m3= prebig when massen1 is applied to volu1.

dens11Q 1,06822593*1030 kg/m3= prebig when massen1 is applied to volu1Q.

dens11' 5,696297167*1018 kg/m3= prebig when massen1 is applied to volu1'.

dens12 7,593819651*1077 kg/m3= prebig when massen1 is applied to volu2.

dens12' 1,546753079*1079 kg/m3= prebig when massen1 is applied to volu2'.

dens3 D >= 1,5*1028 kg/m3= density apex.

dens4 9,84501164467*1096 kg/m3= sphere Planck's size diameter and Planck's mass.

DIAMETERS

diam1 2,23226763*1012 m = prebig after volu1.

diam1Q 1,82821548*108 m = prebig after volu1Q.

diam1' 1,046448*1012 m = prebig after volu1'.

diam2 2,048790686*10-8 m = prebig after volu2.

diam2' 7,500809*10-9 m = prebig after volu2'.

diam31 7,57794194*108 m = prebig after volu31.

diamPr 1,761*10-15 m = proton's diameter [02].

diamQ < 10-19 m = quark's diameter [01, par.7.1].

OTHER

avdens 9,9*10-30 g/cm3= average universe's massen density, after NASA [03].

num1 5,9 protons/m3= average universe's density of protons, after NASA [03]. (This is

equivalent to avdens).

num2 1080 = universe's total number of nucleons, after Shu [04].

num3 2,0368578*1081 = universe's total number of protons, after volu3 * num1.

num4 3,2685428*1090 = universe's total number of photons.

stretching1 1,51515151*1054 = spacetime stretching1 = volu3 / volu31.

stretching2 7,67052487*10103 = spacetime stretching2 = volu3 / volu2.

percPr1 99,999999999945065729 % of proton's volume which is spacetime + energy.

percPr2 99,9999960952053 % of proton's volume which is only spacetime.

10. References

01. Gonzalo A. Ordóñez (Aug-2010). Zero, infinity and nocer ("Nature abhors a vacuum"

revisited). Scribd (Research / Science).

02. Review of Particle Physics (2010). Particle Data Group. U.S.DOE, U.S.NSF, CERN, MEXT,

INFN. http://pdg.lbl.gov/2010/download/rpp-2010-JPhys-G-37-075021.pdf (retrieved December

2010).

03. Gary F. Hinshaw (2006). What is the Universe made of? NASA WMAP – Content of the

Universe. http://map/gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_matter.html (retrieved August 2009).

04. Frank H. Shu (2009). Cosmos ("Superunification and the Planck era"). Encyclopædia

Britannica from Encyclopædia Britannica 2009 Multimedia. Chicago. (Retrieved December

2010).

misconceptions of cosmological horizons and the superluminal expansion of the universe.

University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2052.

arXiv:astro-ph/0310808v2 13 Nov 2003

06. Serge Reynaud, Astrid Lambrecht et al. (2001). Quantum vacuum fluctuations.

arXiv:quant-ph/0105053v2 19 Jun 2001

07. Stefan Nobbenhuis (2006). Categorizing Different Approaches to the Cosmological Constant

Problem. Foundations of Physics, Vol. 36, No. 5, May 2006.

08. C. Sivaram (2007). What is special about the Planck mass? Indian Institute of Astrophysics,

Bangalore 560034. arXiv:0707.0058v1 [gr-qc]