8/2/2019 The Other Universe Theory, Part 1

1/2

-ismi ALLAH 'i Rahman-i Rahim...udwig Herhousen Di Baine a.k.a. Hakan OK

An)OtherUniverseTheory_Iutlak Dzenden Isnarak ve Yrngelerde Hareket Ederek Tekaml Eden Evren ve nsan Hipotezinin Makalesi.

arting Date :12.03.2012, Monday at 12:06cript Title :OtherUniverseTheory_Iuthor :Ludwig Herhousen Di Baine a.k.a. Hakan OK

(The) [An-] Other Universe Theory O.U.T. Part 1

bstract:his is an abstract only version (no other available yet) about this subject. The abstract IS THE THEORY itself...hat is why: The O.U.T. makes a clear and simple (in mind and language) definition of the universe and its laws,

well as explains even simplier how the universe came into being. For the knowing and educated eye (which alot scientists claim to have)it might be too simple to betrue or to believe to be theright thing.My (Ludwig Herhousen DiBaine a.k.a. Hakan OK)aim is not to make anyonebelieve or to convincepeople about my theory, Ispare you. It is uponeverybody him-/herself touse logic, think, use his/herintellect, consider andbelieve what comes out atthe end of their very owneffort.Why Part 1 ? Just 'cause...

Before The BeginningFirst there was (what wecall) Nothing. There was

not Anything that wewould call Something (if we were there at thatmoment), by referring toour materialistic space-time,experienced and perceivedwith our 5 (five) senses:Seeing, Hearing, Smelling,Tasting and Touching. Allthese senses are being

elivered by our sensors (organs): Eyes, Ears, Nose, Tongue and Skin. Not to mention the tools we use to expandand/or extend the abilities of our sensors (...you knowthem, I won't waste my time to line them up...).At this very moment, this infinite single moment of NotBeing (as a functioning space-time-realm), everythingthat would be necessary to become being was there: Aninfinite amount of Hydrogen Atoms, lined up, evenlydistributed, all one like another, in even and the samedistance from each other. At this point many people (even

great scientists like Hawking) make the mistake tomisinterpret the shape of such an even distributed matteras cubical.Bullshit, indeed. I don't know what they were thinking

when they made it up in their minds... A great success inspreading deception and disinformation it was, I now see.It is the worst shape you can think of when you say evendistributed. Why would a mature person even think of it,not to mention any scientific intellect falling into the trap.At this point WE MUST start USING our 6 th (sixth) Sense:OUR INTELLECT, to understand why we impose in

Last changed: 03/16/12 - 13:02:50 | Page 1/2 - OtherUniverseTheory_I

Drawing 1

Drawing 2

8/2/2019 The Other Universe Theory, Part 1

2/2

-ismi ALLAH 'i Rahman-i Rahim...udwig Herhousen Di Baine a.k.a. Hakan OK

An)OtherUniverseTheory_Iutlak Dzenden Isnarak ve Yrngelerde Hareket Ederek Tekaml Eden Evren ve nsan Hipotezinin Makalesi.

articular THIS special shape as an evenly distribution of matter: The TETRAHEDRON. Please look at Drawing 1 nd SEE the even distributed Hydrogen Atoms on a 2 dimensional surface. A similar shape (The Tetrahedron)unts when you hope to distribute matter evenly and people know how it looks like, right ?ut in the 3 rd Dimension you are getting problems when you try to line up the atoms regarding to this shape (trynd you'll see why...). But that is actually not a problem because the irrationality it triggers is not of importanceeyond the nature of our space-time-realm, but serves the explanation of this special and absolute singularity it

as. And it is indeed another, much different singularity than the one we are used to in Black Holes. This one isAbsolute, whereas the singularity in BH's are not (you know what I mean...). The distance of every atom to eachher describes the stabile point of Critical Density of matter to be in an state of absolute singularity. Any density

bove (atoms closer to each other, tighter, denser) would have triggered EM emission and the time flowing efore we could have filled up with enough atoms (to serve a purpose and to be sure that it works out). So beforee go on and trigger a fluctuation within the matter lined up so far, we would have a plan, an intention to do soather divine explanation than scientific, I know). Not enough atoms would mean a premature universe... As (not,ever) seen in other startups of the universe, which mean early collapse before anything could come into being.here must, at this stage be considered that only an infinite amount of atoms can lead to an universe as we canbserve today. Hopefully uou are not asking me right now, why it should have been as I described and not BB andxpanding models. Simple answer; This (one) abstract is about TRYING to explain WITHOUT B.B. And Expansion.

We just consider for a (loooong) moment that there isn't such a thing like BB and Expansion.At The BeginningNow that you have evenlydistributed all that infinitestuff (countless HydrogenAtoms, consider sayinginfinite...), it is time to turnthe lights on. But how ?You say: BE ! (This time yes,

just kidding!!! We are notallowed to refer to anyintelligent design, ironyinclusive...)But before you do that(triggering any fluctuation,somehow...), please have alook at the Drawing where weare at the moment (Drawing3, extreme right: There yousee that writing: No Big Bangat all ! and 0 Kelvin,absolute singularity. Did yousee it? Yes you did!).Note: The complexer itgravitationally gets in theuniverse, the complexer mustgravitational-system-objectsthe clumps do (did then andmaybe still do somewhere

ow) become (guess a peak at galaxy complexity, indeed a prediction by me...). We see that the first giganticars (or Quasars?) must have had way more mass than it even needs to become a Black Hole but didn't collapseet into some, but somehow (because of the less complexity of gravitational effects in the universe then) did.ater on, with increasing complexity of gravitational fields, it became possible to allow Black Holes (Non-Absolute-ngularity-Objects) to form (mostly are told to form inside the core of the galaxies). Well this isn't proved, but

bviously evidence does support this theory hopefully (somehow, don't ask me why, it is just a feeling, Isume...). The Note is rather confusing than explaining my mind about the subject . To form smaller stars within

alaxies and the galaxies themselves, we would need other elements than hydrogen only. Pure hydrogen was ableproduce Quasars only, one may suggest. And those heavier elements were produced by exploding Quasars

upernovae). Much later stars in galaxies started producing the even heavier elements (up to 92nd-Uranium) andread them around in the intragalactic space (within the galactic realm and scale and gravitational bounds),rming the stars we are used to (like but not limited to our sun) and their probable planetary systems (not toention other celestial stuff yet already...).

to be continued (hopefully)...

Last changed: 03/16/12 - 13:02:50 | Page 2/2 - OtherUniverseTheory_I

rawing 3