the greatest story ever told!

The 5 Salient Features Continued

2 - Salient Features of the Mighty CMB: It's CLASSICAL - Not Quantum in Nature

Steinhardt had this has as the last of his "apparent salient features" but we have put it second, because it is the easiest to understand! The only reason thermal equilibrium came before it, is because it is a more fundamental reality, and because we have been studying it for so long, that by now, it should have become the easiest for us all to grasp. Thermodynamics is foundational! Now, in the cosmos there are two main branches of Physics: the classical and the quantum. And, they deal with very different aspects of the sphere of nature. The classical deals with macroscopic objects. The objects that are formed by atoms and molecules: baseballs, tennis rackets, spaceships, horses, planets, galactic superclusters - all these fall within the boundary of classical mechanics. That is, everything which has a scale larger than atoms and subatomic particles. By necessity, this then, means objects, for atoms do not exist in isolation but in groups and the entities those groups form are called "objects." The quantum world is very different, and deals with subatomic particles, that is, the atoms and molecules themselves. Together with all the components that make them up including protons, neutrons, electrons and the discrete quanta of energy - basically photons - that either excite them, or are emitted from them when they drop down their energy ladder. The quantum world is far removed from the world of classical dynamics. Here, different rules apply: like superposition, which make the behaviour of quantum particles very different from the behaviour of macroscopic classical objects. That should be your take-away: the quantum world deals with particles, whilst the classical world is all about objects! The quantum aspects of nature are somewhat puzzling to humans and it has been claimed no one really understands them, so counter-intuitive is the behaviour of quantum mechanics! How counter-intuitive? I will let Niels Bohr, the man who was most responsible for formulating the development of quantum mechanics answer:

Why is the one branch called "classical?" We discussed how Max Planck in solving the ultraviolet catastrophe, discovered that light was quantized. That is, it came in discrete bundles of energy called "photons," instead of in continuous form. Before that there was only one way in which mankind understood the world to work. With the advent of the quantum revolution, a demarcation had to be set between the two drastically different ways in which the world had been experimentally proven to work. The old ways became the "classic" method, hence the name "classical mechanics," while the new discovery based on the quanta of energy - that is, a photon - became known as "quantum mechanics." The "photons" are the discrete packets of energy! Photons equals quanta. Clear enough.

This brings us to another hopeless treasure hunt that many scientists are breathlessly pursuing. What they have labeled as the holy grail of physics - a theory of quantum gravity. Recall, how, in their contrary-to-the-evidence extrapolations, cosmologists believe that, historically, the four fundamental forces were united into one super force? Their assertions are that as you move further and further back in time, the temperatures rise to ever higher energies, and it is these energies that make the distinct fundamental forces merge with each other. Thus when electromagnetism merges with the weak nuclear force, you would get the electroweak force. Move further back in time, and higher in temperature and the electroweak force merges with the strong nuclear force, creating the Grand Unified Theory, or GUT. Continue the trend by moving farther back in time, and to even higher energies, and you then combine GUT, with gravity, achieving the holy grail which merges all known forces into one grand scheme: the Theory of Everything - or TOE. Why is this theory, that unifies all the fundamental forces so special to cosmologists and physicists alike? Because they feel it would help them to explain the whole universe using exclusively material and natural means, without the need for a God, or any such supposed higher power. This is the ultimate goal, the ultimate yearning of the vast majority of scientists! But, TOE has a problem. To unify all forces it would have to include a theory of quantum gravity. And, that is a big problem! That is because according to the Big Bang, the early universe was dominated by radiation, and once it cooled sufficiently, after about 400 000 years, the very first simple atoms started to form. You'll recall Keating's words:

That is significant. A significant mistake. Photons are by definition quanta - discrete packets of energy. Additionally, it is claimed that, the universe at this time was so hot because all the matter that we now see as stars and galaxies and us, was condensed into a super hot compacted volume that was much smaller than an atom and got infinitely smaller as you approach the singularity. That means two things must be true simultaneously about the early universe: it was a quantum environment - since it was dominated by radiation; and that environment had strong gravity - since everything we see today fit into a volume of Space a "billionth the size of a proton" as Dianna Cowern told us earlier. Thus matter and radiation are said to have been coupled. Since these two variables are thus said to have co-existed in an early universe defined by the Big Bang, Big Bang Theorists must find a theory of quantum gravity. A theory of how gravity - due to all the matter - operated at the quantum scale, since everything was so small. But we already know better. No such theory, of quantum gravity exists! Or was ever necessary. Because the evidence tells us so! This is why the proper ordering of the appearance of the 3 entities that formed the "initial conditions" of the universe is so important! From that exercise, we already know, that matter came before radiation! That means Space and matter never existed in an infinitely small radiation-filled volume, i.e., the singularity. For, if they did, then light would have been present. But since light was absent when Space and matter, first appeared, we know the three entities were never confined to such a small volume! The matter becomes even clearer when we reason on the following facts.

Consider, what the significance is, of the fact that the Mighty CMB is telling us that at the moment of its appearance, the universe operated in a CLASSICAL, and not a quantum way? Like Patterson's logic in debunking infinite circles, it is so simple as to be almost anticlimactic. The universe being classical versus quantum is telling us about the scale of matter at that time. Put another way, it means, at the appearance of the Mighty CMB: the universe was not made up of atoms and subatomic particles, but of WHOLE objects! That fact is as simple, as it is important! It is so important, I will repeat the finding again in full: At the time of the appearance of the Mighty CMB, the matter content of the universe - which came before radiation - was in the form of one or more OBJECTS, not atoms!

That in itself, tells us a lot, but there is more. The "classical" nature of the initial special "set up" of the early universe, taken together with its thermal equilibrium between matter and radiation tells us that the temperature shared between the Mighty CMB and objects then present was low enough that the matter content of the universe was either in its solid or liquid phase. How do we know? How do we know it wasn't in a gaseous, or plasma state? Once again because all gases, including ones that are plasmas, are by definition in a quantum state. But the Mighty CMB informs us, that that was not the case - at initial condition! The environment was classical and not quantum in nature. Thus matter was present in one of its two exclusive macroscopic phases: solid, or liquid. That dictates a temperature far below 3 000 kelvin. The previous point, the fact that matter preceded radiation, and the current point, that the ambient temperature was low enough to support either a solid or liquid state of matter - but not a gaseous one, converge to discredit the recombination epoch of the hot Big Bang Theory, which states that radiation precedes the existence of matter; that the ambient temperature of the universe was so high that initially, it was infinite; and that matter is a product of photons. Isn't science wonderful! This allows us to state another firm conclusion:

THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE OF THE EARLY UNIVERSE, THE TEMPERATURE OF THE COSMIC MICROWAVE BACKGROUND, THE THERMAL EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE BETWEEN MATTER & RADIATION, WAS LOW ENOUGH FOR THE OBJECT(S) OCCUPYING SPACE TO BE IN EITHER A LIQUID OR SOLID STATE - BUT NOT A GASEOUS ONE

Lastly, as we consider our knowledge of the phases of matter, we realize that we currently do not have enough data to decide which of the two possible states of matter - solid or liquid - the object or objects were in when radiation first appeared. We will just state the relevant portions of the definition of solids and liquids, for now. Solids have definite shape and definite volume. Liquids have no definite shape, but they do have a definite volume. We'll have to wait for more information, before we can narrow down what the Mighty CMB is telling us, into a firm, evidence backed conclusion! But there is something obvious we can add now - if objects came before radiation, then the origin of baryonic matter and its subsequent organization into the one or more objects present at "initial condition" means matter originated in the dark! THERE WAS NO RADIATION AT THE ADVENT OF MATTER! As we said previously, for now then, we will be satisfied with the four following conclusions:

AT THE TIME OF THE APPEARANCE OF THE MIGHTY CMB, THE MATTER CONTENT OF THE UNIVERSE - WHICH PRECEDED LIGHT - WAS IN THE FORM OF ONE OR MORE OBJECTS, NOT ATOMS!

SINCE LIGHT FIRST APPEARED INTO A CLASSICAL UNIVERSE OF SPACE & ONE OR MORE OBJECTS, THE QUANTUM CONDITIONS THAT DICTATE THE NEED FOR QUANTUM GRAVITY, NEVER EXISTED!

SINCE MATTER IN THE FORM OF BODIES PRECEDED RADIATION - THE APPEARANCE OF THE BODY OR BODIES PRESENT AT INITIAL CONDITION WAS UNDER CONDITION OF DARKNESS

At this point in our journey of reasoning, we still do not know how many objects existed then, one or many. And, we do not know their size or shape. "Reasoning" on the rest of the "apparent salient features" of the cosmic microwave background, will help us to answer all those questions in a non-controversial, evidence backed way. Just as Neil deGrasse Tyson would want it. That's science! We now move onto the third of our salient features of the Mighty CMB - its "partitioned entropy."

3 - Salient Features of the Mighty CMB: PARTITIONED ENTROPY?

Steinhardt is trying to communicate, what he imagines to be the contradictory nature of the two oppositely positioned dynamics. Recall, that through Maxwell and Boltzmann's unwarranted intervention, scientists started thinking of "entropy" in terms of probability, instead of the far superior conception of understanding it for what it was: an inviolable feature of all physical processes. They imagined it as a measurement of the amount of disorder in a system. With that frame in mind, Steinhardt, then expresses the following facts in terms of the probability that they could be found in the state they are in. With the least probable state counting as low entropy; and the most likely state, counting as having a lot of entropy! Fact one: The geometry of the universe was in its least probable configuration - or shape. As Keating explained earlier: theoretically, there are an infinite number of positively curved surfaces - or shapes; and there are an infinitely large number of negatively curved shapes. However the universe had zero curvature in its relationship between matter and the volume of Space it occupied. The geometry of the early universe was Flat, and so it remained. There is only one Flat, zero curvature shape, and the universe had it! The universe was, and has always, been at Critical Density. Hence Steinhardt's description of it as being at minimal entropy! In that he is tending to be right, but is actually far from being accurate! The correct answer is it was a zero entropy! Why? Consider Professor Dave's words,

In their zeal for statistical mechanics, as based on Boltzmann's and Maxwell's ideas, as opposed to Claudius' formula, even when a system has one microstate, scientists focus on the fact that it must have some kinetic energy according to the third law of thermodynamics, thus they describe it as low entropy, as opposed to the correct declaration: it is at zero entropy. Cosmologists always say "low entropy" instead of giving the correct mathematical answer of zero. This is because they are guided by the evolutionary natural processed based model. One microstate always equals an entropy of zero, as the natural log of 1 is O. In which case Boltzmann's constant will be multiplied by zero, producing an entropy of zero, as per the following formula:

S = k log W

Where S is entropy, k is Boltzmann's constant, and W is the number of possible microstates. In a system having one microstate, or put another way, in a system occupying the least probable microstate possible, W is 1 - resulting in ...

S = k log 1

S = k x 0, which in turn equals

S = 0

An entropy of zero! Thus Steinhardt's statement that the entropy of the " ... geometry ... is nearly perfectly uniform. So, almost no entropy," is not wholly factual. The truth is zero curvature, means there is no entropy, it means perfect Critical Density. What makes it difficult for scientists to visualize such a state, and thus always leave wiggle room for some small entropy, is the fact that such an occurrence only happens if, as per Professor Dave's words, "There is no kinetic energy." For them, the universe could only have come into existence by evolutionary processes and not via fiat, thus nature and the universe must be the result of natural spontaneous processes, and all such processes depend on kinetic energy. That much is true. All natural processes do depend on kinetic energy. That's the point! As Davies said, "... the universe was set up - we don't know how - in a rather special state." What the Mighty CMB is telling us, is that, since the geometry of the universe was in one microstate, but without breaking the third law of thermodynamics - about matter not being able to be at absolute zero - the appearance of the universe was not a natural process - but a supernatural process! THAT'S THE POINT! As we have already established. In other words it was not evolutionary, since all evolutionary processes are based on baryonic kinetic energy. That is why all evolutionary models must include a hot plasma soup. How do we know matter was not at absolute zero, because it was in thermal equilibrium with radiation. Radiation, by definition cannot be at zero kelvin, as photons are units of energy - quanta. And absolute zero, means the system has no quanta. But we are currently over-reaching as we spoke of the appearance of the "universe," whereas, we have only proved that it's geometry was at zero entropy. In truth that is enough evidence to prove that the Big Bang never happened: any of the three variables - the geometry of Space, matter, and radiation - we are discussing, being at zero entropy would prove the point, but the Mighty CMB gives us evidence that proves all three variables were at zero entropy initially! So, let's move onto to the next part of Steinhardt's quote.

His second fact about matter and radiation being at "maximum entropy," is even less correct. In fact it is wrong. Normally, thermal equilibrium is accomplished through the repeated collisions of millions upon millions, billions of particles belonging to a system or two or more systems. Thus, in most cases, two entities that reached equilibrium through those means, would indeed be at maximum entropy, as all their subatomic particles would be in the most disorderly state possible, to reach thermal equilibrium at that specific temperature. However ,as we have previously shown, that cannot be the case with the thermal equilibrium between matter and radiation, when the Mighty CMB first appeared. In this case, the term "thermal equilibrium" is a description of the fact that the two systems were at the exact same temperature, not a direct reflection of how they attained their sameness in temperature. It is not a direct statement about the process or mechanism that led them to be at the same temperature. What we know from the evidence of the Mighty CMB, is that, thermal equilibrium was built into the 3 entities of the universe, from the START! They did not achieve it by adjusting to each other's temperatures over time. That's why the evidence backed condition which describes this exact moment in the history of the universe is called an "initial condition." The Mighty CMB shows matter and radiation were at the same temperature from the very beginning. Technically, it is not wrong to call that "thermal equilibrium." Not as long as we realize why that state was not achieved thermodynamically, that is through the movement of heat. This is why scientists very slyly avoid giving any details about these initial conditions. You can tell by their language that they understand that uniformity of temperature was baked in, and was not the outcome of some process over time. Thus Davies says, "... the universe was set up - we don't know how - in a rather special state." Keating speaks of a "... conspiracy. And that's effectively, in the CMB context, saying that there was an equilibrium event that occurred prior...."

Thus, Steinhardt's assessment of the second fact is not telling the whole story. The truth is that both the geometry of the universe - the relationship between matter and the volume of Space it occupied; and the temperatures of the universe - the relationship between the temperature of matter and the temperature of radiation, were at zero entropy. As we have noted, the formula for calculating entropy is

S = k log W where S represents entropy; k is a constant, Boltzmann's constant; and log W, stands for the natural log of the number of microstates possible in a system. Since, microstates are an inferior conceptualization of entropy, than Clausius' original and brilliant thesis, I will not explain them much. It is a paradigm physicists like to use, but it is far less exacting in its power to explain how the universe works than Clausius' method. Worse yet, it fails at either end of its range: that is, there are things which exist, that it cannot explain: such as zero entropy entities at the beginning of the universe; and there are impossible phenomenon, which it asserts are possible. For these reasons, in extreme cases, in leads physicists to believe that things which can clearly never occur in the real world, have a probability of occurring - no matter how remote the chances. This stops grown adults from declaring that obviously impossible phenomenon, such as all the gas molecules in a container spontaneously gathering in one corner of the container, or milk that has been thoroughly mixed into a cup of coffee spontaneously reverting to its original state, are just that - impossible. Faced with such questions, they will only say, it's highly unlikely, but probability says it's possible. Thus it is left to children to state the obvious: "The emperor has no clothes!"

The point is clear. Since we know the Mighty CMB is not a product of fluctuations, we can put two and two together. The "conspiracy" was not in manipulating the non-existent fluctuations of a non-existing hot plasma soup, but in the "set[ting] up" of the universe in a "rather special state." As to how this was done, scientists may claim "we don't know how" all day long, but the truth is obvious: the reality of undeniable evidence leads to only one conclusion. Their most hated option. The one they never want to consider. Spare a thought for an old confused man:

Jastrow has since passed away. Of his meager talents I would list understatement as the foremost. You've missed something indeed, dear Intellectual: the aim for all humans is to become compatible with God, not for God to be compatible with us. The gall! He would have done well to have heeded the words of Richard P Feynman,

Or, Einstein ...

This important fact, highlights that science is the product of nature, and not the other way around! You cannot dictate to the universe what you feel it should be like. The aim of all scientific enquiry should be to do the following, and nothing else:

By definition of what an Intellectual is, there are no Intellectuals who live up to those words. Unfortunately, living at the last stage of empire, such as we are, the vast majority of current scientists are empty credentialed Intellectuals. And very few are in the pioneering mould of the greats of yesteryear! We now recall Keating's words on the subject:

Did you catch that? The existential problem for haters of God, is that the only way to explain "insertion of external conditions that then determine the initial conditions of our universe" means God is the source! And, so big a problem is that for Intellectuals, that they will "do away with" the evidence, because of a desire to "find a naturalistic, or materialistic origin story of the universe." That's the unsolvable problem facing scientists. But it's only a problem for haters of God! The problem is not that scientists cannot figure out what the data is telling them. The problem is that they hate the solitary answer the data repeatedly keeps giving them. I say repeatedly, because as we will soon see, zero entropy is true for the initial conditions of not only geometry - that is Space, but also of matter and radiation. But scientists, spurred by their hatred, keep vainly looking for alternate extrapolated solutions, as opposed to following the science, as they often claim to be doing. They understand exactly what the implications of zero entropy states are - fiat! Again, we consider Keating's words,

As I said, Flatness represents a zero entropy state, and it is impossible for matter to have a zero entropy state according to the third law of thermodynamics. The phrase "Unless, it was exactly isotropically established" is a reference to God, as opposed to their fervent wishes for an alternate baryonic-based "origin story." "We'd like to do away with that," Keating says proudly! Unfortunately for him and his kind, it is not just God who refutes their claims, but observations which have been "unavoidable" since measurements could be taken and experiments run. Ask yourself, how do facts "established very firmly by Cosmic Microwave Background experiments," end up in the murky waters of the inconclusive "seems to indicate?" Shouldn't such very firmly established measurements lead to very firm conclusions? You'd expect so, unless, of course the conclusions are not in line with the scientist's philosophy of how the universe came to be. Are Intellectuals searching for truth, or hoping in vain, to establish their own version of reality? Are they practising the physics of the universe; or the metaphysics of the metaverse? Their core problem is there is only one reality, and it has already been established by its Creator. As such, the facts will always agree with the historical record, for the facts and the history of those facts are one and the same. Scientist's dreams of "... Find[ing] a naturalistic, or materialistic origin story of the universe" are dashed most convincingly by the evidence of the Mighty CMB. Compare that evidence of zero entropy, against the evidence from the laws of thermodynamics. Remember this quote?

For this - among many other reasons - the fevered expectations of Intellectuals are always coming to nil. I don't know what such disappointment feels like, as I rest all my hopes on the only living God, but I imagine it is be depressing. The good news is, we will all find out together - imminently - as the truth of the Creation of the universe becomes, first, controversial discovery, then common knowledge, and then conventional wisdom. As for Intellectuals, the intersection of the evidence from the laws of thermodynamics and the evidence of the Mighty CMB is the problem. All of nature's processes increase entropy, "All the time. Throughout the universe," as the good Professor Goodstein declared. Hence the only explanation for a process that has zero entropy is that it it not natural, but an act of a supernatural agent, or - God. The cosmic microwave background, their once holy grail for disproving the existence of God and that the universe came from a hot Big Bang, has produced indisputable evidence for the exact opposite conclusion - the universe is a product of supernatural FIAT!

We get an additional clue as to how this might work, when we consider Keating's interesting phrase: "It's another word for God ... by insertion of external conditions...." Let's stop there. We have thus far, defined the scene the Mighty CMB is giving us evidence of, as the initial conditions of the universe. Further, we have defined the universe, according to Professor George Ellis, as "everything that exists." How then can there be an "insertion of external conditions?" External to what? They can't be external to the universe, otherwise we, like the vain cosmologists, would be dabbling with the metaphysical, as we have just defined the universe as "everything that exists," hence, nothing can exist, or be external to the universe. Also, it will not do to just invoke fiat as the solution without any evidence. How does God insert "external conditions that then determine the initial conditions of our universe?" What does it mean to be external to the universe and internal to it at the same time?

This is where the logic of how we have ordered our presentation of the Mighty CMB's "apparent salient features" comes to our aide. We have already discussed the answers to these questions in our study of the first two "apparent salient features" of the Mighty CMB: thermal equilibrium and its classical mechanics. As I have already said, this happens because there is an overlapping of facts between the different salient features. I will explain the reason behind such overlaps a little later. In the meantime, resist the urge to try and read ahead when you think you see an overlap coming. Overlapping of facts should not be looked down upon. Instead it should be welcomed and held in the highest esteem. It should be searched for, for such corroborating of the facts is an important feature, not a bug of the truth. It is a telltale sign of something being true, when different aspects of a topic dovetail in a way that one fact supports the others and is supported by them in return.

So, it is, that we return to our main point: the dual nature of our universe. The fact that, as is proven by the evidence, it has two realms of activity! What Merriam-Webster referred to as: "relating to an order of existence!" I couldn't have said it better myself - "an order of existence!" Let us now discuss the second order of existence in more depth.

Recalling our SECOND Realm

Recall, that we know that the universe is made of two realms, or regimes of operation. This situation is not like comparing classical mechanics to quantum mechanics, for those are both dealing with baryonic matter, and are based on mechanics. No, there difference between the dark matter realm and the baryonic matter realm is much more fundamental. Great strides were made by the pioneers of the scientific method, when they not only collected vast amounts of data, but used that data to find hidden relationships between what, sometimes, may have seemed to be completely unrelated entities. We shall now do the same and see what we can learn. When we covered the dark matter realm under the salient feature of thermal equilibrium, we did so with a tight focus on how the relationship between energy and entropy in the baryonic realm rules out evolutionary processes over time and the use of any baryonic materials in "set[ting] up" the initial conditions of the universe. That is because all baryonic processes generate entropy - all the time, throughout the Cosmos! That is the inescapable relationship between energy and entropy. Since Space geometry, matter, and radiation were all at zero entropy, it was obvious that they emerged from other means - leaving the dark matter realm as the only solution. Not only because it was the last man standing, but because its heat free composition is the only solution that meets the requirements! One of the few facts scientists know about dark matter is that it does not interact with electromagnetic radiation - and that was the exact entropy-free requirement needed from whatever created and implemented the "initial conditions" of the universe.

This time under the banner of the partitioned entropy, "salient feature" of the Mighty CMB, we are going to be looking in minute detail into what the thermodynamic definitions of isolated, closed, and open systems teaches us about the two realms of our universe. Are they separate and independent? Or united and complementary? The answers may surprise you. As always, we will use the empirically established laws of thermodynamics to flush out the truth.

The DIFFERENCES Between Isolated, Closed & Open Systems

The thermodynamic rules that define isolated, closed and open systems are quite straightfoward. We know from the Tully-Fisher Relation that we studied earlier, that dark matter and baryonic matter do have some sort of relationship. What we want to do now, is to assess that relationship in terms of how both realms of the universe interact with each other. The key question is: "Do they form an isolated, closed, or open system with each other?" The answer will give us volumes of critical information. An important first acknowledgement is to simplify our labels wherever, and whenever we can. We now understand that what we have previously labeled as the visible baryonic universe, is in fact, a subset of the universe - a realm, "an order of existence." More than that we know the name of this realm - the Cosmos. So, from now on we will call the visible baryonic realm by its name - the Cosmos. It is true, that we do not yet know what we should call the invisible dark realm, so for now that placeholder label will have to do. We will start our analysis of the three systems by considering the most restrictive system, and move down the options.

Isolated Systems

An isolated system is one that simply does not allow anything to cross its boundary. Neither energy - in any form - or matter can leave, or enter an isolated system. This is why the definition of the universe as an isolated system is so significant. It is from this truth, that we then understand that in such a universe, the hot Big Bang model, only had one heat reservoir - the heat source inside the universe - and could thus, not be the source of the work that expanded the universe, by stretching Space. As that would require two heat reservoirs: a heat source, and a heat sink, together with a piston. Those are the three components of any baryonic engine. And the hot Big Bang universe, is, as a whole, by definition of being hot, a baryonic heat engine. Since no isolated system can fill the historical requirement of inserting "external conditions," the hot Big Bang universe was ruled out as a model of what the data is telling us!

How does that relate to the two realms we are now studying? The data from the Mighty CMB is historical, not suggestive, or hypothetical. In other words, it is telling us about what actually happened in the past, not what could be, or what we would like to see. Something outside the Cosmos inserted initial conditions into the Cosmos. The only thing outside the Cosmos is the invisible dark matter realm. Hence, from the evidence of the Mighty CMB, we immediately realize that neither realm of the universe, not the Cosmos, nor the dark matter realm are isolated! We move on to examining our other two options.

Closed Systems

What does the above definition tell us about what it would mean if the dark matter realm were a closed system? Currently we are only interested in this one way traffic, as we are looking for an "external" source that can insert "external conditions, that then determine the initial conditions" that we find hard-wired into the Mighty CMB. So, we are, as yet, only interested in dynamics from the dark matter realm into the Cosmos, and are wholly disinterested in any dynamics that might go in the opposite direction. For now, at least. As the above quote makes clear: in a closed system, matter cannot transfer, but energy can. How is that significant. We recall that every heat engine has three facets: a heat source, a piston - the mechanism to do the work, and a heat sink. A necessary exhaust, to dissipate the entropy that accompanies all heat transfer in the universe!

It quickly becomes obvious that the dark matter realm, being defined as a "closed system," would also not suffice to meet the proofs of the observational evidence supplied to us by the Mighty CMB! Why? If the dark matter realm were merely a closed system, it would only be able to transfer energy into the Cosmos, into the baryonic realm of everything that interacts with light. But that would be insufficient! for the following reason: it would only explain where the energy came from to produce the original object(s) found in the universe, including all three of our entities: Space, matter, and radiation. However, we know that is insufficient, for converting one form of energy into another always involves work! If only energy entered the Cosmos from the dark matter realm, and not matter, then where did the piston come from to convert the dark matter energy into baryonic matter? What mechanism was responsible for doing the work? For obviously, the work was done in the baryonic realm, by a non-baryonic form of matter. Hence, the zero entropy results, at the appearance of the Mighty CMB. As soon as something can interact with light, it is in the baryonic realm - by definition. Although, the dark matter cosmic web is enmeshed throughout the Cosmos; it is not part of the Cosmos, precisely for the reason that it does not interact with light. That is the key definition that separates the two realms, not location, or degree of intermingling. Pause to comprehend that.

To effectively be the source of the "external conditions" that we are looking for, the dark matter realm must fulfill three non-negotiable conditions: it must be the source of the energy that was converted - through work - to form all matter, dark and cosmic, since we now know, that baryonic matter is not the product of a cooling fluctuating hot plasma soup, as matter preceded radiation. It must explain how such work was able to be done without the production of entropy. And lastly, it must be the source of the piston, or mechanism, which did the work of converting dark matter energy into baryonic matter. You'll notice my careful wording in that last sentence. I called it dark matter energy, instead of the shorter and more direct "dark energy." This, as you might have guessed, is to avoid confusion with the false concept of the non-existent negative gravity called dark energy. Essentially, the Inflaton field, of Inflation Theory. Weak minds can only recycle old garbage. Additionally, a point of note: dark matter energy is the source for both dark and cosmic matter, but I only mentioned "all forms of baryonic matter" above, because that is our point of current focus. When you are discussing the universe, focus is critical, for otherwise, you will never come to any conclusions, which is the point - after all. Of our three listed criteria for dark energy to meet, we know it qualifies in the first two, namely: it is the source of the "external" energy, because the only thing external to the Cosmos is the dark matter "order of existence." As for the second criteria: that is of course the easiest to understand, because the source of entropy is heat, the heat that is inherent to all forms of baryonic matter, motion and processes. Thus dark matter, by virtue of the fact that it is not composed of, and does not use atoms, is entropy free. That is how the external "initial conditions" would have been "set up" to be zero-entropy by a non-baryonic, dark matter realm energy source! But, we have not yet fulfilled the criteria for the third requirement. If the dark matter order of existence is indeed the external source of the inserted "initial conditions," then the relationship between the dark matter realm and the Cosmos cannot be a closed system, for such a system does not meet the third criteria: the need for the transfer of matter from the dark matter order of existence into the Cosmos, to act as a piston! Therefore, whatever "external" source was responsible for inserting the "initial conditions" into the Cosmos must - by definition - be an ...

Open System

We finally have our ideal candidate system for how the dark matter realm operates, and of how it's related to the Cosmos! Let us investigate. We have three requirements. We will take them one at a time. We consider the source of the energy that was converted into baryonic matter and energy - kinetic, thermal, chemical, etc. The dark matter realm would meet this criterion as it is the only possible source of any energy, that is external to the baryonic realm, in an otherwise isolated universe. Check.

Point two: we consider the definition of work. Work can either be defined as the "transfer of energy, using the uniform motion of atoms" as Robitaille puts it.* (What is the 1st Law of Thermodynamics? The First Law Explained! From 6:07 - 6:14) Or, as a second definition puts it: work is the conversion of one form of energy into another. This includes matter! We are obviously concerned, only with the second definition as we are talking about a non-baryonic agent doing the work. As such it would not be "using the uniform motion of atoms" - since, it has none to utilize. Check.

We now have the energy source and the correct definition of work that will convert that energy into the baryonic matter and energy that we see throughout the universe. Our third criterion to consider is where the piston or mechanism came from to actually do the work of converting dark matter energy into the three entities we find represented in the Mighty CMB - at the beginning of the universe! Thermodynamics and the empirical evidence found in the cosmic microwave background converge to give us one and only one system, as the solution of how the dark matter realm is related to the Cosmos. The dark matter realm is united with the Cosmos, in a top-down open system! Wonder of wonders. The dark matter realm and the Cosmos are united and complementary! It is this open nature from the superior system to the lesser one, that allows the combination of dark matter energy and a dark matter piston, or mechanism to freely supply the entropy-free energy and matter that was responsible for "set[ting] up" the vaunted "rather special state" - as Paul Davies put it - that is found in the initial conditions of the universe - as testified to empirically, by the evidence of the Mighty CMB. If you have not yet started to grasp why I keep referring to the cosmic microwave background as the Mighty CMB, you are slow. As brilliant as Davies is, he claimed he didn't "know how" such a special state was set up. His fellow scientist Keating was more forthcoming, both in how the "conspiracy" works, and in his denunciation of what that signifies. Here are his words: "... The universe has certain properties that are unexplained if not imposed by fiat, and cosmologists hate fiat. It's another word for God ... by insertion of external conditions that then determine the initial conditions of our universe. We'd like to do away with that. Especially for many cosmologists who don't believe in some SUPERNATURAL designer...." Does that surprise you? That Keating checked all the boxes correctly? He rightly identifies that the initial conditions of the Cosmos would need to established "external[ly];" he correctly identifies that such an outcome would require imposition by fiat - as opposed to evolutionary processes - that is, he recognizes that the piston doing the work must also have a source external to the Cosmos, and lastly; that understands from a scientific perspective, that the initial conditions being set in such means no natural agent could be responsible, leaving only a "SUPERNATURAL designer!" If you are not religious and have put all your faith in secular institutions and you are not seething with anger right now - then, you haven't understood what you've just read! Hate it as he might, Keating's aversion to the facts will not change them. For, according to the cosmic microwave background, that is how all three, most improbable states of zero entropy: for matter, for radiation and for the geometry of Space, were all achieved - by FIAT!

Keating's analysis is not due to him being bright - just honest about the facts! Why? Because it is recognized by all scientists that if the world had a supernatural agent as its Creator, there would have to be a footprint WITHIN THE COSMOS - OF THAT FACT! Understanding that last point is critical, so I will repeat it. Let me put it another way. It is not enough for God to claim he created the world, because he is not an earthling, a citizen of the Cosmos. There has to something inherent to the Cosmos that makes the same claim! It is not enough for God to claim, something about Cosmos itself has to point to him. (You will understand this even better in later chapters.) SOMETHING intrinsic to the Cosmos themselves has to validate Jehovah's Godship. It could be in the structure, formation, development or any other factor, but whatever it is, it has to be original to the Cosmos. WE now know what that intrinsic signature IS - the zero entropy template of the "initial conditions!" Did you see how Keating acknowledging them led him straight to the only conclusion that evidence point to? Don't take my word for it, that all scientists are aware of this Cosmic requirement of independently verifying God's claims - Keating told you as much, himself,

As he himself says, cosmologists as a whole are aware of this requirement and the Scientism you have been funding through your tax dollars is a quest to find alternate facts from the ones reality provides, in an effort to discredit Jehovah's Creatorship, that is the incentive behind all current institutional scientific effort for, in their own words: "we'd like to find a naturalistic, or materialistic origin story of the universe." That is why it is sweet poetic justice that the very tool they wished to use to disprove Jehovah's Godship and supremacy, is the very one that uncovers the truth they are so desperate to hide. When Davies - speaking of the zero entropy initial conditions - feigns ignorance of what they mean, with the extremely feeble minded scientific refrain, "we don't know how" it is obvious he is not being honest. Obvious, because the context of his words exposes the truth. You cannot understand that the initial conditions are "rather special" without understanding why that is so! Here is his full expression: "It turns out that you can trace the origin of this arrow of time, back to the beginning of the universe. So that the universe was set up - we don't know how - in a rather special state." That "arrow of time" and the fact that it stops at the "rather special state" of the "initial "conditions is the smoking gun! All cosmologists are trying to find an evolutionary mechanism for the "origin story of the universe." When I say evolutionary, I mean, one full of entropy! That's what it means to find a "naturalistic or materialistic origin story," it means a story that starts in a high entropy environment! Hence, the great consternation, the immense sense of frustration when the evidence leads to a zero entropy "origin story of the universe."

The "arrow of time" that Davies speaks of is the scientific shorthand for entropy. They wanted the arrow of time to lead to an explosion of entropy, and for the order in the current universe (which means less entropy), to have come about by an expanding universe that has isolated pockets of regions of lesser entropy; and other regions of higher entropy - which then equalize to maintain the overall entropy stable. In this scenario the law that entropy never decreases is preserved, and thus not thermodynamically prohibited. That was their solution. That is the dream. The singularity and the Big Bang and its ultra hot, quantum plasma soup are the highest high entropy scenarios that could be dreamed up. That's why the Big Bang is the preferred "origin story" of cosmologists. If the entropy based "arrow of time" could be traced back to a high entropy, quantum environment, that would have been perfect! BUT - they can't make their story fit the facts! Shame. The "arrow of time" is not just shorthand for entropy, but for all natural processes, in other words, for nature itself! So, its coming to an abrupt end at the zero entropy beginning of the universe is telling you that the universe didn't originate under natural conditions, but under supernatural ones! There are only two options: natural and supernatural. There is no sub-natural option, as anything below nature, couldn't explain the existence of nature. You need something above nature, and that is superior to it. This is the true, scientific meaning of the word "supernatural" as used by Keating. See another example of its scientific meaning and usage in this clip of someone who had worked for the US government in trying to find the origins of Covid-19. In it, he compares the difference between a "natural" origin for Covid-19, and a "supernatural" one:

Now, what did Mr Asher mean, when he said the evidence pointed to a "supernatural" origin for Covid-19? Did he mean the US government thought it was created by ghosts? You know better. You know the answer! He meant, the evidence pointed towards it being created in a "lab." That was more than 18 months ago. Since then the US Senate has recently released its report into the origins of Covid. You can have a look at the analysis of its finding on Dr John Campbell's popular YouTube channel to understand how they decided whethe the origins were "natural" or "supernatural." It is not relevant to our current discussion where Covid originated, what is important for you to understand is that a natural origin and a supernatural origin have different Evidence Profiles! And it is those Evidence Profiles which determine what conclusion we reach. The analysis of the natural and supernatural Evidence Profiles for Covid exactly mirrors the analysis for the Evidence Profiles of a natural or supernatural origin of the universe. So if, you need more grounding in how to distinguish, the video might do you good. (It is 22 minutes long.) Of course you must replace "entropy" for every place the Dr talks about "intermediary species" or "hosts." The common ground is the difference between something appearing fully formed, and something appearing with a breadcrumb trail of its development. Sudden fully formed appearance means a supernatural origin story in both instances. Everyone in the general public understands this. So why is it clear, when it comes to Covid, but a trained scientist claims: "how - we don't know" when the same concept applies to the universe? I have to give Keating the credit of at least being honest enough to state what zero entropy initial conditions mean - a "SUPERNATURAL DESIGNER!" Every scientist knows this! What do I mean? Why does Keating use the specific terms "supernatural" and "designer?" Why those words? In that combination?

For centuries true Science has been in fight to the death with false Science about the unity that exists between nature and the Bible. True scientists have always claimed that science and nature are two expressions of the same truth! God created the universe. While Scientism, that is, scientists who pursue and practice science as an Intellectual pursuit, the ones who come up with empty ideas for a living, they have always, but always fought against any such notion. Instead they insist - exactly as Neil deGrasse Tyson, so vehemently does - that science and the Bible are incompatible: with one being based on facts and the other on blind unfounded beliefs. Contrast that with the deeply held views of the founding fathers of Science, first Copernicus:

Then Kepler ...

And Galileo ...

I don't have to tell you how Newton felt do I?

Two points come out from these quotes. All four founding fathers of Science believed deeply that the Bible and Science are in complete agreement, once both are correctly understood. Newton went so far as to say the Scriptures were Science! Secondly, in the first three quotes we see an ugly pattern as one word keeps being repeated: "prohibit!" What was happening? As I have said previously, false religion and false science are also - themselves - two sides of the same coin, they are also two expressions of the same entity. And it is their job to try to put a wedge between the natural agreement that exists between the Sciences and the Bible. To accomplish this, they use whichever of their dual sources of power is currently en vogue to suppress the truth of the harmony between science and the Bible. In the time of Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo when the Catholic Church held sway, they used it's authority to suppress the scientific truths that were being discovered to God's glory by pioneering giants of the field. The power of the Catholic Church was less dominant by the time Newton came on the scene, as its authority had already been dented by previous scientific discoveries, which debunked much of its doctrine and teachings. Hence, Newton had less opposition, and faced less power to prohibit the publication of his discoveries. In current times when the power of false religion in secular Western societies has been further eroded through centuries of scandal - sexual, doctrinal and otherwise - they now use the Sciences as a powerbase to cudgel into silence true religion and true science. The current leaders of this intimidation tactic, such as deGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox, Sean Carroll, Paul Davies and many many others insist that there could never be a synthesis of reason and the Bible.

There are ONLY Three Choices

In this centuries old back and forth, the lines have long ago been drawn in the sand. Long before the evidence accumulated, the only three choices in the argument were agreed upon by the parties on both sides. God hating believers in evolution claimed two variables would win out at the end of the day, they be enough to prove that God doesn't exist, and explain how the universe came to be. Those variables are "naturalistic" and/or "materialistic" means of evolution. That's what Jastrow meant when he said,

"When you specify those substances" which equals Keating's "materialistic" requirement; and, continues Jastrow, "the laws by which they interact, you've done it all." That second portion of his thinking, of course refers to the "naturalistic" means that Keating invoked. That has been the proposed evolutionary solution for the existence of the universe for many centuries. There's a lot at stake, for proving it true would invalidate the Bible and all claims of Jehovah's Creatorship. Put another way: Science and the Bible would be proven to be incompatible. On the other hand, believers that the Bible and Science are essentially two expressions of God's wisdom - as eloquently captured by Galileo: "Both the Holy Scriptures and nature proceed from the Divine Word ... Two truths can never contradict one another" - have always claimed that the evidence would lead to one conclusion - that a MIND was behind the creation of the universe:

The redline has been drawn in the sand. Both sides have taken their positions. But, it is vitally important that we understand what each side is claiming the evidence would prove. Atheists believe nature would prove that the universe is a product of Evolution, that the "origin story of the universe" would be explained by the agency of naturalistic and materialistic means for the order in, and existence of the universe. Worshippers of God believe that nature would prove that the universe is a product of Creation, that the "origin story of the universe" would be explained by the agency of a mind as the mechanism behind the order in, and existence of the universe. Thus the positions have been set in stone, for centuries!

There is no turning back. No wiggle room in the positions taken. When Kepler refers to the cause of the orderliness being deduced from "the motion of the elements" he means Keating's "naturalistic ... origin story." When he refers to the cause being deduced from "the composition of matter," he means Keating's "materialistic ... origin story." In the absence of these two factors being proven as the mechanism that set up the "initial conditions" that started it all, if the evidence proves that the initial conditions "cannot be deduced from" either of these two variables, it means the original variable - that the universe is the product of God's mind - has been validated, since there are only three variables! I speak of Kepler referring to Keating's words, as if they both lived at the same time and were debating each other. I am of course referring to Keating's position, a position he inherited from fellow evolutionists who held his view in Kepler's time. This debate and its respective views are not new; they have been around for centuries. It is for that REASON that Keating instinctively knows what the only other option is, if the "certain properties that are unexplained" about the universe cannot be explained by a "naturalistic or materialistic origin story - THE UNIVERSE IS A PRODUCT OF A "SUPERNATURAL DESIGNER!" In other words a mind - the option declared, by believers in God, as the only reality the evidence would point to!

In the absence of an abundance of empirical evidence and observational data, it was easy to take the side of the evolutionists. What they did not imagine was that data would indeed be accumulated. In the intervening period from Copernicus to our time scientists have all become aware of the data. This in turn made every scientist aware that the data, the Evidence Profile exists within - and not outside, the COSMOS! A realization expressed formally by John P Wheeler among many others, namely:

Why is that important? Because evolutionists have always vehemently insisted that God - "if" he existed - was transcendant, that is, he existed outside the universe, remote from human affairs. This was in line with their brethren, the false religionists who have historically, and literally painted God as an aloof "mysterious" figure whose only interactions with humans was through incomprehensible miracles that broke the laws of Physics. That is why all the medieval paintings of God depict him as inhabiting a metaphysical ether: a realm "outside" the celestial sphere of the universe (see Figure 74).

Figure 74 Metaphysical Gods: The source of all falsehoods

The Transcendent God

As we have discussed earlier, the fact that scientists tried to make God transcendent, is not to highlight that he is all powerful, or above everything else. No, the motivation is sinister: it is to make him metaphysical in nature, so that we could not think God's thoughts after him - as Kepler once remarked. But of course, we can do so - and understand much about reality in the process! The tell-tale sign for this deception is putting the Celestial sphere between mankind and God - in other words you are physical and God (if he exists) is metaphysical since he occupies some divine space outside the universe. This metaphysical, which by the way means "beyond physics," nature of God, means we cannot get to know him. He will forever, be a mystery. Nothing is farther from the truth!

On the other hand, thought evolutionists: all the data we need, surrounds us. "Materialism" and nature in the form of the laws of nature existed within the universe. They felt they were at a distinct advantage, in their ability to prove their case. They felt the only way true religion could prove its point was for angels to appear in the sky. They completely underestimated the genius of Jehovah! He encoded the evidence for his existence into the very fabric of physical reality. It is the very laws of physics, which atheists like Jastrow revere so much, that have proven to be their undoing. It is "the laws of physics" that "provide a mechanism for the universe to come into being." And that mechanism is not natural, but supernatural! They expected any supernatural evidence to manifest itself in the form of metaphysical agents like angels, but God manifested it "in the laws of physics." It is the inviolable laws of thermodynamics that testify to the fact that the initial conditions of our universe were "inserted" as Keating put it, into the Cosmos. The well understood "arrow of time" that points to a "rather special" zero entropy (thus supernatural) cause for the "initial conditions" is embedded within the Cosmos! The significance of that evidence goes beyond just proving that God created the universe, and that it is not a product of evolution. More importantly, it proves that God is not only not transcendent, but he is IMMANENT! That is the opposite of transcendant, and means: "Existing, or remaining within; inherent," as defined by Wordnik. I also glory at Merriam-Webster's definition: "being within the limits of possible experience or knowledge." That is hugely significant! For it flies in the face of the consistent declarations of all Intellectuals: "If God is real, he is an unknowable entity - outside the universe and the realm of human activity." It is hugely significant! Because it denounces as empty lies all the "mysteries" that false religion has invoked over the centuries to confuse and thus alienate mankind from their loving Creator - and God. The evidence for God's Creatorship has been embedded within the universe, the whole time! That leads us to our next law:

WITHIN THE LAWS OF NATURE OR PHYSICS, THERE MUST BE AN EVIDENCE PROFILE THROUGH WHICH HONEST HEARTED HUMANS CAN DETERMINE IF THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE WAS THROUGH A NATURAL ENTROPY-BASED "MECHANISM," OR A SUPERNATURAL ENTROPY-FREE "MECHANISM." THIS EVIDENCE IS FOUND WHERE THE ARROW OF TIME MEETS THE MIGHTY CMB - AT INITIAL CONDITION - & IT LEADS TO A "SUPERNATURAL MIND"

Following the lead of the early pioneers of Science, the fathers of the scientific method, we have used the hidden relationships found in the abundant data to reach firm evidence backed conclusions about the true nature of the relationship between the invisible dark matter realm, and the visible Cosmos. This has been done under the umbrella of studying the third of five "apparent salient features" of the Mighty CMB, that we are going to investigate from Steinhardt's talk Time to Take the 'Big Bang' out of the Big Bang Theory? What follows is a list of the conclusion we have reached from considering the salient feature of partitioned entropy:

THE MIGHTY CMB PROVIDES EVIDENCE THAT THE INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR THE UNIVERSE WERE AT ZERO ENTROPY IN 3 IMPORTANT WAYS: GEOMETRY, MATTER, & RADIATION CONTENT

THE ZERO ENTROPY STATE OF THE INITIAL CONDITIONS IS POSSIBLE ONLY IF INSERTED INTO THE COSMOS, FROM THE NON-BARYONIC SECOND REALM OF THE UNIVERSE - THE DARK MATTER REALM. SUCH ZERO ENTROPY INITIAL CONDITIONS ARE NOT POSSIBLE THROUGH ANY HEAT-BASED BARYONIC MATTER OR EVOLUTIONARY PROCESSES

CREATING THE INITIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRES 3 VARIABLES THAT ARE ALL EXTERNAL TO THE COSMOS: A DARK MATTER ENERGY SOURCE; A DARK MATTER PISTON; & FOR THE DARK MATTER REALM TO BE IN AN OPEN SYSTEM WITH THE COSMOS, ALLOWING THE MATTER & ENERGY THAT ORIGINATED IN THE SUPERNATURAL DARK MATTER ORDER OF EXISTENCE TO CROSS INTO THE VISIBLE REALM

THE 2 ORDERS OF EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE ARE NOT 2 SEPARATE & INDEPENDENT REALMS. THEY ARE UNITED & COMPLIMENTARY REALMS THAT TOGETHER FORM THE UNIVERSE & ARE CONNECTED THROUGH A TOP-DOWN OPEN SYSTEM

We now come to our fourth "apparent salient feature." What will we learn about the universe from studying its Flat geometry, as recorded by the Mighty CMB?

4 - Salient Features of the Mighty CMB: Its FLAT Geometry

What GEOMETRY Tells us About the Matter Content of the Early Universe

The Flat geometry at that point in the early universe, that is, when the cosmic microwave background appeared confirms another critical piece of information for us: matter came before radiation, and not the other way around! Big Bang cosmology would like to have you believe that matter comes from cooling radiation to thresholds below which it solidifies, like jello, into first, fundamental building blocks - protons, electrons and neutrons, and that those subatomic particles in turn, later form atoms, and eventually, after eons of evolutionary time, those atoms from structures, in the form of objects. Nothing could be further from the truth! Recall Keating's words:

Thus, our discussion of the universe's Flat geometry brings the matter to a head, for the following reason. When the Mighty CMB appeared, it recorded the curvature of the universe. It was at zero curvature - Critical Density, it had a Flat geometry. Put another way, it recorded that the ratio of the volume of Space in the universe, was exactly balanced by the object or objects (we are coming to that soon), in the universe. Since chemistry must precede atoms, and atoms must precede objects - this means matter preceded radiation. The evidence is telling us the exact opposite of what the Big Bang Theorists claim to be true! Matter - in fact, objects - came first, then radiation. Not the other way around! We note that as a conclusion:

THE ZERO CURVATURE BETWEEN SPACE & MATTER IN EVIDENCE AT THE ADVENT OF THE COSMIC MICROWAVE BACKGROUND IS ADDITIONAL PROOF THAT DICTATES THAT MATTER MUST PRECEDE RADIATION

Since classical mechanics deals only with objects and not atoms, molecules, or subatomic particles, we understand from the fact that the Mighty CMB measured a "classical" environment, that matter was in the form of one, or more objects at the time the Mighty CMB appeared. Further, we can reason that such an object, or objects could only have been in one of two states of matter - at least, at their surface: either the solid or liquid phases of matter. How can we possibly know that? Because a gaseous state would once again relate to quantum particles and thus not a "classical" environment. But we can drill down even further in identifying the characteristics of the kind of object(s) that populated Space at this early time, just by applying our knowledge of the differences in the features of solids and liquids. For one, we know liquids do not have definite shapes. They, like gases take the shape of their container. In this context, however, if there was a container, then that would be the object - the surface - tha the Mighty CMB was in thermal equilibrium with and we would discount any liquids that might be inside, as we can only glean surface information, that is, point of contact information from the data. However the opposite is not true. If the object was a liquid that had a solid center, then, it could indeed hold a shape. This in fact, is how the waters in the oceans on earth! hold their shape, because the earth has an iron core. So, the best we can say from our understanding of liquids and solids is, if the entity(ties) that constituted the matter content of the universe was/were a liquid, the liquid was only on the surface, and there must have been a second type of material element that was at its center. It should be obvious that the second entity would have had to be a different element altogether. For instance, to use a familiar liquid: if the liquid in question had been water, it could not have been in its liquid phase on the surface and ice underneath, because then, the solid form would change the temperature of the liquid phase, meaning the temperature of the entity in contact with radiation would be changing over time, and thus not be at thermal equilibrium, both with itself, and with the cosmic microwave background. On the other hand, if the object was a solid, then only one element would be necessary to satisfy the initial conditions. Thus, as an example, had the object(s) been one or more steel balls, all the conditions needed to satisfy the data as found in the Mighty CMB could be met. These, then, are the two choices we have - as set out by the data. Two or more elements at a minimum, if a liquid state was the point of contact with radiation; one element is satisfactory, if surface is in a solid phase.

You will notice that I keep referring to the object(s) as being one or more balls, or more accurately, we will say one or more spheres. Why spheres? The reason is simple. All the basic shapes of heavenly bodies are spheres! And the object or objects in question would have been celestial in nature - by definition, as they would have been existing in Space. So, for now, we can say with confidence that matter was in the form of an object, or multiple objects made from one or more elements, depending on whether their surface was solid, or liquid. The most probable shape of the object(s) was a sphere. That will be our one assumption, until we come across evidence to the contrary. Or the assumption will turn into fact, once we come across evidence that confirms it to be correct. To glean more, about the true nature of the one or more objects present at initial condition, we will have to wait until we get to the last "apparent salient feature," the homogeneous nature of the universe. Then, additional information will narrow down the remaining possibilities and concretize them into actual realities. But for now we continue with what else we can learn from the fact that the universe had, and still has, a Flat geometry.

Now, our last point about matter being in the form of one or more objects, leads us naturally to this one. The appearance of objects was preceded by two important developments: the establishment of chemistry, and the appearance of elements of matter, and importantly - in that order! Logically. You cannot get objects, without the provision of those two prerequisites first! Otherwise, how would matter know how to regulate itself, between the different phases in the first place? And what would a "classical" environment even mean, without chemistry? There would be no such thing as classical, or quantum mechanics, without the prior existence of chemistry, and the elements. Now, both those realities take time. Thus, for bodies to have existed at the moment the Mighty CMB appeared tells us that chemistry and elements - or matter - existed before its advent.

The Big Bang Theory needs 400 000 years just for atoms to first appear. And another 400 million years for structure, or bodies to start appearing. Big Bang cosmologists have suggested these parameters, because they are aware that appearance of chemistry and matter takes time. In that assessment, they are right. From our perspective, we are not interested in speculating on timelines, for things we do not know and cannot confirm. Why can we not confirm them? Because matter existed before radiation, and everything we know about the universe we have learned through light. Hence, in the absence of light, we can learn nothing! See how that works? Thus, our only concern is highlighting the fact that chemistry comes before elements, and elements before bodies. The fact that the cosmic microwave background radiation measured Flat spatial geometry when it appeared, tells us definitively, that matter came before radiation! From which we conclude:

SINCE CHEMISTRY MUST COME BEFORE MATTER & MATTER BEFORE BODIES, & BODIES WHERE PRESENT WHEN THE MIGHTY CMB APPEARED, FLAT GEOMETRY IS ADDITIONAL PROOF THAT MATTER PRECEDES RADIATION

SINCE MATTER IN THE FORM OF BODIES PRECEDED RADIATION - THE APPEARANCE OF THE BODY OR BODIES PRESENT AT INITIAL CONDITION WAS UNDER CONDITIONS OF DARKNESS!

THE SURFACE OF MATTER AT INITIAL CONDITION WAS LIMITED TO 2 STATES: EITHER SOLID, OR LIQUID

IF MATTER WAS IN SOLID FORM, THEN ONE ELEMENT IS THE MINIMUM CHEMICAL REQUIREMENT. HOWEVER, IF THE SURFACE OF MATTER WAS IN THE LIQUID PHASE, THEN, AT LEAST 2 DIFFERENT ELEMENTS HAD TO BE PRESENT, AS LIQUIDS DO NOT HAVE A DEFINITE SHAPE

THE GREATEST FORCE IN THE UNIVERSE CAN BE CALCULATED EMPIRICALLY. THAT FORCE WOULD DEFINE THE EVIDENCE PROFILE OF "PURE ENERGY." "PURE ENERGY" IS THE SOURCE OF ALL MATTER - DARK & BARYONIC THROUGH THE TULLY-FISHER RELATION. THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE UNIVERSE IS EMPIRICALLY THE GREATEST FORCE IN THE UNIVERSE & THUS FITS THE EVIDENCE PROFILE OF "PURE ENERGY." THIS ALSO MAKES IT THE SOURCE OF ALL MATTER

Below, we collate all our conclusions for easy reference:

THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE OF THE EARLY UNIVERSE, THE TEMPERATURE OF THE COSMIC MICROWAVE BACKGROUND, THE THERMAL EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE BETWEEN MATTER & RADIATION, WAS LOW ENOUGH FOR THE OBJECT(S) OCCUPYING SPACE TO BE IN EITHER A LIQUID OR SOLID STATE - BUT NOT A GASEOUS ONE

AT THE TIME OF THE APPEARANCE OF THE MIGHTY CMB, THE MATTER CONTENT OF THE UNIVERSE - WHICH PRECEDED LIGHT - WAS IN THE FORM OF ONE OR MORE OBJECTS, NOT ATOMS!

SINCE LIGHT FIRST APPEARED INTO A CLASSICAL UNIVERSE OF SPACE & ONE OR MORE OBJECTS, THE QUANTUM CONDITIONS THAT DICTATE THE NEED FOR QUANTUM GRAVITY, NEVER EXISTED!

WITHIN THE LAWS OF NATURE OR PHYSICS, THERE MUST BE AN EVIDENCE PROFILE THROUGH WHICH HONEST HEARTED HUMANS CAN DETERMINE IF THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE WAS THROUGH A NATURAL ENTROPY-BASED "MECHANISM," OR A SUPERNATURAL ENTROPY-FREE "MECHANISM." THIS EVIDENCE IS FOUND WHERE THE ARROW OF TIME MEETS THE MIGHTY CMB - AT INITIAL CONDITION - & IT LEADS TO A "SUPERNATURAL MIND"

THE MIGHTY CMB PROVIDES EVIDENCE THAT THE INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR THE UNIVERSE WERE AT ZERO ENTROPY IN 3 IMPORTANT WAYS: GEOMETRY, MATTER, & RADIATION CONTENT

THE ZERO ENTROPY STATE OF THE INITIAL CONDITIONS IS POSSIBLE ONLY IF INSERTED INTO THE COSMOS, FROM THE NON-BARYONIC SECOND REALM OF THE UNIVERSE - THE DARK MATTER REALM. SUCH ZERO ENTROPY INITIAL CONDITIONS ARE NOT POSSIBLE THROUGH ANY HEAT-BASED BARYONIC MATTER OR EVOLUTIONARY PROCESSES

CREATING THE INITIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRES 3 VARIABLES THAT ARE ALL EXTERNAL TO THE COSMOS: A DARK MATTER ENERGY SOURCE; A DARK MATTER PISTON; & FOR THE DARK MATTER REALM TO BE IN AN OPEN SYSTEM WITH THE COSMOS, ALLOWING THE MATTER & ENERGY THAT ORIGINATED IN THE SUPERNATURAL DARK MATTER ORDER OF EXISTENCE TO CROSS INTO THE VISIBLE REALM

THE 2 ORDERS OF EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE ARE NOT 2 SEPARATE & INDEPENDENT REALMS. THEY ARE UNITED & COMPLIMENTARY REALMS THAT TOGETHER FORM THE UNIVERSE & ARE CONNECTED THROUGH A TOP-DOWN OPEN SYSTEM

SINCE MATTER IN THE FORM OF BODIES PRECEDED RADIATION - THE APPEARANCE OF THE BODY OR BODIES PRESENT AT INITIAL CONDITION WAS UNDER CONDITIONS OF DARKNESS!

IF MATTER WAS IN SOLID FORM, THEN ONE ELEMENT IS THE MINIMUM CHEMICAL REQUIREMENT. HOWEVER, IF THE SURFACE OF MATTER WAS IN THE LIQUID PHASE, THEN, AT LEAST 2 DIFFERENT ELEMENTS HAD TO BE PRESENT, AS LIQUIDS DO NOT HAVE A DEFINITE SHAPE

THE GREATEST FORCE IN THE UNIVERSE CAN BE CALCULATED EMPIRICALLY. THAT FORCE WOULD DEFINE THE EVIDENCE PROFILE OF "PURE ENERGY." "PURE ENERGY" IS THE SOURCE OF ALL MATTER - DARK & BARYONIC THROUGH THE TULLY-FISHER RELATION. THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE UNIVERSE IS EMPIRICALLY THE GREATEST FORCE IN THE UNIVERSE & THUS FITS THE EVIDENCE PROFILE OF "PURE ENERGY." THIS ALSO MAKES IT THE SOURCE OF ALL MATTER