Even an amateur or outsider can see that
theories aspiring to be complete must first and foremost answer the above
questions, which I have always thought of as “The first three questions”
(hence the title of today’s paper). So why is it these questions remain
unanswered by the professionals? The main reason is that professional theories
have three logical ‘black holes’ built into them as a result of the plausibility
gap in their treatments of these three questions. To their credit, though,
professionals do admit that all their theories are incomplete. They now
realise that all their theories have been doomed to incompleteness. Not
just because they don’t answer those questions, but because their arguments
are based solely on relative ‘facts’, and so inevitably hit a relative-fact
‘brick wall’ built from the respective arbitrary assumptions (usually cemented
together by convenient boundary conditions). So, whether the arguments
fall into a logical ‘black hole’ or hit the relative-fact ‘brick wall’,
the result is the same: we are left with an uncomfortable feeling that
professional theories start and go ‘absolutely’ nowhere. In fact, to many
outsiders and amateurs, the professional debate is looking increasingly
like some arcane academic guessing game involving relative-fact speculation
and academic argument for argument’s sake. It is clear that professional
physical cosmology is at an impasse. Who hasn’t come across professional
quotes to the effect that their theories are “almost complete”, or “only
needs one more piece of the puzzle”, and so on. When pressed, however,
they will cheerfully and unashamedly admit that the piece they are missing
is an absolutely fundamental one, unlike each and every piece of their
theory as it stands. Now, just because the professionals can’t answer “the
first three questions”, or find an absolutely fundamental piece of the
puzzle, it doesn’t mean no amateur or rank outsider can either. For it
wouldn’t be the first time that an outsider/amateur found some crucial
piece the professionals consistently missed because prior training or orthodoxy
‘blinkered’ them to it. So let’s give it a shot here and now! Let’s clear
our minds and try to outline, as briefly as we can, an objective train
of thought aimed at answering the first three questions and finding a fundamental
piece that we’ve all been missing; and perhaps we’ll finally do away with
the questionable modern catch cry of “Everything is Relative!” Let’s
start our train of thought by confronting head-on the ‘biggest’ of “the
first three questions”, thus...