A U-Cosmology

Author: Robert A. Herrmann Ph. D.
Subject: Cosmology

Within creation-science, there is a conflict between the concept of “Divine intervention” and certain human constructs (imaginations), where such human constructs are claimed to be “the way that God did it.” Today, theistic evolution and the “Prime Mover” concept of Aristotle are almost equivalent. From this notion, we could construct a scale relative to the degree that natural-system behavior follows patterns associated with human imaginations that state that “this is the way that God did it” versus natural-system behavior produced by Divine intervention (miraculous processes).

Such a scale would not have a great deal of meaning for natural-system behavior not discussed within the scriptures (i.e. where the scriptures are silent on the matter), where non-contradictory speculation is usually allowed. There are many models for creation that claim to follow the scriptural account. BUT, such descriptions minimize direct Divine intervention. Divine intervention in these models does not follow the scriptural statements that, to me, indicate that Divine intervention has been applied. What these models do is to elicit Divine intervention only at the point where human imaginations fail to provide a meaningful explanation. Personally, I reject this theology/science approach in accordance with scriptural directives. The following U-cosmology does not substitute human imaginations for direct Divine intervention but rather retains the scriptural intent where the Bible is not silent on the matter. I sincerely hope that it truly glorifies God’s creation scenarios.

There is a way to simplify the scientific terminology given in the following description when a theological interpretation is being considered. What this simplification amounts to is a substitution for such secular terms as “ultraword, ultralogic and subparticles” and the like, the expression “supernatural processes.” Is it very important to note that such a substitution need not be considered unless a theological interpretation is being employed. The MA-model can generate universes without such an interpretation. All material prior to section 7 can be removed in this simplification process. The simplification begins with this section. Certain speculations are made in section 10. One may simply start at the paragraph four of 10. There are within this section further speculations that use material taken from the book “Einstein Corrected.” These processes can simply be re-described as, once again, supernatural in character. The term “supernatural” means “that which is superior to the recognized forces or laws of nature, where these recognized forces or laws are relative to the behavior of the natural-systems contained within our universe.” BUT, when the theological interpretation is being considered, one should include the additional requirement that these processes are consistent with those that are utilized specifically by the God described within the Scriptures.

  1. What follows is a literal Scriptural cosmology based upon rational scientific deduction. The technical aspects of this cosmology are based upon a theological interpretation of the mathematical model called the metamorphic-anamorphosismodel (MA-model). The terms used appear in the monograph which I call the “Solutions…” monograph that gives secular solutions to what have been said are the “most significant questions on the books of physics” (John Wheeler paraphrase.) The terms are more fully dealt with in the monograph (book possibly) entitle “Ultralogicsand more . . . .” Further, for those that might question where or not the MA-model approach is “science,” I point out that the secular MA-model uses the exact same philosophy of science used in theoretical cosmology and quantum logic. For a few general aspects of this cosmology, a small portion of the material in the book “Einstein Corrected” is utilized. The logic employed to argue for conclusions is scientific logic (i.e. the first-order predicate calculus). Although there are a few predicates that are interpreted theologically, for these logical reasons, I consider this to be, at the least, a rational description. It is an important fact that the MA-model can be used to generate all known secular cosmologies as well as a many weak theological ones such as those that utilize the concepts associated with theistic (macroscopic and large scale) evolution.
  2. [Note: The metamorphic portion of this model, the second heavens, the basic firmament as the portion of the substratum, and most other concepts except the more detailed fourth day description were first discussed in the paper “The metamorphic universe” given before the Baltimore Creation Convention 6 June 1987.] The most basic Biblical concepts are the “And God said . . . ” creation statements in Genesis 1 and corresponding statements found in such places as Psalms 33:9 “For hespake, and it was done. . . .”, 148:5 “. . . for he commanded and they were created,” etc. Within the secular MA-model, creation of the natural world entities is triggered by certain initial conditions coupled withultranatural laws within the nonstandard physical world (NSP- world), where from the secular viewpoint this substratum can be considered as being always present. The model states explicitly that it is rational to assume that such initial conditions exist, but the model also states that humankind cannot have any detailed knowledge of these conditions as they would be described in any human language. One of the theological substitutions that is made, after the creation of the substratum, is the replacement of this initial condition triggering mechanism with a Divine selection process. This cosmology uses the theoretical science method called the method of “simplicity.” This means that when two distinct descriptions or concepts lead to the same conclusion, then the conceptually more simplistic is used. This does not mean that the actual modeling process is simplistic. Indeed, it may be much more difficult to model the simpler of two concepts. The fewer premises, the more difficult it may be to model a concept.

In a certain sense, the MA-model – automatically – develops its own philosophy of science. The model specifically states that speculation should be restrained. It states that, while we are in our present fallen state, we can only know some general aspects of how God created. The model states that there are complete and detailed answers to every question that might arise from these general creation procedures; but, for the present, the human mind is not able to comprehend the answers. The MA-model specifically models Paul’s statement in 1 Cor. 13:12 in that we are, indeed, seeing through a glass darkly.

  1. The first statement in Genesis 1 indicates the creation of a “second heavens” in which the natural world will be embedded. This “second heavens” is modeled by the NSP-world and, in particular, the natural world will be embedded within a background or substratum world composed of a dense, to an infinite degree, field ofsubparticlesof various types. [Note: this field models the “vacuum” of particle physics.] The MA-model shows that very little can be known about this “second heavens.” All natural entities are created from non-natural but created entities in this

modeling process. The processes which yield the natural entities are all modeled by operators that can be classified from the theological viewpoint as Divine mental-like processes. All of the created natural world entities could come about by hyperfinite combinations of one single type of subparticle — the ultrasubparticle. [The use of a single type of subparticle for all of God’s natural creation may be a Divine signature indicating God’s oneness.] Then the intermediate subparticles are finitely combined together to produce natural world entities. The basic process that yields these two “combining together processes” is obtained by constructing a nonstandard model for the human process of selecting symbols, words, and the like for the purpose of constructing a linguistic description. Hence, these processes can be described theologically as a Divine mental-like selection and combining process that yields basic natural world entities.

  1. The actual creation days follow the Genesis “And God said . . .” sequence. There is one ultimateultrawordthat when the *S ultralogic operator is applied produces a sequence of six intermediate ultrawords. When the ultralogic *S is applied to each of these intermediate ultrawords for a creation day, then all of the developing natural system ultrawords are produced. These ultrawords yield the required general rules for the development of specific natural systems over that one creation day. The appearance of each natural system during each creation day uses the metamorphic portion of the model and can be comprehended by the human mind by saying that the appearance was sudden or abrupt. Further, as is technically established, the set of natural laws required to sustain (He. 1:3 (NIV)) and preserve (Ne. 9:6 (KJ)) God’s creation are also created at the same moment by an ultraword.
  2. As the biblical sequence progresses, the number and complexity of the necessary natural systems increase. Each intermediateultrawordcontains the appropriate ultrawords that continue the required development of the previously created natural systems, but possibly under altered or additional natural laws. If the natural laws need to be altered, the ultracontinuous anamorphosis portion of the MA-model is applied.
  3. Because of the possible changing character of the natural laws themselves, I will not speculate upon their content during the first few creation days. I will speculate only when the created natural laws seem to more closely correspond to those that are present today and of which the human mind may have, at the least, a partial comprehension.
  4. From Genesis 1.1, we have that the earth abruptly appeared. Throughout the Bible, except in Genesis 1:1-2, the term “earth,” when it refers to an actual material object, seems never to be used for some entity that is significant larger than our present day earth. Thus, in this cosmology, the earth of Genesis 1 has the approximate mass of our present day structure after the separation of a small amount of the water that takes place in Genesis 1:6. Further, as indicated in Genesis 1:2, whatever its composition and size maybe in Genesis 1:1, it has a surface of water when viewed from the substratum. The substratum also invades all of the created objects in the sense that the created objects are densely embedded into the substratum. From Genesis 1:2, the more literal translation “the earth became a chaos and (was) vacant and darkness was on the surface of the submerged chaos” is used. In, at least, three scriptural passages the term “light” is used to name an entity that is distinct from other entities that we know produce such radiation. These are Genesis 1:3, Psalms 74:16 (KJ),Eccl. 12:2. The abrupt creation of light (the entire electromagnetic spectrum) seems to occur in Genesis 1:2. It is “good” and as shown in “Einstein Corrected” electromagnetic properties are an integral part of ALL physical processes. A small speculation would lead to the assumption that the creation of “light” may have had the appropriate “calming” affect upon the “submerged chaos” in thatits at this moment that electromagnetic radiation becomes an integral part of all natural systems. Indeed, electromagnetic radiation, as characterized by photons, seems to be related to almost all significant natural events. God appears to have specifically separated, for further use, the visible portion of the spectrum from other portions. The only natural world space so far employed is that occupied by the earth and “light” combination. (The end of day one.)
  5. In Genesis 1:6,ultraword,ultralogic and subparticle processes produce a separation of an unknown amount of water from the surface of the Geneses 1:2 earth. This is a large separation — the firmament — as can be comprehended by third dimensional geometry and since the waters “above” are separated from the waters “below” there is a large, by present day measures, space between the two water surfaces. The outer water, no matter what condition it is in or how rarefied it might be, represents an outer boundary for the soon to be created additional natural universe. This expanse, at this point, contains no other natural entities and for this reason is not considered complete since this creation is not followed, within many translations, by the usual completeness phrase “it was good.” From the substratum point of view, this firmament is a portion of the vacuum of particle physics and is composed of a portion of the dense field of subparticles. Please note that God names this firmament as a heaven. Indeed, this is the same firmament which will contain God’s day four creations. Further, the day four creations seem to indicate indirectly that the earth of day one may be slowly rotating with respect to this substratum. Further, I do not speculate as to whether the combined earth and light includes some sort of light source since this is actually unnecessary for the entities created during day three. (The end of the second day.)
  6. All entities brought forth during day three are obtained by sudden appearance in an appropriate mature or complex form through application of ultrawords,ultralogicsand subparticle formation processes. Whether or not a light source is necessary to sustain the objects depends upon the natural laws that are produced along with the necessary natural systems. (The end of day three.)
  7. Prior to discussing the day four creations, it is necessary to recall a few facts that appear in “Einstein Corrected.” Certain alterations in natural system behavior are control by various line elements. But when a specific line element is used for the linear velocity or gravitational field alterations the arguments show that only one portion of the line element is used. This portion is the one that involves alterations in the infinitesimal timing light-clocks. All derivations are made in a consistent manner using the concepts of a separatingperatorand universal functions.

There are two types of processes needed to derive these alterations. One process is an actual velocity that can be measured with respect to the substratum. The other is not an actual velocity, but rather a potential velocity within the natural universe. For the case of the Robinson-Walker type line element from which the concept of the textural expansion of the substratum (the firmament) is obtained, an actual velocity statement in terms of a substratum d is used. This appears on pages 100-103 where equation (28) in some copies should have the missing c^2 inserted in two places. But, no purely potential type of velocity for d has, as yet, been considered. For consistency, such a potential type of velocity should also exist for the d expression. I propose that within the substratum there is one other simple possibility. This possibility is a type of tension that is measured as a potential velocity. Using this tension idea, the same derivations that lead to the gravitational field alterations for physical behavior will lead to tension alterations in physical processes through an electromagnetic interaction with the substratum, where the direction is a substratum to natural world interaction. The smaller the tension in a region, the less will be the alterations of physical measures within that region. The larger the tension, the greater will be these alterations. Certainly, tension in a field is a very simple field property.

The description for day four activities bumps headlong into modern observational cosmology. Genesis 1:14 seems to indicate what will be placed within the firmament and the purpose for the created objects. The same occurs in the first part of Genesis 1:15. A pause in a day’s activities or an explanatory or more detailed description occurs with the phrase “and it was so” (KJ). Genesis 1:16 gives a more detailed description, names certain entities and gives a sequence for the production of specific objects. First the sun, then the moon (and I speculate all other members of the original solar system) are made, and then the “stars” are made. Genesis 1:17 states, to me, that God produced these entities in the order stated. The basic difficulty is with the production of the “stars.”

I speculate that the sun, moon and all components of the original solar system are made in mature and complex form by application of the ultraword, ultralogic and subparticle combination processes. But, I speculate that “after” these events, the remaining portion of the firmament is spread over by a dense combination of radiation and matter in one of its simplest combined forms. This form is the usual form associated with the concept of thermal equilibrium or a radiation-matter soup at 3,000 K as measured by present day instruments. Of course, this need not be the exact state-of-affairs. Numerously many “states” would suffice. In order for this radiation-matter combination to degenerate into a matter dominated universe, all of the present day and necessary natural laws are impressed upon the firmament. This includes the concept of the textural expansion of the firmament relative to the actual d velocity associated with the Robinson-Walker line element. However, the rate of expansion d is dependent upon substratum position and natural time coordinates. This would allow for a very simple control over the clumping requirements for star formation. The actual differences in expansion rates need only be minuscule.

Unfortunately, the presence of this radiation-matter soup would affect the objects previously produced. We are told in Ne. 9:6 (KJ) that God will preserve His creation. One portion of this protection can come from a mechanism already created. This is the potential velocity concept – the field tension — associated with the d (v = 0) and the general spherical coordinate line elements that appear on page 86 of “Einstein Corrected.” By increasing the field tension, to an extreme degree, at every point within an immediate and necessary region of the substratum that contains each previously produced solar system entity, these effects could be minimized as such destructive effects are propagated throughout the firmament. When compared to the same processes within the firmament, many physical processes would slow down within every original solar system entity to the point of almost but not quiet being zero. I stress that the processes do not stop and this is only a comparative “slowing down.” I acknowledge the contributions of Humphreys’ by stating that the starlight and time effects discussed by Humphreys will also occur in this cosmology since the universe exterior to the region of high tension is aging at a rate that yields a perceived age of millions upon millions of standard years while the interior region ages, in comparison, only slightly.) I will call these the Humphreys’ effects. [Of course, no black hole quasi-white hole mechanism is employed in the U-cosmology.] If there is any radiation that crosses into the region of high tension, then the methods in “Einstein Corrected” show that the energy associated with such radiation would drop to near zero and, indeed, the entities could even be absorbed into the substratum. This aspect is interesting since this might cause the tension to become less at an appropriate rate and automatically reduce this tension for the original solar system created objects to that which would exist throughout the entire firmament at this present epoch.

If this gradual tension reduction is not part of the creation scenario, then using the “set them in the firmament” as an initial condition, we could conclude that after an appropriate collection of stars was produced the following could occur. In order for the next sequential requirement to take place, the requirement that these stars “rule over the day and over the night,” which is a clear references as to how they will be viewed from the earth, the tension in the substratum would be reduced rapidly so that the last quoted statement would hold true. The processes are then ended by use of the “it was good” statement. [The end of day four.]

  1. All other created, made or formed entities follow the same production pattern as detailed in section 9 for day three. As to the actual length of the six creation days as measured bytodaysstandards, this must be determined by other means. This cosmology does not depend upon these lengths. Obviously, each creation day could be 24 standard hours in duration.
  2. Reading the more refined and continued description for the development of the earth as stated in Genesis 2, it appears that the earth and probably the original solar system were created or made in a special mature form. They were not produced by means of an evolutionary process beginning from some exceedingly primitive composition. In the next section, the following conclusions will be more formally presented. The speculation is that the use of the perceived behavior of various natural-systems that exist today will not lead to a conclusive determination of the actual dates when various mature entities were originally created, made, or formed. Indeed, anomalies will probably occur when only secular means are utilized. Such confusions may be designed to simply “. . . confound the wise;” 1 Cor. 1:27; especially, the secular wise who use only worldly procedures. A further complication in complexity (or age) determination arises from the definite MA-model prediction that aspects of the natural processes as they were originally conceived could have been easily altered during creation week orthere afterby MA-model processes, and this could yield the so-called natural processes that we perceive today. Determining the actual states of maturity or complexity for the original created, made, or formed natural systems, and the removal of anomalies can only come through directed research coupled with spiritual and scriptural guidance. Such guidance is presented in the next section.
  3. The earthly world as it is described through the flood scenario is of a very special type. For example, the natural-systems are distinctly different from those we observe today. It appears that rain did not occur. God used a form of mist and rivers to “water the crops,” so to speak. It appears that in this pristine world many of the natural processes we associate with the degeneration of a natural-system either did not occur or occurred much more slowly than today.

We are told in Genesis 6 that humankind not only corrupted itself but also corrupted the very earth (land) as well. God was to destroy all living things, with a very few exceptions, by direct intervention. And this would include the earth (land). “I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.” Gen. 6:13 (NIV) But most certainly the earth was not annihilated. It is most likely that during the flood the earth (land) and its supporting natural-systems were greatly altered so as to remove the special character they were originally accorded.

Throughout the above description for the U-cosmology, various ultranatural processes as created by God are used by God to produce all created entities and processes. They can also be used to produce all sudden alterations in natural-system behavior. Using the tension concept within the substratum but letting it be measured not by a simple real d but rather the pure complex di, the line element and derivation approach in “Einstein Corrected” leads to a “speeding up” of many natural processes. Applying this to various natural-systems during the flood would give the appearance of rapid “aging” as it might be measured by such natural-systems. Indeed, this could be done so that the special character of the earth was removed, with possibly some exceptions, and its natural-systems now display the same behavior as similar natural-systems within the exterior universe. Hopefully, God did not alter all natural-systems in this fashion. As mentioned above, anomalies may present themselves, anomalies that can only be explained by assuming that God did not alter some specific natural-systems as a sort of “signature” of His divine power. The Bible appears to be silent as to the remaining portions of the original solar system. Maybe here is where the anomalies will be found. After the flood, the many actual “young” natural- systems, so to speak, now give the appearance of old age; they now appear no different than other portions of the universe. Most natural-systems now degenerate at approximately the same rate as they do today. All of this degeneration will continue until God makes all things new and all of the “former things are passed away.”

  1. What has been discussed above is aScripturallyliteral cosmology. This cosmology is in direct conflict with the various evolutionary theistic models. It is one of infinitely many possible cosmologies consistent with MA- model processes. Almost all such cosmologies cannot be differentiated one from another by scientific means. As mentioned in section 13, unless certain anomalies present themselves, the U-cosmology also can not be differentiate from most secular cosmologies discussed within the present day scientific literature. The selection of a specific cosmology by an individual cannot be based upon the scientific method as used by the physical scientist due to the existence of the MA-model. The selection can only be based upon other considerations. Indeed, if there is no “supernatural” means for deciding which cosmology is the correct cosmology, then the correct cosmology can not be determined. (Final version completed 20 Jan. 1996)

Math. Dept., US Naval Academy, 572 Holloway Rd., Annapolis, MD 21402-5002