Theory Personal Reflexion About the First Moments of the Universe

Cosmologists today, are at their disposal theoretical tools sufficiently appropriate and sound to understand the very beginnings of the Universe. Those tools are the General theory of Relativity of Einstein, and the Standard Model of physics. Thus, the Universe is thought to have been born from a quantum singularity, which, further, has been accurately explained through the theory of the inflation, with an ensemble of a field of false vacuum, and a trough of lower energy. This ensemble is of an infinitesimally minute size. This ensemble, at a moment, enters into an instability, with triggers the Big Bang. The instability transforms the energy of the false vacuum field into matter and energy, with, moreover, the inflationary episode

The concepts of space-time, and of the curvature of space (like integrating the old, Newtonian concept of gravity) allow to travel far back in time from the current Universe. All the current large-scale features of our Universe are pointing to an originating point. Once passed -in direction of the ignition of the Big Bang- the first stars, then the first molecules, once passed still the time of the atoms, then that of the bricks of the atoms, the Relativity had to let the room, for any explanation, to the Standard Model and the quantum physics. Academically however -rationally that is- even the quantum physics cannot explain what's happening beyond 10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang. That is because the Standard Model of physics does not include the gravity in its explanation of the fundamental particles. Although gravity, in the Standard Model, is taken in account like a force, it is not, theoretically -mathematically- included into it. There, so, is a theoretical impossibility

Should one make abstraction of such an impossibility of that nature, one endeavours to go beyond the Planck time, and thence to think in non-mathematical terms about what the logics could be between the initial instant of the Big Bang and the moment -at the Planck time- when the Standard Model of physics begins to apply, what can be said? It seems like what follows seems sound and founded:

• at the instant T0, an ensemble, of an infinitesimally small size, exists. It is formed of a field of false vacuum, which bears a potential energy and an anti-gravitational force, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, of a 'trough' of lower energy. That ensemble is in equilibrium
• the equilibrium of that quantum singularity is perturbed, leading to that the false vacuum field damps into the trough. That process is triggering the gigantic forces and energy of the Big Bang. That fantastic energy is then to dissipate into matter and energy
• one thinks that, before the Planck time, the fundamental forces of physics are unified. The strong force, which holds together the basic bricks of the world (the quarks), the weak force, which concerns the instable bricks of it, the electromagnetism qui holds the particles together through the electromagnetism, and gravity. Gravity, on the other hand, may or may not be part of the unified forces
• how to articulate this idea of a unified force with the idea of the ensemble of the false vacuum-through of lesser energy? The unified force may be the component of the false vacuum field as, constrasting with the trough, it's it which triggers the Big Bang
• how, now, to articulate the previous with that that one of the components of the primeval quantum ensemble holds an anti-gravitational force? Likely through the concept of the famed Einstein's 'cosmological constant', according to which the void of the Universe holds an anti-gravitational force in it. Why, thus, that should not be a field of false vacuum?

From that, it looks like one may reach to that idea that the incompatibility between the General theory of Relativity and the quantum Standard Model be apparent only. How both would join would be through the gravity and the anti-gravity. Such a process might maybe be explained due to the unified state of the forces of physics ahead of the Planck time. If, like described by the Standard Model of physics, forces -the gravity included- are working based upon force-carrier particles, if, further, the anti-gravity exists, there may exist thus also an anti-strong force, or an anti-weak force, etc., leading to that that could be a hint to some state of the forces having merged together, and maybe even with their force-carriers merged into. Thus -and maybe above all- if there is not that incompatibility between the General theory of Relativity and the Standard Model, those both explanations of the world, one may expect, for example, that the current mathematics of the Standard Model -of the physics of particles- and that those of the General theory of Relativity be enough to pass over the Planck time in direction of the initial state of things which prevails before the Big Bang starts. More to come, thus...

A sequence of the events and structures triggered once the Big Bang started might be the following. Anti-gravity comes before gravity. Basic particles appear. Anti-gravity and gravity, in a spacetime context are triggering the inflation. Inflation determines the filamentary structure of the Universe. Forces which allow for the exchanges of forces between particles and then electricity or magnetism makes that the bricks of the particles associate between themselves. Dark matter agregated along the filamentary structure of the Universe allow for a further structuration of matter. It is a possibility that the spacetime fabrics include anti-gravity, with gravity as a process of anti-gravity re-appears 7 billion years ago with dark energy. Function of the quantum theory at last, matter and light, in the Universe may behave like a wave, or like a particle. The gravity, according to the Standard Model of physics, presents some questionment as, like a force, it should be linked to a force carrier particle, like any other of the fundamental bricks of Nature. That particle -which the physicists name the 'graviton'- however has never been observed until now in the atom smashers of the physicists, albeit the total energy released by a collision between atoms in the synchrotrons, compared to the particles observed, is showing that there is some excess in energy. Scientists think that that excess match the gravity phenomenon. It well looks like gravity either is no linked to any force carrier and thus a special kind of force, or that the particles' accelerators detectors aren't accurate enough to spot that force which carries gravity. Physicists further look like they are prejudicing that the gravity, at that scale of the basic bricks of the world, be a force of a quantum sort and thus transported through a force carrier. It is possible however that gravity, even in that frame, remain of the Einsteinian type, a curvature of space-time by mass. Scientists' search has allowed some of them to theorize that some particle is giving its mass to others, and named the Higgs boson, or 'God particle' as that would mostly explain the basic process of the Big Bang. In fact the choice is open. Is gravity else than a usual force carried by a usual force carrier particle. Is gravity a force with a force carrier, like any other particle of the Standard Model of physics, or does the Higgs boson is part of the explanation?

A last important view, concerning the basic mechanisms of the Universe is what is observed by the times of the recombination epoch. The Universe then mostly is composed with dark matter -which represents 63 percent of it- and neutrinos -10 percent as the remaining is 'normal' matter and photons. The dark energy, as far as it is concerned, is negligeable. Such a massive presence of dark matter obviously is questioning. Further, its participation in the Universe later falls to 23 percent nowadays as neutrinos have fallen down to 1 percent. Dark energy, conversely, has reached 72 percent. It looks like thus that a strong correlation exists between the decrease in dark matter and neutrinos and the increase in dark energy

• starting from that, at about 400,000 years after the Big Bang, dark matter is that important as dark energy is negligeable, one can likely state the following. On the one hand, dark matter well seems to be part of the creation process of all what is created through the fundamental processes of the Big Bang. The question remains however of knowing whether it is not created during the late steps of matter creation only, like when atoms form, for example. Such a minute participation of dark energy into those beginnings of the Universe might well mean that the 'void energy' then would limit its action at the particles level, or even of the false void spaces, or the inflation process. The question then is how to explain that dark energy is acquiring 7 billion years ago its new dimension, when it is becoming a force able to accelerate the expansion of the Universe at large
• what the explanation might be of that correlation between the decrease of dark matter and the increase of dark energy? Between the beginnings of the Universe and that time 7 billion years ago, what have happened, if not the formation of most of galaxies and stars. It looks like that when dark matter includes itself in galaxies or when forming its own large scale structures -which means, when dark matter get structured- that brings to that its quantity is decreasing. On the other hand, one might explain the fact that dark energy passes from a action at the particle level to the one of the Universe by when matter is getting structured. The more matter -and dark matter- structures, from atoms to molecules or from gas clouds to stars and galaxies, the more such its large scale structures themselves look like they acquire that capacity of repulsive gravity