The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure made the universe explode!

Abstract

Mankind all over its past epochs did ask the question, how this huge and materially impressive universe could ever have started its existence. The standard dogmatic answer presently given by the majority of modern cosmologists is: By the Big-Bang! - i.e. that initial explosion of the central highly condensed world matter system! But why - it could be asked - should this system have exploded at all? Perhaps this popular BB-hypothesis of a general and global cosmic explosion creating the world is especially suggestive just in these days of wars and weapons all around. Nevertheless to declare such an initial event as the begin of the universe unexpectedly turns out to be extremely hard to explain when based on purely physical grounds. Though it is easy to envisage a granate explosion causing matter to fly apart in all directions from the center of the explosion, but as a total surprise it is extremely hard to explain which physically operating forces or pressures might be responsible to drive the initially highly compacted cosmic matter agglomeration apart of each other. If the explosion forces are imagined as due to acting thermal pressure forces of normal massive matter, then the needed pressures cannot be due to the extremely high temperatures of the condensed matter, because the thermal energy of relativistically hot matter, as relativity theory tells us, will act as an additional source of gravity, i.e. making matter even "heavier"! Hence this just impedes the initial mass agglomeration to explode and fly apart. As we shall show in the following article the explosive BB- event can only physically be explained, if the necessary pressure is not conventionally realized by the temperature of the gravitating matter, but to the contrary by the immaterial cosmic vacuum. In fact - as we shall demonstrate here - without a cosmic vacuum pressure, the so-called Big-Bang never at all could have happened. Certainly vacuum pressure up to the present days of cosmology still is a fully speculative subject, but it will become evident in the following article, that without this highly speculative, physically handable quantity a primordial Big-Bang would not have happened at all.

Full text

Submit Manuscript | http://medcraveonline.com
Introduction: Doubts on the big-bang
hypothesis
Surprisingly enough just this initial explosive event of the universe
represents a genuine physical secret and deep mystery. This is true
because relativistic material pressure namely not acts explosively, but
to the contrary does effectively support gravity, i.e. produces additional
centripetal gravitation forces. This just impedes an explosion by
helping to keep concentrated the matter at its small volume or even
initiating an implosion. This problem, however, as we shall show here,
might have an astonishing, completely unexpected solution: Namely
the initial explosion only could happen by a pressure of a completely
unusual type - namely an immaterial pressure that is not connected
with hot matter, but with a pressurized, cosmic vacuum.
The always cited Big-Bang is generally seen as the prime physical,
causal condition for the cosmic matter to explosively y apart into ever
growing cosmic volumes. This initial explosion may also have initiated
the early Hubble expansion of the universe. But should scientists of
these days not ask on the basis of modern physics for the responsible
physical terms and forces which could have provocated this initial
explosive event? Matter, when it is assumed to be highly condensed
at this “BB”-begin, evidently organizes a strong gravitational eld
which effectively opposes the explosive y-off of cosmic matter. One
evidently needs in addition an overcompensating “antigravitational”,
“centrifugally directed” force. As the needed force cosmologists have
of course identied pressure forces at this cosmic evolution. Evidently
the B-B-matter not only is innitely dense and hot - it also evidently
is highly pressurized by thermal pressure. And hence in a rst glance
this makes evident that this necessarily creates an explosive scenario!
But this is simply not true, - because the thermal pressure connected
with the relativistically hot BB- matter namely also contributes to a
strengthening of the internal centripetal gravitational eld. This is
due to the presence of countable portions of increased equivalent
relativistic masses, as it is well described by the theory of General
Relativity.1−4
This has to be concluded, because energy in all its mass-equivalent
forms, evidently including all forms of kinetic energy, also acts as
source of gravity. And the relativistic thermal kinetic energy of the
Big-Bang matter can not at all be neglected relative to its rest mass
energy. As soon as the mass energy density
2
·
MM
c=
ε
, seen from
its order of magnitude, competes with the energy equivalent of the
material pressure
M
p
, then immediately its pressure-induced effects
are showing up in the eld-relevant energy-momentum tensor
ik
Π
of the GR-eld equations. We rst give them here without taking into
account vacuum energy. Then these equations take the form:1
4
·8·
2
ik ik
ik
gGc
ψΠ
ψ− =π
where
ik
ψ
denotes the Riemann´ian curvature tensor,
ψ
is the
curvature scalar,
ik
g
is the metric tensor,
ik
Π
is the energy-momentum
tensor, and
G
is Newton‘s constant of gravitation. The specic
action of the thermal material pressure
M
p
becomes evident, when one
procedes from the above tensor equations to the Friedmann-Lemaître
differential equations2,3 which are given in the form
Phys Astron Int J. 2023;7(4):274‒278. 274
©2023 Hans. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.
The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially
hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure
made the universe explode!
Volume 7 Issue 4 - 2023
Hans J Fahr
Argelander Institute for Astronomy, University of Bonn,
Germany
Correspondence: Hans J Fahr, Argelander Institute for
Astronomy, University of Bonn, Auf dem Huegel 71, 53121 Bonn,
Germany, Email
Received: November 29, 2023 | Published: December 08,
2023
Abstract
Mankind all over its past epochs did ask the question, how this huge and materially
impressive universe could ever have started its existence. The standard dogmatic answer
presently given by the majority of modern cosmologists is: By the Big-Bang! - i.e. that
initial explosion of the central highly condensed world matter system! But why - it could
be asked - should this system have exploded at all? Perhaps this popular BB-hypothesis of
a general and global cosmic explosion creating the world is especially suggestive just in
these days of wars and weapons all around. Nevertheless to declare such an initial event
as the begin of the universe unexpectedly turns out to be extremely hard to explain when
based on purely physical grounds. Though it is easy to envisage a granate explosion causing
matter to y apart in all directions from the center of the explosion, but as a total surprise
it is extremely hard to explain which physically operating forces or pressures might be
responsible to drive the initially highly compacted cosmic matter agglomeration apart of
each other. If the explosion forces are imagined as due to acting thermal pressure forces
of normal massive matter, then the needed pressures cannot be due to the extremely high
temperatures of the condensed matter, because the thermal energy of relativistically hot
matter, as relativity theory tells us, will act as an additional source of gravity, i.e. making
matter even “heavier”! Hence this just impedes the initial mass agglomeration to explode
and y apart. As we shall show in the following article the explosive BB- event can only
physically be explained, if the necessary pressure is not conventionally realized by the
temperature of the gravitating matter, but to the contrary by the immaterial cosmic vacuum.
In fact - as we shall demonstrate here - without a cosmic vacuum pressure, the so-called
Big-Bang never at all could have happened. Certainly vacuum pressure up to the present
days of cosmology still is a fully speculative subject, but it will become evident in the
following article, that without this highly speculative, physically handable quantity a
primordial Big-Bang would not have happened at all.
Physics Astronomy International Journal
Review Article Open Access

The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure
made the universe explode! 275
Copyright:
©2023 Hans
Citation: Hans JF. The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure made the universe explode!. Phys
Astron Int J. 2023;7(4):274‒278. DOI: 10.15406/paij.2023.07.00319
( )
2
2
8
/ ()
33
M
G kc
RR t
π
= −

And:
2
4 3 ()
[ () ]
3
M
M
R G pt
t
Rc
π
=−+


where
()R Rt=
is the time-dependent spatial scale of the
homogeneous Robertson-Walker universe,4,5
R
ο
and
R

denote its
rst and second derivatives with respect to cosmic time
,
M
tQ
and
M
p
denote mass density and pressure of the cosmic matter, and
k
is
the curvature parameter which in this normalized approach can only
attain values of
1, 0, 1k kk=+= =−
.
One can see in the second of these two above differential equations,
that as well the material pressure
()
M
pt
, as also the material energy
density
2
()
M
tc
, both do contribute in the same sense to the acting
gravitational eld. They namely do decelerate the scale expansion,
and with
0R<

do determine a collapsing!,- rather than an explosively
- expanding universe, in case no other cosmic forces in addition had to
be taken into account. This is especially true in case when the cosmic
matter has relativistic temperatures, i.e. when
2
()
M
tc
and
()
M
pt
turn out to be of the same order of magnitude. How then the early
universe with a relativistically hot matter can at all have exploded?
This according to present-day views is only possible, if in addition
to the upper material pressure
()
M
pt
an additional cosmic pressure
()pt

of a completely different nature becomes active; namely a
pressure is needed of a nonthermal nature and thus is not coupled
to “massive” matter. It rather must be a pressure of an unusual, i.e.
an “immaterial” form, which does not simultaneously contribute to a
centripetal gravity eld.
Such an “immaterial” pressure
()pt

, as it is suggested in these
present days, could perhaps be connected with cosmic vacuum
energy, whose role nowadays is seriously discussed all around in
cosmology. The rst who introduced vacuum energy, however ,
a pressure-less vacuum energy ,into the theory of cosmology was
Einstein6 with his cosmologic constant
Λ
which helped at least for
the value
2
8/
EQ
E
GcΛ =−π
to enable a static Euclidean (uncurved
0k=
!) universe which Einstein at these days was looking for. Later
then Friedman,3,4 introduced this term, given by the cosmologic
constant
Λ
, into the eld equations. Together with the use of the so-
called Robertson-Walker geometry,4,5 (Robertson), he obtained the
following set of equations:
( )
22 22
8
/ / /3
3
Q
G
R R ck R c π
= −Λ =

And:
( )
22 22
2
8
2 / / / ·( )
G
RR RR ckR c p p
c
π
+ + − Λ=− +
  
If now one only is interested in the uncurved Euclidean universe
with a constant but vanishing curvature
0k=
!, one then obtains the
following two differential equations, but now containing the inuence
of vacuum energy in the form:
( )
2
2
8
/
3
Q
cG
RR Λ+ π
=

and:
( )
22
2
8
2 / / ·( )
G
RR RR c p p
c
π
+ − Λ=− +
  
Replacing here the term
( )
2
/RR

in the second equation by the
rst equation leads to
2
2
28 8
2 / ·( )
3
cG G
RR p p
c
− Λ+ π π
+ =−+
 

Expressing the following, interesting relation:
2
2
2
41
2 / [ ( )]
33
cG
RR c p p
c
Λπ
= − ++
 

This equation, however, for the rst time here and now, shows the
possibility of getting an explosive Big-Bang event for the specic, but
realistic case:
2
2
2
41
[ ( )]
33
cG
c pp
c
Λπ
> ++


How to describe vacuum pressure?
To further continue this analysis we now have to study the
unusual form of the vacuum pressure
p

which is connected with the
vacuum energy density
vac
∈
and anyway, in these days, is strongly
instrumentalized for cosmological purposes. Of course, its physical
nature and its relation to other physical quantities, even today, is
strongly obscure and under permanently new discussions. Nevertheless
as has been shown by Fahr and Sokaliwska7 and Fahr,8 vacuum energy
density only is a conserved quantity of cosmic spacetime, when it is
introduced like Einstein6 did it with his
constΛ=
, - namely only -, if
the proper energy of the comoving space time volume is conserved.
This invariance, however, can only be expected, if this vacuum proper
energy or its energy density does not perform work at the expansion
or upon the dynamics of cosmic space time. If to the contrary such
a work is in fact performed by the vacuum energy, i.e. in case the
vacuum does perform work at the expansion of the cosmic scale R,9
then - as an unavoidable thermodynamical consequence of the omni-
valid energy conservation law - it cannot be constant!
This is because in that case the thermodynamic relations between
the cosmic vacuum energy density
vac
∈
and the associated vacuum
pressure
p

=
vac
p
do require that the following thermodynamical
relation is fullled:
33
()
vac vac
dd
R pR
dR dR
= −
∈
This relation can, however, mathematically only be satised, when
the following functional relation between these two quantities holds:
3
3
vac vac
p−ξ
= −
∈
where
ξ
is the polytropic vacuum index, i.e. a pure number which
only for the specic case
ξ
= 3 describes the case of a “pressure-less”
vacuum which in fact Einstein6 and Friedman2 did consider. In all
other cases
3ξ
vacuum energy
vac
∈
is associated with a pressurized
vacuum and evidently also then does unavoidably perform work at
the scale-expansion of space. Under these latter conditions, however,
vacuum energy density
vac
∈
as shown by the upper equation, cannot be
constant, which in contrast once was formulated by Einstein7 with his
42
8 /8 /
vac Q E
G c G c constΛ= π = π =
∈
.for a static universe (i.e for
R const=
!), where
E
Q
is equivalent of the Einstein´ían mass density
just stabilizing the universe against a gravitational collapse.
Looking here again back to the earlier problem raised in this
article, that the thermal pressure
M
p
of relativistic cosmic matter
cannot help to let the Big-Bang matter explode, we therefore, in
order to nevertheless have a Big-Bang genesis of our universe, would
need a type of vacuum with a non-vanishing, positive pressure
vac
p
, given for the cases
3ξ>
, however, with the evident consequence,
that this kind of pressure unavoidably performs thermodynamic work
at the expansion of the universe (i.e. with growing scale
( ( ))R Rt=
. This necessarily means that
vac
∈
in that case cannot be constant, but,
also, and even in favour of a Big-Bang genesis of the universe, has
to fall off with the scale R of the universe! This in no case would
be a dramatic or desastrous solution for a Big-Bang universe. One

The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure
made the universe explode! 276
Copyright:
©2023 Hans
Citation: Hans JF. The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure made the universe explode!. Phys
Astron Int J. 2023;7(4):274‒278. DOI: 10.15406/paij.2023.07.00319
only has to see the consequence that this result were contrary to
what was thought by many cosmologists of these days, especially by
Perlmutter et al.,10 Schmidt et al.,11 or Riess et al.12 namely that this
actual universe, in view of its observed redshift-luminosity relations,
can well and best! be explained by a constant vacuum energy density
with
2
8/
vac
G c constΛ= π =
according just to the idea once created
by Einstein,7 however, by him for different reasons.
How does the cosmic vacuum cause a big-bang?
Let us remind here, that the only essential condition for an
“explosive” BB- event is fullled, if the following relation holds:
2
2
841
[ ( )]
33
vac
vac
GGQc p p
c
ππ
> ++

which, with
2
33
33
vac vac vac
pc= − −ξ ξ−
=
∈
,
leads to the following form of the second Friedman equation:
22
2
841 3
/ [ ( )]
33 3
vac
vac
GG
RR c p c
c
ππ ξ−
= − ++



Taking this equation serious, one then can think positively in
favour of the Big-Bang to happen, namely: In order to have the
vacuum pressure dominant at small scales of the universe, i.e. in the
very young universe
0
RR<
!, and thus to have a Big-Bang happening
in this earliest cosmologic epoch, one needs to have a dominance of
the vacuum mass energy density
vac

over cosmic mass density

, thus
a relation for instance given in the form:
,0 ,0 0 0
/ ( / )· ( / )
vac Q vac Q
RR
γ
=
with
γ
denoting a positive number and meaning that the vacuum
energy density is given by:
( )
3
,0 0
( ) ·( / )
vac vac
R RR
+γ
=
With this information one could then reduce the upper differential
equation for scales
0
RR<
by neglecting the term containing the mass
density

into the following simplied form:
( )
2
2
843 4
/ [ )] ·[2 3 ]
3 33
vac
vac vac
GGG
RR c
c
ππ ξ− π
= − = − ξ−



and would nd the Big-Bang acceleration
R

for the range
0
RR<
with a positive scale acceleration given by:
( )
4
,0 0 0
4/
3
vac
G
R R RR
+γ
π
= ⋅
 
The above equation does not allow to calculate the exact course
of the Big-Bang scale explosion due to the missing knowledge on
the relevant cosmologic quantities
,0vac

,
ξ
, and
γ
but it nevertheless
allows to at least prove that under conditions of a pressurized cosmic
vacuum the event of a cosmic Big-Bang at least seems physically
representable.
A universe with vanishing energy
For many cosmologists it would establish a usefull basis to start
from the principle, that this universe in terms of energy consists of
“nothing”. Because then it would also be easy to understand that
this world could have originated from “nothing”, and the plagueing
question, how the world could originate at all, would have an easy and
evident answer: This universe came from nothing, it is nothing, and
will be nothing forever! But how such an idea could be put on rational
physical grounds?
Physically spoken, - “nothing” is absense of energy. But can the
assumption of a complete absense of energy be a rational approach
towards the real nature of our universe where evidently the energies
of stars and galaxies, added up from all over the universe, represent
a huge positive amount of energy? The answer can astonishingly
enough be : “YES”! - Namely, if all positively valued energies
E
are completely balanced by negatively valued energies
U
, e.g. like
binding energies , with the result:
0EU+=
!
Whether or not such a cosmic condition can at all be expected
as realized, must be further investigated in detail, but it denitely
requires a universe different from that which we presently believe in
or have in mind.
Ideas that the total energy of the universe might be zero, already
appeared in the scientic literature very early in the last century13,14
Cosmic mass energies can be calculated by15 (Rosen and Cooperstock,
the expression derived for perfect uids in the form:
2
( 3)
m
E g c p dV=−+
∫
ρ
where
g
is the determinant of the cosmic metric tensor, and
ρ
and m
p
denote the mass density and the material pressure.
When additionally including the pressure of the vacuum here with
2
vac vac
pc= −
ρ
and integrating the above integral one obtains:
43
2
3
cR
E Mc
G
Λ
= −
where
3
4 /3MR= π
ρ
is the cosmic mass inside a spherical region
of
3
4 /3VR= π
, and
23
3/GM c RΛ=
denotes the vacuum energy
density according to Einstein and De Sitter.16
As shown by Overduin and Fahr17 the total binding energy under
such conditions can be determined to
22 2
3
10 10
c MR GM
U
R
Λ
= −
and thus leads to the following condition for the “zero”-energy
universe:
22 2
2
3
0 (1 ) ( )
3 10
c R GM
E U Mc
GM R
Λ
+==− −
This means one would have two conditions under which the total
energy of the universe vanishes, namely
1:
22
1
3
cR
GM
Λ
=
And
2:
2
3
1
10
GM
cR
=
This second condition is in fact, and to some surprise for
theoreticians, identical with the well known “perfect cosmic
dragging” - condition formulated already very early in the last century
by Thirring,18 but for completely different reasons.
To stress this result a little more let us construct an expression
for the total energy of the universe. Hereby not only those energies
have to be added up over the total cosmic space, which serve as
energy equivalents of deposited masses with densities

, but also
the thermal and kinetic energies of these masses have to be added up
in this balance. This can be done by accounting for their pressures
and bulk velocities. For a total balance one thereby has to count
for baryonic mass densities
b
ρ
, dark matter densities
d
ρ
, and of
course also the mass equivalent density of the vacuum
vac
ρ
. The same
procedure has to be carried out for the respective pressures in the
form
b d vac
pp p p=++
. The resulting expression of the sum
E
in
a homogeneous universe reveals as proportional to the cube of the
cosmic scale, i.e.
3
R
.

The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure
made the universe explode! 277
Copyright:
©2023 Hans
Citation: Hans JF. The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure made the universe explode!. Phys
Astron Int J. 2023;7(4):274‒278. DOI: 10.15406/paij.2023.07.00319
Along a similar procedure the gravitational binding energy of the
mass-and energy-carrying cosmic matter can be dene by adding up
scale-per-scale of the gravitating mass and energy in their gravitational
binding strength to the rest of the world. Hereby one nds for the
total binding energy
U
an expresssion which is proportional to the
vth power of the scale
R
, i.e.
5
R
(Fahr and Heyl, 2007a/b). When
requiring again now that
E
and
U
just compensate, this then leads
to the interesting requirement:
2
2
3( ( 2) )
2
b d vac
c
GR = + + ξ−
π
ρρ ρ
where
ξ
again is the polytrope of the relation between vacuum
pressure and vacuum energy density as given in the form:
2
(3 )
3
vac vac
pc
−ξ
= −
ρ
As can be recognized from the above, the requirement
0EU+=
can only be fullled, if all mass densities in the universe are scaling
with . That implies that the mass densities
b
ρ
and
d
ρ
scale
like , different from the generally expected form , and
clearly meaning that here a cosmic mass generation according to
,bd RH
R
= =


ρ
ρρ
has to happen in this universe which otherwise would remain
massless forever. It is very interesting to notice that this is exactly
identical to the mass generation rate which was required for bound
mass systems in the universe as expression of the work of the vacuum
pressure at the expansion of the universe8
This may also answer easily the question how the required mass
generation can be explained; Now the cosmic vacuum energy density
is not anymore taken to be constant as in the standard cosmology (e.g.
see Perlmutter et al.,8 but it is reduced in an expanding universe like
2
vac
R
−
�
ρ
, from where one can easily draw the solution
vac
= −

ρρ
.
This interestingly enough means, that in a “zero-energy universe”
the cosmic vacuum energy has to convert into cosmic matter energy
with the exciting consequence, that at very small cosmic scales, i.e.
towards the begin of the universe, the energy of the universe becomes
more and more vacuum energy, while the matter energy seen back
towards the Big-Bang event dissolves, i.e. vanishes completely. This
ts perfectly into the view developed recently by Fahr12 speculating
that the Big-Bang only could happen as an explosion of the initial
cosmic vacuum.
An other question, however, also not yet solved here is whether
or not such a matter generation as a consequence of the decay of
the cosmic vacuum energy could also then at its decay deliver the
elementary abundances of the originating cosmic matter (i.e.H-, D-,
He-, Li- abundances etc!).19 To decide this question one, however,
rst had to study the thermodynamics of the cosmic vacuum and
the condensation and temperature of the generated cosmic matter as
function of the scale R and the cosmic time t. We shall, however, look
into this problem in a forthcoming paper.
Conclusions with a view on cosmic mass
generation and negative masses:
In the article above we have argued that vacuum energy density
vac

, even though it is till today a mysterious and hardly handable
quantity, for the case of a vacuum polytropic index
3ξ≥
at least must
be connected with a positive vacuum pressure
( )
3 /3
vac vac
p= ξ− 


. Thanks to this vacuum pressure it induces at the absence of other
cosmic forces a kind of a Hubble- expansion of the whole universe with
a growing cosmic scale
( )
Rt
. This may demonstrate the enormous
potential of the vacuum concerning an alternative determination of
the whole dynamics of the universe, beginning with an explosive,
initial cosmic event, however, at the absence of matter, without a mass
singularity at its begin.
Our ideas here can be seen as running a little bit in parallel
to the so-called “Cold Genesis Theory” (CGT) propagated by
Arghirescu.15,20 In this latter theory the possibility was discussed to
explain all fundamental elds and particles by a simple, composite
chiral soliton model of fermions like a kind of condensation from
the primordial vacuum. Hereby it is conceived that leptons and
anti-leptons are generated as “gravistars” from a strong vortex of
primordial dark energy. This possibility of the generation of dark
particles condensating out of the primordial vacuum energy as dark
chiral solitons is supported by several accompanying CGT theories.20
Perhaps it may be furthermore interesting to compare this idea
with an other view, alternative to ours here and the above, namely
presented by Farnes:21 It was recognized by Farnes21 that a kind of
vacuum pressure of just that same form, as requested in our article
here, would as well arise, if the total of cosmic masses were partly
due to negative masses
m−
and partly due to positive masses
m
+ (
n.b.: not electrically positively and negatively charged masses, -
but with negative and positive mass qualities). This would have the
evident property that positive and negative mass particles would reject
eachother by repulsive gravitational forces between them according
to forces
2
/ ** / 0
vac
dp dR G m m r
+−
=−≥
. As Farnes21 this opens up
a situation similar to the one under positive cosmic vacuum pressure
as we have discussed it here in this article. In this sense a mass-less
cosmology with
+−
ρ=ρ
( i.e. full compensation of negative by positive
cosmic masses!) would also represent at the same time a gravity-free
cosmology like given in a mass less case
0ρ=
, when only vacuum
forces are active. In this respect Farnes21 derives an equivalence of
the cosmologic constant
Λ
and the neglected negative cosmic masses
given by the relation:
2
8/Gc
−
Λ= π
ρ
A similar relation is connected with Hoyle‘s “steady state universe”
requiring that the expansion of the universe be connected with a well-
adjusted mass generation rate

ρ
to guarantee that the state of the
expanding universe characterized by its instantaneous mass density
H
const= =
ρρ
does not change with time. As we have shown18 in
the sense of the Einstein - de Sitter universe16 this would lead to the
following identity:
2
83
HH
G
c

π
Λ=



ρ
Thus we can draw the following conclusion: On one hand it
seems as if vacuum energy is denitely needed to have an initial
cosmic explosive event which later leads into an expanding universe
according to a Hubble expansion, on the other hand, however, this
vacuum energy has to manifest a positive pressure which is shown
here to do thermodynamic work at the cosmic scale expansion and
thus has to unavoidably reduce its vacuum energy density. It thus
seems from the above, as if there are only two options to understand
the universe as we wish to understand it at these days:
Either one accepts a variable vacuum energy density decreasing at
ongoing expansion of the cosmic scale
( )
Rt
. This would imply that
cosmic vacuum energy density becomes less and less important in
the cosmic future, and the SN1a-redshift ts presented by Perlmutter
et al.,10 Schmidt et al.,11 Riess et al.,12 built on the assumption of a

The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure
made the universe explode! 278
Copyright:
©2023 Hans
Citation: Hans JF. The big-bang started from nothing: Not the initially hot cosmic matter, but a positive vacuum pressure made the universe explode!. Phys
Astron Int J. 2023;7(4):274‒278. DOI: 10.15406/paij.2023.07.00319
constant vacuum energy according to Einstein‘s
Λ
, hence cannot tell
us the nal cosmic truth.
Or alternatively when one assumes, that cosmic vacuum energy
density is a constant universal quantity, however, with a permanently
vanishing pressure, - then one cannot explain the initial explosive
Big-Bang event and the ongoing Hubble expansion of the universe
due to an evident lack of cosmic pressure! The reader may make his
own choice!
Acknowledgments
None.
Conicts of interest
The author declares there is no conict of interest.
References
1. Goenner H. Einführung in die spezielle und allgemeine Relativitätstheorie.
Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg; 1996.
2. Friedman A. Über die Krümmung des Raumes. Zeitschrift f Physik.
1922;10:377–386.
3. Friedman A. Über die Möglichkeit einer Welt mit konstanter negativer
Krümmung. Zeitschrift f Physik. 1924;21:326–332.
4. Robertson HP. On the foundations of relativistic cosmology. Proc Nat
Acad Sci (USA). 1929;15(11):822–829.
5. Robertson HP. Relativistic cosmology. Rev Mod Phys. 1933;5:62–90.
6. Einstein A. Kosmologische Betrachtungen zur Allgemeinen Relativit
ätstheorie, Sitzungsberichte der K.P.Akademie der Wissenschaften. Phys
Math Klasse. 1917;142–152.
7. Fahr Hans J, Sokaliwska M. Revised concepts for cosmic vacuum energy
and binding energy: Innovative Cosmology. In: Antonio Alfonso-Faus,
editor. Aspects of Today‘s Cosmology. INTECH Open Access Publisher;
2011. Chapter 5, p. 95−121
8. Fahr Hans J. Cosmic vacuum energy with thermodynamic and
gravodynamic action power. Phys Astron Int J. 2022;6(2):62−66.
9. Fahr HJ, Heyl M. The universe generated by the explosion of the
primordial vacuum. Adv Theo Comp Phy. 2023;6(3):174−178.
10. Perlmutter S, Aldering G, Goldhabe G, et al. The supernova cosmology
project: Measurement of Omega and Lambda from 42 high–redshift
supernovae. Astrophys J. 1999;517:565–586.
11. Schmidt BP, Suntzeff NB, Philipps MM, et al. The high-Z- supernova
search; measuring cosmic deceleration and global curvature of the
universe using type Ia supernovae. Astrophys Journal. 1998;507(1):46.
12. Riess AG, Filippenko AV, Challis P, et al. Observational evidence from
supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant.
Astronomical Journal. 1998;116(3):1009.
13. Tryon EP. Is the Universe a vacuum uctuation? Nature.1973;246:396−397.
14. Jordan P. Die Herkunft der Sterne. Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft,
M.B.H; 1949. 16 p.
15. Arghirescu M. A quasi-unitary pre-quantum theory of particles and
elds and some theoretical implications. Intern Journal of High Energy
Physics. 2015;2(4-1):80−103
16. Einstein A, De Sitter W. On the relation between the expansion
and the mean density of the universe. Proc Nat Acad Sci (USA).
1932;18(3):213−214.
17. Overduin JM, Fahr HJ. Vacuum energy and the economical universe.
Found Phys Lett. 2003;16(2):119−125.
18. Fahr HJ, Heyl M. Cosmic vacuum decay and creation of cosmic matter.
Naturwissenschaften. 2007;94(9):709−724.
19. Goenner H. Einführung in die Kosmologie. Spektrum Akademischer
Verlag Heidelberg; 1994.
20. Arghirescu M. The cold genesis of matter and elds. Science Publishing
Group; 2015.
21. Farnes JS. A unifying theory of dark energy and dark matter: Negative
masses and matter creation within a modied – framework.
Astronomy & Astrophysics. 2018;620:A92.