Orignally Published : June 29th, 2021.

Podcast Episode 1 - The Cosmological Principle

Hello and welcome to the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis podcast. My name is Stuart MacLean and I am both your host and progenitor of said hypothesis.

The Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis is exactly what its name pertains to be in that it is a scientific hypothesis relating to the Big Bang theory itself. In one word “hypernova” I am able to convey the entire basis of my hypothesis.

The term “Big Bang” itself is a potential source of confusion as it can relates to many things. Firstly the term “The Big Bang Theory” is itself most popularly associated with a TV comedy show of said name. Off course, this is not the “Fun with flags” podcast.

The Big Bang Theory itself is the observation that our universe at some point in the distant past, around 13.8 billion years ago, was a much smaller, hotter and denser place. When Albert Einstein discovered his equations of General Relativity the progenitor of the Big Bang Theory, George Lemaître, noted that a consequence of relativity was that we live in a universe that is constantly expanding. That is, the very fabric of the universe is continually expanding causing galaxies to move away from one another.

Realising that the universe was expanding Lemaître considered the reverse in that if the clock was rewound that galaxies would come closer together as the fabric of spacetime contracted. Extrapolating this insight Lemaître realised that at some point in the distant past the universe was a much smaller, hotter and denser place than we see today. The resultant afterglow of the very early universe being effectively filled with hot plasma is seen coming from all heavenly directions and is called the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.

This in a nutshell is what I refer to as the Big Bang Theory itself. Namely, the observation that the entire universe was a much smaller, hotter and denser place than we see today as evident by the presence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. This microwave radiation has been repeatedly measured, observed and mapped thanks to both NASA’s WMAP and ESA’s Planck mission.

So the Big Bang Theory itself is not in contention amongst cosmologists. Even if there are old diehards of the Steady-state model but they are a dying breed. Einstein was believer in the Steady-state model himself until Edwin Hubble managed to convince him otherwise by way of his observations.

What is in contention however is in trying to find some rational explanation as to exactly how and why our universe came to be a much smaller, hotter and denser place some 13.8 billion years ago as evident from the microwave sky. Running the clock back further in time from the moment photons of the now microwave sky began their journey across the cosmos we find that the entire universe came from a single point of infinity density and curvature. What we call a gravitational or physical singularity, a point where the curvature of spacetime is infinite arising from its infinite density.

Or more specifically it was Steven Hawking, for his pHD, who took the standard cosmological solution of General Relativity, the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric, and by rewinding the clock back on the given mathematical equations that it was inevitable that the universe was born from a gravitational singularity; a point of infinite density.

[1]

The simplicity of the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis is to say “In order to understand the birth of the Big Bang’s gravitational singularity then let the birth of a known gravitational singularity, specifically a black hole, be the template within nature from which we extrapolate”. In order to understand nature we must study nature itself. That is what physics means “knowledge of nature” and this is central to the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis.

Off course the real trouble with my hypothesis now is that after about five years digging, researching and effectively trying to nullify it; my hypothesis has grown from a hatchling into being like a 600-tonne silver-back gorilla that more or less can ground stomp any competing cosmological models or explanations. I say this in light of completing my essay entitled “General Relativity and Rotation” in which I showed how a rotational white hole located in the Eridanus void can perfectly explain the large scale anisotropies observed on the microwave sky as observed by both WMAP and Planck. Prior to that I made the prediction that the white hole would be located in the Eridanus void; so in effect I watched yet another prediction come true. And then I watched the new Kong vs Godzilla movie!

Looking in the mirror the other day I see my beard having now turned to a silver mane. A biological reaction to having the weight of a fully conscious cosmos come crashing down around your head and into your life will kind of do that to a man. Well did to me. And that is before we even get into the whole of the affair of what I simply call the “inspirational artwork or symbology”.

I mean can any other scientist answer this out of left field question. Is it normal to build an entire cosmological model upon what quite simply is the one and only true Biblical Holy Grail?

The answer is, “Yes it is perfectly normal and to be expected” as I look at Dan Brown’s series of Robert Langdon books realising exactly what they were. Namely, what is referred to in my trade as “a trail run” before the actual execution of the event itself. Well now, the deed is done as I stand back and begin to understand the magnitude of what I’ve written. Effectively enough to show that the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis can answer with great simplicity the various questions and problems, proposed by other physicists, that a cosmological model has to be able address.

To paraphrase the bullet point list on my homepage the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis can:

And that’s only really us at the very start of this exploration.

Now if you feel like I just cast a Confundus Charm upon you accept my apologies. Everyone I try to explain this too seems to end up with the same blank look expression. Cosmology after all is an extremely specialist subject of which I have been a life long passionate geek.

My purpose is not to confuse but rather to communicate to those, who like me, are in the know. Despite the paradoxical name the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis is rapidly becoming THE serious heavy weight contender. And that is before we even discuss Buddhism and its cosmological models. Seriously! Oh man, for all you physicists who are true seekers of truth and desire a hypothesis that actually makes sense in considering the deep mysteries of life well you’re certainly not going to be disappointed.

I’m still trying to picking my jaw up off the floor after being blown away, yet again, by this week’s revelation. This revelation comes from a composite image of the Milky Way’s galactic core in both X-Ray and Radio. As the man who coined the term “Jet-a-verse” in the context of CPT-Symmetry via helical spirals I am just counting the ghostly number of Jet-a-verses seen in this image. The very structure of each Jet-a-verse being mirrored in the DNA chromosome. To my eyes at least! [2] [3]

This panorama shows the central region of the Milky Way Galaxy. It builds on previous surveys from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes, and expands Chandra’s high-energy view farther above and below the plane of the Galaxy than previous imaging campaigns. X-rays from Chandra are orange, green, and purple, showing different X-ray energies, and the radio data from MeerKAT are gray. Image credit: NASA / CXC / UMass / Q.D. Wang / NRF / SARAO / MeerKAT.

Then this week past there is also this discovery of a giant galactic arc measuring 3.3 billion light years in length. I do love arcs and curvature that defy the homogenous and isotropic principle like the large scale anisotropies that main stream cosmologists have been trying to hide for the last two decades. Then there is discovery of the largest spinning structure in the universe which I found out about last night. [4] [5] [6]

They say theoretical physicists have to wait decades or even a century before their ideas can actually be tested. Life for me these last years has been non-stop revelation and confirmation as I have an idea and low behold the solution or evidence presents itself as it flows in across my RSS news feed. This week being a classical case in point.

To be honest I have watched as repeatedly again and again I have had head shot after head shot in developing my entire hypothesis. A head shot being a discovery worthy of a Nobel Prize in itself. Each one in and of itself is worth a lifetime’s study and devotion. But to have so many in rapid succession well it would be nice to say that I am “Just that good!”.

No. Am good but I am entangled with a higher power which really wants to make a very specific point. Part of that point is to allow me as a singular man to act with I guess divine like powers causing me to run scared of my own self. The mantra “Your human” a prayer of humility as I remind myself of what I truly am in this life.

The truth of the matter is that I have the personal backing of that spirit which man in ancient days called “Apollo”. I simply follow a predestined path that was long planned out thousands of years ago. The problem I really have is that my internal story narrative, which is the locus of my identity, leads to this one and only conclusion. Things look less funny when you employ the uncoded symbology borne upon the bone box of the man who prosecuted and sent one Jesus of Nazareth, circa 33 A.D., to be crucified in order to develop my hypothesis. I don’t think I’ll ever get over the fact that the Box of Caiaphas has the number of the beast all over it.

Certainly the number of beast has had the effect of turning me into a beast. That I cannot deny! Being ostracised after all for me is a way of life and my comfort zone having been marked by this number by Evangelical’s in the Satanic Panic of the 1980s. But tales of wizards and boarding school’s in the highlands of Scotland is a tale for another time.

Well at least on the other hand I might finally get to talk to a therapist.

Maybe I could describe dinner this evening to my therapist. A quiet happy family meal the height of luxury for me. What caught my eye during dinner was the engraved wood work on the back of the dining chairs I had inherited from my grand parents. I hadn’t noticed it before but suddenly I was looking at the engraving upon the back of the chair. What I saw in the engraving was the cross-sectional pattern of a feeding black hole with twin jet formations.

Like the duck-rabbit optical illusion I could see two flip sides to the artwork. On the one flip side the horizontal part is the input accretion disc and the vertical two closed jet-a-verses. On the other side the vertical is the closed electromagnetic field lines that captures the input accretion disc and the vertical were the actual astrophysical jet formations.

You see it is in everything because fractal geometry is the cosmological principle and self-similarity repeats itself irrespective of scale. This is not some academic point of highfalutin philosophy. This truth of nature is so fundamental I see it in a piece of furniture that has always been present in my life for the very first time this evening. It is something that just blows my socks off and yet again puts my jaw on the floor. Such beauty in the simplest and modest of things is truly artistic genius in my eyes.

And for us this is a good place to begin our journey as we begin by gaining an understanding of the importance that is the cosmological principle.

We cannot recreate the Big Bang in a lab! Simple as, we cannot recreate the Big Bang in a laboratory no matter what we do. And I don’t care what the people at the LHC or Fermilab have to say. One because the very metric of spacetime at the time of the Big Bang was much smaller than it was today. A meter or even a light year in length, as it is today, would have been smaller than the size of a quark in the moments proceeding the Big Bang event.

Secondly, the quantum mechanical versions of the Big Bang such as Quantum Gravity or Inflation Theory are only valid if quantum mechanics is the underlying mechanism of the Big Bang. By using the theory and results of General Relativity I have laid out reasoned explanation as to exactly what is responsible for both the Cold Spot and the large scale anisotropies. I don’t need quantum mechanics to explain the microwave sky.

The Big Bang Theory is a prediction of General Relativity and via General Relativity I have been able to explain the microwave sky. This is opposed to the particle physicist sales pitch to build ever larger colliders where General Relativity’s only relevance in the Big Bang is in the determination of “scale”.

So the Big Bang cannot be recreated in a lab. Thus I am unable to create an experiment that I can use to test my ideas. There was only one Big Bang event, with respect to the birth of our universe, and it cannot be reproduced. The point being that I am forced into making assumptions about the birth of our universe which acts as the very foundations upon which I build my ideas.

The importance of the cosmological principle is that it is the very key cornerstone foundational block upon which everything else is built. If that cornerstone were to be later falsified then it would be very catastrophic to everything that was built upon it.

The accepted cosmological principle says that the spatial distribution of matter in the universe is both homogenous and isotropic when viewed on a large enough scale.

So what does this mean and what is it implying?

Firstly, it is a statement about how matter is distributed, or spread, throughout the early universe. It says that matter is evenly distributed through-out the early universe. In other words, for any location in the early universe the density of matter at that point is exactly the same as every other point in the early universe. This is what homogenous, meaning the same everywhere, explicitly implies.

The second condition applied to the spatial distribution of matter is that it is isotropic. In a nutshell, isotropy is uniformity in all orientations. A good example in thinking about the isotropic nature of the cosmological principle comes from considering the orientation and spinward direction of spiral galaxies.

A spiral galaxy has a disc shaped structure with arms. Stars in the spiral galaxy orbit, or rotate, around a central galactic core. Thus the spiral galaxy can be said to have an axis of rotation. That is an equivalent North-South line can be drawn through the centre of the galaxy, intersecting with the supermassive black hole at its core, around which the stars in the galaxy orbit.

Artist’s impression based on an ESO study looking at quasar alignment within the large-scale structures they inhabit; these alignments are over billions of light-years and are some of the largest known in the Universe. Note that the quasar alignments are generally orientated in the direction of the cosmic filament that a given active galaxy resides. This anisotropic alignment runs counter to the isotropic assumption of the cosmological principle. Image credit: ESO / M. Kornmesser. [7] [8]

This axis of rotation of a spiral galaxy is explicitly seen when the supermassive black hole at the galactic core is feeding. The two resultant astrophysical jets each travel in polar opposite directions away from one another. These tight beam jets travel along the axis of rotation and thus allows astronomers to measure the orientation of a galaxy.

Now in saying that the spatial distribution of matter is isotropic what we are saying is that the orientation of any piece of matter is completely random with respect to all other matter. In the case of spiral galaxies it means that a given spiral galaxy’s axis of rotation, or orientation, should be completely random. So if I were to sample a piece of the night sky and record the orientation of all spiral galaxies in that region then I would expect the resultant distribution showing orientation to be evenly, hence randomly, distributed. The galaxies should not be generally pointing in the same direction if the spatial distribution of matter is isotropic.

The spiral arms of a galaxy when viewed from Earth can be seen to have a clockwise or anti-clockwise spin. Starting from the centre and moving out the spiral patterns on the left show clockwise spiral. The spirals on the right, starting from the centre and moving out, show an anti-clockwise spiral.

The concept of there being a binary choice spinward direction of a spiral galaxy and the great importance of this observation I see reflected in the symbology of my inspirational artwork. Such is the symmetry between symbology and its import in the actual discovery that to not represent it, for me, would be to lessen the quality of my work. Also it is a perfect example of what I am meaning about the unnatural power of this one single object. It is if a higher power knew exactly how the mystery of the CMB anisotropies would be solved such that I could use it as a prop in demonstrating this binary choice.

Another example looking at spiral galaxies comes in the spinward direction of their arms as it allows for a binary measurement. The binary measurement is that we could observe the arms of a spiral galaxy as having either a clockwise spinward direction or a counter-clockwise spinward direction. That is follow the curvature of an arm in a spiral galaxy travelling from the centre to its edge and look at the curve. The curve is either orientated in a clockwise direction or a counter-clockwise direction.

Now we measure a large sample of spiral galaxies and measure their spinward direction with respect to how we observe them here on Earth. If the isotropic principle holds true then there should be no statistically significant asymmetry between the number of galaxies with a clockwise spinward direction versus the number of galaxies with a counter-clockwise spinward direction. In other words there should be no asymmetry between the number of galaxies with either clockwise and counter-clockwise spinward directions.

Thus isotropic means that matter has no preferred direction in the early universe.

Put this together we see the standing cosmological principle is the assumption that the distribution of matter through-out the universe is both evenly spread and its orientation and direction of travel is completely random. i.e. The spatial distribution of matter is both homogeneous and isotropic. This IS the one single assumption that the mainstream cosmologists have made in building theories about the Big Bang event itself.

Now the reasons for making this assumption are many with philosophical roots going back to both Newton and Copernicus. Copernicus who showed the Earth is not the centre of the universe as he first showed how we orbit the Sun along with all the other planets. Patterns repeat themselves being as I am the first man to define the Superverse as well as coin the term Jet-a-verse I can hear the ghostly whisper of Copernicus saying “Welcome brother!”.

The last piece in understanding this cosmological principle comes in the phrase “when viewed on a large enough scale”. i.e. The cosmological principle states “the spatial distribution of matter in the universe is both homogenous and isotropic when viewed on a large enough scale”.

The key principle being communicated here is that we have to acknowledge that the very fabric of spacetime that underlies our universe has been expanding from the moment of the Big Bang. Because of this expansion what would have been initially a small metric volume in the early universe will have expanded and grown over time such that its overall spatial volume is now “sufficiently large enough”.

So this part of the cosmological principle recognises that what was initially a homogenous and isotropic distribution of matter has overtime coalesced into clusters of galaxies. Thus in considering this principle in looking out at the universe today we ensure the spatial volume being sampled is of a sufficiently large enough size when applied to the field of cosmology. The actual figure for a sufficiently large enough size is between 250-330 million light years.

Putting this all together I begin by defining a sphere whose diameter is around 300 million light years across. Selecting a point inside our universe at random we place the centre of our imaginary sphere at this randomly selected point. Next I count the number of galaxies inside the sphere and measure their orientations. I then repeat this procedure by again selecting another random point, placing the centre of the sphere at that point and counting the number of galaxies as well as their orientation. I then continuously repeat this process again and again for the entire observable universe.

If the homogenous part holds true then the distribution in the number of galaxies counted should produce a normal distribution. If the isotropic part holds true then a plot of all the orientations should produce an even distribution showing no favour to any alignment. If it is not an even distribution for a given region then we say that the region has “anisotropies”.

The quadrupole map from the Tegmark et al. (2003) cleaned map, presented in Galactic coordinates, after correcting for the kinetic quadrupole. The solid line is the ecliptic plane and the dashed line is the supergalactic plane. The directions of the equinoxes (EQX), dipole due to our motion through the Universe, north and south ecliptic poles (NEP and SEP) and north and south supergalactic poles (NSGP and SSGP) are shown. The multipole vectors are plotted as the solid red symbols for each map, ILC (circles), TOH (diamonds), and LILC (squares). The open symbols of the same shapes are for the normal vector for each map. The dotted line is the great circle connecting the two multipole vectors for this map. The minimum and maximum temperature locations in this multipole are shown as the white stars. The direction that maximises the angular momentum dispersion of any of the maps coincides with the respective normal vector as discussed in the text. [9] [10]

The word “anisotropy” is going to keep being repeated throughout all of my work. Primarily because that is what is actually being found. So when we talk about anisotropies we are talking about the orientation of matter. Specifically, I think in terms of orientation of the axis of a galaxy rotation. This in turn can be directly observed and measured in active galaxies by the orientation of their astrophysical jets. [8].

Now the primary reason that the standing cosmological principle that at large enough scales the spatial distribution of matter is both homogeneous and isotropic has become the accepted view is that when we look out into the night sky we have consistently seen the same picture over and over again. Namely a picture of galaxies containing billions of stars made up of the same atoms following the exact same laws of physics as we are subjected to here on Earth.

When first detected and measured by Penzias and Wilson the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation showed no variation thus validating and reenforcing the homogenous and isotropic assumption. However with more sensitive and accurate experiments like COBE, WMAP and Planck was there actual variation discovered.

When measured a fairly homogenous and isotropic distribution of galaxies was found, well at first. However, as more and more observations have been done and automated processes have allowed for greater and greater data collection this does not quite appear to be the case. This particularly dates back to the BOOMERang experiment in 2000 when the anisotropies on the microwave sky were first detected.

When the cosmic microwave background radiation was first discovered and then subsequently mapped these maps showed an even temperature distribution indicative of a universe that is mostly homogenous and isotropic.

It has only been in the last couple of decades that more accurate maps arising from more precise experimentation, such as WMAP and Planck, has there been any actual variation found. It has only been in the last couple of decades with the advancements in technology, experimentation and observation that we have managed to step into the golden age of precision cosmology.

The problem now for the homogenous and isotropic cosmological principle is that the evidence that this assumption is in fact wrong is mounting up on a near daily basis. I refer to the two examples I gave prior from this week alone as being a typical case in point.

Particular examples, that I have covered in previous work, include the Bootes Supervoid. The Bootes Supervoid is a spherical void of nothingness measuring over 330 million light years across. Given that a definition of “sufficiently large” is about 250 million light years then by this cosmological principle there should be around 2000 galaxies occupying the spherical volume of the Bootes Supervoid.

The Lambda-CDM model’s explanation, the standard model of cosmology, states that voids like soap bubbles coalesce over time. So from an initial homogenous mixture over time galaxies are drawn to one another into clusters and superclusters. Likewise regions filled with dark energy also coalesced together into forming larger and larger voids. [11]

Now there was a debate that given the size of the Bootes Supervoid the amount of time required for such a large void to form was far greater than the age of the universe, 13.8 billion years. But the consensus seems to be that there is no crisis in the Lambda-CDM model. [12]

Now if Supervoid’s like Bootes take time to form then what about the Eridanus Supervoid aka the Cold Spot on the Microwave Sky?

The Cold Spot area resides in the constellation Eridanus in the southern galactic hemisphere. The insets show the environment of this anomalous patch of the sky as mapped by Szapudi’s team using PS1 and WISE data and as observed in the cosmic microwave background temperature data taken by the Planck satellite. The angular diameter of the vast supervoid aligned with the Cold Spot, which exceeds 30 degrees, is marked by the white circles. Graphics by Gergő Kránicz. Image credit: ESA Planck Collaboration. [13]

We observe the Cold Spot both in WMAP and Planck. The conclusion is that this is a supervoid measuring around 1-billion light years across. Given the Lambda-CDM model’s explanation for the Bootes Supervoid then how did this form only 200,000 years after the Big Bang event itself.

I guess it’s not “statistically significant” and like the large scale anisotropies can be conveniently swept under the rug. Such a danger does it pose to the existing literature and the foundations upon which the vast majority of cosmology is based.

Then we have discovered structures like the Sloan Great Wall measuring 1-billion light years in length. Or the Coma Wall galactic filament measuring 750-million light years in length. But that great galactic arc measuring over 3 billion light years in length is yet another nail in the coffin of this homogenous and isotropic principle. [5]

But the greatest elephant in the room for the homogenous and isotropic principle comes with the large scale anisotropies identified on the microwave sky. These large scale anisotropies have been observed in both the WMAP and Planck data and hence the same result has been reproduced. Coupled to this is the work of Lior Shamir from late last year. He showed that these large scale anisotropies are related to the asymmetry of galactic spinward direction and thus most likely linked with the large scale rotation of the universe as a whole. [9] [15]

The actual high resolution map as published by the ESA Planck team with the actual large-scale anisotropies highlighted. [14]

Off course, a rotating universe to the vast majority of cosmologists makes no sense. Rotating with respect to what? Particularly, when your vision of everything is confined to this universe alone and all that exists and ever will be was contained inside the Big Bang itself. Well until I came along and invented, or rather discovered, the concept of a larger Superverse of which we are but a subset. The tale of that discovery being recorded in the making of my CPT-Symmetry film. Notice I do not mention the name Superverse before that date particularly in my original film.

So from my point of view a rotating universe makes sense because I can say with respect to a stationary observer within the Superverse.

My real contention with the homogenous and isotropic principle is that straight up the microwave sky nullifies this cosmological principle. The maps of the microwave sky have shown these large scale anisotropies and for the last two decades this evidence has been effectively swept under the carpet.

And for that I am truly grateful. Ok, I may not be able to get funding or position inside a university because of my position. That’s alright! Because a thousand years from now it will be my name people will speak and remember.

The reason I was so successful where all else have failed comes down to what I choice as being my cosmological principle. Namely I say fractal geometry is the cosmological principle. This is my basis and philosophical foundational cornerstone. Coupled with this I have the very foundation stone of all of Western civilisation backing me that shows the full might and splendour of this one single principle in full action. Go look at all my work and you’ll see.

Fractal geometry is the true cosmological principle.

So what am I meaning by this?

Well first I need to define what I mean by a fractal. To quote the Wikipedia, “In mathematics, a fractal is a subset of Euclidean space with a fractal dimension that strictly exceeds its topological dimension. Fractals appear the same at different scales, as illustrated in successive magnifications of the Mandelbrot set. Fractals exhibit similar patterns at increasingly smaller scales, a property called self-similarity, also known as expanding symmetry or unfolding symmetry”.

Animation based on the Mandelbrot Set which I feel communicates the ideas of self-similarity and scale invariance in a very minted sort of way. [16]

The key sentence I wish to concentrate upon is “Fractals exhibit similar patterns at increasingly smaller scales, a property called self-similarity.”. A self-similar object is exactly or approximately similar to a part of itself. In other words, the whole has the same shape as one or more of the parts. Many objects in the real world, such as coastlines or fern leaves, are statistically self-similar. Parts of them show the same statistical properties at many scales.

Scale invariance is an exact form of self-similarity where at any magnification there is a smaller piece of the object that is similar to the whole. For instance, a side of the Koch snowflake is both symmetrical and scale-invariant; it can be continually magnified 3x without changing shape.

Thus the foundation is laid such that I can formulate the underlying structure that forms my hypothesis about the Big Bang theory and the birth of the universe.

Knowing that an unknown gravitational singularity, as evident by Steven Hawking’s pHD, gave birth to our universe then by studying the birth of a known gravitational singularity; a black hole, we can infer its behaviour to a larger scale, by the law of scale-invariance, in order to describe the birth of our universe.

And that’s it! Period! So to repeat that:

Knowing that an unknown gravitational singularity, as evident by Steven Hawking’s pHD, gave birth to our universe then by studying the birth of a known gravitational singularity; a black hole, we can infer its behaviour to a larger scale, by the law of scale-invariance, in order to describe the birth of our universe.

Meaning by studying the dynamic pattern of how a black hole, which by General Relativity contains a gravitational singularity, is born inside our own universe then we can imagine this at a much larger scale. Namely at a scale that is sufficient to account for the mass of our entire universe.

And what exactly gives birth to a black hole? In one word! A hypernova!

But the subject of what exactly a hypernova is we will explore in the next episode of the Big Bang Hypernova Hypothesis podcast.

Until next time!

References: