by William Hamilton III

from AstroSciences Website



The prevailing theory called the Big Bang presumes the creation of the entire universe from ex nihilo, that is, "creation out of nothing”. A more formal statement by cosmologist is that the universe resulted from a vacuum fluctuation. There was no space, no time and no matter, yet we are led to believe that from this state of no-thing a special event occurred over 15 billion years ago. Though the Big Bang has become the prevailing paradigm, a challenge to its role as a dominant theory of the universe has been made and is known as the Quasi Steady State Cosmology (QSSC) proposed by scientists Fred Hoyle, Geoffrey Burbridge, and Jayant V. Narlikar.

The QSSC proposes the continuous creation of matter in space rather than a single event and proposes to account for observations that seem to strain the limits of the Big Bang model. Other proposed cosmologies suggest that our universe is just one in a chain of reproducing universes. That the substance of the universe seems to come from nowhere is a continuing mystery and is the edge where physics fumbles for answers.

Some recent correspondence hints that anomalous appearances and disappearances of matter have taken place without accountability. If verified, this could put a whole new spin on the creation process and suggest that either matter and energy can be created or there is a bridge to some other physical dimension that permits the transfer of matter and energy into our universe. This also bumps up against the edge of another mystery, the mystery and role of consciousness in the universe.

Matter creation:
According to Narlikar,

“The action principle tells us that matter creation is possible at a given spacetime point provided the ambient c-field satisfies the equality c=mp at that point. In normal circumstances, the background level of the c-field will be below this level. However, in the strong gravity obtaining in the neighborhood of compact massive objects the value of the field can be locally raised. This leads to creation of matter along with the creation of negative c-field energy. The latter also has negative stresses which have the effect of blowing the spacetime outwards (as in an inflationary model) with the result that the created matter is thrown out in an explosion. We shall refer to such pockets of creation as minibangs or mini-creation events.” (01)

In email exchanges physicist Robert Neil Boyd noted an anomalous phenomena in a vacuum chamber.

“That was our first thought, that the hydrogen was migrating through the walls of the containment chamber. But we were rapidly disabused of this notion by the sheer volume and persistence of the hydrogen density.
Regardless of how many times we ionized the chamber and swept the chamber clean, we still had the same amount of hydrogen we started with. And we could count how much hydrogen we had removed from the chamber. So it was obvious what was going on. Hydrogen was being created in the chamber. Our observations informed us that this process did not occur until a certain level of vacuum had been obtained. But from then on, it was hopeless to try to obtain our “perfect vacuum”. So we gave up and worked with what we had to work with.

• Perhaps it slips in some where your not able to detect, via
• the “pulling in” of multiple “sub atomic” substructures and it
• then “builds” on top of that which “collects” within the chamber.

Maybe. But it is appearing there in the vacuum chamber. I still can’t account for the sheer volume of it by such logical excursions as the above mentioned possibility. For us, the process was similar to trying to empty out a flowing stream of water by using a spoon. We kept taking water out, and more kept appearing. It doesn’t take too long under such circumstances to realize that the effort is futile.

• Until you confirm that absolutely no such things are happening, we
• can’t assume it has formed/created via the “ether” within
• the “chamber”

Your suggestion could be the answer. I don’t know. All I know right now is we couldn’t get rid of it as fast as it appeared in the chamber, when we reached a certain level of vacuum.

• Thus, I would not assume it has been created/formed from ether
• directly within the chamber.


A fair assumption. Is it testable?”

How does a universal ether of subquantic particles give rise to a structure such as Hydrogen? It is believed that virtual elementary particles are constantly created and destroyed in a continuous flux out of the vacuum, but Hydrogen is already an assembly of particles. Extreme vacuums exist in space where molecular Hydrogen also exists in abundance.

Answers to queries:

I have forwarded you statements on Hydrogen left in the containment vessel to a biological scientist who has discovered something amazing and he asked these questions which you may or may not be able to answer.


The link he gives is most interesting...

“Yes, the degree of vacuum is important and yes these results could be supportive (if not confirmatory) of a source, external to our Universe’s explicate matter. Yes, I am very interested in hearing more of it. Just being tantalized by the information you sent, I have a few questions/ideas to banter around.

Q1. Was the hydrogen obtained “normal” diatomic or in an ionized state? It sounds like diatomic gas but I assume nothing anymore.
Ans: Due to the methods we used, i.e., electrical discharges through the chamber, most of the hydrogen we got was in an initially ionized condition, later turning monatomic, then diatomic as it was collected, stored, and transported away from the fusion confinement volume.

Q2. Under the assumption that it was diatomic hydrogen, and knowing the utter frustrations involved with being unable to eliminate intervening variables, I wonder.... With the use of Faraday’s Law we can induce a magnetic moment, thereby force-exposing any diatomic hydrogen (usually only weakly magnetic), external to the test vessel, to a magnetic field, draw it away, and at least substantially eliminate the influx variable -- (where “it slips in some where you are not able to detect”) can be thrown out??
Ans: Yeah, we did that, in addition to ionizing whatever gases were in the chamber. We referred to that process as "sweeping the chamber". That was where the mystery started.

Q3. In the spirit of work that was conducted and reflected at this
Ans: Regarding this above article, it has been known for several years that Photons interact with each other. This Swedish experiment seems to produce some confirmation of Louis de Broglie’s original hypothesis concerning the existence of a material subquantum media with which the waves interact, and depend on. Einstein’s early expression, that there was no reason to postulate an aether wave media in his physics paradigm, apparently discouraged subsequent researches in this direction, in spite of the fact that Einstein later recanted his stance on the non-existence of an aether, saying that we actually required one.

Q4. Would there be a way to (or did the original researchers already conduct) an internal measurement of electromagnetic field changes or emissions (if any) over time as this phenomenon proceeded?”
Ans: Standard plasma diagnostics techniques are pretty accurate in these regards. But the instrumentation and other equipment required are most likely not something your average garage hobbyist will be able to afford

Paul Marmet explains, (2)

“ In papers published about a decade ago, the author and colleagues predicted the widespread presence of hydrogen in the molecular (H2) form in space (Marmet and Reber 1989; Marmet 1990a,b). Although hydrogen in the atomic form is easily detected through radioastronomy, the molecular form is difficult to detect. We showed that the presence of this missing mass would explain the anomalous rotational motion observed in galaxies, which is otherwise explained by exotic hypotheses, such as swarms of invisible brown or white dwarfs, or weird atomic particles called WIMPs or axions, and "quark nuggets."

We also showed that the presence of large amounts of the hard-to-detect molecular hydrogen in interstellar space could provide an alternative explanation to the Big Bang theory, by explaining the observed redshift as a result of the delayed propagation of light through space, caused by the collision of photons with interstellar matter.

The more commonly held view explains the observed shift in frequency of the spectral lines detected from distant galaxies as arising from a Doppler shift (a shift in the frequency of a wave caused by the relative motion of the emitting object and the observer). The downshift in the frequency, toward the red end of the spectrum, is taken to mean that distant galaxies are receding from us, thus implying an expanding universe.

Our prediction, based on a critique of many of the commonly held assumptions of cosmology, was the result of a serious study of the molecular structure of hydrogen and of the astronomical observation of atomic hydrogen in space. However, the astrophysicists preferred to ignore H2, and instead to hypothesize the existence of weird objects.”

Could H2 be assembling in space by the creation process? This would throw a whole new light on our universe.

Marmet goes on to say,

“Using the European Space Agency's Infrared Space Observatory, E. A. Valentijn and P. P. van der Werf recently detected huge amounts of molecular hydrogen (H2) in NGC 891 (click image right), an edge-on galaxy 30 million light-years away in Andromeda (Valentijn and van der Werf 1999). In their report, published in September 1999, they state that their result "matches well, the mass required to solve the problem of the missing mass of spiral galaxies."

They conclude that the galaxy contains 5 to 15 times more molecular than atomic hydrogen. [For a second Internet news story on this discovery click here.]

It is generally accepted that atomic hydrogen is by far the most abundant particle in the universe. It is also well established that about 10 times as much molecular hydrogen as atomic hydrogen solves the missing mass problem. Finally, Valentijn adds:

"The halo culture that has grown up around the dark matter problem might never have arisen if the ISO results had been known earlier."


Two months after the publication of this discovery, in a piece published in Nature, Nov. 25, 1999, P. Richter, et al. reported the discovery of the absorption lines of molecular hydrogen in a high-velocity cloud of the Milky Way halo (Richter et al. 1999).”

In 1997 scientists created matter from light.

“A team of 20 physicists from four institutions has created particles of matter from ordinary light for the first time. The experiment was carried out at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) by scientists and students from the University of Rochester, Princeton University, the University of Tennessee, and Stanford. The team reported the work in the 1 September issue of Physical Review Letters. (03)

The implications of a creation process are such that we might envision a future science where we make matter to order by replicating the universe’s creation process.

Since we know that consciousness plays a significant role in quantum processes, could it be possible for us to create matter out of the void using our minds alone? The ancients believed that it was not matter that produced mind, but mind that produced matter.