THE GRAND LARCENY AND DELUSION OF PARTICLE PHYSICS Domi Vale Nov. 2025 Strategic Studies & Policy Physics as a discipline has been conquered by a cabal of cult like particle physicists, who reject basic laws of physics that have created the atomic bomb and microchip, and have instead imagined a surreal world that has no basis in mathematics or basic laboratory science. Particle physicists have not only collected hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money to fabricate an imaginary and absurd world of particle physics, but have begun to replace observational astrophysics with their fraudulent canon. Ideas like the CERN hadron collider, quantum computers, and mechanical nuclear fusion are all based on an imaginary and absurd canon. In Hawking's (2001) book Universe in a Nutshell, Hawking covertly points out the gross errors and absurdities of particle physics and explains he could not publically expose this cabal and still maintain his position at Cambridge, censored like Soviet scientists by the EU establishment and their U.S. partners. It must be understood that Hawking mathematically conceptualized and proved the idea of the big bang singularity as a geometric function of time (1970) and has been academically suppressed and marginalized to prevent exposure of the particle physicists' conspiracy and monopoly. The corruption of the field has become politically established. This paper will expose the gross absurdities of particle physics since WWII and demonstrate how this ideological canon is conquering physics and astronomy, syphoning taxpayer funds, and stagnating technological development. Thus far this year, the Trump administration has spent $700,000,000 in taxpayer funds to the rebranded "quantum information science," which is a gross abuse of spending for incredibly deceptive and fraudulent research. Particle physics has conquered material science and chemistry such that US academics are being paid $800,000 each for pseudoscientific research into "attochemistry" or "quantum speed" or "vortex quantum states" and other nonsensical chemistry simulations which baselessly promise "emergent technology" and are funded through the DOE and NSF. Nonsense "neutrino" DUNE program costs taxpayers $5 billion dollars. Particle physicists in the US are paid more in grant funding per year than G15 public officials at top positions in the government. Particle physics has been coordinated as a massive conspiracy to defraud the United States. The Trump administration must not only demonstrate austerity and cut this wasteful spending, but also have DOJ investigate to what degree US institutions have been engaging in criminal grand larceny. I. Hawking's (2001) book is filled with images that are standard concepts of particle physics and it is clear the unusuality and absurdity of the schematics. Hawking (2001) makes it clear that a) time is a property dependent on gravity and the velocity of light, thus time may have different rates depending on gravity and velocity, and technically black holes would stop time since black holes stop light, and b) that nothing can by definition exist before the big bang. This is as surreal as cosmology gets observationally, but Hawking (1974) was trying to push the theoretical envelope and suppliment Einstein's theories, using the properties of black holes such as mass, spin, charge to deduce black hole temperature to probe what is geometrically beyond a black hole's horizon. Particle physicists take Hawking's formulas, mischaracterize them, and make the universe some surreal, psychadelic fantasy scape. Physics is realistic in measurements such as distance, time, mass, velocity, and energy, and straight forward in how this can be conceptualized in rare and complex astronomical events. The particle physicists have incredulous ideas of multiverses and time dimensions that have no basis in mathematics, nor observation, and are pure imaginary conjecture almost as if crafted while taking hallucinogenic drugs. Hawking (2001) points out the corruption of this regime is so established, there is no public dissent exposing how particle physics foundations not only are not mathematically based but can be blatantly disproven with basic experiments. Particle physics is not merely uncertain or flimsy concepts that keep stacking like a house of cards, but the foundational concepts are invented notions that grow in canon to a multitude of erratic, conflicting, and nonsensical ideas. Hawking enjoyed entertaining fictional concepts to demonstrate and reinforce why he is confident in modern cosmological models, and explains the Academy of Geneva, Cambridge, Caltech, and MIT failed to appreciate and comprehend the scientific falacies and instead marketted the fictions as fact. It must be stated that Hawking was able to dispute every propasition asserted by particle physicists and had a mastery of relativity and tensor geometry that had no peer. Hawking was able to conceptualize and calculate any and all properties of theories of gravitation and thus spent most of his career refuting bad practice than on development of novelty. Hawking (2001)'s work itself was often beyond the comprehension of cosmologists and many of his ideas were not understood and appreciated except by Russian physicists. How would a young graduate student with no reputation convince Russian cosmologists to abandon the idea of a universe that starts and stops and starts again like a revolution, except through the accredation of proof? Hawking (2001, 2018) implied Russian physicists could never collaborate with Europeans because Russian scientists were trapped beyond the wall of the iron curtain. Hawking used a collision of black holes and how the new horizon was greater than the sum of the pair almost as a lament for the loss of science without collaboration. Important to understand the Cold War's affect on physics and how the lack of collaboration and proper checks and balances of the technological powers allowed incredulity and fallacy to overtake the discipline in Europe. Hawking may have felt physics was stuck inside a black hole and he was one particle without pair who escaped to infinity. Hawking maintained his criticism and refutation of quantum theory despite the professional alienation, and never submitted to the indoctrination of this anti-science regime. Hawking must be remembered not only as the scientist who had a command and mastery of general relativity (that even Einstein the architect could not compare) but additionally for how his integrity for scientific ethics stood unimpeachably resolute in the face of incalculable pressure. II. Matter in the universe is either light photons or elements. Elements are distinct by their atoms. Elementary particles that comprise the atom are electrons, protons, and neutrons at a negative, positive, and neutral electric charge. This is the extent of particle physics phenomena. The idea of a quark is solely theoretical, used to categorize an elementary particle moments after the big bang before an elementary particle was assigned a charge, and given that particles can change charge, the idea of a quark as the blank slate of an elementary particle is useful (such that quark plus negative is an electron, quark plus positive is a proton), noting that quarks only existed for a moment during the big bang and now only electrons, protons, and neutrons exist in the universe. All other particle categorization are pure conjecture and CERN is lying that their machines prove all these other particles exist. We can see that they 1) conjured these ideas without any basis in math or physics, then 2) use the hadron collider to claim they have proof. All the physics behind computing, nuclear energy and weapons, and everything from tvs to surveillence satellites comes from physics established before WWII and all of the physics advances we have made have been harnessing these basic concepts. In cosmology, we have yet to understand why the universe expands, why galaxies can stay in formation, or how elements such as gold and uranium form in a supernova. Our concepts of physics have changed very little: after general relativity and all the predictions of the big bang and black holes, all physics discoveries are either observing phenomena in outer space, or using pre-WWII quantum mechanics and electromagnetic theory to push the envelope of what types of instruments we can build. The scientific framework has not changed since WWII and all our developments have been in utilizing these frameworks. Particle physics and CERN are complete nonsense similar to medieval alchemy (particle physics claim that neutrino particles can turn lead into gold), and investing in an idea like quantum computing is like chasing unicorns. III. Electromagnetism, classic and modern physics covers electromagnetic radiation, magnetism, light photons and electron behaviors that are the basis for complex instrumentation today. Quantum mechanics such as the exclusion principle and uncertainty principle may predict the behavior of light photons and electrons to a likelihood and is useful in designing computers and other equipment. Quantum mechanics is a limited framework, and most quantum mechanics innovations are proprietary patents in labs such as Nvidia and AMD conducted through experimenting and production. The academic quantum mechanics since WWII is entirely fabricated. Here is a short list of the extremely incompetant frameworks in particle physics that became the basis for the expansive nonsense canon marketted today-- vaccuum energy; dualities; entanglement; bosons, fermions, axions, gluons, neutrinos, supergravity, negative time, superstates, cosmic strings, branes-- It is important to note the language is crafted to sound plausible. Hawking (2001) charts where these notions come from and how the particle theories evolved over time. Wormholes were introduced as a concept to prove how abstract math can state certain geometric possibilities, but this may have no basis in reality; and yet particle physicists like Kip Thorne ignored the point made and postulated wormholes as a real phenomena, as well as the warping of time and multidimensions. Hawking (2001) pointed out the wormhole idea was just a point made about fallacies of mathematics, and showed wormholes and other fantasms are actually physically impossible in physics. For a wormhole or time warping to exist, matter in the universe would have to be negative, meaning wormholes may be possible if matter in the universe did not exist. Quantum theorists did not accept that negative time or negative matter means there is no time nor no matter, and instead asserted negatives mean the universe is running in reverse. Kip Thorne and Richard Feynman of Caltech fancied themselves real trailblazers in cosmology and failed to grasp basic principles of gravitational law. Lab experiments working with hydrogen can show a phenomena of positive and negative particles popping in and out of space, the lamb shift, and this has 0 affect on technology, and this is as far as quantum mechanics goes into the surreal. This particle, antiparticle concept may be significant around black hole phenomena, and Hawking's work in the 1970s was trying to understand black hole geometry and what causes its gravitational effects. Hawking's work has become a muse for pseudoscientific fantasms by physicists who want to be celebrities and they cannot even understand his or Einstein's work. Caltech and MIT particle theorists such as Brian Greene, Michio Kaku, and Sean Carroll are savants of pseudoscience and have made millions with books and tv appearances preaching the canon of quantum conjecture. The understanding here is that quantum physics after Heisenberg's uncertainty and Pauli's exclusion (1930s), CERN particle physics, string theory, and this contingent quantum information theory is imaginary and financially fraudulent. All of our instrumentation and technological development of the static age 1950s and computer age 2000s has come from harnessing photons, electrons, and atoms, and that contemporary technological innovations in instrumentation will occur through strategic and economic testing and fabrication, not fantastic promises of tech revolutions. IV. To reiterate, particle physicists bastardize Hawking's theoretical work into the frankenstein quantum gravity theories & get billions of dollars in taxpayer funding for it. We have limited knowledge of, for example, the sun's behavior and how solar radiation may affect circuitry in satellites, but we can understand what materials satellites can be made of to limit solar interference or damage to systems. The CERN hadron collider promises insights into the atoms of elements (on the periodic table) or photons (which is light on the electromagnetic spectrum), which may assist satellite development, but CERN has supplied civilization with 0 insights. All modern technological development occurs through testing results, again, the concepts have not been modified or supplemented since WWII. It is concerning that particle physics' conquest into chemistry may suffocate developements in material science that requires chemistry, atomic, and electromagnetic physics, such as in development of fuels, metals, magnets, wires, lenses, fabrics etc of which breakthroughs vastly shape our technological advancements such as in national defense, infrastructure, and finance. Physics can be separate into studies of 1), gravity, 2) electrictity and magnetism, and 3) nuclear physics, throughly covering all the forces in the universe. Particle physics stated agenda is to unify these theories, and so the quantum canon is a piecemeal conjecture trying to cannibalize disciplines into a "grand unified theory." It is unclear to what degree the EU and US academic institutions became aware of particle physics' deception and whether these persons have been consciously engaging in taxpayer funding fraud. Particle physicists may be making groundbreaking discoveries in orchestrating financial crime. V. Underground neutrino detectors have coordinated a fraudulent result after the 1987 supernova was observed optically with telescopes. The neutrino detectors did not report their findings until prompted and claimed they were not looking at their detectors while the supernova occured. Compare with the LIGO and Virgo gravity wave detectors that reported their separate findings immediately of a black hole merger in 2015 and were coorborated by several optical observatories. It is clear light propagates through the universe and can reach our instruments and gravity too has a propagation we can observe. Neutrons exist, but neutrinos are a fabricated concept crafted from particle theorists and are used to handwave an explanation of supernova element creation (such that neutrinos convert iron to platinum in a strange alchemy) rather than have scientists investigate through what processes energy may create exotic elements in a supernova burst (that thus lead to our solar system's formation). The DUNE project has cost the taxpayers $5 billion in development and will cost many hundreds of millions to pay scientists to "pour over" the alleged collected data. Cosmologists and electromagnetic engineers should not have their disciplines called into question based on the ability of particle physicists to commit fraud, and the proof is in the production, however this deceit does call into question to what degree the U.S. taxpayer should finance science on such as scale that has no relevancy to life quality and only serves as socialist subsidies to affluent academics. Academics are collecting millions each over the course of their careers from public funding meanwhile there is a talent shortage in chemical, hardware and computer systems engineering. Perhaps stopping grand public subsidies on irrelevant sciences will then shepherd engineers into the private sector where skills are paid based on relevancy and return. Fantastic and emergent promises such as mRNA vaccines and AI have thus syphoned funding from continuing improving current cancer treatments and hardware innovations in electromagnetic devices. The pattern exhibitted is the lure of fantastic quick fixes to societal challenges and the massive reallocation of taxpayer wealth into institutions creating financial bubbles with no surplus gains, meaning a vast waste of time and money that stagnates economic growth. Now "quantum information" theory is promising grand breakthroughs in chemistry and material sciences meanwhile material science has been stagnated through talent shortage for years. Many cutting edge scientific designs can be fabricated, permitting only there were developments in material science. Particle physics and the colonization of engineering creating talent scarcity is a threat to U.S. competitiveness. VI. Lab experiments yield consistent results and technologists have innovated technological developments based on previous experiments and likelihoods of successful designs. In fact, quantum mechanics discipline is disaggregated in the trade secrets of companies who patent technologies. Technologists can harness the atom, the electron, and the photon, however the mechanical processes cannot be observed and thus models of the "black box" such as the path of a photon or electron cannot be determined precisely only probablistically. Meaning, we know what works and what works consistently, however we are not 100% certain why it works. Particle physics tries to explain the path of a photon or electron, that we know may have a random outcome in a limited set such like a dice roll, however particle physics doctrine like Feynman's "infinite histories" make a wild and useless claim that cannot be proven and can be refuted (since time does not run backwards), yet to which he won a Nobel prize. Electrons and photons have spin and a trajectory and we can manipulate their path with electricity and magnetism and build microchips and satellites, although we cannot see what the path looks like and anyone's guess is as good as Feynman's. This is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Particle physicists strangely think of the uncertainty principle, which is an adjustment for errors, as a law of the universe. So instead of the error margin where we can either know speed or position but not both, believers claim this is a property we cannot break. It is bizarre to make an uncertainty a constraint or parameter. It would be like saying "if we know more than 90% we are breeching the laws of the universe." It is bizarre how the few quantum mechanical discoveries have become dogma. It must be understood that quantum mechanics is a pamplet compared to the study of electricity and magnetism that can fill a textbook, and experimentation yields the mathematical equations. "Quantum mechanics" was corrupted after 1930, when particle physics' pseudoscientific expansion colonized the emergent field of quantum mechanics then came after electricity and magnetism. It is concerning knowing the amount of talent that may be lost to industry and invention if they are taught this absurd and fake doctrine. Cosmology is now being challenged by this cancerous particle physics cannon, and chemistry is next in line for reunification. The Trump administration and its promises to cut the size and scope of government must take this particle physics cannibalization to task and radiate it into remission like the tumor on American innovation it is. VII. Particle physics can be rebuked at its initial stage when the quark was introduced. As a joke, I should be able to introduce a concept to challenge the idea of a quark, and claim a liquid substance called a latras gives an electron a negative charge, and a substance called a matras gives a proton its positive charge, and that a neutron has a neutral charge because it is comprised of both the latras and matras which cancel out the charges. Since this theory 1) has no basis, 2) cannot be proven, 3) is unnecessary for calculation, and 4) yet does not interfere with calculations, then thus it has the same legitimacy as the idea of a quark. I could keep building on this theory, such to then postulate things that conflict with universal physics laws, silence any critics with social exclusion, and induct enough people to corroborate the legitimacy of this theory. We can then convince governments to spend money on machines that we can itemize as $10,000,000,000 but really cost $100,000,000, and the rest of the money I can divide up amongst my fellow conspirators at the DUNE facility or CERN. Regarding LIGO, LIGO should be a very simplistic design. Lazer beams are shot repeatedly at a long distance and their time of interception is recorded, and should all hit a surface at the same time interval, distance crossed at the speed of light. If a gravity wave happens to pass through our planet, the length of spacetime should increase and the time of a lazer's trajectory would be slightly delayed or increased due to an increase in distance traveled. We could then take the time difference we recorded, and if we have the mass of the gravity wave event or its distance, we can use the wave function to estimate this wave's waveform or magnitude then can corroborate the length expansion and confirm the phenomena. This does not require any more sophisticated sounding machinery, and it is questionable if the money for LIGO was itemized with unnecessary costs as a way to launder money from the U.S. taxpayer, such that a mechanic bills you $1,300 for a list of fixes when all they actually replaced was a $30 alternator belt. VIII. Hawking's (2010) book Grand Design pointed out Feynman's quote saying the double slit experiment "contains all the mystery of quantum mechanics" and this experiment was evidently the catalyst for the quantum mechanics corruption. Light has a black box on its trajectory and we have a difficult time conceptualizing this geometrically or spatially. The double slit experiment counterintuitively showed that light shot through a small space has a random range where it will land on a surface. We thought it would be a straight line, consistent bullet on target. What we get is several positions in a range at random. Shrodinger did the math that allows a precise prediction of this effect and its probabilities, thus we have been able to make predictions. Shrodinger's math was genius, but like Russel Crowe in the film, "A Beautiful Mind," Shrodinger was a little wacky, and his conceptualization was off beat and surreal. The problem here is: we have the excellent mathematical formulas but how we spatially comprehend these concepts may differ or may even be wrong. Shrodinger's wild interpretation of his wave function (Shrodinger's cat) set particle physics on a path to absurd concepts, thinking if Shrodinger's math was correct, he then has the authority on the conceptualization. Shrodinger's cat thought experiment was a morbid and elaborate way to essentially flip a coin. The notion that 1 photon of a near-negligable energy does not have the same path outcome of a propagation of billions of photons in a non-negligable energy (where photons saturate the wall), the single photon only landed in 1 spot on the wall in a random outcome, lead German physicists to surreally believe that the photon must also be in all the expected landing places invisibly, known as superposition, and now reality and consciousness and God is in question. Alternatively, we can assume 1 photon exhibits this random behavior and photons as a collective exhibit expected saturation behavior. We need to understand the math is the math, but how we conceptualize its meaning may differ. Imagination helps us conjure ideas to then test mathematics formula, but the point made is that the math rules the game, not the imagination. Shrodinger's surreal interpretation of a cat both dead and alive as a model of a photon's trajectory lead particle physics to have a derealization disorder when approaching phenomena, to the point of doubting and rewriting reality to fit a concept, rather than sticking to the mathematical frameworks backed by observational evidence that we know are correct if they predict with accuracy. Meaning, particle physics theorized ideas based on Shrodinger's cat conceptualization, not Shrodinger's wave function. Thus we have the surreal world of entanglement or superposition that particle physicists then run into brick walls in their math and accept these constructs anyway. The purpose of physics is to build technology. We may have a philosophical interest to study the universe, but pragmatically our purposes are development. And our physics must be precise or we fail to produce. It is tragic to see Hawking (2001, 2010, 2018) repeatedly appealing that science must be in touch with reality and particle physicists' derealization disorder and fallacious math is a threat to the discipline. IX. I should reiterate all matter in the universe is made up of the elements on the periodic table, and we can include the subatomic particles, electrons, protons, and neutrons that make up the atoms of those elements. All other matter such as what we are made of or what we make, combine these elements in some combination. Light, or a photon, is hydrogen or heat from other elements. The speed of light is constant and limited, mass of objects creates gravity curves in the universe, time has a forward direction, atoms can be manipulated to create magnetic fields, forces, and energy. The universe is filled with complex phenomena we try to analyse to understand the universe's properties and harness the universe's powers. We have limits to what we can understand and thus uncertainty but our technological development is evidence of the success of the scientific enterprise. Physicists study the universe's laws and objects in cosmology, nuclear physicists study the atoms and elements, electromagnetism studies light and subatomic particles, and particle physicists created their own imaginary doctrine and are defrauding governments in a coordinated operations. Studies have shown that ideology can cause a seemingly bright person to believe in false things-- such the mind confirms what it wants to believe to prevent discomfort-- for example liberal mathematicians have been prone to make errors in basic math problems to confirm efficacy in gun control. Particle physics and contemporary quantum mechanics is a doctrine that inducts bright minds and has them breaking their own mathematical reason to confirm the doctrine. We must 1) stop all questionable funding, 2) prosecute individuals for commiting larceny, 3) change standards in textbooks to prevent junk science indoctrination. "US govt removes string theory from college textbooks calling it science fiction." We can preserve our prestige and reputation and not cause mass mistrust in science in the general public, knowing however how serious this circumstance is and how robust our actions must be. We can suspect particle physics has been a conspiracy to limit U.S.' future technological prowess and military power. We can also believe Europeans arejealous of U.S. vast innovative impact on physics and wanted a discipline where they make the mark so they constructed one. X. Double slit experiment (1927) where 1 single photon's path shocks the senses with its outcome, the single photon does not go in a straight trajectory but goes to any 1 position in a range, at an apparent accute angle from the point of entry. (We can be betting on the photon outcomes' final position and that it would be more exciting than horse races.) Feynman was given a noble prize in the 1940s for his ridiculous interpretation of the double slit experiment such that a particle that starts in two places may wind up in any one of 10 places, to which Fehnman said there is "infinite histories" of that projectile's trajectory (opposed to maybe 1 per outcome) as if the noble committee was rewarding a physics experiment's proof of a derealized world philosophy, such that there is no objective reality, etc. It started with the German reaction to the experiment, such that Germans regarded it as a profound revelation into the lnature of nature, reality, and God, (rather than a physical property of a single photon) & postulated that we cannot predict the photon path outcome because nature has no certainty as nature itself has not been determined yet. This may shock the conscious and induct a person into a dogma like Marxism does, and induct others as they socially prove their brain is genius if they can accept a profound notion. I find it hard to believe that the universe is so orderly but that the vital components of the universe atoms, photons, would be crapshoots. (Germans thought god must not be real to allow such chaos.) We do not have to accept the interpretation nor dialogue of 1930s Germans despite how good their physics work has been. We do not have to treat their feedback of results as the laws or maths themselves and need to have our own views of scientific results. These Germans such as Einstein, Bohr, Shrodinger, etc may have been studying physics to find nature's deep philosophical meanings, like a crystal ball, but we are trying to build technologies not find spiritual answers. The wave function is useful, it may have taken observation of 1 photon's path observed multiple times to find a light wave's behavior; we understand light has a spherical propagation at measureable energies, perhaps this probalistic outcome is a property of said effect in 1 photon; we have not seen the double slit experiment in a near vaccum space environment to eliminate atmospheric or gravitational interference or to see if our result differs to any degree. We have not seen credible attempts with electrons with various mass. 1) We must accept we will not be able to understand the universe as if we ourselves engineered it and thus not understand every causal detail. 2) We want to reduce uncertainty not accept it as a fixed parameter. We may find ourselves with a need to decrease uncertainty and need other means to find vital measurements thus can commission a revisitation of the wave function or uncertainty principle. To reiterate a very important point, there is no monopoly on the conceptualization or realization of a physics result, and this dependency on authority of interpretation has been a catalyst for indoctrination in a pseudoscientific, metaphysical organized fraud campaign challenging the legitimacy of scientific claim, stagnating the discipline's advancement, and directly threatening the national security of the United States. XI. There is no strong and weak nuclear force. This is an arbitrary separation that is only asserted if someone finds electromagnetic theory to be invalid because working consistently without fail is not exciting enough and we need to trip ourselves out. Quantum mechanics enter stage left. There exists the atom and its properties such as radiation and fusion and technological fission of the atom. We can give the activity of electrons, protons, and neutrons in the atom a force if it helps us understand how these components form an atom, same force we assume gives magnets magnetism. What we do not need to do is accept a notion electromagnetism as a framework is wrong and needs any quantum theory modifications or replacement. If looks like more fallacious math inconsistent at low and high energy levels in quantum conjecture lead to the abritrary segregation of the nuclear force. Accept the idea all we need of an electron is mass, charge, and momentum and we can accept the energy of an atom based on electron density or amount of electrons. The the loss or gain of energy is through radiation which can decrease energy or magnetism which can increase it, and that an electron can never be at 0 velocity and thus has a constant to where an atom can never be 0 energy (and also exist). We must abandon Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and abandon the idea we even need to know the precise position of an electron within the atom when we can measure the energy and know the mass. We need to have a separation of "consciousness" from physics; it is an absolute scandal we invalidate values if we can define them, this idea 'conscious awareness' affects physics properties is lunacy. We must also accept the universe is not 'making it up as it goes along like' such 'the rules of the universe are not yet written' at the quantum level. These theorists are the ones making it up as they go along. Assume electron degeneracy pressure or the fact an electron in existence can't take up the same space as an electron also in existence and density requires expansion of space to accomidate electrons, and using principle of volume space optimization we see in spheres, a virtual diameter from nucleus increases as energy increases as necessary but we do not need a precise schematic. We need to approach physics theory with efficiency and jettison dead weight. XII. Relativity predicts a singularity where temperature, density, and curvature is infinite. This concept should awe the self. Of course quantum mechanics believe this makes Einsten wrong and thus want to fix what wasn't broken. Hawking (2010) believes this is the singularity from which the universe initiated. Quantum theorists also assume the universe expanded faster than light speed, which there is no proof only guesswork, and that the universe went from 0 to billions of light years wide in a fraction of a second. We have no reason to assume light has ever traveled faster than we see it travel now. Jettison assumption. We can assume the universe must have been initially smaller than the universe we see today because the universe needed time to radiate and thus cool or there would be hotter radiation permeating space particularly on the perimeter. Hawking (2010) believes the image of the CMBR has been falsified to (in the least) add temperature fluctuations to falsely prove quantum theories and that NASA has fradulent observations relating to temperature of the universe. The temperature of their inflation model as they theorized should be 100% uniform and COBE and WMAP are cooking the books. But their inflation model is probably also wrong. NASA scientists have been lying about data to expediently prove cosmological evolution theories, such as the first galaxies form due to variance of density in the early universe radiation burst. Hawking (2010) makes a striking assertion that if there was density in the early universe then those dense patches would have a slower rate of expansion than other patches due to how powerful gravity was it would make a distinct impression and slow expansion. This is the entire idea of how gravity affects expansion that cosmologists ignore to satisfy their understanding. Not only would the universe be expanding at various rates, but NASA's cited temperature variance would have very little affect on gravity to form galaxies. To reiterate, density would cause the universe's expansion to be nonuniform and this temperature flux would not have much persuation on galaxy formation. Meaning, the theory is wrong in two points scientifically, although the idea brings us comfort and closure and we cling to it like our bible. XIII. The cosmological model of the universe is conceptually clever but observationally bullsh*t. Brace yourselves for the paradigm bomb: there is no CMBR, atleast we cannot prove it because what we will be getting is microwaves permeating from all bodies in the universe that would require sensitive measurements to reduce noise and isolate unknown sources. Would radiation from the big bang mean a saturation of microwaves that give interstellar space an uniform energy when we also assume this space to be a near-0 energy vaccuum? Cosmologists think they're smart with this clever model, but if we were to see the inflationary epoch we would see galaxies before they were formed or in process of forming. We would see a lot of phenomena in formation. But we do not; we just see galaxies in a complete and stationary form. We would probably see superimposed images. We actually cannot see backward in time, only that the images we see are from a long time ago, like an old photo is seeing backward in time. We see solid objects and at a time delay, some delays are billions of years long. Did this idea of light's time delay make scientists believe we could look back in time, and can look back in time to the big bang epoch? Can we actually see the big bang radiation? If we could out instruments may not be precise enough. We more likely are the big bang and the big bang has no signiture in space we can witness. The universe is not an expanding cone. Isotropy and homogeny is a geometrically more complex parameter. This simplified model thinks it is very clever, and scientists will say we just do not understand it. Both Hawking and I can wrap our head around it and we think it is wrong. It is a concept that we do not have to accept just because it is clever or because we can wrap our head around it or because the real geometry of the universe is much harder to grasp. People may feel obligated to accept this idea socially to not feel intellectually insufficient. The theory has evident problems and we are suspicious of these results. Our next NASA survey of the CMBR will be email subpoenas and we will know for sure if the CMBR is evidence of cosmic inflation or evidence of a committed felony. We must accept there are things we know we do not know. We must beware of the known unknowns and of scientific coercion. Who would have thought pointing telescopes at the sky and revealing the secrets of nature for money would end up an organized crime racket? Another probably fraudulent game changer, was the study by Ryle at Cambridge (where else) where faint radio signals disproved the static state universe theory, such to show the universe differs in density given time, however you may say that a radio signal's lower energy luminosity could be due to apparent brightness or distance, so you'd have to assume the luminosities are nearly the same for the study to be true (which may not be the case). This study was the smoking gun scientists wanted desperately to prove at the time, and thus sample may have been selective, to then open up the field for more discovery thus more funding. The point is the tendency for studies to confirm models through deception. We have a fake doctrine of quantum theory, and we also have a fabricated and oversimplified model of the universe's inflation. Who would have thought scientists would believe constructed canon and also lie about data then be so self-satisfied and scoff at lesser intellects who cling to the absurdities of religion? Physics has been in a great depression and we have a lot of work to do.