Quantum Cosmology

Cosmological Bounces and Bouncing Cosmologies: https://bouncingcosmology.com/index.html

LINK to Mike McCulloch's blog relating to Quantised Inertia.

The title of the page suggests the holy grail of physics: a theory that reconciles quantum mechanics and general relativity. Before getting too deeply into that however, let's start with the basics:

The above image is copied from the Wikipedia article describing the Standard Model of Particle Physics.

Here is a different depiction with the same information from the same source:

Finally, there is this table:

What stimulated my interest again in cosmology and quantum mechanics was Julian Barbour's book "The End of Time" in which he argues that time doesn't exist. All that does exists are configurations of the universe which individuals experience as a series of successive NOWs. This experience of successive instants of time generates the illusion of time. All these instants of time or NOWs however, exist in the eternal present; our experience of them represents a path within the totality of these configurations. It is only one of an infinite many paths that we could have followed. However, most paths are not likely to be followed but a few are and these represent bifurcations, points in our lives when we could have easily chosen B instead of A. It is these probable paths that we can explore following physical death when our consciousness is no longer focused on the physical plane. We still experience the instants of time on the astral plane but the energy levels are too high for sustained experience there and so our focus returns to the life just lived but this time with more flexibility, objectivity and intensity. Our experiences in the afterlife are not mediated by a physical body but instead by an astral body and so the NOWs flash by at a faster rate than before and with far greater intensity for better (the heaven state) or worse (the hell state). Experiences representing 100 years of life might take place in only a single year as viewed from the perspective of earthly existence.

Getting back to cosmology, Barbour's point is that the Universe does not exist in space. It is space. The totality of possible configurations is all that there is. This totality doesn't evolve over time. Each configuration can be conceptualised as a point and we move from one point to another in the sense that our experience of the NOW changes focus from one point to another. Newton believed in absolute space and time. Einstein proposed that space and time are intimately connected as space-time but he still clung to the notions of space and time. Both Newton's and Einstein's cosmologies are termed "classical". For both of them, time was something real and so it has remained for physicists up to the present day. As Barbour was not an academic (he made his living by translating articles from Russian to English), he had no need to publish scientifically acceptable papers that would consolidate his reputation in the scientific community. At the same time, he had completed a Ph.D. in the area of general relativity and was up-to-date with what was happening in quantum mechanics and cosmology. Most physicists don't have the "time" to question something as fundamental as time. It's easier to just keep assuming its existence.