Assumptions: The universe is infinite both spatially and in energy content. In a universe infinite in energy, is there any reason to believe our big bang is not just a common ordinary big bang? With infinite energy to work with why not an infinite number of such bangs present now throughout the potentially infinite Universe.Yes, to the extent that critical density and the cosmological constant are now used to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...l_density.html

Critical density is the average density of the energy content of a flat universe, i.e. when vacuum energy and matter energy are in balance with each other.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo..._constant.html
If you mean why, "In order to accomplish this cycle the EEP must have some characteristics that set it apart for anything we can actually find and study", it is because there is no explanation of what caused the big bang.

If you mean why, "If we limit our description to characteristics necessary to accomplish the task, and avoid unnecessary description and characteristics, the required EEP will be a simple 'thing'", it is because if we can explain the physics need without extra dimension, that would be better.

If you mean why, "Try to be logical and rational, and evaluate the EEP from a detached perspective, and you should agree that at the instant of the big bang, the particle would be in its most excited state, and the interactions between EEPs that are possible will begin very slowly because of these highly excited and rapidly expanding circumstances", it is because under extreme pressure, particles as we know them demonstrate an increase in thermal radiation, heat, and it is equated to "excitement" in my description of the EEP.In the Plank regime, the energy is represented as permeating space, and virtual particles are proposed to transmit or move energy from place to place. The EEP, having mass and being indestructible does not come in and out of existence, and becomes a GR entity having mass and momentum.You mean the expansion? The standard cosmology today, the Big Bang with Inflation, goes as far back in time as the instant after the big bang, and describes the total content of the ‘known’ universe it that instant as being smaller than a pinhead, and hotter that Hades. In the second instant there was exponential expansion when the universe inflated 500,000,000,000 times in size, establishing an isotropic and homogeneous domain within which and from which the known universe evolved.

http://research.amnh.org/~tyson/essa...yEverTold.html

Also from the above link,” When the universe was a piping-hot 10^30 degrees and a youthful 10^-43 seconds old" Free of the bonds and forces that are characteristic of atomics and nuclear physics, i.e. the forces that bind the nucleolus of the atom together, and contain electrons to the various rings around the nucleolus, as well as free from physics of the sub-nuclear particles, quarks in particular, since I propose all of the above are composed of the smaller EEP.10^-43 seconds or so.
Space is filled with energy, and the energy permeating space takes one of two forms; matter energy or vacuum energy. The two together equal total energy. The values assigned to matter energy (ME) and vacuum energy (VE) are directly related to each other, i.e. they both increase or decrease together.

"Matter energy" is based on E=mc^2, i.e. matter and energy are proportional to the relationship where the energy contained in matter is equal to the mass of the matter times the speed of light squared. Clearly there is a large amount of energy in even a tiny amount of matter.

From this relationship, E=mc^2, we can get a good impression of what matter energy is and I will use that formula to define matter energy.

However E=mc^2 gives us just as good an impression of what vacuum energy is when you consider the direct relationship between matter energy and vacuum energy. Since as ME increases, VE increases; the increase in VE equals the increase in ME. This works if ME comes from VE, and if that is the case, then VE can be defined by e=mc^2 as well.

This makes sense if VE and ME are taken to mean the physical content of energy in space as defined by E=mc^2, and that as the physical content of energy in space accumulates in one area of space it must decline in another. The area where the content of energy accumulates is an area of ME relative to the area where the content of energy declines. So the content of energy in ME is relative to the content of energy in VE, in an inverse relationship. Since matter energy and vacuum energy are said to have a direct relationship, vacuum energy increases in an area as the content of energy in that area of space decrease and therefore vacuum energy is measured as a negative while matter energy is measured as a positive. The negative amount of vacuum energy increases as the positive amount of matter energy increases, and there is no change in the total amount of energy. Energy is just redistributed from one area of space to another. Vacuum energy grows as energy is removed from the VE space.

At this point in the description of ME and VE we should go back to the term critical density. ME and VE are in balance at the point of critical density. This means that if the energy content of all space was equally distributed throughout space, there would be no areas of ME or VE, there would just be space containing energy at critical density everywhere. This circumstance would exit if the universe was homogeneous and isotropic at the infinitesimal level.

Since the space we are talking about is in the vicinity of a big crunch, the ME density of the crunched material is extremely dense with EEPs, and the surrounding arena (the space from which the big crunch was accumulated over maybe ten trillion years) contains an extreme amount of VE, translated to an extremely sparse population of EEPs.

Reminder: both VE and ME are composed of EEPs, but as the density of ME increases, the EEP density of VE decreases.
I am not sure of the relationship of the EEP to the quanta of the Higgs field, i.e. Higgs bosons. I am sticking with the idea the EEPs have mass and am perplexed by certain descriptions of the electroweak force studies where particles with zero mass can be completely left or right handed. I think that time will have to tell when electroweak theory and QCD are unified someday, maybe.
In physical size the core is not large because of the density of locked EEPs; near infinite density.

If the mass of an electron is about 1/2000th of the mass of a proton, and if the electron consists of ~one million EEPs, then the hydrogen atom contains two billion EEPs. If the average density of the universe is one hydrogen atom per cubic meter (I can't remember the exact estimates but it is a small number, say 3 to 6) , then the average density of the pre-synthesis material is two billion EEPs per cubic meter or 2 EEPs per 10^-10 cubic meters. If you compress all of the EEPs required to make up the matter in the known universe you get ~ *Bogie gets out his calculator and finds he can't figure it out yet*, but more that a teaspoon full.http://filer.case.edu/~sjr16/stars_blackhole.html
The core represents the singularity in the linked diagram. Other structure in the big crunch could be similar to proposed structure of a massive black hole, i.e. inner and outer event horizons, Ergosphere, and accretion disk.Compression.Yes.The frequency of the pulses covers the frequencies along the electromagnetic spectrum.

The size of EEPs is infinitesimal, but they can vary in size from >0 to 1 on a scale I call the "presence scale" of EEPs. The maximum size is determined by the maximum mass that can keep from flying apart at the peak of the expansion phase of the EEP expansion/contraction cycle.

The mass of the EEPs is measured in “presence”. Presence of an EEP falls in a range from >0 to 1. The frequency of the pulse of an individual EEP is determined by its “mass/presence”, i.e. the relative mass on the presence scale.

The frequency of the pulse is inversely related to the “mass/presence”.

Based on electromagnetic radiation being the emission of wave/particle EEPs, the size of the EEP on the 0 to 1 scale determines the frequency of the pulse and the relative placement of that particular EEP on the frequency range along the EMR spectrum.The volume of an EEP varies between >zero and 1, 1 being the maximum size that can exist and still not be blown apart by the expansion phase of the EEP pulse cycle. I have estimated the size above in effect. "If the mass of an electron is about 1/2000th of the mass of a proton, and if the electron consists of ~one million EEPs, then the hydrogen atom contains two billion EEPs. If the average density of the universe is one hydrogen atom per cubic meter, then the average density of the pre-synthesis material is two billion EEPs per cubic meter or 2 EEPs per 10^-10 cubic meters. If you compress all of the EEPs required to make up the matter in the known universe you get ~ *Bogie gets out his calculator and finds he can't figure it out yet*, but more that a teaspoon full."In QM as in the Planck regime, the energy is represented as permeating space, and virtual particles are proposed to transmit or move energy from place to place. The EEP, having mass and being indestructible does not come in and out of existence, and becomes a GR entity having mass and momentum.


If this is not responsive in various parts please let me know, because as I said in the OP, this is a work in progress.

Thank you for taking the time to evaluate my post and bring up such thoughtful questions.