Very good question. In my book there is chapter “Types of interactions”. To define a type of interaction first of all we must describe the carrier of interaction and place of creation of the carrier.
In my model in the gravitational interaction the eterions are the carriers and they are eternal. The higgson (i.e. the torus whirling in the closed spiral) has the weight because the viscosity of the eterions and the higgson and the helicity of the torus cause that the trajectories of the eterions, going near the surface of the torus are curved. The set of the curved trajectories of the eterions connected to a higgson I call the gravitational field of the higgson.
As I said before all objects larger than the neutrinos are built of neutrinos. Also the photons. The elementary photon it is the binary system of two neutrinos of different the weak charges. The wave packet it is a set of such elementary photons.
In the electromagnetic interaction of the nucleon the virtual or real photons are the carriers and they are created on the surface of torus or its equator (i.e. on the analog of the Ketterle surface). In the electrostatic interaction of two charges the eterion-higgson streams are the carriers and they are created by the stable torus (the analog of the Ketterle surface gives such possibility). There are two possibilities (repulsion or attraction)-details you can find in the book.
In the weak interaction of the nucleon the small neutrino loops are the carriers and they are created on the equator of the point mass in the centre of the torus. It is short-range interaction because the loop decays after some time. There is second possibility which leads to the visible distribution of galaxies-details you can find in the book.
In the strong interaction of the nucleon the large neutrino loops are the carriers and they are created on the circular axis of the torus. It is also the short-range interaction because the loop decays after some time.
The calculated life-times and ranges within my theory have great accuracy-authors of other theories may only to dream of it.
The interactions of the neutrinos, electrons and the superworlds are dual with described above. Sometimes the physical conditions exlude some types of interactions.

The button “send” on www.cosmology-particles.pl is working and you can order free e-copy of my book.

It is very important in Sylvester’s idea - "the main assumption is that the nature has its internal defensive mechanism which prevents the creation of singularities of infinite mass density."

We can use it to the so called Black Holes. We see everywhere in the Universe that the main movement is along a torus like a accretion disc around Heavy Neutron Star.

You may read an article of G.Chapline from march 2005 – he suggests that real Black Hole does not exist.
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/0503...0328-8_pf.html

The idea of the Black Hole changes with time:
1. Black Holes take everything in a singularity
2. 1972 S. Hawking said a small BH can radiate and evaporate
3. 2004 S. Hawking said every BH can evaporate at least

There is an self organized mechanism in a Heavy Neutron Star – supplied matter creates an accretion disc around the neutron star close to a theoretical horizon of the BH mass. The mass increase – the radius of the accretion disc increase – the density decrease.

The rotating accretion disc covers the neutron star and produce enormous radiation and plasma ejections.

In my idea of the Rotating Universe we live in one jet of the ejected matter from a primordial rotating Black Hole. A supplied from outside energy is transformed into the matter and antimatter plasma and ejected according to their spin. The Self Organized Mechanism makes the diameter of our Observable Universe bigger and bigger but with a density close still to the critical (flat geometry).

From my model results that there exist the typical black holes built of neutrons. The mass of such typical black hole is equal to about 25 masses of the Sun and has radius equal to 36.7km. The larger black holes are built of the typical black holes. It seems as a big nucleus but we must replace the nucleons with the typical black holes. Why? As I said before, objects larger than the neutrino are built of the neutrinos then theoretically there can exist the neutrino black holes of the energy density higher than in the nucleon and it is but such black hole has mass 424.1 MeV and can exist only in the combined state in the centre of the torus of nucleon. On the other side we know that in the creations of particles there is obligatory the particle-antiparticle symmetry i.e. we cannot destroy the nucleon if we do not destroy the antinucleon.
Since we know the radius of the typical black hole and we know that velocity on the equator is equal to the light velocity in vacuum then we can calculate the minimal time of pulsation of the pulsars 0.77ms (after explosion the angular velocity is lower). It is true because from experimental data results that there do not exist pulsars with shorter times of pulsation.
What is mechanism of evaporation of the black holes? In my book I present mechanism which radically differs from that what S.Hawking is talking about:
“When the mass of a black hole exceeds the mass of typical black hole then creates disc because the dropping on the black hole particles might attain velocities higher than the light velocity. Such disc violently evaporates. The neutrons placed on the surface of the black hole, in respect of the weak decays, emit the electrons and electron antineutrinos in directions parallel to the magnetic axis of black hole. Owing to the electric repulsion between electrons and to the strong spin polarization of the antineutrinos and electrons in directions parallel to the magnetic axis of the black hole, electrons are accelerated to the velocities almost equal to the light velocity. Due to these emissions the surface of the black hole is charged positively. The electric repulsion of protons causes that the protons gather first of all in surroundings of the equator of black hole. At last the electric repulsion exceeds the gravitational attraction and there take place the proton explosions in the plane of the equator of black hole. The rapid slow-down of protons creates the electromagnetic radiation. The proton streams carry away some neutrons what causes the additional emissions of electrons and electron antineutrinos in directions perpendicular to the plane of disc. The electron-antineutrino stream have the form of very strong collimated jet. Similar phenomena but on a larger scale took place in surroundings of the quasars. The emitted protons capture the electrons and create the protonuclei from which, after their transformation into the nuclei and electron gas, arise the big stars of first generation. In the time of the proton explosions the quasars are loud with respect of emission of radiation.”
In my Big Bang in the beginning there were the typical black holes and they intensively evaporated.

Your idea, Sylvester seems very natural. I have read something similar about the magnetars. They are supplied by a matter and then they eject everything far away. The magnetar can't create a singularity.

You are right – the magnetar cannot create a singularity. I am going one step forward. In my model there is not place for exotic matter and the quark-gluon plasma. When outside of the magnetar (or the superquasar) built of the typical black holes, there is sufficiently low density of matter the magnetar intensively evaporates. There are evidences that the evaporation of the black holes was very violent. From the Lyman alfa-lines for quasars results that gas clouds were placed close to each other - why? Since on the beginning there were only typical black holes. Conception that on the beginning there were only a tiny ripples is false. On the beginning there were largest structures. Why in our near-by surroundings we do not observe many quasars? They should be if the larger structures were created from smaller structures. Also we know from experimental data that on the beginning of the Big Bang there were the superquasars – now they do not exist.

The big problem is with the exit of our World from the state of a black hole. In my book I explained this enigma. We know that if any object is placed under the Schwarzschild surface then an infinite energy is needed to remove that object far away from a black hole. In the ultimate theory it is said that our World was created inside the Supertorus. When the mass of the Superworld had attained the energy adequate to create a new neutrino then the mass of Superworld was frozen inside the new neutrino. Our World which remained after the Big Collapse was not a black hole (as the whole was not but was built of the typical black holes) any more and there begun the cosmic expansion. We may say that the World hatched from the Supertorus of the Superworld. In the same way hatches the strong neutrino loop in the nucleon. In my theory the Superworld looked as the big neutron in which the neutrinos we must replace with the neutrons.

It was not an asymmetry in behaviour of matter and antimatter that caused that in our World we observe only the matter. Simply our World had before the Big Bang the anticlockwise internal helicity and such helicity, contrary to the antineutrons, have the neutrons.

We have discussed on this Forum at 4.march 2005 a similar problem
Where is the antimatter gone ?
The antimatter separated in the quasar’s jets ?

A spin is like a gyroscope top. If an accreting cloud rotate around the neutron star or Black Hole and this rotation change the axis towards the main axis, the clouds fall down to the center. We see the scenario as in CERN Athena project then. Everything is rotating like gyroscope and when it hits the particle-antiparticle are created. Left spin goes down and right spin goes up.

This way may the antimatter be from the beginning of our rotating local Universe separated.

I think we have independent an analogous idea of the history of our Observable Universe. The mainstream accepts now a theory there was a Big Bang from nothing. In my idea there was an eternal energy in existing space and this energy was concentrated and like in e superquasar transformed in the matter-antimatter and separated according their spin.
Nobody want think about an energy supplied to this system from outside.

A Big Bang from nothing? It is incredible history. If an input energy is equal to zero than the output energy also is equal to zero. It is fundamental conservation law. Of course I know that the gravitational potential energy may have negative value but there must exist the gravitational field and it must have the internal structure. The structure built of nothing?

We know that new mass is created as matter-antimatter system. To create such system there is not needed separation of matter and antimatter because matter and antimatter are built of the neutrinos (there exists the neutrino background in whole infinitive Universe). MATTER AND ANTIMATTER DIFFERE ONLY IN THE INTERNAL HELICITY (vortex-antivortex). Of course described by you the phenomenon exists.

I do not exactly understand why matter and antimatter have not need to be separated. It will annihilate I think if they wiil be to close.

The existence of the wave function suggests that a distant points in the infinite Universe can quickly communicate. From my calculations it results that distance between our World (built of the neutrons) and antiworld (built of the antineutrinos) was equal to about 1000 billion (i.e. about 10^12) light-years. It results from the neutrino density in the background of the Universe. Tendency to the annihilation of a pair object-antiobject decreases when the energy density in object (antiobject) increases, for example annihilation of the pair neutrino-antineutrino is practically impossible. In the creation of a mass there is obligatory the law that the resultant helicity of the whole infinite Universe must be equal to zero. If there is created vortex, in other place in the Universe must be created antivortex (in the same time). Distance between constituents of a pair vortex-antivortex can be various, for example distances between cyclones in the earth atmosphere are different.

It means that there is a distance between vortex and antivortex - a separation between matter and antimatter.

Which neutrinos do you mean? Electron, muon, tauon, and their respective anti-particles (you currently have six to choose from)?

Also, given that there is strong evidence that the electron neutrino possesses mass, (i.e. m_0<>0), are you also proposing that photons also possess mass?

As I said before the analog to the Ketterle surface gives two possibilities. Because the torus built of the higgsons creates the streams of the eterions so we have two states - one when the streams flow through the holes in the higgsons into the torus, and the second when the streams flow out through the holes of the higgsons. One of these fields I call the field of positive weak charge and second the field of negative weak charge. You will see that in the structures of nucleons and electrons there exist the analogous states which I identify with the fields of positive and negative electric charge. The particles built of the higgsons have four states because there exist two states of internal helicity (the clockwise or anticlockwise internal helicity is connected with the turns of the higgsons on the circular axis and with the rotation of the torus round its linear axis) and two states of weak charge (positive and negative). These four states I identify as four states of the neutrino: the electron neutrino, the electron antineutrino, the muon neutrino and the muon antineutrino. The taon neutrino and the taon antineutrino do not exist and future experiments will prove it. If there exist three neutrinos when why, for example, we do not observe different states of charged pion:
First: electron-electron antineutrino-muon neutrino-muon antineutrino
Second: electron-electron antineutrino-taon neutrino-taon antineutrino
Theird: ………..
All these problems I described in my book in chapter “Bound states of the elementary fermions”. In the decay of the taon there appear the same neutrinos as in the muon decay. As I said before the quark-gluon plasma does not exist then we do not need three neutrinos.

Calculated within my theory the mass of neutrino is equal to 3.32 . 10 to power -67 kg. It is very very very small mass but it causes that the path of the photon is curved in the gravitational field (the Einstein effect). As I said before the QED is wrong because gives good results but does not take into account the weak interactions. For example QED does not take into account the dark energy in spite that the wave function of the electron fills whole space.

I think that the truth lies in the middle. From the observational facts it results that evolution of our World has following direction: from the objects of most high density (on the beginning of the Big Bang there were the superquasars) to the objects of lower density. There is hypothesis that our solar system was created by the explosion of supernova. But before that there was more massive object.
Recapitulation: I think that the cores of planets in the solar system have age about 15 billion years and the age of exterior layers is equal to about 5 billion years.

Any idea, then, why no meteorite with a radioactive decay age >~ 5 billion years has been found?

Existance of two belts (Kuiper's and Oort's) suggests that there were two explosions. First very big explosion of the star of first generation took place about 15 billion years ago and created the Oort's belt which lies in distance greater than 30 000 AU. The elements of this belt we cannot explore. Second explosion took place about 5 billion years ago (explosion of supernova) and created the Kuiper's belt which lies in distance greater than 35 AU. We observe elements from this belt. From dominant elements i.e. hydrogen and helium 5 billion years ago was created the sun.
If the solar system would be created from collapsing cloud then the angular momentum of this system should be much higher. In my theory the solar system has the angular momentum about 10 times lower than the typical black hole but we know that there from the matter frown away by the typical black hole were created other stars.

Then why should the cores of planets contain material that's older?

And how come the Oort Cloud survived the second explosion?

Also, aren't at least some of the long period comets original denizens of the Oort cloud? Ditto those with parabolic orbits?

Finally, if we can detect (and, potentially, sample) interstellar dust, why not Oort dust?

See "Cosmogony of the solar system", thread 'Very massive black hole in Sagittarius'. There were the rings and the radii were determined by the Titius-Bode law.

Some parts of the rings survived.

You are right but probability of finding such comets among the Kuiper's comets is almost equal to zero.

Because they are cold iron (with impurity of nickel) meteors. All such meteors and dwarfs gives the dark cold matter.

Which only deepens the mystery, right?

I mean, are the main belt asteroids then also composed of 'planetary core' material (they are, after all, a ring in the Titus-Bode law, right?)? And what about the late-heavy bombardment impactors (responsible for Hellas, Carolis, Valhalla, South Pole-Aitken)? and the impactor that became the Moon??Oh? So you think that all the non-periodic comets can be ruled out, definitively, as originating in the Oort cloud? Including the Kreutz sungrazer family??You've lost me ... interstellar dust is (IIRC) silicate grains; are you saying that Oort dust would be dark matter?

From the Titius-Bode rings were created the cores of planets. The second explosion swept out all objects built of the matter thrown by the star of first generation except the cores of planets because they had great masses (why the planets near the Sun have small masses?). In the 'eye' of the Oort's belt there are, first of all (practically 100% - probability is probability), the objects built of the matter thrown by the star of second generation i.e. a supernova. The Sun it is the star of third generation.

Yes. From my model it results that the dark cold matter is built of iron with impurity of nickel and has form of dwarfs and meteors. The are the remainders after the explosions of the stars of first generation (80% of iron with impurity of nickel and the remaining 20% had such composition: 74% oxygen and 26% helium).