Sub Quantum Physical Reality (SQPR) uses CIQ (the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum) as a first order, linear approximation. SQPR adds to CIQ just one axiom: the Quantum Interaction (aka collapse, aka decoherence, aka entanglement) proceeds at an enormous speed TAU (at least 10^23 c, the supposed speed of Cosmic Inflation in the standard Big Bang model known as LCDM).

(Yes having an entanglement speed 10^23 c would contradict *Jules Henri Poincaré’s* idea that the speed of light, c, is an absolute speed limit, the fundamental idea of his Theory of Relativity… But it does not contradict Relativity actually… in part because of several logical twists many overlooks: *Poincaré’s* *Relativity is strictly local, at the neighborhood ultrafilter limit… and says something between events, not within events… moreover, the speed of space is not the speed of light. TAU is the speed of these expanding chunks of space we call “particles” although when in translation, they are known to behave like waves).*

Out of this added hypothesis comes Dark Matter and probably Dark Energy (I say probably because DE is even more mysterious than DM).

How does SQPR predicts Dark Matter? Some Quantum Interactions, on a cosmic scale, will leave mass-energy behind, because TAU is not fast enough for a proper collapse. This is Dark Matter. In particular, DM will tend to gather in rings around galactic cores. Another remnant, from tearing apart of fundamental processes, averaged on a cosmic scale, is the 3 degree Kelvin background radiation [1].

If one assumes that interactions are mediated by quantum processes, the SQPR mechanism will apply to them. Thus long range forces will be affected, and distorted. In particular gravity [2]. Hence the prediction of DE (details in the future, as DE is too mysterious to describe cogently beyond the basic fact that it accelerates the cosmic expansion… How exactly is not clear).

Depending upon the exact geometry of a part of the universe then gravity will be affected… thus affecting the expansion speed, and making it potentially anisotropic, as observed in 2020. Now how to explain my slightly more sensationalist title, beyond a natural love for the spectacular?

Simple: any theory incorporating some sort of gravitation (a universal attraction) will develop grains, hence a chaotic geometry in the distribution of matter. At that point the Quantum Interaction (what causes Quantum Collapse) will guarantee that lumps in Dark Matter form. In turn, if virtual particles are really real (and not just a mathematical symbolism as they are presently), and thus submitted to the Quantum Interaction, we will variation in gravitation on a cosmic scale, namely a lowering of attraction in some region. Hence the tabloid inspiration. By the way, the same reasoning gives a reason for the expanding universe in totto… [3].

Patrice Ayme

***

[1] So SQPR throws out the main reason for the entire Big Bang. One thing is gained by SQPR: the need for Cosmic Inflation disappear (cosmic inflation is an ad hoc hypothesis built to make LCDM work)

***

[2] MOND boldly explains away DM by claiming the 1/dd, the inverse square of the distance law, is not valid anymore. So the Dark Matter effect, according to MOND is not caused by a mysterious form of matter (explained by SQPR), but simply by a failure of gravitation.

That 1/dd law is the bedrock of so-called “General Relativity” (which, despite its grandiloquent name, is truly *just* an improved theory of gravitation; one could call it Grav 4… Grav 1 being Boulliau/Bulladius (1/dd), Grav 2 Newton (equivalence with Kepler), Grav 3 Laplace (waves), Grav 4 (Riemann-Poincare-Einstein)).

MOND looks impossible, and is also ugly (being ad hoc, without deep, or logically simplifying justification). SQPR is natural, logically lean… But also predicts, in conjunction with the assumption that all forces are Quantum mediated, that at scales of the order of galactic clusters, gravity will turn in some sort of locally geometrically dependent MOND…

***

[3] esteemed commenter physicist Ian Miller (FRS) correctly observes that: “*I don’t see that* [Cosmic Anisotropy] *cancels out the big bang concept, but it certainly puts the cat amongst the pigeons for cosmic inflation, which was devised to account for the difficulty in explaining the complete symmetry and uniformity of the expansion. Since it is no longer so uniform or symmetric, presumably cosmic inflation should disappear. Any bets on whether such an idea with so many devout followers will die out?”* The problem is that the Big Bang LCDM model doesn’t work without cosmic inflation. So then the Big Bang is down to two arguments: the cosmic background radiation (answered above by SQPR), and the fabrication of helium (supposedly stars can’t do it, but those stars, the old fashion way, were weaklings… Thus that could be answered by a very old universe, as I have proposed, and as it is necessary now that we know Cosmic Inflation is lame, at best… with stars or supernova hotter than classical theory had it; it seems such stars have been observed…)