In a manuscript by Albert Einstein dated back to 1931, which had been neglected by researchers of his work, is found an alternative theory about the origins of the Universe.

The renowned scientist suggested that instead of the Big Bang, the Universe was expanding continuously and eternally, a theory supported by the British physicist Fred Hoyle two decades later.

The Big Bang theory began to flourish when the American astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered in the 1920s that the universe expands. Since the Universe today is greater than yesterday, logic dictates that once in the history of was infinitesimally small, and, therefore, infinitely dense and active.

However, in the 1940s, Hoyle argued that it would be mathematically acceptable a scenario in which the universe expands eternally, but keeps its density constant.

For that to happen, the new matter needs to be created constantly in order to form new structures such as galaxies and stars that will be occupying the space. As the universe would be always infinite, its size will not vary with the expansion.

Exactly the same idea is described by Einstein in his manuscript:

To keep the density constant, new matter particles should be formed continuously,” he writes.

Although Einstein himself soon abandoned this idea and unfortunately for Hoyle did not ever publish it, the dissatisfaction with the notion that the universe was started by a big bang is reflected in the same document, although this idea was fully compatible with his General Theory of Relativity. The key behind this attitude was the belief of Einstein that the universe should be static and eternal, at least ostensibly.

The text was made available to the public who visited the archives of Albert Einstein in Jerusalem but had inadvertently neglected, as it was classified as the earlier version of another publication.

The discovery of Albert Einstein’s lost theory about the origins of the universe was made by Irish physicist Cormac O’Raifeartaigh, who published the full text of the European Physical Journal.

Copyright © 2012-2024 Learning Mind. All rights reserved. For permission to reprint, contact us.

power of misfits book banner desktop

Like what you are reading? Subscribe to our newsletter to make sure you don’t miss new thought-provoking articles!

This Post Has 5 Comments

  1. Otto Bhan

    Where does the new material come from? I really want to know.

    At times I wonder, do black holes feed material from this universe into close by brane universes?

  2. George E Moss

    It has to be true to say that the universe is a good deal more complex than any theory that comes from the purely intellect thought of humans. The physical intellect is limited by considering only the physical (space-time) part of the universe. The non-physical parts include aether, spirit, mind and the processes, such as telepathy.

    It is clearly evident from seance meetings, spirit and Angelic communications and interplanetary communications that the non-physical parts of this universe cannot be overlooked. Furthermore, there are also other coincident universes of different energy or vibration to ours.

    It is true that both Einstein and Hoyle have suggested that an expanding universe must have constant density … or ‘energy’, which might be an easier model to consider. We have not yet fully fathomed the part played by black holes. I suspect they have an extremely important role in energy-transmutation. It is the transmutation of energy plus non-physical connections that result in an expanding and ever-changing set of coincident universes. It is also clearly evident that our universe expands from all points within itself, as does baker’s dough. There never was a singularity source or a big bang (or Fred Hoyle’s blown-up balloon with an expanding 3-dimensional surface). These are examples of erroneous ideas that have arisen from the mistake of purely physical intellect void of spiritual acceptance. These matters are amplified in my new book ‘Earth’s Cosmic Ascendancy’ to be published by White Crow, April 2014.

  3. Cormac

    Hi Anna, what a nice blog. I should clarify that Einstein is not proposing his fledgling steady-state theory as an alternative to the big bang – the manuscript bears all the hallmarks of being written before scientists started to worry about the problem of origins.
    Re Otto’s question of where all the stuff is supposed to come from, AE is gloriously vague about that, just remarking that space is not empty of energy because of the cosmological constant (so invoking E = mc2)

  4. George E Moss

    Thank you Anna and Cormac. I can now say that ‘Earth’s Cosmic Ascendancy’ is available from Amazon, also as an e-book. Moving on from there I have begun work on a further book concerning the ‘aether’ … precursor to the space-time creation, and how ‘black holes’ relate to universe status quo. Watch this space!

  5. Ernest Porps

    Hi! Anna !

    Where can I find Einstein’s statement ~ “Space is not empty!”

    Thank You!


Leave a Reply