Perhaps dark energy/cosmic expansion is simply an affect of a big crunch?

Allow me to elucidate;- When a 'crunch' condenses below its Schwarzchild Radius, I propose a duality is formed, being the Lorentz Transform imaginary values associated with <Sr distances - we know time=0 at an event horizon; therefore, beneath this boundary, t becomes a dualistic positive/negative ..... basically, the inner convergence co-manifests as a recursive, out-riding expansion. This suggests our universe is cyclic /wavicle like and totally explains why the expansion rate is steadily increasing, as the condensing crunch produces exponetially increasing t/ti values.

Even wilder speculation;- I believe every particle, even the humble photon may obey this simple process (implying - the universe is just another particle ) Shocked

Energy convergence with regards to a photon, ultimately produces a singularity via its very own Schwarzchild radius (albeit at extremely small scale distance).

i.e; If a photons relativistic mass (hf/c^2 - yes I know photons do not possess mass!) is substituted for M in calculating a Schwarzchild Radius: 2GM/C^2. This photon, say in the visible spectrum (around 600 THz) would produce a figure of about 10^-62 meters ....... totally smaller than planck length!

The photonic cycle is one of 720° (360° positive/ 360° negative), in which convergence and expansion co-exist simultaneously.

Expansion above the Sr can be thought of as the magnetic component. Similarly, condensation beneath; manifests as the electric component. Thus, this duality operates with 180° phase differential, perfectly matching/describing electromagnetism, with each swapping identities @ the Sr 'boundary'.

An electron/ positron pair;- perhaps a ring singularity to hypertorus cycle, embedded in the expanding wavefront surface of our universe, with photons themselves, as integrated wavicles within a facet of their overall electro-positronic wave-state .... 'riding around' hyperspace.

Musing on ..... your average photon cycles a tad more rapidly than our universe, say 300Ghz compared to maybe once in a trillion years - how can this be so? ..... well, it's all to do with dimensionality. With increasing dimensionality, energy is sprawled about ridiculously thinner;- so what of our universe, an expanding wavefront of possibly hypertoroidal topology?;- A cosmos of high order dimensionality may have energy spread out rather sparse ..... it's energy concentration that determines frequency i.e;- low energy photons cycle slower than high ones. Photons, despite having astoundingly less energy than the universe, have absolute lashings to play about within their far lower dimensional wave-space realm.

Very good point! I have read something similar articles but one you might find very interesting is R. C. Jennison "On the Fundamental Properties of Matter".
Here is a section of it.

"The finite boundary condition has important consequences for inertia, for it provides an essential requirement for a phase-locked particle, that there shall be an outer boundary from which information may return to produce the requisite feedback in the system. Thus we can identify the closed systems of matter waves discussed in this paper with the J0 types of phase-locked cavity and expect them to possess the various properties that have been discussed in that context. In particular, such particles of matter possess inertia corresponding to their rest mass and independent of the rest of the Universe (Jennison, 1981 etc). This is currently of especial importance in view of the recent discovery of a possible rotation of the Universe and the resulting inapplicability of Mach's principle (Birch, 1982).

SOME COMMENTS ON THE PROPERTIES OF THE ROTATING SOLUTION

It will be noted from (4) that if we follow de Broglie's concept in contra-distinction to Schrodinger's interpretation and we identify

with the distribution of mass, then the mass distribution in any shell decreases as 1/r2 along a single radial line and as 1/r for successive complete rings in the equatorial plane. The angular momentum for a ring is, however, proportional to the mass in that ring, the square of the radius of the ring and the angular velocity of rotation. For a system defined by the limiting radius

becomes mRc but we have seen that m varies as 1/R, the angular momentum for the interior shells therefore increases precisely to compensate for those shells which are discarded as the system is spun up. Within the limiting radius, the angular momentum of the total system is conserved as

increases in integral steps.
The excess angular momentum is, conversely, shed in equal quantised steps as

increases and Rmax progresses inwards in discrete steps from

. A perfect detent mechanism therefore operates at the boundary to maintain a quantised state by shedding quanta of angular momentum from the system as its angular velocity is increased. If the system is born in a rotating state, as might correspond to the circumstances in the process of pair production, then the solution simply indicates that a rotating mass results, the angular momentum of which is conserved and quantised in the manner indicated.
The properties of the boundary formed from the rotating transformation are remarkable and probably of some importance to the interpretation of measurements in particle physics. The boundary represents an onset of matter with a tangential velocity at the velocity of light. The formation of a mechanical system with a boundary rotating at this velocity would be quite impossible in macroscopic classical physics but in this case it is simply constructed from the component matter waves so that the usual mechanical constraints are inapplicable, indeed the mechanical system appears to correspond closely with the electromagnetic models discussed in Jennison 1978. In that paper it was shown that the Compton energy and momentum equations could be derived classically for such a system whilst Ashworth and Jennison 1974 showed that the angular scattering could be treated classically. Ashworth (1978) showed that the angular distribution of the scattering could be expressed in a form directly compatible with a specular reflection and with the Jennison 1978 energy and momentum treatment. In these treatments it is usual to transform from the laboratory frame to that of the particle and then back again. It is assumed that a fundamental observer at the particle could apply the usual laws of physics and that Snell's law and the usual conservation laws apply.

From the present analysis we now ascertain a number of very remarkable facts relevant to such a particle observer. If the reflection occurs at a surface which is rotating at or very close to the velocity of light then the scale size of the Universe will be vanishingly small. (This effect has been discussed in Ashworth and Jennison 1976.) If this observer receives radiation, then, as the Universe has been reduced to vanishing dimensions, the remainder of the wavefront which strikes him is contained in the encounter at the rotating observer's point in space-time. We can speculate that it may therefore disappear, or strictly, never appear, as far as all other observers are concerned. Furthermore the apparent specular reflection encountered in the Compton effect may be a simple outcome of the curious rotating geometry at this boundary. If this is the case, the communicating properties of fundamental particles in space-time are out of this world but still amenable to physical understanding.

No attempt has been made in the paper to discuss wave-mechanical models for the system which embrace the axial dimension and I have ignored the possibility of co-related electromagnetic phenomena, whereas many fundamental particles having rest mass also have electromagnetic properties. This paper has been concerned entirely with the wave-mechanical system but it invites the speculation that the boundary, rotating at the velocity of light, may behave as a ring displacement current, giving rise to an axial dipole magnetic field which may well constrain the polar component of the matter waves. I repeat that this is entirely speculation but the present treatment has taken one so far down the road in providing a wave-mechanical description of a discrete fundamental particle that one suspects that the final axial closure must come about in an equally simple manner."

Some the equations will not copy over, so here is the URL:  [url=http://www.greenstone.org/greenstone3/nzdl;jsessionid=64BBC5A29B67542F97EAE208F132AF9B?a=d&c=envl&d=HASH8a0afea69cce9a9819cf36.10.np&sib=1&p.s=ClassifierBrowse&p.sa=&p.a=b][/url]

But I do disagree with the dark energy/cosmic expansion:e.g., big bang dogma, and wonder how these concepts would work with H. Arp ideas of new matter being formed from the cores of galaxies and quasars since that would be on a much more localized universe. Could this also explain Quantization of Redshifts?