Relativity and beyond it

What can be really said about the physical origin and the ultimate nature of the properties of matter described by Quantum Mechanics?

After the joint analysis by Planck, BICEP2 and Keck Array has been made public (arXiv:1502.00612) invalidating the March 2014 announcement by BICEP2 (arXiv:1403.3985v1), a Forbes contributor writes « When Science Gets It Wrong: Gravitational Waves ». Obviously, scientific institutions should be more careful before launching or supporting certain kinds of propaganda.

My post of July 22 « BICEP2 Data, CMB B-modes, Inflation, Alternative Cosmologies... (II) » already discussed the situation after the publication (19 June 2014) of the Physical Review Letters 112, 241101 version of the BICEP2 article « Detection of B-Mode Polarization at Degree Angular Scales by BICEP2 ».

My post of July 22 « BICEP2 Data, CMB B-modes, Inflation, Alternative Cosmologies... (II) » already discussed the situation after the publication of the Physical Review Letters 112, 241101 version of the BICEP2 article « Detection of B-Mode Polarization at Degree Angular Scales by BICEP2 ».

It is now generally admitted that the BICEP2 Collaboration has not yet produced an evidence for the existence of primordial B-modes in the measured polarization of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation. Contrary to the claim contained in the initial  (March 2014) version of their article arXiv:1403.3985v1 and to the strong media coverage that followed this announcement, the Physical Review Letters 112, 241101 version (June 2014) explicitly recognizes that the experimental and phenomenological situation is not so simple.

Two months after the controversial BICEP2 announcement, The Washington Post writes « Big Bang backlash: BICEP2 discovery of gravity waves questioned by cosmologists » and National Geographic emphasizes « Big Bang Discovery Comes Under Fire.

Would the existence of B-modes in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation be an evidence for inflation? Many influential colleagues claim that this is indeed the case. But their arguments are based on standard cosmological schemes. Actually, pre-Big Bang patterns beyond conventional cosmology do not require inflation and can generate CMB B-modes.Two papers by the BICEP2 Collaboration : BICEP2 I: Detection Of B-mode Polarization at Degree Angular Scales, arXiv:1403.3985

How to present in a simple way the spinorial space-time and the privileged space direction it generates? What is the fundamental difference between space-time spinors and the conventional description of space and time? What is the relevance for the analysis of WMAP and Planck data ?

The spinorial space-time that I suggested in 1996-7 [1,2] naturally predicts a privileged space dimension for each observer. This was emphasized in some of my recent works [3,4], well before the Planck collaboration wrote on March 21-22 [5] :http://sci.esa.int/planck/51559-hemispheric-asymmetry-and-cold-spot-in-… Cosmic Microwave Background anomalous features (...) are confirmed (...). One is an asymmetry in the average temperatures on opposite hemispheres of the sky (...).(end of quote)