Even if the Universe had come out of Nothing, any definition or specfication of Nothing will not do. Most religions (major exception being Hinduism or rather Sanatana Dharma or more specifically the Upanishad Philosophy expounded 4000+ years ago) defined this Nothing as God: God desired and said let me create the Universe. He must indeed be powerful.
Science has defined this Nothing as nothing that the scientists know off or have been so far able to identify.
But, we can try to define this Nothing by what we would consider as possible source of the Universe in terms of the chracteristic it must have in order to be a source of the Universe.
First, Nothing, as the source of the Universe, must be perpetually ceaseless, permanent, indestructible and inexhaustible even after the Universe comes out of Nothing: otherwise the Universe cannot be explained continually on a permanent basis.
Second, Nothing must be uncharged, unchanging, unaffected and unperturbed by the Universe: other wise, it becomes part of the continually changing Universe whose source we are exploring.
Third, Nothing must never have been born or dead: otherwise it would be contradicting with the first two requirements above.
Fourth, Nothing should be as infinite as a Source capable of explaining the infinite nature of the Universe.
Fifth, Nothing, being the source from which all energy, matter, space and time have emerged, must be powerful enough to contain at least all these in implicit form in itself: if it did not contain these, Nothing cannot be the source of the Universe and if it contained these explicitly, it would become part of the physical Universe.
Sixth, Nothing should be incomprehensible, unexplainable, inexpressible, unimaginable, unalterable and original: otherwise, we cannot use it as the source from which the Universe has come.
Seventh, Nothing should be capable of making its impact felt in any part or the whole of the Universe: if there is no impact of Nothing on the Universe, we cannot say that the Universe has come out of Nothing. Nothing must make its presence felt in each and everything in the Universe: Nothing must be felt to be present everywhere and in everything.
Eighth, Nothing must be formless in the sense of the Universe, i.e, it cannot have any physical form that matter, energy or space or time can take.
In sum, Nothing should satisfy the following criteria to be eligible to be the source of the Universe: be implicitly present ceaselessly in everything and everywhere of the Universe, and yet Nothing should be formless, indestructible, indivisible, infinite and permanent unlike the continuous transient phenomenon that continually transform in the Universe.
You are right. Nothing satisfying the above criteria is close to the description of God in the Upanishads of the ancient Indians (ancestors of Hindus) ( http://senland.blogspot.com/2009/02/gita-and-god-0002.html and http://senland.blogspot.com/2009/02/gita-and-god-0007.html). But that is besides the point.
We have some acceptable criteria now to imagine (cannot really describe it properly as per the specifications above) Nothing from which the Universe has come out. Not that we hope to satisfy all these criteria by imagining ANoting, nor we may like allcriteria to be satisfied. But we can explore and experiment. Let us imagine One Nothing in the next post.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
8. Universe From Nothing (Maha Sunnya)
The Cosmologists always have this dilemma: did the Universe come out of Nothing or something cannot come out of Nothing? The Cosmologists have always been obsessed with finding the beginning of the Uinverse and obsessed with the idea that the beginning must be small.
As per the Cosmic Myth @2011, in the beginning there was only infinitely dense energy in an infinitsimal point. But this small beginning had to immediately adopt of Big Bang - not an explosion but a sudden large expansion. Space, elementary particles of matter and time did not exist at the beginning and emerged from the very small energy concentrate. The only things that the Cosmic Myth of 2011 did not explain are: where did the energy-concentrate come from, where did this high-density energy point lie and why did the original energy started reducing its density. Maybe someday we shall be able to answer these three questions. We can explore these questions later.
But at this point it is clear that the Cosmic Myth @2011 based on Big Bang has identified a beginning and that beginning is a small size one. And, this small size enegy concentrate apparently came from Nothing, If we combine Big Bang with Big Cruch, we avoid the obsession of a begining (and therfore also avoid the obsession with small beginning) because with Cosmic expansion and cosmic contraction alternating like a sinsodial curve, the question of when did it all start vanishes. But the question of where from the energy come still remains and the answer is that it has always been there. This the same thing as saying that the energy came from Nothing.
One surprising thing about elementary particles of matter are particles! It is not clear why particles, rather elementary particles, emerged as particles - whether point particles or string particle? Why was it necessary for the Universe to start with Energy being converted into elementary particles like Quarks and Gluons? Could not energy directly produce atoms and then atoms started splitting of into elementary particles and the latter started recombining, re-spliting add infinitum? The obvious answer is that from a point-like concentrated and condensed energy one cannot produce atoms as these required more space which was scarce in the beginning: cosmic inflation has to generate space first to accommodate larger units of matter like atoms.
True, but why not we start with a huge mass of matter in concentrated or condensed form that then converts into high density energy and then energy start reducing its density rapidly?
Alternatively, why could not the beginning start with the most expanded form of the Universe and then the process of a Big Crunch start. If we could start with, for example, a mutiple of the present size of the Universe with space, matter and energy all available and then through a continous process of deflation we arrive at a point-like energy concentrate?
If we start with the an infinitely large Universe with galaxies, black holes, stars and plannets and then start the process of concentration or deflation, we need a domain of the largest size of the Universe. This is the Domain of every thing: the space, the matter and the energy. Cosmic Deflation would have led to a point-like energy or matter concentrate floating in an infinitely large Domain. Once this Domain is available, energy or matter or space could then undergo both inflation as it had happened after the Big Bang or contraction as explained by Big Cruch.
This Domain can in fact be called as a Great Zero (Maha Sunnya or MS) or Nothing in which all physical matter, energy, space and time rests. At any point of time, any point in Nothing or MS will have either some matter or energy or space or a mixuture of all three.
Let's explore this concept of Nothing or MS from which the Uinverse has arisen in this blog later. After all we have no way out of the conclusion that the Universe has come out of Nothing.
As per the Cosmic Myth @2011, in the beginning there was only infinitely dense energy in an infinitsimal point. But this small beginning had to immediately adopt of Big Bang - not an explosion but a sudden large expansion. Space, elementary particles of matter and time did not exist at the beginning and emerged from the very small energy concentrate. The only things that the Cosmic Myth of 2011 did not explain are: where did the energy-concentrate come from, where did this high-density energy point lie and why did the original energy started reducing its density. Maybe someday we shall be able to answer these three questions. We can explore these questions later.
But at this point it is clear that the Cosmic Myth @2011 based on Big Bang has identified a beginning and that beginning is a small size one. And, this small size enegy concentrate apparently came from Nothing, If we combine Big Bang with Big Cruch, we avoid the obsession of a begining (and therfore also avoid the obsession with small beginning) because with Cosmic expansion and cosmic contraction alternating like a sinsodial curve, the question of when did it all start vanishes. But the question of where from the energy come still remains and the answer is that it has always been there. This the same thing as saying that the energy came from Nothing.
One surprising thing about elementary particles of matter are particles! It is not clear why particles, rather elementary particles, emerged as particles - whether point particles or string particle? Why was it necessary for the Universe to start with Energy being converted into elementary particles like Quarks and Gluons? Could not energy directly produce atoms and then atoms started splitting of into elementary particles and the latter started recombining, re-spliting add infinitum? The obvious answer is that from a point-like concentrated and condensed energy one cannot produce atoms as these required more space which was scarce in the beginning: cosmic inflation has to generate space first to accommodate larger units of matter like atoms.
True, but why not we start with a huge mass of matter in concentrated or condensed form that then converts into high density energy and then energy start reducing its density rapidly?
Alternatively, why could not the beginning start with the most expanded form of the Universe and then the process of a Big Crunch start. If we could start with, for example, a mutiple of the present size of the Universe with space, matter and energy all available and then through a continous process of deflation we arrive at a point-like energy concentrate?
If we start with the an infinitely large Universe with galaxies, black holes, stars and plannets and then start the process of concentration or deflation, we need a domain of the largest size of the Universe. This is the Domain of every thing: the space, the matter and the energy. Cosmic Deflation would have led to a point-like energy or matter concentrate floating in an infinitely large Domain. Once this Domain is available, energy or matter or space could then undergo both inflation as it had happened after the Big Bang or contraction as explained by Big Cruch.
This Domain can in fact be called as a Great Zero (Maha Sunnya or MS) or Nothing in which all physical matter, energy, space and time rests. At any point of time, any point in Nothing or MS will have either some matter or energy or space or a mixuture of all three.
Let's explore this concept of Nothing or MS from which the Uinverse has arisen in this blog later. After all we have no way out of the conclusion that the Universe has come out of Nothing.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
7. Eluding Elementary Particles
The Universe is so huge and expanding. It is infinite. The Macro-universe is so wonderful thing to explore with infinite number of celestial physical bodies of matter like comets, planets, stars, constellations, galaxies, expanding space with cosmic radiation and colourful lights: the Micro-universe of particles and elementary particles that are believed to be the building blocks of the Universe are equally absorbing infinity of exploration. All colours, lights, energy, forces, consolidation / disintegration of matter and movements seem to be the play of particles.
All matter, the substance of all physical objects from atoms and other particles to stars have mass and occupy a volume of space (we ignore the fact that alternative scientific meanings of "matter" in different subjects of study may be even incompatible). But the smallest bits of matter are called particles. The ultimate goal of scientific investigators would be breakdown into the internal substructure of all particles to find out the unique fundamental source of all matter in the Universe.
As the scientists delved deeper and deeper into particles, they identified Elementary or Fundamental particles that are believed not to have substructure. The process seems to be never ending: instead of one or a few elementary particles, they have come to identify, speculate and detect many such elementary particles! the small particle, Atom,which was thought to be an elementary particle initially soon turned out to have a substructure with even smaller particles like electrons, protons and neutron forming the nuclei of atoms. Even protons and neutrons are not elementary particles. In the
In theStandard Model of particle physics, the quarks, leptons, and gauge bosons are elementary particles.
Quarks, an elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter, combine to form composite particles called hadrons, the most stable of which are protons and neutrons.
Gluons are elementary particles which act as the exchange particles (gauge bosons) for the color force between quarks, analogous to the exchange of photons in the electromagnetic force between two charged particles. quarks make up the baryons (composite of three quarks) and the strong interaction takes place between baryons, one could say that the color force is the source of the strong interaction, or that the strong interaction is like a residual color force which extends beyond the baryons, for example when protons and neutrons are bound together in a nucleus.
Bosonic particles that act as carriers of the fundamental forces of nature: particles exert forces on each other by the exchange of gauge bosons.
The best known of all leptons is the electron which governs nearly all of chemistry as it is found in atoms and is directly tied to all chemical properties. Two main classes of leptons exist: charged leptons (also known as the electron-like leptons), and neutral leptons (better known as neutrinos). Charged leptons can combine with other particles to form various composite particles such as atoms and positron's, while neutrinos rarely interact with anything, and are consequently rarely observed: neutrino usually travels close to the speed of light, is electrically neutral, and is able to pass through ordinary matter almost undisturbed. This makes neutrinos extremely difficult to detect. Neutrinos have a very small, but non-zero rest mass.
Bosonic particles that act as carriers of the fundamental forces of nature: particles exert forces on each other by the exchange of gauge bosons.
The best known of all leptons is the electron which governs nearly all of chemistry as it is found in atoms and is directly tied to all chemical properties. Two main classes of leptons exist: charged leptons (also known as the electron-like leptons), and neutral leptons (better known as neutrinos). Charged leptons can combine with other particles to form various composite particles such as atoms and positron's, while neutrinos rarely interact with anything, and are consequently rarely observed: neutrino usually travels close to the speed of light, is electrically neutral, and is able to pass through ordinary matter almost undisturbed. This makes neutrinos extremely difficult to detect. Neutrinos have a very small, but non-zero rest mass.
A fermion can be an elementary particle, like the electron, or a composite particle, like the proton.There are 12 flavors of elementary fermions, plus their corresponding antiparticles, as well as elementary bosons that mediate the forces and the still undiscovered Higgs boson. There may also be elementary particles not described by the Standard Model, such as the graviton, the particle that would carry the gravitational force or the sparticles, supersymmetric partners of the ordinary particles.
The 12 fundamental fermionic flavours are divided into three generations of four particles each. Six of the particles are quarks. The remaining six are leptons, three of which are neutrinos, and the remaining three of which have an electric charge of −1: the electron and its two cousins, the muon and the tau. So, we have electron, electron nutrino, muon, muon nutrino, tau, tau nutrino, up quark, down quark, charm quark, strange quark, top quark and bottom quark. The best known of all leptons is the electron which governs nearly all of chemistry as it is found in atoms and is directly tied to all chemical properties. Two main classes of leptons exist: charged leptons (also known as the electron-like leptons), and neutral leptons (better known as neutrinos). Charged leptons can combine with other particles to form various composite particles such as atoms and positronium, while neutrinos rarely interact with anything, and are consequently rarely observed. There are also 12 fundamental fermionic antiparticles: anti-electron (positron), electron anti-nutrino, antimuon, muon anti-nutrino, tau, tau anti-nutrino, up antiquark, down antiquark, charm antiquark, strange antiquark, top antiquark and bottom antiquark.
Isolated quarks and antiquarks have never been detected, a fact explained by confinement. Every quark carries one of three color charges of the strong interaction; antiquarks similarly carry anticolor. Color charged particles interact via gluon exchange in the same way that charged particles interact via photon exchange. However, gluons are themselves color charged, resulting in an amplification of the strong force as color charged particles are separated. Unlike the electromagnetic force which diminishes as charged particles separate, color charged particles feel increasing force. Color charged particles may combine to form color neutral composite particles called hadrons. A quark may pair up with an antiquark: the quark has a color and the antiquark has the corresponding anticolor. The color and anticolor cancel out, forming a color neutral meson. Alternatively, three quarks can exist together, one quark being "red", another "blue", another "green". These three colored quarks together form a color-neutral baryon. Symmetrically, three antiquarks with the colors "antired", "antiblue" and "antigreen" can form a color-neutral antibaryon. Evidence for the existence of quarks comes from deep inelastic scattering: firing electrons at nuclei to determine the distribution of charge within nucleons (which are baryons). If the charge is uniform, the electric field around the proton should be uniform and the electron should scatter elastically. Low-energy electrons do scatter in this way, but above a particular energy, the protons deflect some electrons through large angles. The recoiling electron has much less energy and a jet of particles is emitted. This inelastic scattering suggests that the charge in the proton is not uniform but split among smaller charged particles: quarks.
Gluons are the mediators of the strong interaction and carry both colour and anticolour. Although gluons are massless, they are never observed in detectors due to colour confinement; rather, they produce jets of hadrons, similar to single quarks. The first evidence for gluons came from annihilations of electrons and antielectrons at high energies which sometimes produced three jets — a quark, an antiquark, and a gluon.
The fundamental forces of nature are mediated by gauge bosons, and mass is hypothesized to be created by the Higgs boson. There are three weak gauge bosons: W+, W−, and Z0; these mediate the weak interaction. The massless photon mediates the electromagnetic interaction. The Higgs boson itself has not yet been observed in detectors.
Existence of more elementary particles have been identified or speculated by the scientists: one class of these are supersymmetric particles or sparticles. Each particle in the Standard Model would have a superpartner whose spin differs by 1/2 from the ordinary particle. There are a whole list of names of elementary particles / particles here: neutrilinos (superpartners of neutral Higgs bosons, Z bosons and photon), chargino (superpartner of charged bosons), photino (sp of photon), wino ( sp of W bosons), zino (sp of Z boson), Higgisions (sp of Higgs bosons), gluino (sp of gluons), gravitino (sp of graviton), sleptons (sp of leptons), sneutrino (sp of neutrino) and squarks (sp of quarks).
There are stll more elementary particles: graviscalar, graviphoton,axion, saxion, axino, saxion, branon, dilaton, dilatino, leptoquarks X and Y bosons, magnetic photon, majoron and majorana.
We are virtually flooded with elementary particles of different kinds. The explain or predictably potential in explaining the material universe. But then the Universe is dependent on too many fundamental building blocks. We do not know how they came into existence except from the Big Bang general source of Energy Concentrate in the continuous process of losing density. In that case, they are not the building blocks of the Universe: they are the result of the dilution of energy.
The Truely Fundamental Particles could not have been too many and must be capable of explaining the high density energy concentrate itself and its inflationary behaviour. The Fundemental Elementary Particles or constiuent of the Universe are still illuding us. What we know so far and in the process of knowing is the properties and chracteristics of particles that help explain the operation of other particles and forces but not yet amenable to investigation as how they are sourced from the basic orgin of all matter. The String Theory talks of particles not being point particles but closed or open strings and may help better explain how the particles behave. But does string theory yet solve our problem of too many elementary particles? Maybe the concept of strings and branes have given us the desired direction of investigation. If the vibration of strings produce elementary particles, the strings themselves may be the path to the origin of all matter, energy, space and time!
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
6. Eternity Nicks In The Nick of Time
Time is so much an integral part of human life, that we have time for everything except time. Time and existence of time is taken for granted. We are born in the nick of time. Our time starts some 42 weeks before we see the light of the World. We record the time of birth and time of death both on Calendat time and clock/ wrist watch time. We enjoy happy times and find time to introspect. We have the habit of even killing time, even though we know time is money. We forget things from time to time and even with time. Time is supposed to be a great healer.Sometimes we have idle or spare time, sometimes we run short of time, Sometimes we schedule time for appointment and sometimes we failed to reach the destination in time. We complain of scarcity of time. When we do not know we hope time will tell. We desire good things to be done in time and aircraft's departing, flying and landing on time. We know time runs out fast and yet waiting at the end of a long queue we seem to find time taking its own sweet time to reach us at the head of the queue.
We schedule our programs to best utilize time. We need leisure time, bedtime , breakfast time and dinner time. Some say that any time is tea time. We distinguish between day time and night time. We dislike time consuming work and time delays. Some likes winter time but dislike summer times. Television channels want their prime time ratings to go up. We do not like time delays but wait to act when the time is ripe. Many things take time to make an impact.
We place events in chronological time and maintain records as per Calendar time. Executives want information online on real time basis. We pass time in pastimes and get worried during war times. We read about events in historical times with interest and are amazed to know that some scholars have discovered about things during pre-historic time. In arithmetic, there were sums involving time and work. In college they taught differential calculus and difference equations to deal with time dynamics. In science fiction, we travel backwards and forward in time.
If our lives are so time dependent and intertwined with time, we could perhaps allocate time to explore the concept of and independent existence of time. It is better to start with the stupid question: what is Time (not what is the time)? Does Time have an existence or is it only a construct to make living more comfortable?
The concept of Time helps us the sequence events/ happenings and future outcomes in a manner to place them in the order of their occurrence: which occurred before and which after which. Time also helps us have an idea of the distance between two events as also measure the duration of an event or happening. Thus, Kurukshetra War happened before Arjun died and after Arjun's father died, the distance between Arjun's father's death and Arjun's death was x number of years and that the the battle of Kurukshtra lasted for say 18 days. It is like a number system where the numbers are placed in a sequence of ascending/ descending order of magnitude and where the distance between two numbers are capable of being measured and distances between two different pairs of numbers can be compared. This is applicable not in the past tense, past continuous tense and past perfect tense, but also of the different categories of present and future tense.
We are herefore very particular about measuring time / time periods and time intervals. Units of measurement are small as as very large. One Planck time is the time it would take a photon travelling at the speed of light to cross a distance equal to one Planck length (1.616252(81)×10−35 meters). Theoretically, the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible is roughly 10-43 seconds (change in time less than one Planck time apart, is beyond physical measurement and detection: the smallest time interval that was directly measured was one of 12 attoseconds (12 x 10−18 seconds), about 1024 times larger than the Planck time. Planck Epoch Planck epoch (or Planck era), named after Max Planck, is the earliest period of time in the history of the universe, from zero to approximately 10−43 seconds (Planck time), during which, it is believed, quantum effects of gravity were significant. Division and combination of tiem units have been in practice among ancient Indians(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_units_of_measurement). The smalest units of time is a miniscule of a currently known second while the largest is Brahma's day equivalent to 4.32 billion human years. But what we measure as time my not be really in existence: we measure change or movement and call it time!
Does Time have any real existence beyond such use to deal with past, present and future which are essentially a classification for human convenience. Would Time be there when human beings did not exist? Is Time an independent component of the Universe as Energy-Matter is or it is just another derivative of the phenomenon called Energy-Matter? We have discussed in the previous post, how Space is a mere derivative of Energy: energy reduces its density to produce and expand space. This is what Big Bang theory of the creation of Universe says. The same is true of Time. Time started with the Big Bang and merely reflects the change in energy density and the consequential creation and expansion of space. That is why just like we have energy-matter equivalence a la Einstein, we have space-time as one dimension or a single spacetime contimum. Einstein showed that with electromagnemtic measurement, time and space get entangled in what is called Minowski space.
We could derive a formula following Einstein.
Time = Distance travelled by light in space divided by the square-root of energy per unit of mass. You are right. I expressed the famous E = m*c^2 in a different way. For Einstein energy per unit of mass and speed of light are constants of equal values (speed of light is nothing but a ratio of related intervals of space and time covered by light as it travels). If particles of light has to move, they should get space to move in. The interval space between which a light particle moved is nothing but a change of position. This change of position is alternatively measured in time so that one can derive a notion called speed or velocity. If there is no change, there is no time. Time disappears. Time does not have any existence of its own. It started with Big Bang and will end with Heat Death of Big Rip. What was the time before Big Bang is a meaningless question if we understand Stephen Hawkings, the greatscientist of our time.
Ultimately, we arrive at Energy as the sole element of the Universe.
But equations are equations. What is a dependent variable and which is independent often depends on our choice. So, one can if one wishes can say that energy, mass and space - all exists only in time. Without Time, nothing exists: Kaal, the Eternal Time, as per the Cosmic Myth of 200 BC, shapes the path of behaviour of all beings and non-beings in the Universe and the Universe. But for the Cosmic Myth of 2011 AD, Time is just about 14 billion years of age and was created only by the Big Bang, meaning the Big Bang was beyond Time.
By just adding Big Crunch to Big Bang, however, one can easily extend the lifetime of Time to Infinity: a never-ending repeated cycles of contraction and expansion of space along with increasing and decreasing density of energy. This means Time never ends as change never ends. Change in energy density and amount of space occurs only in Time. If change never ceases permanently, Time is Infinite just as the numbers are.
We thus go back to the Cosmic Myth of 200BC. In the five to two millennium BC, the source of all creation was traced back to the Infinite Kaal (Time) by the knowledge seekers in India: Everything exists in Time and Time exists in everything. And yes, that is the Concept of God in Sanatana Hindu Cosmology (not religion). Eternity nicked Time in the nick of time.
Still the question about Time would persist. Energy (or for that matter or latent matter was there to start with and never ceases to exist (conservation principle that nothing is lost in the Universe). Even space is not created by human beings. Time is the creation of human beings just as the numbers are. They may be uncountable infinite, but they are not fundamental to the Universe. Stars are part of the Universe but their numbers, however counted, are not part of the Universe. So time is not a fundamental and independent constituent/ ingredient/ feature of the Universe.
There are no human beings in the Mars or the Jupiter. So, there is no Number or Time in the Universe outside the Earth. Even at the time the Planet Earth was formed, there were no human beings and hence there would not have been numbers or Time. Could it not be that both the Number System and Time existed all along in the Universe just as Energy and matter and possibly Space did. Human beings only discovered them that all these existed in the Universe. Internet technology was not discovered until recently: does it mean that Internet communication did not exist in the Universe from the very beginning?
Where are the scientific answers to these questions? Can we live with opinions and hunches? For how long Time do we have to wait? Till Eternity? Or, is it that since energy, mass, space and time get entangled, the quadruplet is nothing but the same thing: there is nothing to distinguish among time, energy, mass and time!!!
We would explore these thoughts a little later.
We schedule our programs to best utilize time. We need leisure time, bedtime , breakfast time and dinner time. Some say that any time is tea time. We distinguish between day time and night time. We dislike time consuming work and time delays. Some likes winter time but dislike summer times. Television channels want their prime time ratings to go up. We do not like time delays but wait to act when the time is ripe. Many things take time to make an impact.
We place events in chronological time and maintain records as per Calendar time. Executives want information online on real time basis. We pass time in pastimes and get worried during war times. We read about events in historical times with interest and are amazed to know that some scholars have discovered about things during pre-historic time. In arithmetic, there were sums involving time and work. In college they taught differential calculus and difference equations to deal with time dynamics. In science fiction, we travel backwards and forward in time.
If our lives are so time dependent and intertwined with time, we could perhaps allocate time to explore the concept of and independent existence of time. It is better to start with the stupid question: what is Time (not what is the time)? Does Time have an existence or is it only a construct to make living more comfortable?
The concept of Time helps us the sequence events/ happenings and future outcomes in a manner to place them in the order of their occurrence: which occurred before and which after which. Time also helps us have an idea of the distance between two events as also measure the duration of an event or happening. Thus, Kurukshetra War happened before Arjun died and after Arjun's father died, the distance between Arjun's father's death and Arjun's death was x number of years and that the the battle of Kurukshtra lasted for say 18 days. It is like a number system where the numbers are placed in a sequence of ascending/ descending order of magnitude and where the distance between two numbers are capable of being measured and distances between two different pairs of numbers can be compared. This is applicable not in the past tense, past continuous tense and past perfect tense, but also of the different categories of present and future tense.
We are herefore very particular about measuring time / time periods and time intervals. Units of measurement are small as as very large. One Planck time is the time it would take a photon travelling at the speed of light to cross a distance equal to one Planck length (1.616252(81)×10−35 meters). Theoretically, the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible is roughly 10-43 seconds (change in time less than one Planck time apart, is beyond physical measurement and detection: the smallest time interval that was directly measured was one of 12 attoseconds (12 x 10−18 seconds), about 1024 times larger than the Planck time. Planck Epoch Planck epoch (or Planck era), named after Max Planck, is the earliest period of time in the history of the universe, from zero to approximately 10−43 seconds (Planck time), during which, it is believed, quantum effects of gravity were significant. Division and combination of tiem units have been in practice among ancient Indians(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_units_of_measurement). The smalest units of time is a miniscule of a currently known second while the largest is Brahma's day equivalent to 4.32 billion human years. But what we measure as time my not be really in existence: we measure change or movement and call it time!
Does Time have any real existence beyond such use to deal with past, present and future which are essentially a classification for human convenience. Would Time be there when human beings did not exist? Is Time an independent component of the Universe as Energy-Matter is or it is just another derivative of the phenomenon called Energy-Matter? We have discussed in the previous post, how Space is a mere derivative of Energy: energy reduces its density to produce and expand space. This is what Big Bang theory of the creation of Universe says. The same is true of Time. Time started with the Big Bang and merely reflects the change in energy density and the consequential creation and expansion of space. That is why just like we have energy-matter equivalence a la Einstein, we have space-time as one dimension or a single spacetime contimum. Einstein showed that with electromagnemtic measurement, time and space get entangled in what is called Minowski space.
We could derive a formula following Einstein.
Time = Distance travelled by light in space divided by the square-root of energy per unit of mass. You are right. I expressed the famous E = m*c^2 in a different way. For Einstein energy per unit of mass and speed of light are constants of equal values (speed of light is nothing but a ratio of related intervals of space and time covered by light as it travels). If particles of light has to move, they should get space to move in. The interval space between which a light particle moved is nothing but a change of position. This change of position is alternatively measured in time so that one can derive a notion called speed or velocity. If there is no change, there is no time. Time disappears. Time does not have any existence of its own. It started with Big Bang and will end with Heat Death of Big Rip. What was the time before Big Bang is a meaningless question if we understand Stephen Hawkings, the greatscientist of our time.
Ultimately, we arrive at Energy as the sole element of the Universe.
But equations are equations. What is a dependent variable and which is independent often depends on our choice. So, one can if one wishes can say that energy, mass and space - all exists only in time. Without Time, nothing exists: Kaal, the Eternal Time, as per the Cosmic Myth of 200 BC, shapes the path of behaviour of all beings and non-beings in the Universe and the Universe. But for the Cosmic Myth of 2011 AD, Time is just about 14 billion years of age and was created only by the Big Bang, meaning the Big Bang was beyond Time.
By just adding Big Crunch to Big Bang, however, one can easily extend the lifetime of Time to Infinity: a never-ending repeated cycles of contraction and expansion of space along with increasing and decreasing density of energy. This means Time never ends as change never ends. Change in energy density and amount of space occurs only in Time. If change never ceases permanently, Time is Infinite just as the numbers are.
We thus go back to the Cosmic Myth of 200BC. In the five to two millennium BC, the source of all creation was traced back to the Infinite Kaal (Time) by the knowledge seekers in India: Everything exists in Time and Time exists in everything. And yes, that is the Concept of God in Sanatana Hindu Cosmology (not religion). Eternity nicked Time in the nick of time.
Still the question about Time would persist. Energy (or for that matter or latent matter was there to start with and never ceases to exist (conservation principle that nothing is lost in the Universe). Even space is not created by human beings. Time is the creation of human beings just as the numbers are. They may be uncountable infinite, but they are not fundamental to the Universe. Stars are part of the Universe but their numbers, however counted, are not part of the Universe. So time is not a fundamental and independent constituent/ ingredient/ feature of the Universe.
There are no human beings in the Mars or the Jupiter. So, there is no Number or Time in the Universe outside the Earth. Even at the time the Planet Earth was formed, there were no human beings and hence there would not have been numbers or Time. Could it not be that both the Number System and Time existed all along in the Universe just as Energy and matter and possibly Space did. Human beings only discovered them that all these existed in the Universe. Internet technology was not discovered until recently: does it mean that Internet communication did not exist in the Universe from the very beginning?
Where are the scientific answers to these questions? Can we live with opinions and hunches? For how long Time do we have to wait? Till Eternity? Or, is it that since energy, mass, space and time get entangled, the quadruplet is nothing but the same thing: there is nothing to distinguish among time, energy, mass and time!!!
We would explore these thoughts a little later.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
5. Space in Search for Domain
Concept of space is so crucial to human beings. We need abstract spaces to satisfy our intellectual needs and nebulous spaces to satisfy our emotional needs and physical spaces to satisfy our need to accommodate everything that we come across. When we have plenty of space in supply, we space out the all that we need to keep in space and when we have more things to be accommodated, we squeeze out space from the available space through compacting.
In mathematics, a space is a set whose members satisfy some defined structure. And, there are many types of mathematical spaces like (arranged alphabetically) Affine Space, Baire Space, Banach Space, Base Space, Bergman Space, Besov Space, Borel Space, Calabi-Yau Space, Cellular Space, Chu Space, Dimension, Dodecahedral Space, Drinfeld's Symmetric Space, Eilenberg-Mac Lane Space, Euclidean Space, Fiber Space, Finsler Space, First-Countable Space, Fréchet Space, Function Space, G-Space, Green Space, Hausdorff Space, Heisenberg Space, Hilbert Space, Hyperbolic Space, Inner Product Space, L2-Space, Lens Space, Line Space, Linear Space, Liouville Space, Locally Convex Space, Locally Finite Space, Loop Space, Mapping Space, Measure Space, Metric Space, Minkowski Space, Müntz Space, Non-Euclidean Spaces, Normed Space, Paracompact Space, Planar Space, Polish Space, Probability Space, Projective Space, Quotient Space, Riemann's Moduli Space, Riemann Space, Sample Space, Standard Space, State Space, Stone Space, Symplectic Space, Teichmüller Space, Tensor Space, Topological Space, Topological Vector Space, Total Space, Vector Space . Topological spaces are the most general type of spaces, while the most familiar and popular space in everyday life is the Euclidean space: we all started with Euclidean geometry and in Einstein's theory of Special Relativity, Euclidean three-space plus time are unified into the so-called Minkowski space. The supply of newer mathematical spaces however cannot meet the ever-growing demand for physical and emotional spaces.
Every moment is in search for space. The growing human population needs more space to live more prosperous and quality life. The endangered species need space. Houses need more living, dinning and partying space. Cars need more communication space as well as parking space. The women needs space as much to the men. The children need space. Computers need more disk space. Data storage and transmission need infinite cyberspace. Human mind needs space to explore and work out the shape of space and reach the edges of space if any. Matter occupies space. The balloon expands in space. Light travels and radiates in space. Energy fills space. Fields needs space to work on. The stars and planets are in the space and the galaxies have space within the formations as well between any two of them. Even invisible energy and matter occupy space. Space seems to get filled in with something or the other, so there is no empty space that remains to be occupied. So, space has to expand itself to keep the Universe going.
Is that why the Cosmic Myth 2011 AD (Big Bang, Big Crunch etc) provides for creation and expansion/ contraction of space depending on the emerging requirement for space? It says that Space, matter, energy and time arose out of the continuous inflation of the dimension-less primordial point of maximum density energy with high pressure and temperature that appeared from no where suddenly 14 billion human years ago to begin the journey of the Universe. This myth does not explain how that point came about and where did it appear to exist? Scientific could go so far back only as for Science this was the beginning. Of course, the Big Crunch helps to explain that the primordial infinitesimal, dimension-less point of concentrated energy is not primordial but the result of cosmic contraction. But that does not help answer the question from where did this energy come from: it is just like the Cosmic Myth @ 200 BC not explaining when and how the Consciousness come from. Well, there are two ways to deal with that. First, just as God has been there as Consciousness all the time as Self created / Sayambhu, the same property applies to Energy that moves from the State of maximum possible density to the State of minimum possible density (cosmic inflation) and then back to maximum density (through cosmic deflation) phase. Second, if there are continuous cycles of alternating contraction and expansion phases, there is no need to ask where and when did it all begin. Just as the Hindus know that God has been in existence for ever without a beginning and end.
In the cosmic inflation phase, energy density continually decreases, even as part of the energy converts itself into matter and matter converts itself into energy, creating more and ore space in the process. It is tautological: energy density is defined as amount of energy per unit of space: increase / decrease in energy density implies that space must expand/ contract at a faster rate than expansion/ contraction of energy. Thus, the Universe is essentially defined by Energy and its properties - matter and space are mere derivatives/ consequence of the properties of energy.
And, energy loses density to create space. And, the space in the Universe is expanding. Between ant two galaxies, the amount of space is expanding. And, this is how currently the Universe is expanding in size. The balloon expands in space, but in what does the space or the Universe expand? Either we assume that expansion or contraction of space is a mere illusion or assume that expansion of space creates its own required space. Both are interesting concepts but not very appealing without proof.
There is still another alternative. The total energy of the Universe in its most concentrated form exists in an infinite, end-less, indestructible, unperturbed, non-expandable, non-contractible, non-tearing, non-breakable, seamless, transparent, color-less, all-pervasive and medium, named, say, Illusionnet (MayaJaal) or Netillude. Space and the Universe expand and contracts in that Illiusionnet. What does that illusion contain: it contains all that is there in the space including spaces that energy, matter, fields, time and strings that occupy as also spaces that are free of matter, energy, fields, time and strings, etc. It is like the 200 BC mythological concept of Narayana which is present in each and everything with complete density and in which each and everything exists. It is the only concept that allows for existence of the same particle to be present simultaneously at different locations and time. All spaces, whetheroccupied/ tainted by any physical component/ matter/ energy/ field or not, may have to lie in some domain like Narayana or Neillude.
Let's forget for the present such illusive concepts as Narayana or Netilude. Let's be comortable with the idea that the space between any two galaxies are expanding. Two issues need to be addressed. First, if the space is expanding, it must be doing so because the invisible/ visible energy content in those parts of the space must still be becoming less dense. Where is this energy or matter going? Crossing over to fall inside the boundaries of the galaxies and their graviational fields? When would the space between galxies become completely bereft f any matter or energy or anything else? And, when it does hppen, what would happen to that empty spce? Will it collapse or become static. This would mean the distances between galaxies would tereafter stop increasing.
Second, if the distances between galaxies are expanding, then some galaxies would have already gone out of our Milkyway glaxies and those nearby. And, may be some galaxies may have gone out of the horion of the galaxies that are at the edge of our Horizon. Wht is happenning to those galaxies that have gone out of the horion of the end of our horizon? What is the position of the set of galaxies beyong the horizon of the infinite horizons? Are there spaces beyond them? The edge of the infinite Universe brdered by galaxies or empty spaces? (does the natural number system end with an odd or even number? being infinite, the question does ot arise, since the series of natural numbers cannot not ever have an end point?)
Is the concept of Space up for a grand deconceptualisation and reconceptualisation?
In mathematics, a space is a set whose members satisfy some defined structure. And, there are many types of mathematical spaces like (arranged alphabetically) Affine Space, Baire Space, Banach Space, Base Space, Bergman Space, Besov Space, Borel Space, Calabi-Yau Space, Cellular Space, Chu Space, Dimension, Dodecahedral Space, Drinfeld's Symmetric Space, Eilenberg-Mac Lane Space, Euclidean Space, Fiber Space, Finsler Space, First-Countable Space, Fréchet Space, Function Space, G-Space, Green Space, Hausdorff Space, Heisenberg Space, Hilbert Space, Hyperbolic Space, Inner Product Space, L2-Space, Lens Space, Line Space, Linear Space, Liouville Space, Locally Convex Space, Locally Finite Space, Loop Space, Mapping Space, Measure Space, Metric Space, Minkowski Space, Müntz Space, Non-Euclidean Spaces, Normed Space, Paracompact Space, Planar Space, Polish Space, Probability Space, Projective Space, Quotient Space, Riemann's Moduli Space, Riemann Space, Sample Space, Standard Space, State Space, Stone Space, Symplectic Space, Teichmüller Space, Tensor Space, Topological Space, Topological Vector Space, Total Space, Vector Space . Topological spaces are the most general type of spaces, while the most familiar and popular space in everyday life is the Euclidean space: we all started with Euclidean geometry and in Einstein's theory of Special Relativity, Euclidean three-space plus time are unified into the so-called Minkowski space. The supply of newer mathematical spaces however cannot meet the ever-growing demand for physical and emotional spaces.
Every moment is in search for space. The growing human population needs more space to live more prosperous and quality life. The endangered species need space. Houses need more living, dinning and partying space. Cars need more communication space as well as parking space. The women needs space as much to the men. The children need space. Computers need more disk space. Data storage and transmission need infinite cyberspace. Human mind needs space to explore and work out the shape of space and reach the edges of space if any. Matter occupies space. The balloon expands in space. Light travels and radiates in space. Energy fills space. Fields needs space to work on. The stars and planets are in the space and the galaxies have space within the formations as well between any two of them. Even invisible energy and matter occupy space. Space seems to get filled in with something or the other, so there is no empty space that remains to be occupied. So, space has to expand itself to keep the Universe going.
Is that why the Cosmic Myth 2011 AD (Big Bang, Big Crunch etc) provides for creation and expansion/ contraction of space depending on the emerging requirement for space? It says that Space, matter, energy and time arose out of the continuous inflation of the dimension-less primordial point of maximum density energy with high pressure and temperature that appeared from no where suddenly 14 billion human years ago to begin the journey of the Universe. This myth does not explain how that point came about and where did it appear to exist? Scientific could go so far back only as for Science this was the beginning. Of course, the Big Crunch helps to explain that the primordial infinitesimal, dimension-less point of concentrated energy is not primordial but the result of cosmic contraction. But that does not help answer the question from where did this energy come from: it is just like the Cosmic Myth @ 200 BC not explaining when and how the Consciousness come from. Well, there are two ways to deal with that. First, just as God has been there as Consciousness all the time as Self created / Sayambhu, the same property applies to Energy that moves from the State of maximum possible density to the State of minimum possible density (cosmic inflation) and then back to maximum density (through cosmic deflation) phase. Second, if there are continuous cycles of alternating contraction and expansion phases, there is no need to ask where and when did it all begin. Just as the Hindus know that God has been in existence for ever without a beginning and end.
In the cosmic inflation phase, energy density continually decreases, even as part of the energy converts itself into matter and matter converts itself into energy, creating more and ore space in the process. It is tautological: energy density is defined as amount of energy per unit of space: increase / decrease in energy density implies that space must expand/ contract at a faster rate than expansion/ contraction of energy. Thus, the Universe is essentially defined by Energy and its properties - matter and space are mere derivatives/ consequence of the properties of energy.
And, energy loses density to create space. And, the space in the Universe is expanding. Between ant two galaxies, the amount of space is expanding. And, this is how currently the Universe is expanding in size. The balloon expands in space, but in what does the space or the Universe expand? Either we assume that expansion or contraction of space is a mere illusion or assume that expansion of space creates its own required space. Both are interesting concepts but not very appealing without proof.
There is still another alternative. The total energy of the Universe in its most concentrated form exists in an infinite, end-less, indestructible, unperturbed, non-expandable, non-contractible, non-tearing, non-breakable, seamless, transparent, color-less, all-pervasive and medium, named, say, Illusionnet (MayaJaal) or Netillude. Space and the Universe expand and contracts in that Illiusionnet. What does that illusion contain: it contains all that is there in the space including spaces that energy, matter, fields, time and strings that occupy as also spaces that are free of matter, energy, fields, time and strings, etc. It is like the 200 BC mythological concept of Narayana which is present in each and everything with complete density and in which each and everything exists. It is the only concept that allows for existence of the same particle to be present simultaneously at different locations and time. All spaces, whetheroccupied/ tainted by any physical component/ matter/ energy/ field or not, may have to lie in some domain like Narayana or Neillude.
Let's forget for the present such illusive concepts as Narayana or Netilude. Let's be comortable with the idea that the space between any two galaxies are expanding. Two issues need to be addressed. First, if the space is expanding, it must be doing so because the invisible/ visible energy content in those parts of the space must still be becoming less dense. Where is this energy or matter going? Crossing over to fall inside the boundaries of the galaxies and their graviational fields? When would the space between galxies become completely bereft f any matter or energy or anything else? And, when it does hppen, what would happen to that empty spce? Will it collapse or become static. This would mean the distances between galaxies would tereafter stop increasing.
Second, if the distances between galaxies are expanding, then some galaxies would have already gone out of our Milkyway glaxies and those nearby. And, may be some galaxies may have gone out of the horion of the galaxies that are at the edge of our Horizon. Wht is happenning to those galaxies that have gone out of the horion of the end of our horizon? What is the position of the set of galaxies beyong the horizon of the infinite horizons? Are there spaces beyond them? The edge of the infinite Universe brdered by galaxies or empty spaces? (does the natural number system end with an odd or even number? being infinite, the question does ot arise, since the series of natural numbers cannot not ever have an end point?)
Is the concept of Space up for a grand deconceptualisation and reconceptualisation?
Thursday, January 6, 2011
4. The Cosmic Myth @ 2011 AD
The Grand Father (GF) was chatting with his Grand Child (GC) over the Internet. The GC asked: Grand Father, could you please tell me ‘How did all that we see around and in the sky come about’?
GF: But I have very little knowledge about this, my dear. You have to learn all this by yourself.
GC: This is not fair Grand Dad. More than 2210 years back, a Grand Father told his Grand Child the story about the Universe. You should do the same favour to me if you love me.
GF: How do you know about grand father story of 2ooBC?
GC: Well, that is in the Internet. You can visit the story Grand Dad by clicking on http://universeofignorance.blogspot.com/ .
GF: Then, what is the problem? You read the story there yourself.
GC: I read it, Dadu. But the story is based on knowledge gathered in the 5-7 centuries prior to 200 before Christ. I need you to update that story for me.
GF: But I am old and have virtually no knowledge on the subject. You are the only Sun in my Universe now dear young one.
GC: Grand Dad, you must make some efforts to help me. Search the Internet and spin your story as far as your capability allows you. That would be a good start for me and I promise I will refer to your contribution when I spin my story for my grand children.
GF: OK. Let me try. You come back to me after seven days on this subject.
GC: I love you, Grand Pa. You are so sweet.
The chat gets over. After seven days, the chat resumes on the subject.
GC: So, Grandpa, tell me now ‘How did all that we see around and in the sky come about’?
GF: About 13.58 - 13.92 billion human years ago, there was only an infinitesimal volume, infinitesimal point-like entity filled homogeneously and isotropically with an incredibly very high density energy density characterised by huge temperature and pressures. As soon as that entity emerged, it instantaneously started expanding and in 10−37 seconds, a phase transition caused a cosmic inflation of exponential expansion. After about 10−11 seconds, the particle energies dropped to values that can be attained in particle physics experiments. Soon the expansion witnessed the appearance of quark–gluon plasma and other elementary particles: high temperature caused random motions of particles at relativistic speeds with particle–antiparticle pairs of all kinds were being continuously created and destroyed in collisions. At about 10−6 seconds, quarks and gluon's combined to form baryons such as protons and neutrons. More stable particles protons and neutrons started to form when the expansion was one second old.
At some point into the expansion, an unknown reaction called baryon-genesis led to a small excess of quarks and leptons over anti-quarks and anti-leptons — of about one part in 30 million. The small excess of quarks over anti-quarks led to a small excess of baryons over anti-baryons. The temperature was now no longer high enough to create new proton–antiproton pairs (similarly for neutrons–antineutrons), so a mass annihilation immediately followed, leaving just one in 1010 of the original protons and neutrons, and none of their antiparticles. A similar process happened at about 1 second for electrons and positrons. After these annihilation, the remaining protons, neutrons and electrons were no longer moving relativistic and the energy density of the expanding entity was dominated by photons (with a minor contribution from neutrinos). This resulted in the predominance of matter over antimatter. The entity continued to grow in size and fall in temperature, hence the typical energy of each particle was decreasing. Symmetry breaking phase transitions put the fundamental forces of physics and the parameters of elementary particles into their present form.
A few minutes into the expansion, when the temperature was about a billion Kelvin and the density was about that of air, neutrons combined with protons to form deuterium and helium nuclei in a process called Big Bang nucleo-synthesis. Most protons remained uncombined as hydrogen nuclei. As the entity cooled down further, the rest mass energy density of matter came to gravitationally dominate that of the photon radiation.
The expanding entity was getting filled with a uniform glow from its white-hot fog of hydrogen plasma. With the continuous expansion, both the plasma and the thermal radiation filling it grew cooler. When the entity cooled enough, stable atoms could form. These atoms could no longer absorb the thermal radiation, the opaque fog was replaced gradually by a transparent entity. The photons that existed at that time have been propagating ever since, though growing fainter and less energetic (there being exactly the same number of photons in a progressively larger entity).
With the entity expanding and the density of energy and matter falling, progressively more space was being created. The fabric of space itself began expanding like the surface of an inflating balloon – matter simply rode along the stretching space like dust on the balloon's surface. The big bang is not like an explosion of matter in otherwise empty space; rather, space itself began with the Big Bang and carried matter with it as it expanded. The entity grew from smaller than a single atom to bigger than a galaxy. And it kept on growing at a fantastic rate. It is still expanding even as we chat now.
After about 379,000 years of expansion, the electrons and nuclei combined into atoms (mostly hydrogen). Galaxies and stars and other bodies formed later. Much later did the entity witness within it the emergence of trees, animals, birds and human beings through this process of transformation of and interaction energy, matter and its constituents, the space and the resulting time of continuous change in them. This is the entity that we call as the Universe now.
GC: Very interesting story, Grandpa, though many words that you spoke is not yet in the domain of my knowledge.
GF: I also do not understand or comprehend the meaning of many of these words. But each word has a definitive meaning, even if often somewhat abstract. These are coined by the scientists who work with such concepts as are meaningful and I have narrated a simplified, even if not absolutely perfect, story that they have developed with lot of efforts.
GC: But how do the scientists know that they have a correct and true story? They were not there for the overwhelmingly greater part of the time of 14 billion years covered by their story.
GF: They have used the method of extrapolation of successive periods of time in the recent periods into the past to get to the beginning of the story 14 billion years ago.
GC: Method of extrapolation of the recent period into the period long, long time past!
GC: Yes, there are lot of questions that remains unanswered by the Cosmological Myth that you have narrated.
GF: These questions are the subject matter of interest in the subsequent set of posts in this blog, my dear. If you have time just have a glance time to time.
GC: Thanks Grandpa.
GC: Method of extrapolation of the recent period into the period long, long time past!
GF: Yes. First, one observes the behaviour of the Universe in the recent period to formulate a dynamic model of a set of differential equations based on certain reasonable assumptions that are testable/ verifiable and then from the solution of the set of equations to find the time path of the variables describing the Universe. Once the time path is known, you work backwards in time to get the picture/ snapshots at different points of time in the past as far as you can go.
The two basic assumptions are that the physical laws are universally applicable and the Cosmological Principle that on large scales the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic. These assumptions have been tested to be true. Einstein's nine field equations based on General Relativity is then used to get into the past. That the individual galaxies still remain bounded by the same size under the pressure of their respective gravitational forces, while the space between any two of them are observed to be increasing over time (resulting in the increasing distances between them), is a proof that the Universe is still expanding the way it had been doing since the Big Bang expansion started from an infinitesimal entity of incredibly high density energy, high temperature, high pressure phenomenon.
The two basic assumptions are that the physical laws are universally applicable and the Cosmological Principle that on large scales the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic. These assumptions have been tested to be true. Einstein's nine field equations based on General Relativity is then used to get into the past. That the individual galaxies still remain bounded by the same size under the pressure of their respective gravitational forces, while the space between any two of them are observed to be increasing over time (resulting in the increasing distances between them), is a proof that the Universe is still expanding the way it had been doing since the Big Bang expansion started from an infinitesimal entity of incredibly high density energy, high temperature, high pressure phenomenon.
If the large-scale Universe appears isotropic as viewed from Earth, the cosmological principle can be derived from the simpler Copernican Principle that there is no preferred (or special) observer or vantage point. The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.
The "Big Bang" was not an explosion but the abrupt appearance of expanding space time containing radiation at temperatures of around 1015 K. This was immediately (within 10−29 second) followed by an exponential expansion of space by a scale multiplier of 1027 or more. The early universe remained hot (above 10,000 K) for several hundred thousand years, a state that is detectable as a residual cosmic microwave background or CMB, a very low energy radiation emanating from all parts of the sky. The "Big Bang" scenario, with cosmic inflation and standard particle physics, is the only current cosmological model consistent with the observed continuing expansion of space, the observed distribution of lighter elements (hydrogen, helium, lithium, oxygen) in the universe, and the spatial texture of minute irregularities (anisotropies) in the CMB radiation.
The "Big Bang" was not an explosion but the abrupt appearance of expanding space time containing radiation at temperatures of around 1015 K. This was immediately (within 10−29 second) followed by an exponential expansion of space by a scale multiplier of 1027 or more. The early universe remained hot (above 10,000 K) for several hundred thousand years, a state that is detectable as a residual cosmic microwave background or CMB, a very low energy radiation emanating from all parts of the sky. The "Big Bang" scenario, with cosmic inflation and standard particle physics, is the only current cosmological model consistent with the observed continuing expansion of space, the observed distribution of lighter elements (hydrogen, helium, lithium, oxygen) in the universe, and the spatial texture of minute irregularities (anisotropies) in the CMB radiation.
I do not understand these proofs of the Big Bang and the associated mathematics, but it looks like that the proofs are valid scientifically. So, if you wish you can go and study these scientific details. Unlike the Cosmic Myth @ 200 BC, the Cosmic Myth @ 2011 AD provides enough scientific proofs for scrutiny.
GC: What does the Myth @ 2011 AD forecast for the future
GF: The continued expansion that more and more of the currently visible Universe will pass beyond our event horizon and out of contact with us. The eventual result is not known. The Universe contains massive quantity of dark energy in the form of a cosmological constant. If the density in the Universe were equal to or below the critical density, the expansion would slow down, but never stop. Star formation would cease as all the interstellar gas in each galaxy is consumed; stars would burn out leaving white dwarfs, neutron stars, and black holes. Very gradually, collisions between these would result in mass accumulating into larger and larger black holes. The average temperature of the Universe would asymptotically approach absolute zero — a Big Freeze.
There is a possibility that only gravitationally bound systems, such as galaxies, would remain together, and they too would be subject to heat death, as the Universe expands and cools. If the protons were unstable, then baryon matter would disappear, leaving only radiation and black holes. Eventually, black holes would evaporate by emitting Hawking radiation. The entropy of the Universe would increase to the point where no organized form of energy could be extracted from it, a scenario known as heat death. I do not know whether that means the terminal date of the Universe. Phantom energy theories suggest that ultimately galaxy clusters, stars, planets, atoms, nuclei and matter itself will be torn apart by the ever-increasing expansion in a so-called Big Rip.
There is also a possibility that there could be a Big Crunch. If the mass density of the Universe were greater than the critical density, then the Universe would reach a maximum size and then begin to collapse. It would become denser and hotter again, ending with a state that was similar to that in which it started — a Big Crunch. This theory says the universe will one day stop expanding. Then, as gravity pulls on matter, the universe will begin to contract, falling inward until it has collapsed into a super hot, super-dense singularity. The universe is like a giant souffle. It starts out small, expands as it heats up, and eventually, as the souffle cools, begins to collapse. Big Crunch is the consequence of the Big Bang and vice verse.
GC: But repeated cycles of Big Bang and Big Crunch bring us back to Myth @ 200 BC.
GF: You are right. The Cosmological Myth that you would spin when you become a grand father may in fact be one that is more akin to the Cosmological Myth of Indians in second to sixth century BC.
GC: Yes, there are lot of questions that remains unanswered by the Cosmological Myth that you have narrated.
GF: These questions are the subject matter of interest in the subsequent set of posts in this blog, my dear. If you have time just have a glance time to time.
GC: Thanks Grandpa.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)