IMHO, modern cosmology is in a state of crisis with seemingly dozens of highly speculative ideas, each one weirder than the previous one, competing for space in the scientific and general public literature. Fundamental questions vastly outnumber fundamental answers. Was there a before-the-Big-Bang or the creation of something-from-nothing? Could our Universe actually have been in-the-beginning the size of a pinhead or less? Was there a Big Bang event and an inflation event and which came first? What actually banged and/or inflated anyway and why did it bang and/or inflate? Is the Universe actually the inside of a Black Hole or really a 2-D hologram? Is the cosmos designed and fine-tuned and if so, what's the explanation and just who is the designer and tuner? Is string theory the ultimate answer to life, the Universe and everything, complete with extra but hidden dimensions? Will the Universe end up in a Big Rip, a Heat Death, or a Big Crunch? Can there be an infinite Cosmos is time and/or in space with repeating histories and infinite copies of you and me? Is there a Multiverse and if so do all universes have the exact same laws, principles and relationships of physics? Is the Universe virtually real or really real? Here's some of my thoughts.
PART ONE: COSMOLOGY
The Cosmos, all that was, is or ever will be, is the ultimate closed system. Nothing gets in and nothing gets out. The contents are fixed.
Just because the Cosmos is infinite in duration doesn't mean the matter / energy contents are also infinite. An infinite amount of stuff in the Cosmos means everything is a something and therefore motion isn't possible.
So, the contents of the Cosmos are finite. Since the Cosmos has infinite duration that means that every possible configuration of matter / energy will happen sooner or later. Every possible configuration would therefore also have to repeat, some configurations perhaps more than others; perhaps not.
The upshot is, whatever it is that you are doing, you've done it before - an infinite number of times before - and you'll do it an infinite number of times in the infinite future.
The Cosmos, and even any universes contained within, might therefore not be cyclic in the traditional sense - Big Bang - Big Crunch - Big Bang - Big Crunch - Big Bang, etc. Rather it's an overall scenario of what goes around comes around again, and again, and again.
PART TWO: COSMOLOGY AT THE BAT: COSMOLOGY STRIKES OUT
I've read a fair few modern cosmology tomes and seen a fair few modern cosmology videos/lectures on YouTube. One overall conclusion I've reached is that most modern cosmologists reside in Alice's "Wonderland". Either that or they have forgotten what they learned in their basic ninth grade high school general science class!
Modern Cosmology: Strike One - The Big Bang Singularity. Big Bang wasn't quantum sized. Iron ball expanding in hot sun run backwards to quantum singularity isn't obviously justified.
Modern Cosmology: Strike Two - Expanding space. No one has ever demonstrated that space is an actual something with structure and of substance.
Modern Cosmology: Strike Three - Dark Energy. The concept of Dark Energy is akin to having an expanding barrel full of apples, yet the apple density within the expanding barrel remains constant. Since one cannot create apples out of less than thin air, where are all of these extra apples coming from? The Twilight Zone? Wonderland? The Outer Limits?
PART THREE: BIG BANG ISSUES
There is one almighty problem with the established or standard model Big Bang event that I'm astounded to note that never seems to have been addressed in any cosmology text. Perhaps I'm missing the obvious here, but even in my ignorance - assuming same - here goes nothing.
The obvious problem, to my way of thinking is that if you cram the contents of our Universe into the sort of volume postulated at the moment of the Big Bang event, then of necessity you must have the Mother of all Black Holes from which there is no en-mass escape! So that means there could not have been a Bang of any size. End of story. So there! Put that in your cosmology texts and ponder that issue!
However, there must be an escape clause somewhere, somehow since cosmologists are hardly going to abandon their Big Bang scenario, not just on a mere Black Hole technicality! Well here are some my options, none of which I suspect will please the professional cosmologist one jot.
Firstly, there was no Big Bang event ever at anytime, anyplace, anywhere and anyhow. Of course that sort of blasphemy is enough to get you figuratively burned at the stake.
Secondly, at the moment of the Big Bang event, the volume, hence density of the Universe was less than the critical density required to form the Mother of all Black Holes. That would also imply that the Universe hadn't of reached minimum volume / maximum density yet, so we appear to have a Big Crunch model in the making. That Big Crunch in the making somehow hit a barrier before reaching critical density, rebounded or reversed direction before becoming a Black Hole. That rebound is or explains our Big Bang event and subsequent expanding Universe. Now that might imply that our Big Bang event was actually the Mother of all Supernova events.
Thirdly, the Universe is expanding - tick. Expansion implies an explosion either controlled or out of control. Explosions require an energy source(s). What is the energy source of our Big Bang event? In order to understand our Big Bang event one must go and theoretically explore a before-the-Big-Bang universe, a universe that contained something that would provide lots and lots and lots of pure energy since the Big Bang event was apparently a pure energy event. Well the ideal, most efficient energy option is matter - antimatter annihilation. A little matter mass combined with a little antimatter mass equals one heck of a lot of pure energy. Still, you'd need more than just a little matter and antimatter. One would almost need a quasi-sized universe of matter meeting and greeting a quasi-sized universe of antimatter. That doesn't strike me as likely and in any event the resulting explosion couldn't happen all at once due to speed of light limitations.
Lastly, the Big Bang event was just a computer / software programmed simulation; the Universe is just a computer / software programmed simulation and we are just a computer / software programmed simulation, beings 'existing' in a virtual reality landscape.
Told you cosmologists wouldn't like my options!
PART FOUR: IN THE BEGINNING: SOMETHING FROM SOMETHING
"In the beginning" there arose something from something.
"In the beginning" there was energy, pure energy.
"In the beginning" was the Big Bang event. If my readings are correct, this was a 100% uniform pure energy event of electromagnetic radiation (photons of X-Ray, Ultraviolet, Infra-Red, Visible, Radio, Gamma, etc. radiation) and of course gravity (gravitons) since energy is a something and all somethings generate gravity *. Now of course energy really is a something which you well know if you've ever had a sunburn or put your hand too close to the fire. Energy is just the opposite of the coin from matter, as per Einstein's famous equation. But now the mysteries start piling up. Creating something from something is also mysterious.
Okay, so you have this new Universe full of energy that's expanding and cooling (getting less dense). During the early stages of this expansion / cooling there was a phase transition(s) and some of this energy morphed into matter (again, as per Einstein's formula). The question is, why so many different fundamental types of matter (including antimatter)? Why not just one type of matter (and/or antimatter) something? **
I mean you have three generations of up-quarks and down-quarks (that's six quarks); three generations of particles with one negative charge (i.e. - three generations or types of 'electrons'); three generations or types of neutral neutrinos; plus all of their anti-particles. Then throw in the Higgs Boson not to mention that some particles come in right-handed and left-handed (clockwise and anticlockwise) spins. So that's then well over two-and-a-half dozen fundamental particles (and fundamental anti-particles) the Universe spawned from the energy available at the Big Bang event.
Finally, where did the strong and the weak nuclear forces come from since they only apply once atoms came into being? Were this (atomic range only) force particles just drifting around space waiting to latch on to some just-so combinations of quarks to form neutrons and protons?
It really would seem on the surface that things post Big Bang went according to some master plan, some grand design with lots of fine-tuning to allow those atoms, etc. to exist, ultimately forming somethings like you and I.
* But why is that so? Why gravity at all? Is gravity inevitable? Could you have a Cosmos without gravity? Questions, questions, questions without answers.
** Why in fact did some energy morph into matter in the first place? Why not a Cosmos of just pure, but ever diluting energy (due to expansion)? Why not a Cosmos of pure matter where all energy, not just some energy, morphs into matter? Why does matter and energy have to be related or interconnected at all? Yet more questions without answers. It looks like cosmologists have a long, long road to go yet before the cosmic dust settles.
Source : articlesbase.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment