Physics looks for new Einstein as nature rewrites laws of universe

Times Newspapers Ltd. ^ | September 9 2001 | Jonathan Leake

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

This seems to be a totally serve serving argument

[PatrickHenry]

From Guth's book, "The Inflationary Universe," 1997, at page 182, he mentions that photons were around before 300K years after the BB, but they were being scattered by plasma. After 300K years, when there was enough cooling for hydrogen atoms to form, the photons were free to travel in straight lines. In a footnote on the next page he says this:

According to the big bang theory, the separation between points A and B [in a diagram] grew from zero to 90 million light-years during a time interval of only 300,000 years. The rate of separation, therefore, was much larger than the speed of light. For a subtle reason, however, this does not violate the stricture on faster-than-light travel. The complication stems from the fact that, in general relativity, space itself is plastic, capable of bending and stretching. In the big bang theory, the space stretches as the universe expands. The restriction on velocities remains valid, in the sense that no particle can ever win a race with a light beam. Nonetheless, the distance between two particles can increase due to the stretching of the space between them, and general relativity places no restriction on how fast the stretching can occur.

[Linda Liberty]

This seems to be a totally serve serving argument

What is the referent of "this" in your sentence and what is a serve serving argument?

If you are saying that Smolin's argument is self serving, that is not correct. Smolin addresses the mystery that the laws of physics need to be extremely fine tuned (in their current version) to reach our universe. For the vast majority of parameter settings (e.g. choice of the Planck Mass and other fundamental constants) life would be impossible. Why did it happen that the constants were so balanced on a needle? Smolin shows that two simple and plausible hypotheses cause this fine tuning to happen automatically, by evolution. His theory is also falsifiable, making various predictions. He argues that the available evidence indicates his theory is correct, i.e. his predictions will be verified, but it is certainly far from conclusive. It may become more conclusive, however, with more research.

I gather some posters here think that the proposed variation of physical laws is somehow an argument for a creator and against the theory of evolution, but in fact it is a plank in the proposal of evolution on a much grander scale, evolution of the laws of physics itself, leading to laws of physics that support life, as well as leading to life.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

Transmission of waves without a medium is well understood. I am familiar with the mathematics of propogation. I was referring to the mechanism that creates the Red Shift, assuming that it really is an effect of the emitting object having a velocity component in the direction (or opposite) the observer. I'll take your word that this is well understood, but .. I know that there are other questions about observed Red Shidt, light travelling through an expanding universe, etc (ie. space being stretched, although I have always thought stretching was a bad term, more like filling in the holes..)

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

Your description seemed to be circular. Sounds intersting, though. Maybe I'll pick it up.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

I gather some posters here think that the proposed variation of physical laws is somehow an argument for a creator and against the theory of evolution, but in fact it is a plank in the proposal of evolution on a much grander scale, evolution of the laws of physics itself, leading to laws of physics that support life, as well as leading to life.

Ha, I try not to get too theological...

I guess I have always been satisfied with an anthropic explaination, ie. that the laws of physics had to be the way they are in our univers precisely b/c they had to support us (which is easiy if you assume infinite Universes with varying laws of physics). Maybe its a cop out...

This is a pretty good book for the layperson on the required precision of certain physical constants, ratios, writtwn by Matthew Rees: Just Six Numbers. I seem to recall that it wasn't really meaty

[longshadow]

Nonetheless, the distance between two particles can increase due to the stretching of the space between them, and general relativity places no restriction on how fast the stretching can occur.

Yes. That's what I vaguely remembered. Another way of putting it is to think of it as not as a case of photons speeding up per se, but of the photons being displaced by the spatial inflation. They, along with the matter, are just going along for the ride. Measured in a local frame of reference, nothing was physically breaking the cosmic speed limit.

It's an almost lawyerly explanation to get out of a cosmic speeding ticket, doncha think?

[longshadow]

But since all things in a closed system tend toward entropy, that includes light.

Light (and it's velocity) is NOT a thermodynamic phenomonon. Entropy has NOTHING to do with the speed of light.

[Physicist]

Guth is not very clear in that passage. The "inflationary phase" doesn't last for 300,000 years. According to this useful timeline, the universe was 21 orders of magnitude older at the time of electroweak symmetry breaking than it was at the end of inflation, and 23 orders of magnitude older at the time of radiation decoupling than it was at the time of electroweak symmetry breaking. Most of the expansion happened in an exceedingly brief time.

[Physicist]

But the point is that there is a Doppler effect for light whether there's a medium or not. Measuring redshifts and blueshifts for radio waves and laser beams is something students do in undergraduate labs. It's a stone cold experimental fact that if something is moving away from you, its light is demonstrably and reproducibly redshifted. So we can explain the redshift of distant objects without invoking exotic new physics, simply by making the assumption that they are moving away from us.

[ksen]

Among the ideas facing revision is Einstein's belief that the speed of light must always be the same - 186,000 miles a second in a vacuum. There is growing evidence that light moved much faster during the early stages of our universe.

First of all, let me admit that I am no scientist, I do not even play one on TV. I am a Fundamentalist Christian who believes in a young universe. Now I did not say all of that to invite flames, I just wanted you guys to know where I was coming from and that I am not trying to hide my bias.

I do have a serious question, I have almost finished a book by Dr. Russell Humphries called Starlight and Time. In that book (booklet really) Humphries attempts to reconcile how, in a young universe, light from stars that are millions of light years away could have possibly be observed on Earth.

He says that with Einstein's General(?) Theory if you start with the assumption that the universe is boundless the Theory will produce the result that the universe started with a black hole.

However, if you start with the assumption that the universe does indeed have a boundary then the Theory will produce the result that the universe began with a white hole.

He then goes on to explain how as you move further and further away from the event horizon that time seems to slow down.

Anyhow, I would like your opinions about that theory. Please don't just brush it aside because it was thought up by a young Earth Creationist. If you have the time and/or inclination I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on this subject.

Thanks in advance.

-ksen

[parsifal]

LOL! But seriously, 186,000 x 186,000 = a really big number. How do we accurately measure the output number? After all, everything close is blown to hell and back. How do know that E doesn't really = m x 185,000^2???, or 187,000^2. (Those are really big numbers, too.)Sign me, parsifal the curious?

[Physicist]

Quite honestly, none of that made any sense to me.

[PatrickHenry]

It's an almost lawyerly explanation to get out of a cosmic speeding ticket, doncha think?

Lawyers wouldn't do that well, trust me. But I see that there really is a difference with this space stretching business. Once the space has come into existence, photons would presumably be restricted to travel at c, within the existing space. But at the "frontier" it's different.

[ksen]

Yeah, when I read it after I posted it I agree. (Hey, I'm an accountant, not a scientist, debits on the left and credits on the right ;^) )

If you ever come across the book maybe you could take a look at it, it is under 100 pages. Or I will post an excerpt for you scientific types to hash over, or discard. Ever since I have started it I have desired to know what you guys (you, PH, VadeRetro, etc.) would have to say.

Sorry I could not be clearer than I was.

-ksen

[PatrickHenry]

He then goes on to explain how as you move further and further away from the event horizon that time seems to slow down.

In particular, that doesn't fit into anything I've ever heard of. I suspect your author doesn't know what an "event horizon" is all about. I respectfully suggest that you get another source of information on the subject.

[PatrickHenry]

Guth is not very clear in that passage. The "inflationary phase" doesn't last for 300,000 years.

The lack of clarity originated in me, not Guth. In the passage I quoted, he referred to a diagram. The diagram is a picture of the universe at 300,000 years of age, "when the cosmic background radiation was released." I guess my hopping around for passages to quote left the impression that inflation had been going on that long. Guth doesn't say that.

[Doctor Stochastic]

One weighs (indirectly) the mass of various atoms. Then one measures the energy given off by alpha or beta decay leading to the transmutation of one type of atom to another. Plug in the speed of light and there's the answer.

[tm22721]

Religion must deal with these issues and vice verse

Somehow I knew it wouldn't take much more than 10 posts to get to the subject of religion...I am well conditioned after three years on this forum.

BUMP