A Creator's Possible Calling Card

Sky & Telescope Magazine ^ | December 23, 2005 | Robert Naeye

[Brilliant]

If our universe was purposefully created — perhaps by a deity or an advanced civilization in another universe — could the Creator have left a calling card? The idea is not as crazy as it seems. Renowned cosmologists such as Andre Linde (Stanford University) and Alan Guth (MIT) have speculated that an advanced civilization could, in principle, cook up a new universe in a lab by concentrating huge quantities of energy into a tiny volume of space. And even the avowed agnostic Carl Sagan concocted a story at the very end of his sci-fi novel Contact of how scientists discover a message from the Creator embedded deep inside the number pi.

In a paper posted on astro-ph, physicists Stephen Hsu (University of Oregon) and Anthony Zee (University of California, Santa Barbara) come up with an alternative idea: astronomers can look for a message from the Creator in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) — the echo of the Big Bang.

"Our work does not support the Intelligent Design movement in any way whatsoever, but asks, and attempts to answer, the entirely scientific question of what the medium and message might be IF there was actually a message," write the authors.

The trick, say Hsu and Zee, is for the Creator to fine-tune the inflaton field — the field responsible for inflating the early universe — to encode a binary message in the subtle hot and cold spots of the CMB. As the authors note, the CMB is a "giant billboard on the sky" visible to all civilizations in all galaxies. Because different regions of the universe are so far apart that they are not causally connected, only a cosmos Creator could place a message in the CMB that all civilizations could detect.

Given the limited number of distinct regions of the sky of any fixed size, Hsu and Zee calculate that the message could include up to 100,000 bits of information. Such a message might, for example, reveal fundamental laws of physics. While current experiments like NASA's WMAP satellite do not have sufficient angular resolution or sensitivity to detect the extremely small-scale temperature fluctuations that would encode the message, future instruments might be capable of doing so. The authors urge that scientists analyze subsequent CMB data for possible patterns. "This may be even more fun than SETI," they conclude (SETI is the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence).

In another paper posted on astro-ph, Douglas Scott and James P. Zibin (University of British Columbia, Canada) counter that Hsu and Zee overestimate the amount of information that can be encoded in the CMB.

Hsu responds, "Both groups agree that one can encode a universal message in the CMB. But we disagree as to its maximal information content."

The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is leftover radiation from the Big Bang redshifted (stretched) by the universe's expansion into the microwave region of the spectrum. In this image NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) records minuscule temperature fluctuations in the CMB as different colors. In principle, an advanced civilization could create a universe and encode information in the CMB that would let civilizations in the offspring universe know that their universe had been purposefully created. NASA / WMAP Science Team.

[CobaltBlue]

The universe was created by an advanced civilization?

Panspermia. One of my favorite ideas. Improbable, but the entire Universe is improbable to begin with. So is life.

[CobaltBlue]

Eeeeeeeeeee! No. Please, make it stop.

[CobaltBlue]

In point of fact, Anton van Leeuwenhoek was introduced to the British Royal Society fairly early on and carried on a correspondence with that august body (which included Isaac Newton, Christopher Wren, Humphrey Davy and Robert Boyle) for many years. Leeuwenhoek invented the microscope in 1668 and began corresponding with the Royal Society in 1673, only five years later.

In fact, the Royal Society itself was only formed in 1660, immediately after the Restoration of Charles II.

He wasn't some wild man out in the wilderness, ignored by snooty ignoramuses posing as scientists.

I could see how that trope would appeal to fundamentalists.

[djf]

I personally don't know of a single soul who would describe me as a "fundamentalist".
The fact remains that alot of folks are gonna get real bent over the next advance in physics. As a mainframe computer engineer, I don't have a dog in that hunt.

But it will be interesting to watch.

[furball4paws]

Right on CB. The Book "Antony van Leeuwenhoek and his 'Little Animals'" is still around. Some of his descriptions are so good that the organism can actually be identified today, i.e. Vorticella. He was hardly ignored because the Royal Society was the best thing going at the time. He was, however, at least 100 years before his time, though.

[editor-surveyor]

But who created the members of said 'advanced civilisation?'

[editor-surveyor]

"I'll be impressed if the results tell whether the Euler-Mascheroni constant is rational or not. That would be a real feather to stick in their cap."

A joke? - How could it be rational? That would require our numbers to be finite.

[hang 'em]

TASTES LIKE CHICKEN SMELLS LIKE FISH

[gomaaa]

I think I see it, and it explains a lot.

Aacckkkk!!! Ctrl-Alt-Delete! CTRL-ALT-DELETE!!!!!

[js1138]

I know I will be scorned for saying it, but I think physics needs a new paragigm. They are up against a brick wall. Cracks are appearing in Einsteins work. Locality has been relegated to the dust heap.

I enjoy these diatribes against the establishment, but they are more amusing than informative.

Quantum theory is the single most counterintuitive idea since Copernicus, and it took about thirty years from first glimmer to established theory. Science is always impressed by numbers that work, regardless of their implications.

Common descent is the only scientific idea that seems to be resisted by large numbers of people, but the resisters are, for the most part, not scientists.

[gomaaa]

I know I will be scorned for saying it, but I think physics needs a new paragigm. They are up against a brick wall. Cracks are appearing in Einsteins work. Locality has been relegated to the dust heap.

Locality has BEEN in the dust heap (so to speak) for a while now. There are no "cracks" in Einsteins work that I am aware of. (although general relativity may have to be tweaked. It's wrapped up in the whole dark matter thing.) The Standard Model (governing high-energy particles) is one of the most succesful theories in the history of science.

True that there are a lot of new things that we still don't know much about, but we physicists are all hard at work (when we are not chatting on internet forums) exploring the frontiers. I guess I'm not sure what your "new paradigm" would really entail.

[CobaltBlue]

Sorry I called you fundamentalist. Mistook you for someone else.

[Quark2005]

I know, they told us in our second grade science books that Spontaneous generation is false, but... looks like they've changed their minds about that since then.

I'd like to point out (again) that evolutionary biologists do not believe in the sudden, spontaneous generation of life from non-life and/or nothingness. Only creationists believe this, and yes, they are wrong.

[free_at_jsl.com]

One of the theoretical outcomes of string theory is that it is possible, in a laboratory environment, to create "baby universes". The only drawback is that there is no way to interact with them.

[Quark2005]

I know I will be scorned for saying it, but I think physics needs a new paradigm. They are up against a brick wall. Cracks are appearing in Einsteins work. Locality has been relegated to the dust heap.

If you are referring to the phenomenon of quantum entanglement (I assume you are), it's important to point out that one of the biggest misconceptions about it (which I've even see a few physicists fall into) is that the implied 'action-at-a-distance' somehow implies a violation of relativity. It simply doesn't. (This question has been explored extensively.)

It's very complicated, but it comes down to the fact that nothing of substance, i.e. no energy, matter or information, is actually transmitted between two extended points faster than light, ever*. What does extend instantaneously over the range is the non-physical mathematical entity of the wave-function (which is really just our own non-real tool of convenience for describing what's going on).

I do believe you (djf) are correct that there is a major paradigm shift occurring in our understanding of quantum mechanics, but not quite in the way you're describing it here (i.e. relativity isn't about to go anywhere).

*Never say never, I know, but aside from some esoteric mathematical constructs involving highly hypothetical situations with cosmic strings, wormholes, etc., we know of no situation where it's possible.

[Quark2005]

This research project looks a little flaky to me. I'm trying to keep an open mind here, but looking for God's skywriting in the cosmic background radiation evokes images of people researching whether or not it really was an image of the Virgin Mary in that grilled cheese sandwich. What would be considered positive evidence of a message versus a coincidence? Is the image below positive evidence of a message from God? Do we have any reason to believe the cosmic microwave background is a place more likely than a grilled cheese sandwich for God to leave His signature? Do they expect to find "We apologize for the incovenience" scrawled across the sky? This seems so be overstepping the bounds of legit science, to me.

By the way, am I the only one who thinks it looks like the woman in this toast is holding a handgun?

[PatrickHenry]

It could end up like searching for bible codes. If you pick your number keys and your intervals just right, you can find all kinds of words and phrases.

[gomaaa]

If you are referring to the phenomenon of quantum entanglement (I assume you are), it's important to point out that one of the biggest misconceptions about it (which I've even see a few physicists fall into) is that the implied 'action-at-a-distance' somehow implies a violation of relativity. It simply doesn't. (This question has been explored extensively.)

I LOVE this stuff! I had to do a report on the EPR paradox as an undergrad and it was one of the things that made me love physics enough to seek a career in it.

Just an extension on your explanation: I've also heard an analogy drawn to the movement of a shadow or a point of light from a laser pointer. If you shine a laser onto the moon, then change the angle of the laser quickly enough, you can make it appear as though the laser 'dot' is moving faster than the speed of light. However, there is no real 'thing' that is actually moving. The photons from the laser obey the rules and there is no transfer of energy, momentum, or information that exceeds the speed of light. Even if you were to have observers at points 'A' and 'B' on the moon and move the laser between them, there would be no way to confirm that the dot had 'traveled' without having the observers compare notes and agree that they had both observed the laser. This comparison must be done at normal speeds.

Oh! And don't forget tachyons! Everybody loves tachyons!

[Quark2005]

Oh! And don't forget tachyons! Everybody loves tachyons!

That must be an answer to a question I haven't asked you yet.

[js1138]

In Carl Sagan's "Contact" (the book, not the movie) there is a chapter dealing with the "Author's signature" found in the digits of pi. It seems that somewhere in the hundred gazillionth binary digit of pi, a picture emerges if you place the digits on a grid.

Unmentioned by the author of the book, the known data stream of pi digits has the characteristics of a random number. In such a stream, every possible substring will eventually emerge, including the ASCII equivalent of Shakespeare.