A Physics forum. Physics Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Physics Banter forum » Physics Newsgroups » Physics - General Discussion
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tags: , , , ,

On Feb 2004 Scientific American New Cosmology



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 1st 04 posted to sci.astro,sci.space,sci.skeptic,sci.physics,alt.ufo.reports
Jack Sarfatti
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,218
Default On Feb 2004 Scientific American New Cosmology

Sarfatti Commentary on

“FROM SLOWDOWN to SPEEDUP”
By Adam G. Riess and Michael S. Turner

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN FEBRUARY 2004

“Although Einstein’s general theory
of relativity allows for gravity to push as well as pull, most physicists
regarded this as a purely theoretical possibility, irrelevant
to the universe today. Until recently, astronomers fully expected
to see gravity slowing down the expansion of the cosmos.
In 1998, however, researchers discovered the repulsive side
of gravity. By carefully observing distant supernovae—stellar explosions
that for a brief time shine as brightly as 10 billion suns—
astronomers found that they were fainter than expected. The
most plausible explanation for the discrepancy is that the light
from the supernovae, which exploded billions of years ago, traveled
a greater distance than theorists had predicted. And this explanation,
in turn, led to the conclusion that the expansion of
the universe is actually speeding up, not slowing down. …
In the past fewyears, though, astronomers have solidified the case for
cosmic
acceleration by studying ever more remote supernovae.
But has the cosmic expansion been speeding up throughout
the lifetime of the universe, or is it a relatively recent development
—that is, occurring within the past five billion years or so?


In Einstein’s theory, the notion of gravity as an attractive
force still holds for all known forms of matter and energy, even
on the cosmic scale. Therefore, general relativity predicts that
the expansion of the universe should slow down at a rate determined
by the density of matter and energy within it. But general
relativity also allows for the possibility of forms of energy with
strange properties that produce repulsive gravity
The discovery of accelerating rather than decelerating
expansion has apparently revealed the presence of such an energy
form, referred to as dark energy.



In 1998 observations of distant supernovae indicated
that the expansion of the universe is speeding up. Since
then, astronomers have solidified the case for cosmic
acceleration. By studying ever more remote supernovae, researchers
have found evidence that the expansion slowed down
before it sped up—just as cosmologists had predicted.

THE ANCIENT SUPERNOVAE also provided new clues about
dark energy, the underlying cause of the cosmic speedup. The
leading candidate to explain dark energy’s effects is vacuum energy,
which is mathematically equivalent to the cosmological
constant that Einstein invented in 1917. Because Einstein
thought he needed to model a static universe, he introduced his
“cosmological fudge factor” to balance the attractive gravity
of matter. In this recipe, the constant’s density was half that of
matter. But to produce the observed acceleration of the universe,
the constant’s density would have to be twice that of matter.
Where could this energy density come from? The uncertainty
principle of quantum mechanics requires that the vacuum be
filled with particles living on borrowed time and energy, popping
in and out of existence. But when theorists try to compute
the energy density associated with the quantum vacuum, they
come up with values that are at least 55 orders of magnitude too
large. If the vacuum energy density were really that high, all matter
in the universe would instantly fly apart and galaxies would
never have formed.”

Jack: This is the problem I claim I have solved with the idea of
“vacuum coherence” that is in fact the inflation field in disguise.
Einstein’s gravity together with both dark energy and dark matter emerge
together from ripples in the holographic phase and intensity of the
vacuum coherence field that decreases the randomness of the zero point
vacuum fluctuations of all the quantum fields.
I have provided a very simple dynamical reason based on Dirac’s theory
of the electron why this happens that is very like what happens when a
normal metal becomes a superconductor.

“This discrepancy has been called the worst embarrassment
in all of theoretical physics, but it may actually be the sign of a
great opportunity. Although it is possible that new attempts to
estimate the vacuum energy density may yield just the right
amount to explain cosmic acceleration, many theorists believe
that a correct calculation, incorporating a new symmetry principle,
will lead to the conclusion that the energy associated with
the quantum vacuum is zero. (Even quantum nothingness
weighs nothing!) If this is true, something else must be causing
the expansion of the universe to speed up.”

Jack: No, this is simply confused thinking. What you see below
Is All The King’s Men grasping wildly willy nilly at straws like the
Sufi Story where The Pundits shine strong light in the wrong part of
Plato’s Dark Cave.

“Theorists have proposed a variety of ideas, ranging from the
influence of extra, hidden dimensions to the energy associated
with a new field of nature, sometimes called quintessence [see
“Out of the Darkness,” by Georgi Dvali, on page 68]. In general,
these hypotheses posit a dark energy density that is not constant
and that usually decreases as the universe expands. (But
the suggestion that dark energy density is actually increasing as
the universe expands has also been put forth.) Perhaps the most
radical idea is that there is no dark energy at all but rather that
Einstein’s theory of gravity must be modified.”

Jack: Bad idea. The following however is in agreement with my model.



“IN NEWTON’S THEORY, gravity is always attractive and its
strength depends on the mass of the attracting object. The
twist in Einstein’s theory is that the strength of the
gravitational pull exerted by an object also depends on its
composition. Physicists characterize the composition of a
substance by its internal pressure. An object’s gravity is
proportional to its energy density plus three times the
pressure. Our sun, for example, is a hot sphere of gas with
positive (outward) pressure; because gas pressure rises with
temperature, the sun’s gravitational pull is slightly greater
than that of a cold ball of matter of equivalent mass. On the
other hand, a gas of photons has a pressure that is equal to
one third its energy density, so its gravitational pull should
be twice that of an equivalent mass of cold matter.
Dark energy is characterized by negative pressure.
(Elastic objects—for instance, a rubber sheet—also have
negative, or inward, pressure.) If the pressure falls below
–1?3 times the energy density, then the combination of energy
plus three times the pressure is negative and the gravitational
force is repulsive. The quantum vacuum has a pressure that
is –1 times its energy density, so the gravity of a vacuum is
very repulsive. Other hypothetical forms of dark energy have
a pressure that is between –1?3 and –1 times its energy
density. Some of these types of energy have been invoked to
explain the inflationary epoch, a very early period of cosmic
acceleration. Other types are candidates for the dark energy
powering the acceleration observed today.

Only theories stipulating large variations in dark energy density
have been ruled out ... The only way to forecast our cosmic future is
to figure out the nature of dark energy.”

Jack: I agree completely here. This is “metric engineering” in which we
will control the unified exotic vacuum dark energy/matter local field
for super-technology missions of exploring the universe using weightless
warp drive through traversable wormhole time travel gateways to the
future and past of our universe, to distance parts of our universe and
to the parallel universes next door. The UFOs show that we are not the
first to have figured out how to do this. We are getting close to
figuring it out. Ad Astra and Beyond is our Manifest Destiny.

References:
“Our Final Hour” Sir Martin Rees (Chapter 9)

Do Type Ia Supernovae Provide Direct Evidence for Past Deceleration in
the Universe? Michael S. Turner and Adam G. Riess in Astrophysical
Journal, Vol. 569, Part 1, pages 18–22; April 10, 2002. Available online at
arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0106051
...
Is Cosmic Speed-Up Due to New Gravitational Physics? Sean M. Carroll,
Vikram Duvvuri, Mark Trodden and Michael S. Turner in Physical Review
Letters (in press). arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0306438


On Jan 31, 2004, at 12:10 AM, ISEP Theoretical Physics Group wrote:

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN FEBRUARY 2004
Critique #1
George Divali wrote:
"Cosmologists and particle physicists have seldom felt so
confused. Although our standard model of cosmology
has been confirmed by recent observations, it still
has a gaping hole: nobody knows why the expansion of the universe
is accelerating."

JS: I think I do. http://qedcorp.com/APS/EmergentGravity.pdf

GD: "If you throw a stone straight up, the pull
of Earth’s gravity will cause it to slow down; it will not accelerate
away from the planet. Similarly, distant galaxies, thrown
apart by the big bang expansion, should pull on one another
and slow down. Yet they are accelerating apart. Researchers
commonly attribute the acceleration to some mysterious entity
called dark energy, but there is little physics to back up these
fine words."

JS: That is false in my opinion. An exotic vacuum phase with net total
cumulative random positive zero point vacuum fluctuation energy density,
hence negative pressure with w = -1, from all physical quantum fields
does the trick. One must realize that the degree of randomness of the
zero point vacuum fluctuations is tempered by the local inflation vacuum
coherence field whose phase variation is the dominant smooth c-number
non-perturbative background-independent geometrodynamic field of
Einstein's 1915 general theory of relativity upon which precision
cosmology is predicated in the equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = -8pi(G/c^4)Tuv

GD: "The only thing that is becoming clear is that at the
largest observable distances, gravity behaves in a rather strange
way, turning into a repulsive force."

JS: Agreed. We can also, I bet, do this on a small scale for exotic
warp drive time travel through traversable wormholes.

GD: "The laws of physics say that gravity is generated by matter
and energy, so they attribute a strange sort of gravity to a
strange sort of matter or energy. That is the rationale for dark
energy. But maybe the laws themselves need to be changed."

JS: That is "too cheap" as Einstein mistakenly told Bohm. However, I am
not mistaken I think in my opinion that a drastic overhaul of the known
laws of physics is needed for this problem.

GD: Physicists have a precedent for such a change: the law of gravity
that Newton formulated in the 17th century, which had various
conceptual and experimental limitations, gave way to Einstein’s
general theory of relativity in 1915. Relativity, too, has
limitations; in particular, it runs into trouble when applied to
extremely short distances, which are the domain of quantum
mechanics. Much as relativity subsumed Newtonian physics, a
quantum theory of gravity will ultimately subsume relativity.
Over the years, physicists have come up with a few plausible
approaches to quantum gravity, the most prominent being
string theory."

JS: Smolin, Ashtekar, Baez, Rovelli et-al will strongly disagree on that
against Greene, Witten, et-al. Of course neither string theory nor loop
quantum gravity have made hard predictions of any facts nor have they
provided compelling explanations of the observational mysteries of
precision cosmology and particle physics. Yet many of the Guardians of
respectability and ideological purity reminiscent of Stalinism in the
Soviet Union on the LANL Cornell Archive and in mass media like
Scientific American and NOVA PBS are quick to embrace these radical
speculations which in fact
are little more than pretty mathematical vaporware.

GD: "When gravity operates over microscopic distances
—for instance, at the center of a black hole, where a huge
mass is packed into a subatomic volume—the bizarre quantum
properties of matter come into play, and string theory describes
how the law of gravity changes.
Over greater distances, string theorists have generally assumed
that quantum effects are unimportant. Yet the cosmological
discoveries of the past several years have encouraged researchers
to reconsider. Four years ago my colleagues and I
asked whether string theory would change the law of gravity
not just on the smallest scales but also on the largest ones. The
feature of string theory that could bring about this revision is
its extra dimensions—additional directions in which particles
can roam. The theory adds six or seven dimensions to the usual
three."

JS: Theorists today are willing to pay any price to avoid signal
nonlocality.

GD: In the past, string theorists have argued that the extra dimensions
are too small for us to see or move in. But recent progress
reveals that some or all of the new dimensions could actually
be infinite in size. They are hidden from view not because
they are small but because the particles that make up our bodies
are trapped in three dimensions. The one particle that eludes
confinement is the particle that transmits the force of gravity,
and as a result, the law of gravity changes.
Quintessence Even from Nothingness
WHEN ASTRONOMERS ENCOUNTERED the cosmic acceleration,
their first reaction was to attribute it to the so-called cosmological
constant. Notoriously introduced and then retracted
by Einstein, the constant represents the energy inherent in space
Maybe cosmic acceleration isn’t caused by dark energy after all
but by an inexorable leakage of gravity out of our world

COPYRIGHT 2004 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC.

GD: "A completely empty volume of space, devoid of all matter,
would still contain this energy—equivalent to roughly 10–26
kilogram per cubic meter. Although the cosmological constant
is consistent with all the existing data so far, many physicists find
it unsatisfying. The problem is its inexplicable smallness,"

JS: This is only a problem because The Pundits have not properly used
the idea of "vacuum coherence" in which the cosmological term in
Einstein's equation has a subsidiary equation

/\zpf = (Quantum of Area)^-1[(Quantum of Area)^3/2|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]

Where the tetrad gravity field Cartan 1-form in the sense of Rovelli's
book on Quantum Gravity is

euadx^a = Kronecker Deltau^adx^a + (Quantum of Area)(argVacuum Coherence),u

A vanishing Vacuum Coherence means maximally random zero point energy
fluctuations from all fields in unstable globally flat spacetime with no
gravity.


Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Feb 2004 Scientific American's over speculation? Jack Sarfatti Physics - General Discussion 6 February 1st 04 06:00 PM
Article: Four Keys to Cosmology Robert Karl Stonjek Physics - General Discussion 2 January 30th 04 05:30 AM
Question on Kantian cosmology Steve Physics - General Discussion 2 October 5th 03 03:41 PM
When are scientific theories 'scientific explanations'? Lawson English Physics - General Discussion 0 August 17th 03 05:33 PM
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons David James Polewka Physics - General Discussion 1 July 8th 03 05:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2008 Physics Banter, part of the NewsgroupBanter project.
The comments are property of their posters.
Pocket PC Shareware - Personal Loans - Loans - Mortgage Calculator - Car Insurance