![]() |
| 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. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: 2004, american, cosmology, feb, scientific |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 | |
|
|
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 |