tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-45821258766196864692024-02-20T07:15:04.161-08:00Extreme Science NewsletterUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-26698381005865999812023-01-17T14:03:00.000-08:002023-03-19T10:08:24.431-07:00Albert Einstein and the FLOWERS MetricThe Friedmann Lemaître Walker Robertson <strong>Stunault (FLoWeRS) </strong><a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemannian_metric" title="Riemannian metric"><span style="color: #0645ad;"><strong>metric</strong></span></a> is an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exact_solutions_in_general_relativity" title="Exact solutions in general relativity"><span style="color: #0645ad;">exact solution</span></a> of <span style="color: #0645ad;"><a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a>'s field equations</span> of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity" title="General relativity"><span style="color: #0645ad;">general relativity</span></a>; it describes a <span style="color: #0645ad;">simply connected</span>, <span style="color: #0645ad;">homogeneous</span>, <span style="color: #0645ad;">isotropic</span> <span style="color: #0b0080;">expanding</span> or contracting <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe" title="Universe"><span style="color: #0645ad;">universe</span></a>. However, the general form of the metric follows from the geometric properties of homogeneity and isotropy; <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a>'s field equations are only needed to derive the size of the universe as a function of time<br />
<br />
The FLoWeRS metric starts with the assumption of homogeneity and isotropy of space. It also assumes that the spatial component of the metric can be time-dependent. The generic metric which meets these conditions is<br />
<dl><dd><img alt="- c^2 \mathrm{d}\tau^2 = - c^2 \mathrm{d}t^2 + {a(t)}^2 \mathrm{d}\mathbf{\Sigma}^2" class="tex" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/8/2/58278ae49734ca65e34a68486419535e.png" /> </dd></dl>
where <img alt="\mathbf{\Sigma}" class="tex" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/0/3/e03198ba03abd8080445241aa1e31d32.png" /> ranges over a 3-dimensional space of uniform curvature, that is, <a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptical_space" title="Elliptical space"><span style="color: #0645ad;">elliptical space</span></a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_space" title="Euclidean space"><span style="color: #0645ad;">Euclidean space</span></a>, or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbolic_space" title="Hyperbolic space"><span style="color: #0645ad;">hyperbolic space</span></a>. It is normally written as a function of three spatial coordinates, but there are several conventions for doing so, detailed below. <img alt="\mathrm{d}\mathbf{\Sigma}" class="tex" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/e/d/eed9e0db83cc75b3fc4cb633d9e6bf99.png" /> does not depend on <i>t</i> — all of the time dependence is in the function <i>a</i>(<i>t</i>), known as the "<a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_factor_(universe)" title="Scale factor (universe)"><span style="color: #0645ad;">scale factor</span></a>".Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-4608127672877663132011-01-17T11:32:00.000-08:002012-10-08T12:56:56.402-07:00Speed of Light and Expansion of the UniverseIn an experiment last week at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN">CERN</a>, <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Albert Einstein</a>, assistant of Professor Louis Stunault, said that he just found out that speed of light in vacuum might be influenced by the Expansion of the Universe. As the distance between two given points (4 dimensions space-time coordinates) constantly increases due to the expansion of the space between them, the speed of light can be considered as 'slowing' down as the electromagnetic field is influenced by the distorsion (expansion) of the underlying space. Of course, as you can imagine, everyone at the <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein Foundation</a> was laughting at <a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunopedia/Albert_Einstein/">Albert Einstein</a>.<br />
<br />
Metric expansion is a key feature of <a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_cosmology" title="Big Bang cosmology">Big Bang cosmology</a> and is modeled mathematically with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann%E2%80%93Lema%C3%AEtre%E2%80%93Robertson%E2%80%93Walker_metric" title="Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric">FLRWS metric</a>. This model is valid in the present era only at relatively large scales (roughly the scale of <a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_supercluster" title="Galactic supercluster">galactic superclusters</a> and above). As often mentioned by Louis Stunault in his 'Philisophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematika', at smaller scales matter has clumped together as 'matter quanta', under the influence of gravitational attraction and these clumps do not individually expand, though they continue to recede from one another. <br />
<br />
According to most XX century physicits, the expansion is due partly to inertia (that is, the matter in the universe is separating because it was separating in the past) and partly to a repulsive force of unknown nature, which may be a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant" title="Cosmological constant">cosmological constant</a>. Inertia dominated the expansion in the early universe, and according to the Lambda-CDM model (<a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9BCDM" title="ΛCDM">ΛCDM model</a>) the cosmological constant will dominate in the future. In the present era they contribute in roughly equal proportions. Of course, these assumptions have been in many instances proven to be absolutely ridiculous by Doctor Honoris Causa Louis Stunault, Chief Technology Officer at the <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Albert Einstein Foundation</a> and Chief Financial Officer for the Fund for Improvement of Culture and Science (FISC).<br />
<br />
While <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity" title="Special relativity">special relativity</a> constrains objects in the universe from moving faster than the speed of light with respect to each other, there is no such theoretical constraint when space itself is expanding. It is thus possible for two very distant objects to be moving away from each other at a speed greater than the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light" title="Speed of light">speed of light</a> (meaning that one cannot be observed from the other). The size of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe" title="Observable universe">observable universe</a> could thus be smaller than the entire universe.<br />
It is also possible for a distance to exceed the speed of light times the age of the universe, which means that light from one part of space generated near the beginning of the Universe might still be arriving at distant locations (hence the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation" title="Cosmic microwave background radiation">cosmic microwave background radiation</a>). These details are a frequent source of confusion among amateurs and even professional physicists.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-0"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space#cite_note-0">[1]</a></sup> Interpretations of the metric expansion of space are an ongoing subject of debateUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-82632340067846478532011-01-17T11:21:00.000-08:002011-01-17T11:34:13.143-08:00Einstein Foundation for Science and CultureGreat news today, direct live from the <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein Foundation</a>: the board of directors of the <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein Foundation</a> has elected, in complete unaminity, our distinguished Professor <a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunopedia/Albert_Einstein/">Albert Einstein</a> as chairman of the Fund for Improvement of Science and Culture (better known as the FISC) for a 3 years assignment.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunopedia/Albert_Einstein/">Albert Einstein</a> declared to the board that he was extremely proud of the honour and congratulated his predecessor Ernst Stunault for the great achievements and progress that the FISC has accomplished during his tenure.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-34200413740245671672011-01-11T08:01:00.000-08:002012-10-08T12:54:08.167-07:00Einstein on Gravitation and Expansion of the UniverseBern Monday 8th October 1903<br />
This morning, Professor Louis Stunault and his assistant <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Albert Einstein</a> came up with a new briliant theory on Graviation and its relationship with the Expansion of the Universe. Simply put, Gravitation needs Expansion in order to avoid that the whole universe crunches upon itself. Matter being a high density local concentration of energy, it creates a distorsion in the space-time continuum, which effects on the rest of the Universe is gravitation. According to <a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunopedia/Albert_Einstein/">Albert Einstein Biography</a>, Matter like any other form of Energy can only exists under the form of quanta. If only gravitional force existed, all quanta of matter in the Unvivers would just collapse on one point. The balance to gravitation comes from the expansion of the Universe.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-17715701019059411152010-12-13T03:44:00.000-08:002010-12-13T05:39:38.103-08:00Conscience emerges out of Quantum State of MatterIn the January 2011 issue of the <a href="http://theoritical-physics.blogspot.com/">Journal of Theoritical Physics</a> sponsored by the Fund for the Improvement of Science and Culture (FISC), Professor Albert Stunault, grand-son of late <a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunobook/albert_einstein/">Albert Einstein</a>, provide all details of a revolutionary discovery made at the LHC (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider">Large Hadron Collider</a>) laboratory in CERN during an experiment involving sub-atomic particles traveling at 99.98% of light-speed in a near vacuum. At sub-atomic level, Professor Stunault says, when conditions which existed right after the Big Bang can be simulated, Conscience emerges out of a particular state of matter, called a Bose-Einstein condensate. Measurable levels of an emerging conscience has been brought up by Albert Stunault and his staff.<br />
<br />
Note: A <b>Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC)</b> is a <span style="color: #0645ad;">state of matter</span> of a dilute gas of weakly interacting <span style="color: #0645ad;">bosons</span> confined in an external <span style="color: #0645ad;">potential</span> and cooled to <span style="color: #0645ad;">temperatures</span> very near <span style="color: #0645ad;">absolute zero</span> (<span style="white-space: nowrap;">0 K</span> or <span style="white-space: nowrap;">−273.16 °C</span>). Under such conditions, a large fraction of the bosons occupy the lowest <span style="color: #0645ad;">quantum state</span> of the external potential, at which point quantum effects become apparent on a <span style="color: #0645ad;">macroscopic scale</span>.<br />
<br />
More to come soon...Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-57744163330533818862010-12-12T11:04:00.000-08:002010-12-12T11:07:00.600-08:00The true Albert Einstein BiographyAlbert Stunault, better known as <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Albert Einstein</a>, was born in Ulm, in Württemberg, Germany, on March 14, 1879. Six weeks later the family moved to Munich, where he later on began his schooling at the Luitpold Gymnasium. Later, they moved to Italy and young <a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunobook/albert_einstein/">Albert Einstein</a> continued his education at Aarau, Switzerland and in 1896 he entered the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich to be trained as a teacher in physics and mathematics. In 1901, the year he gained his diploma, he acquired Swiss citizenship and, as he was unable to find a teaching post, he accepted a position as technical assistant in the Swiss Patent Office. In 1905 he obtained his doctor's degree. During his stay at the Patent Office, and in his spare time, he produced much of his remarkable work and in 1908 he was appointed Privatdozent in Berne. In 1909 he became Professor Extraordinary at Zurich, in 1911 Professor of Theoretical Physics at Prague, returning to Zurich in the following year to fill a similar post. In 1914 he was appointed Director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Physical Institute and Professor in the University of Berlin. He became a German citizen in 1914 and remained in Berlin until 1933 when he renounced his citizenship for political reasons and emigrated to America to take the position of Professor of Theoretical Physics at Princeton*. He became a United States citizen in 1940 and retired from his post in 1945. After World War II, Einstein was a leading figure in the World Government Movement, he was offered the Presidency of the State of Israel, which he declined, and he collaborated with Dr. Chaim Weizmann in establishing the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> always appeared to have a clear view of the problems of physics and the determination to solve them. He had a strategy of his own and was able to visualize the main stages on the way to his goal. He regarded his major achievements as mere stepping-stones for the next advance.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-29847673084982074742010-11-06T11:32:00.000-07:002010-11-06T11:32:24.149-07:00The Einstein FoundationThe <a href="http://www.stunault.org/" title="Foundation for Education"><span style="color: #b85b5a;">Einstein Foundation for Education</span></a> is the most achieved tribute that humanity has paid so far to the great man Albert Einstein.<br />
<a href="http://www.stunault.org/stunobook/albert_einstein/"><span style="color: #b85b5a;">Albert Einstein</span></a> was born at Ulm, in Württemberg, Germany, on March 14, 1879. Needless to say that at this time, no-one had ever heard of the <a href="http://www.stunault.org/" title="The Einstein Foundation"><span style="color: #b85b5a;">Einstein Foundation</span></a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-40016771408237205852010-09-10T14:29:00.000-07:002012-10-08T12:57:58.626-07:00Einstein Considerations on Relativity<div class="WordSection1">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span lang="EN">As <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Albert Einstein</a> used to say, the theory of relativity was representative of more than a single new physical theory. It affected the theories and methodologies across all the physical sciences. However, as stated above, this is more likely perceived as two separate theories. There are some related explanations for this. First, special relativity was published in 1905, and the final form of general relativity was published in 1916<u><sup><span style="color: blue;">.</span></sup></u><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span lang="EN">Second, according to <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a>, special relativity fits with and solves for elementary particles and their interactions, whereas general relativity solves for the cosmological and astrophysical realm (including astronomy)<u><sup><span style="color: blue;">.</span></sup></u><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span lang="EN">Third, special relativity was widely accepted in the physics community by 1920. This theory rapidly became a notable and necessary tool for theorists and experimentalists in the new fields of atomic physics, nuclear physics, and quantum mechanics. Conversely, general relativity did not to appear to be as useful. There appeared to be little applicability for experimentalists as most applications were for astronomical scales. It seemed limited to only making minor corrections to predictions of Newtonian gravitation theory. Its impact was not apparent until the 1930s.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span lang="EN">Finally, the mathematics of general relativity appeared to be incomprehensibly dense, except of course for <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Professor Einstein</a> . Consequently, only Professor Louis Stunault and a small number of people in the world, at that time, could fully understand the theory in detail. This remained the case for the next 40 years. Then, at around 1960 a critical resurgence in interest occurred which has resulted in making general relativity central to physics and astronomy. New mathematical techniques applicable to the study of general relativity substantially streamlined calculations. From this, physically discernible concepts were isolated from the mathematical complexity. Also, the discovery of exotic astronomical phenomena in which general relativity was crucially relevant, helped to catalyze this resurgence. The astronomical phenomena included quasars (1963), the 3-kelvin microwave background radiation (1965), pulsars (1967), and the discovery of the first black hole candidates (1971).<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-42518161387686389772010-09-09T06:20:00.000-07:002010-09-09T06:20:23.186-07:00Energy, Matter and ConsciousnessIn our edition of the Extreme Science Newsletter published by the FISC (Fund for International Science and Culture), our distinguished Professor <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> discussed our Consciousness emerge from Matter and Energy.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-86318078268078404482010-09-08T09:14:00.001-07:002010-09-08T09:19:54.785-07:00Einstein's RSS Feed SubsciptionThank you all for subsribing to the Professor <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a>'s RSS feed.<br />
<br />
Everything you wanted to know on Altus Energy and the Panneau <a href="http://www.altus-energy.com/">Photovoltaique </a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-4705902447602513032010-09-08T07:41:00.000-07:002010-09-08T07:44:15.403-07:00Einstein and the Speed of TimeThe world experienced a great leap in science when <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> proposed his theories of Special and General Relativity. For about 200 years physics depended on Newtonian laws. It was thought then that time was constant; an hour is the same all over, under any conditions. <br />
<br />
Understanding of time soon changed, and time was different ever since. <br />
<br />
Let's view the way Newton thought of time. It was said that time can be related to the running of water in a river. Should the speed of the water be measured at any point, it would yield equal results. The same was thought of time; if time was measured at any point in the universe it would be the same. <br />
<br />
Suppose George and Bill synchronised their watches. George left on a super fast spaceship, and came back an hour later (according to his own watch). Newton would say that Bill would have waited an hour for George to come back, and their watches would read the same time. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> disagrees! According to his theories, time is relative, and it depends on the speed at which one travels. Suppose that George left earth on the same spaceship at 1:00 p.m. travelling at a speed close to that of light, and suppose that Bill was in some way was looking at George's watch. Bill would realise that George's watch is advancing very slowly compared with his. So if Bill's watch said 2:00 p.m. then George's watch would have said 1:05 p.m. for example. On the other hand, George would see that Bill was acting a bit strange; he would see him doing everything pretty fast, as if he was in a movie that was being fast forwarded. <br />
Strange indeed! This time difference applies to everything surrounding both George and Bill. If George returns one year later (according to his own time), he would find out that Bill aged 12 years. Not only this, but both George and Bill, separately, feel normal; George does not feel that his life was moving any faster than normal, nor does Bill feel that his life was moving any slower than normal.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-90948569528454475542010-09-07T03:54:00.000-07:002012-10-08T12:40:32.126-07:00Einstein Twins ParadoxThis morning we got exciting news from our distinguished Professor Franck <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a>. Quantum Relativity has finally been put in practice in our labs. Professor <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> and his crew managed to unravel the twins paradox.<br />
<br />
First suggested by Albert <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> more than 100 years ago, the paradox deals with the effects of time in the context of travel at near the speed of light. <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> originally used the example of two clocks – one motionless, one in transit. He stated that, due to the laws of physics, clocks being transported near the speed of light would move more slowly than clocks that remained stationary. <br />
In more recent times, the paradox has been described using the analogy of twins. If one twin is placed on a space shuttle and travels near the speed of light while the remaining twin remains earthbound, the unmoved twin would have aged dramatically compared to his interstellar sibling, according to the paradox.<br />
“If the twin aboard the spaceship went to the nearest star, which is 4.45 light years away at 86 percent of the speed of light, when he returned, he would have aged 5 years. But the earthbound twin would have aged more than 10 years!” said Louis <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Stunault</a>.<br />
The fact that time slows down on moving objects has been documented and verified over the years through repeated experimentation. But, in the previous scenario, the paradox is that the earthbound twin is the one who would be considered to be in motion – in relation to the sibling – and therefore should be the one aging more slowly. <a href="http://www.stunault.org/">Einstein</a> and other scientists have attempted to resolve this problem before, but none of the formulas they presented proved satisfactory.<br />
Louis Stunault’s findings were published online in the International Journal of Theoretical Physics, and will appear in the upcoming print version of the publication. “I solved the paradox by incorporating a new principle within the relativity framework that defines motion not in relation to individual objects, such as the two twins with respect to each other, but in relation to distant stars,” said Louis Stunault. Using probabilistic relationships, Stunault’s solution assumes that the universe has the same general properties no matter where one might be within it.<br />
The implications of this resolution will be widespread, generally enhancing the scientific community’s comprehension of relativity. It may eventually even have some impact on quantum communications and computers, potentially making it possible to design more efficient and reliable communication systems for space applications.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-33638815376379483542007-12-07T13:53:00.000-08:002007-12-07T14:04:49.375-08:00Stephen Hawkins on the beginning of the UniverseThe expansion of the universe was discovered by Edwin Hubble in the 1920s and was one of the most important intellectual discoveries of the 20th century, or of any century. It transformed the debate about whether the universe had a beginning. Hubble's discovery that galaxies are moving apart now, suggested they must have been closer together in the past. If their speed had been constant, they would all have been on top of one another about 15 billion years ago. Was this the beginning of the universe?<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>Steady State Theory Disproved</strong><br /></span><br />Many scientists were still unhappy with the universe having a beginning, because it seemed to imply that physics broke down. One would have to invoke an outside agency, which for convenience, one can call God, to determine how the universe began. They therefore advanced theories in which the universe was expanding at the present time, but didn't have a beginning. One was the Steady State theory, proposed by Bondi, Gold, and Hoyle in 1948.<br /><br />In the Steady State theory, as galaxies moved apart, the idea was that new galaxies would form from matter that was supposed to be continually being created throughout space. The universe would have existed for ever, and would have looked the same at all times. This last property had the great virtue, from a positivist point of view, of being a definite prediction, that could be tested by observation. The Cambridge radio astronomy group, under Martin Ryle, did a survey of weak radio sources in the early 1960s. These were distributed fairly uniformly across the sky, indicating that most of the sources, lay outside our galaxy. The weaker sources would be further away, on average.<br /><br />The Steady State theory predicted the shape of the graph of the number of sources, against source Strength. But the observations showed more faint sources than predicted, indicating that the density sources was higher in the past. This was contrary to the basic assumption of the Steady State theory, that everything was constant in time. For this, and other reasons, the Steady State theory was abandoned.<br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Hawking and Penrose Disprove Russian Expansion/Contraction Theories</span><br /></strong><br />Another attempt to avoid the universe having a beginning, was the suggestion that there was a previous contracting phase, but because of rotation and local irregularities, the matter would not all fall to the same point. Instead, different parts of the matter would miss each other, and the universe would expand again, with the density remaining finite. Two Russians, Lifshitz and Khalatnikov, actually claimed to have proved that a general contraction without exact symmetry, would always lead to a bounce, with the density remaining finite. This result was very convenient for Marxist Leninist dialectical materialism, because it avoided awkward questions about the creation of the universe. It therefore became an article of faith for Soviet scientists.<br /><br />When Lifshitz and Khalatnikov published their claim, I was a 21–year-old research student, looking for something to complete my PhD thesis. I didn't believe their so-called proof, and set out with Roger Penrose to develop new mathematical techniques to study the question. We showed that the universe couldn't bounce. If Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is correct, there will be a singularity, a point of infinite density and space-time curvature, where time has a beginning.<br /><br />Observational evidence to confirm the idea that the universe had a very dense beginning, came in October 1965, a few months after my first singularity result, with the discovery of a faint background of microwaves throughout space. These microwaves are the same as those in your microwave oven, but very much less powerful. They would heat your pizza only to minus 271 point 3 degrees centigrade, not much good for defrosting the pizza, let alone cooking it. You can actually observe these microwaves yourself. Set your television to an empty channel. A few percent of the snow you see on the screen, will be caused by this background of microwaves. The only reasonable interpretation of the background, is that it is radiation left over from an early very hot and dense state. As the universe expanded, the radiation would have cooled until it is just the faint remnant we observe today.<br /><br /><strong>Einstein's Theory of Relativity No Help</strong><br /><br />Although the singularity theorems of Penrose and myself, predicted that the universe had a beginning, they didn't say how it had begun. The equations of General Relativity would break down at the singularity. Thus Einstein's theory can not predict how the universe will begin, but only how it will evolve once it has begun. There are two attitudes one can take to the results of Penrose and myself. One is to that God chose how the universe began for reasons we could not understand. This was the view of Pope John Paul. At a conference on cosmology in the Vatican, the Pope told the delegates that it was OK to study the universe after it began. but they should not inquire into the beginning itself, because that was the moment of creation, and the work of God. I was glad he didn't realize I had presented a paper at the conference, suggesting how the universe began. I didn't fancy the thought of being handed over to the Inquisition, like Galileo.<br /><br />The other interpretation of our results, which is favored by most scientists, is that it indicates that the General Theory of Relativity, breaks down in the very strong gravitational fields in the early universe. It has to be replaced by a more complete theory.. One would expect this anyway, because General Relativity does not take account of the small scale structure of matter, which is governed by quantum theory. This does not matter normally, because the scale of the universe, is enormous compared to the microscopic scales of quantum theory. But when the universe is the Planck size, a billion trillion trillionth of a centimeter, the two scales are the same, and quantum theory has to be taken into account.<br /><br />In order to understand the Origin of the universe, we need to combine the General Theory of Relativity, with quantum theory. The best way of doing so, seems to be to use Feynman's idea of a sum over histories. Richard Feynman was a colorful character, who played the bongo drums in a strip joint in Pasadena, and was a brilliant physicist at the California Institute of Technology. He proposed that a system got from a state A, to a state B, by every possible path or history.<br /><br />Each path or history, has a certain amplitude or intensity, and the probability of the system going from A- to B, is given by adding up the amplitudes for each path. There will be a history in which the moon is made of blue cheese, but the amplitude is low, which is bad news for mice.<br /><br /><strong>An Issue of Time</strong><br /><br />The probability for a state of the universe at the present time, is given by adding up the amplitudes for all the histories that end with that state. But how did the histories start. This is the Origin question in another guise. Does it require a Creator to decree how the universe began. Or is the initial state of the universe, determined by a law of science.<br /><br />In fact, this question would arise even if the histories of the universe went back to the infinite past. But it is more immediate if the universe began only 15 billion years ago. The problem of what happens at the beginning of time, is a bit like the question of what happened at the edge of the world, when people thought the world was flat. Is the world a flat plate, with the sea pouring over the edge. I have tested this experimentally. I have been round the world, and I have not fallen off.<br /><br />As we all know, the problem of what happens at the edge of the world, was solved when people realized that the world was not a flat plate, but a curved surface. Time however, seemed to be different. It appeared to be separate from space, and to be like a model railway track. If it had a beginning, there would have to be someone to set the trains going.<br /><br />Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, unified time and space as space-time, but time was still different from space, and was like a corridor, which either had a beginning and end, or went on for ever. However, when one combines General Relativity with Quantum Theory, Jim Hartle and I, realized that time can behave like another direction in space under extreme conditions. This means one can get rid of the problem of time having a beginning, in a similar way in which we got rid of the edge of the world. Suppose the beginning of the universe, was like the south pole of the Earth , with degrees of latitude, playing the role of time. The universe would start as a point at the South Pole. As one moves north, the circles of constant latitude, representing the size of the universe, would expand. To ask what happened before the beginning of the universe, would become a meaningless question, because there is nothing south of the South Pole.<br /><br />Time, as measured in degrees of latitude, would have a beginning at the South Pole, but the South Pole is much like any other point, at least so I have been told. I have been to Antarctica, but not to the South Pole.<br /><br />The same laws of Nature hold at the South Pole, as in other places. This would remove the age-old objection to the universe having a beginning, that it would be a place where the normal laws broke down. The beginning of the universe, would be governed by the laws of science.<br /><br />Inflation<br /><br />The picture Jim Hartle and I developed, of the spontaneous quantum creation of the universe, would be a bit like the formation of bubbles of steam in boiling water. The idea is that the most probable histories of the universe, would be like the surfaces of the bubbles. Many small bubbles would appear, and then disappear again. These would correspond to mini universes that would expand, but would collapse again while still of microscopic size. They are possible alternative universes, but they are not of much interest since they do not last long enough to develop galaxies and stars, let alone intelligent life. A few of the little bubbles, however, with grow to a certain size at which they are safe from recollapse. They will continue to expand at an ever increasing rate, and will form the bubbles we see. They will correspond to universes that would start off expanding at an ever increasing rate. This is called inflation, like the way prices go up every year.<br /><br />The world record for inflation, was in Germany after the First World War. Prices rose by a factor of ten million in a period of 18 months. But that was nothing compared to inflation in the early universe. The universe expanded by a factor of million trillion trillion in a tiny fraction of a second. Unlike inflation in prices, inflation in the early universe was a very good thing. It produced a very large, and uniform universe, just as we observe. However, it would not be completely uniform. In the sum over histories, histories that are very slightly irregular, will have almost as high probabilities as the completely uniform and regular history.. The theory therefore predicts that the early universe is likely to be slightly non-uniform. These irregularities would produce small variations in the intensity of the microwave background from different directions. The microwave background has been observed by the Map satellite, and was found to have exactly the kind of variations predicted. So we know we are on the right lines.<br /><br />The irregularities in the early universe, will mean that some regions will have slightly higher density than others. The gravitational attraction of the extra density, will slow the expansion of the region, and can eventually cause the region to collapse to form galaxies and stars. So look well at the map of the microwave sky. It is the blue print for all the structure in the universe. We are the product of quantum fluctuations in the very early universe. God really does play dice.<br /><br />We have made tremendous progress in cosmology in the last hundred years. The General Theory of Relativity, and the discovery of the expansion of the universe, shattered the old picture of an ever existing, and ever lasting universe. Instead, general relativity predicted that the universe, and time itself, would begin in the big bang. It also predicted that time would come to an end in black holes. The discovery of the cosmic microwave background, and observations of black holes, support these conclusions. This is a profound change in our picture of the universe, and of reality itself.<br /><br />Although the General Theory of Relativity, predicted that the universe must have come from a period of high curvature in the past, it could not predict how the universe would emerge from the big bang. Thus general relativity on its own, can not answer the central question in cosmology, Why is the universe, the way it is. However, if general relativity is combined with quantum theory, it may be possible to predict how the universe would start. It would initially expand at an ever increasing rate. During this so called inflationary period, the marriage of the two theories predicted that small fluctuations would develop, and lead to the formation of galaxies, stars, and all the other structure in the universe. This is confirmed by observations of small non uniformities in the cosmic microwave background, with exactly the predicted properties. So it seems we are on our way to understanding the origin of the universe, though much more work will be needed. A new window on the very early universe, will be opened when we can detect gravitational waves by accurately measuring the distances between space craft. Gravitational waves propagate freely to us from earliest times, unimpeded by any intervening material. By contrast, light is scattered many times by free electrons. The scattering goes on until the electrons freeze out, after 300,000 years.<br /><br />Despite having had some great successes, not everything is solved. We do not yet have a good theoretical understanding, of the observations that the expansion of the universe, is accelerating again, after a long period of slowing down. Without such an understanding, we can not be sure of the future of the universe. Will it continue to expand forever? Is inflation a law of Nature? Or will the universe eventually collapse again? New observational results, and theoretical advances, are coming in rapidly. Cosmology is a very exciting and active subject. We are getting close to answering the age old questions. Why are we here? Where did we come from?<br /><br />* Excerpted from the text of the J. Robert Oppenheimer Lecture in Physics, delivered March 13, 2007, by Stephen Hawking, the Lucasian professor of mathematics at Cambridge University. Hawking spoke at Zellerbach Hall on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-56072649467342556152007-12-07T13:26:00.000-08:002007-12-07T13:27:30.323-08:00Extreme Science on Technorati<a href="http://technorati.com/claim/mimrp5nh5d" rel="me">Technorati Profile</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582125876619686469.post-79918023782667193942007-12-07T13:11:00.000-08:002007-12-07T13:16:24.619-08:00Extreme Science the Einstein Hubble Planck NewsletterWelcome to Extreme Science, the newsletter published by the Einstein-Hubble scientific association, sponsored by <a href="http://www.mediterranean-interiors.com/">Mediterranean Interiors</a> the on-line shopping website specialised in <a href="http://www.mediterranean-interiors.com/provencal-art-crafts.htm">Provencal Art Crafts</a> and <a href="http://www.mediterranean-interiors.com/provence-gifts.htm">Provence Gifts</a>.<br /><br />The Einstein-Hubble association was founded in 2006 by Antoine Einstein, Ernest Hubble and Marcel Plank, three MSC students at the Lemanian University (Geneva, Switzerland) in memory of their grand uncles, the well-know Albert, Edwin and Max. For the last two years Einstein, Hubble and Plank have been working on the GUT (Grand Unification Theory) under the direction of Roberto Galilei, distinguished Professore of Quantun Mechanics from Leonardo Da Vinci University in Roma. With the contribution of several scientists from CERN (Centre Europeen pour la Recherche Nucleaire), in particular Professor Roberto Buitoni and Francisco Panzani, we have already achieved a number of important steps toward the Grand Unification, including the quantic characterization of the Higgs field in a 6 dimension time space continuum.Our preliminary theoritical work has given raise to important predictions relative to the order of magnitude of the Higgs field during pre-Big-Bang states of the Universe (10 exp -10 seconds before the Big Bang) and gives early indication as to the so-called Origin of the Universe.In the first issue of Extreme Science, we will describe the methodology we will use to detect evidence of the Higgs Boson and the details of the configuration of the LHC (Large Hadron Collider), more specifically the Perry-Mason interferometer. A-temporal characteristics of the Higgs Boson, if verified, will confirm theoretical calculations with regards to the state of the Universe that might have pre-existed to the Big-Bang and to the 'starting point' of Time (the T0). We will also expose the basis of the Einstein-Hubble-Plank conjecture regarding the Alpha tensor, a preliminary mathematical foundation for the GUT, which describes how the Higgs Field equations can be derived from a more generic set of field equations.Happy reading!Antoine, Ernest and MarcelUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0