Nexus - 1304 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

We must understand that the cosmos is what it is and not confuse how it is with what we wish it to be. The obvious is sometimes false; the unexpected sometimes true. With this primordial apple as a start, you can then create the We must understand that the cosmos is what it is and not rest of the world in proportion. If this isn't true, there must be confuse how it is with what we wish it to be. The obvious is something in "nothingness" that determines the scale of things, sometimes false; the unexpected sometimes true. which contradicts the concept of nothingness. We conclude that physically equivalent universes might exist 5. The SEC theory implies new physics at different scales and that no particular cosmological scale is Let's try to model scale expansion. We have to come up with preferred; the cosmos is "scale-equivalent". This reasoning a way to model how time expands relative to time. We might suggests that the cosmological scale of space and time might be try to use differential methods and form the derivative of time changing, which is the essence of the SEC theory. with respect to time, which is dt/dt. Since dt/dt always equals A scale-expanding cosmos has no beginning or end; the scale one, we conclude that time always progresses at the same pace may continually keep expanding forever. Thus, there is no BB relative to itself. This doesn't help. However, if instead of time event to consider, so eliminating the most troublesome aspect of we use the cosmological scale as an additional parameter, we the BB theory. An observer in the SEC, like you or I, expands could model a scale that increases with time in GR. However, together with the universe and will not notice the expansion we will then get a cosmological model that changes with time, locally, since everything else in our environment, including and lose the fundamental feature of cosmological scale- material objects, expands at the same pace. equivalence. This model would lead to a BB-type scenario. Although we cannot notice the This problem occupied my mind for expansion locally, its effects can be about two years. I found that this seen in the redshift of light from . also had been an insurmountable faraway galaxies. However, this A scale-expanding cosmos obstacle for other investigators, who remot ue recevon tive | hasino beginning or end; fins at lowed dh ame rao long measuring tape between two the scale may continually GR must be incomplete since it alaxies, Id find that th A a t del scale-equivalent gtinesve would nd athey | Keep expanding forever. fst mode sce-equaten positions since the tape expands Thus, there Is no Big Bang was a disappointment, but I thought togeth ith thing else. And if A that scal ansi as such < we timed a light beam between the event to consider. simple and pure idea and that it galaxies, we would find the same should be possible, even if it couldn't constant time interval since the pace be modelled by GR. After having of time slows down when space further investigated the properties of expands. the SEC and finding that it accurately models the world as we Thus, relative positions of galaxies remain the same. You see it, I gradually became convinced that GR should be might say that the universe expands without expanding! The generalised to make possible discrete scale adjustments. I found cosmological explanation is in scale, which does not change that if the cosmological scale were to change in small and rapid relationships between the three spatial metrics and the temporal increments, the SEC could be modelled by GR! GR is "blind" to metric. The cosmological redshift therefore is an expanding discrete, stepwise scale changes; Einstein's equations remain space-time effect. unaffected. If the cosmological expansion were to occur in Furthermore, since universes of different scales are physically discrete scale increments, thus being treated as a "fifth equivalent, the scale expansion may progress without dimension" beyond the four space-time dimensions, GR could cosmological ageing. You may object to this because it seems still be used. to violate thermodynamics by suggesting that the universe is a perpetual motion —_——, "machine". However, this conundrum is f _ ; 7 resolved by the previously unanticipated | Pt p you Knew! i, rd Goop, THEN slowing progression of time, which has the THE UMWWERre is! Fes if Don't STAND effect of inducing cosmological energy. | t ‘ i ~" ET. Although the idea of cosmological scale COnTIFVALLY $s rar / expansion seems natural to most people ExfA NPI NG? PI . PAE / Pa without scientific training, people in — science might have a hard time with this simple idea because physically equivalent cosmological scale expansion cannot be ra) modelled by GR. Since general relativity and quantum mechanics are the two central pillars of modern physics, it is unthinkable é for people in academia to consider | anything that might violate GR. But, scale expansion is such a simple and natural idea that it seems wrong to abandon it simply because it cannot be modelled by GR. Quoting Carl Sagan from his book Cosmos: A scale-expanding cosmos has no beginning or end; the scale may continually keep expanding forever. Thus, there is no Big Bang event to consider. i Goop, THEN { pon'r =), 50 Close To | E Zo DID YOU Know oN THE UMWERSE is Yes, COMTIN VALLY I | \_ EXPANDING? Ip. JUNE — JULY 2006 NEXUS = 41 www.nexusmagazine.com