On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 08 Dec 2017, at 00:43, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > > https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23631550-600-dark-energy-is-mutating-with-grave-consequences-for-the-cosmos/ > > This is interesting and a bit disturbing. Phantom energy means the vacuum > energy density is increasing with time. This means that not only is the > universe accelerating the acceleration itself is increasing. With ordinary > dark energy the quantum vacuum energy is constant which gives an > exponential rule for the time dependent separation of two test masses > (galaxies) is exponential, but it asymptotes. There is some time in the > future where the rate of separation diverges. With exponential expansion > things gravitationally bound, such as galaxies, experience no increase in a > force pulling them apart. With phantom energy that does happen. In fact > towards the end stellar systems of planets get torn apart, then the stars > and planet. then atoms, then hadrons are pulled apart into a plasma of > quarks and gluons and ... it hits a gravitational singularity called the > big rip. Everything is snuffed out of existence. > > What is disturbing about these data is it implies this has been going on > very noticeably during the past history of the cosmos. So the quantum > vacuum has been changing through the last 10 or more billion years. That is > what is most unsettling. It implies something very odd is going on with > quantum mechanics that frankly makes no sense. Certainly the contribution > to the vacuum energy of the universe can't be due to some change in known > quantum fields. The fine structure constant α = e^2/ħc ~ 1/137.0, for e the > electric charge ħ the Planck unit of action and c the speed of light, is > measured from distant atomic transitions is galaxies and no change is > observed. If there were changes to the QCD vacuum energy this would be seen > in changes in the mass of protons and nuclei. No such thing is observed, > for this too would impact atomic transitions in atoms in distant galaxies. > > Before going into more physics there is the lighter disturbing element to > this in that it appears Schopenhauer may not have been half baked when he > said we life in the worst of all possible worlds. This was a sort of > anti-Liebnitzian stance he had. In my philosophy classes I couldn't stand > Schopenhauer; I always groaned when he came up. I always thought he was a > clinically depressed nut who took too long at getting around to his > suicide. A phantom universe is not different than any other; no matter what > type of universe you exist in you are doomed. Well, except for the steady > State cosmology that is empirically ruled out. However, with phantom energy > you are not only doomed, but it is coming a whole lot sooner. > > I think the universe consists of only one electron, and only one type of > neutrino, and one photon and one up quark with r and b charge and ... . The > reason why we see so many of them is they careen between the early universe > with inflationary expansion where the vacuum energy is enormous, and they > careen off the future vacuum energy where again it is enormous. The tiny > cosmological constant we observe is bounded in time by two huge vacuum > energies. So a type of elementary particle, say an electron, cycles back > and forth in time appearing as an electron here when going forwards in > time, an anti-electron there when going backwards in time after being > deflected by the future big rip singularity and appears as an electron > somewhere else. So the electrons running in the wires of my computer are > all the same, and the same as electrons in a white dwarf star exerting > degenerate pressure, a positron generated near a black hole, or an electron > being ejected by a hot star. > > This is potentially my solution to the whole problem of the 123 orders of > magnitude issue with the quantum vacuum. Quantum fields are modeled as > harmonic oscillators. The pendulum with small swing is a classical case. > However, quantum mechanically a zero-swinging pendulum (a plumb bob) has an > uncertainty in its position so it has some swing --- no matter how much you > try to get rid of it. If you sum over all possible frequencies quantum > fields give this zero point energy, or quantum vacuum, that has 10^{123} > times what would determine the cosmological constant. This is a big > outstanding problem. It might just be this huge vacuum does exist, but it > exists not locally in time, but at the very beginning and the end. > > So there is opportunity here, but it does ultimately mean we are DOOMED! > > > > OK. Assuming that a "physical universe" can somehow select your history > from the infinitely many one emulated in the arithmetical reality. > > This is, from the point of view of (serious) metaphysics, a quite strong > assumption, of the type "religion", and even of the type "non-mechanist > religion". > > Someone said that there are only two certainties: taxes and death. If we > are machine, we lost one more certainty, and we can be sure only of one > thing: taxes. > > ... You really think you could evade paying your taxes with some doomsday? > It will not work (assuming mechanism). > > Bruno >
I guess I do not understand your comment. You seem to be talking MWI sort of stuff. The doom comments are not that serious. Although the only universe where some IGUS or intelligent life could exist eternally is the steady state cosmology. Even there it would be a bit of a dice game. The steady state universe is completely ruled out by observation. All other cosmologies are ultimately lethal. The recollapsing cosmology is lethal and the eternally expanding universe is lethal. The recollapsing cosmology burns everything up in "Planck energy fire." The eternally expanding cosmology freezes into heat death. The exponentially expanding cosmology further means all possible energy and resources will ultimately cross the cosmological event horizon and escape you. The big rip accelerates the universe into a Planck wall of energy. Cosmology is a bit like the Ne'ile at Yom Kippur, where death is a certainty and we can only seek absolution in the moment before the doors are closed or the cement hardened. More parochially I think it likely the human race will implode within the next 100 years.The whole process of civilization is a transient period of a 7 to 10 thousand years which separates two stone ages. The prior stone age, the paleolithic, was during the Pleistocene period where the Earth was biologically rich, and it started about 150,000 years ago when our species emerged. The next stone age will be when the Earth will be depleted, toxic and the whole biome of this planet will be collapsing into the next or sixth mass extinction. How long Homo sapiens will endure the next stone age in unknown. However, the Hominid species most related to us lasted only about 200,000 to 300,000 years. LC -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
