July 27, 2010

Big Bang Abandoned in New Model of the Universe

A new cosmology successfully explains the accelerating expansion of the
universe without dark energy; but only if the universe has no beginning and
no end.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/419984/big-bang-abandoned-in-new-model-of-the-universe/

As one of the few astrophysical events that most people are familiar with,
the Big Bang has a special place in our culture. And while there is
scientific consensus that it is the best explanation for the origin of the
Universe, the debate is far from closed. However, it’s hard to find
alternative models of the Universe without a beginning that are genuinely
compelling.

That could change now with the fascinating work of Wun-Yi Shu at the
National Tsing Hua University in Taiwan. Shu has developed an innovative
new description of the Universe in which the roles of time space and mass
are related in new kind of relativity.

Shu’s idea is that time and space are not independent entities but can be
converted back and forth between each other. In his formulation of the
geometry of spacetime, the speed of light is simply the conversion factor
between the two. Similarly, mass and length are interchangeable in a
relationship in which the conversion factor depends on both the
gravitational constant G and the speed of light, neither of which need be
constant.

So as the Universe expands, mass and time are converted to length and space
and vice versa as it contracts.

This universe has no beginning or end, just alternating periods of
expansion and contraction. In fact, Shu shows that singularities cannot
exist in this cosmos.

It’s easy to dismiss this idea as just another amusing and unrealistic
model dreamed up by those whacky comsologists.

That is until you look at the predictions it makes. During a period of
expansion, an observer in this universe would see an odd kind of change in
the red-shift of bright objects such as Type-I supernovas, as they
accelerate away. It turns out, says Shu, that his data exactly matches the
observations that astronomers have made on Earth.

This kind of acceleration is an ordinary feature of Shu’s universe.

That’s in stark contrast to the various models of the Universe based on the
Big Bang. Since the accelerating expansion of the Universe was discovered,
cosmologists have been performing some rather worrying contortions with the
laws of physics to make their models work.

The most commonly discussed idea is that the universe is filled with a dark
energy that is forcing the universe to expand at an increasing rate. For
this model to work, dark energy must make up 75 per cent of the energy-mass
of the Universe and be increasing at a fantastic rate.

But there is a serious price to pay for this idea: the law of conservation
of energy. The embarrassing truth is that the world’s cosmologists have
conveniently swept under the carpet one the of fundamental laws of physics
in an attempt to square this circle.

That paints Shu’s ideas in a slightly different perspective. There’s no
need to abandon conservation of energy to make his theory work.


That’s not to say Shu’s theory is perfect. Far from it. One of the biggest
problems he faces is explaining the existence and structure of the cosmic
microwave background, something that many astrophysicists believe to be the
the strongest evidence that the Big Bang really did happen. The CMB, they
say, is the echo of the Big bang.

How it might arise in Shu’s cosmology isn’t yet clear but I imagine he’s
working on it.

Even if he finds a way, there will need to be some uncomfortable rethinking
before his ideas can gain traction. His approach may well explain the
Type-I supernova observations without abandoning conservation of energy but
it asks us to give up the notion of the Big Bang, the constancy of the
speed of light and to accept a vast new set of potential phenomenon related
to the interchangeable relationships between mass, space and time.

Rightly or wrongly, that’s a trade off that many will find hard. Let’s hope
Shu sticks to his guns, if only for the sake of good old-fashioned debate

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1007.1750: Cosmological Models with No Big Bang

Reply via email to