Carbon Based

Posts tagged physics

203 notes

exploringthecosmos:

The Big Bang
The Big Bang is a beautiful theory which is an effort to understand where the universe came from. Some of the most fundamental questions concerning our origins, such as that of the elements, can be explained with the Big Bang theory. But just where did everything come from? What existed before the Big Bang? Where did space come from? And what caused the Big Bang? Well, the simple answer is: We don’t know.
We know the universe is expanding; it’s accelerating, actually. This means that yesterday, the universe was a little bit smaller than it is today. A month ago, it was even smaller. A year ago, smaller still. Turning the clock backwards, the universe seems to be getting smaller, the galaxies closer together. If we go further enough back in time, the universe was so small that everything was contained in a point of space and time. Everything that exists today; you, me, the Earth, our Galaxy, everything came from this point.
Approximately 14.6 billion years ago, the Universe was created and it was very hot. Radiation (simply photons) dominated the early universe which cooled down as it expanded. Analysis of the CMB data suggests that the universe is a perfect blackbody; a higher blackbody temperature means typical photons have higher energies. In the early universe, these photons were so energetic that they produced matter-antimatter particles copiously seemingly out of “nothing” which can be explained using Einstein’s E=mc² formula (see this post.) The early universe was constantly creating matter and antimatter which quickly annihilated; this is the Particle Era. The universe was bubbling with matter, the prerequisite for everything in our Universe. Since our Universe is made of matter, and not antimatter, a baryonic asymmetry is proposed to be the origin of our matter dominated Universe.
Once the mean photon energy drops below ~1MeV, nuclei may be formed. This is the nuclear binding energy and thus, the Nucleosynthesis Era. During the Nucleosynthesis Era, the universe is one big nuclear reactor. This era sets the primordial chemical composition of the universe: 76% Hydrogen and 24% Helium.
The Nucleosynthesis Era is followed by the Era of Nuclei. Photon energies are at this point beyond the electron binding energy (~1eV). This era of the universe is foggy since photons are continuously being scattered by nuclei. At the very special moment during which photon energies drop below the electron binding energy, electrons may then bind to nuclei to form the first atoms - the fog is lifted. The Universe, during the era of atoms, becomes transparent. Photons are no longer being continuously scattered and they are suddenly released. This release of photons during the Era of Atoms is the origin of the Cosmic Microwave Background and is a significant use of study. Recall that beyond the CMB, before stable atoms are made, the universe is still foggy. It is for this reason that we cannot see beyond this point in the universe.
Not only can we not see past this point in the universe, but we cannot (yet) study what is happening at the moment of the Big Bang. There are no mathematical tools that can be used at the moment of the Big Bang, and thus, we cannot study what happened before the Big Bang. The current laws of physics seem to break down at the singularity in the beginning of the Universe, similar to what happens when we attempt to understand what happens inside a black hole. What caused the Big Bang is still a mystery, and there is still a lot left to discover, but we have achieved a lot in our understanding. The origin of our species, of the stars in the sky, of the elements that compose our Universe, can all be explained with this elegant theory.

exploringthecosmos:

The Big Bang

The Big Bang is a beautiful theory which is an effort to understand where the universe came from. Some of the most fundamental questions concerning our origins, such as that of the elements, can be explained with the Big Bang theory. But just where did everything come from? What existed before the Big Bang? Where did space come from? And what caused the Big Bang? Well, the simple answer is: We don’t know.

We know the universe is expanding; it’s accelerating, actually. This means that yesterday, the universe was a little bit smaller than it is today. A month ago, it was even smaller. A year ago, smaller still. Turning the clock backwards, the universe seems to be getting smaller, the galaxies closer together. If we go further enough back in time, the universe was so small that everything was contained in a point of space and time. Everything that exists today; you, me, the Earth, our Galaxy, everything came from this point.

Approximately 14.6 billion years ago, the Universe was created and it was very hot. Radiation (simply photons) dominated the early universe which cooled down as it expanded. Analysis of the CMB data suggests that the universe is a perfect blackbody; a higher blackbody temperature means typical photons have higher energies. In the early universe, these photons were so energetic that they produced matter-antimatter particles copiously seemingly out of “nothing” which can be explained using Einstein’s E=mc² formula (see this post.) The early universe was constantly creating matter and antimatter which quickly annihilated; this is the Particle Era. The universe was bubbling with matter, the prerequisite for everything in our Universe. Since our Universe is made of matter, and not antimatter, a baryonic asymmetry is proposed to be the origin of our matter dominated Universe.

Once the mean photon energy drops below ~1MeV, nuclei may be formed. This is the nuclear binding energy and thus, the Nucleosynthesis Era. During the Nucleosynthesis Era, the universe is one big nuclear reactor. This era sets the primordial chemical composition of the universe: 76% Hydrogen and 24% Helium.

The Nucleosynthesis Era is followed by the Era of Nuclei. Photon energies are at this point beyond the electron binding energy (~1eV). This era of the universe is foggy since photons are continuously being scattered by nuclei. At the very special moment during which photon energies drop below the electron binding energy, electrons may then bind to nuclei to form the first atoms - the fog is lifted. The Universe, during the era of atoms, becomes transparent. Photons are no longer being continuously scattered and they are suddenly released. This release of photons during the Era of Atoms is the origin of the Cosmic Microwave Background and is a significant use of study. Recall that beyond the CMB, before stable atoms are made, the universe is still foggy. It is for this reason that we cannot see beyond this point in the universe.

Not only can we not see past this point in the universe, but we cannot (yet) study what is happening at the moment of the Big Bang. There are no mathematical tools that can be used at the moment of the Big Bang, and thus, we cannot study what happened before the Big Bang. The current laws of physics seem to break down at the singularity in the beginning of the Universe, similar to what happens when we attempt to understand what happens inside a black hole. What caused the Big Bang is still a mystery, and there is still a lot left to discover, but we have achieved a lot in our understanding. The origin of our species, of the stars in the sky, of the elements that compose our Universe, can all be explained with this elegant theory.

Filed under science astronomy cosmology physics Big Bang universe

11 notes

The Poetry of Science: Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson

Two of science’s luminaries converse on the beauty of science. Neil deGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist and host of NOVA and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins will explore the wonders of the Cosmos and of Life, its origins, its inspirations, and why science is not just an option, it is the only reality we possess.

This is one of the best things that I have ever seen.

Filed under Neil DeGrasse Tyson Richard Dawkins science astronomy physics evolution

10 notes

Q: Why?

Mathematician: From time to time, people like asking us questions such as “Why?”, while steadfastly refusing to explain what the heck they are talking about. The best example of this was a naked guy who approached our “Ask a Mathematician / Ask a Physicist” booth at Burning Man. In an attempt to respect everyone’s right to not explain themselves, we’ll make a series of guesses about what those folks might be trying to get at, and briefly respond to each of these possible questions.


1. “Why do we exist?”

Mathematician: We exist because our ancestors were at least slightly better at passing down their genetic material than other people. If the environment of earth happened to be just a tad bit different, then other genes besides our own would have been favored, and we would not be here today. If the environment had been a little more different still, then not only would we not be here, but the human species would not even be here. Some other creatures (possibly of great intelligence) would now be romping around this planet. In conclusion, we exist because the process of evolution works, because our planet happened to have the right conditions for evolution to begin, and because conditions changed over time such that human genes (and more specifically, our ancestor’s genes) happened to be favored for survival. We all got very, very lucky.

Physicist: If the many-worlds hypothesis holds (it totally does), then everything that’s possible happens in some version of the universe.  If you can ask the question “Why do we exist?”, then you’ve already restricted your attention to the (possibly very small) set of universes where intelligent life exists.  This argument is called the “anthropic principle“.  So the reason we exist is because there is at least some vanishingly small chance that we could.

[Read More]

Filed under physics mathematics universe anthropic principle existence aliens life nature

47 notes

Does the Big Bang theory violate the laws of thermodynamics?

sciencecenter:

Short answer: no.

Long answer: click through the link.

WARNING! Quantum fluctuations lie ahead.

Guth says (p. 12-14, 271-276) that the person who first suggested that the universe and its associated space may have originated as a quantum fluctuation was Edward Tryon in 1973 in his paper Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation? (Nature, vol. 246, p. 396-397, 14 December 1973.) As Tryon says in that paper:

In any big bang model, one must deal with the problem of ‘creation’. This problem has two aspects. One is that the conservation laws of physics forbid the creation of something from nothing. The other is that even if the conservation laws were inapplicable at the moment of creation, there is no apparent reason for such an event to occur.

Contrary to widespread belief, such an event need not have violated any of the conventional laws of physics. The laws of physics merely imply that a Universe which appears from nowhere must have certain specific properties. In particular, such a Universe must have a zero net value for all conserved quantities.

To indicate how such a creation might have come about, I refer to quantum field theory, in which every phenomenon that could happen in principle actually does happen occasionally in practice, on a statistically random basis. For example, quantum electrodynamics reveals that an electron, positron and photon occasionally emerge spontaneously from a perfect vacuum. When this happens, the three particles exist for a brief time, and then annihilate each other, leaving no trace behind.

If it is true that our Universe has a zero net value for all conserved quantities, then it may simply be a fluctuation of the vacuum, the vacuum of some larger space in which our Universe is imbedded. In answer to the question of why it happened, I offer the modest proposal that our Universe is simply one of those things which happen from time to time.

Filed under science big bang theory physics astrophysics quantum fluctuations

39 notes

Don’t Shake Hands With an Anti-Alien!

     You are hovering some planet in a galaxy far far away, uncertain whether it is made of matter or antimatter and hence whether or not it will be safe to land. The planet is inhabited by friendly aliens with whom you have made radio contact. They are very intelligent and understand you, and being advanced, know all about matter and antimatter.

     Naturally, they insist that they are made of matter; after all, it would be surprising if anyone chose to define their own stuff as ‘anti.’ How can we decide if their dictionary and ours coincide? What questions will unambiguously reveal whether they are made of the same stuff as us, or are anti-aliens?

     If matter and antimatter were always perfectly symmetrically counterpoised, there would be no way to settle the issue, other than gambling with a close approach of firing a tiny unmanned probe and seeing what  happens when it hits the atmosphere or anti-atmosphere. However, we know that there is an asymmetry, small but measurable, and that is what the electrically neutral variety of K mesons can reveal. They do so when they decay, producing a pion that is either positively or negatively charged accompanied by an electron or positron respectively. If matter and antimatter were perfect opposites, these two decays would also be precisely matched, the chance of each being the same. In reality, they are slightly different.

     The neutral K and anti-K are welded together in nature in such a way that they sometimes die quickly, but at other times live longer. The two possibilities are quite distinct and are known as the short- and long-lived versions. Each of these shows an asymmetry between matter and antimatter, but it is the long-lived one where the effect is biggest, they decay that leads to a positron being slightly more likely to happen than giving an electron: out of every two-thousand examples, on the average, 1,003 will give a positron and 997 give an electron. Now at last we have something to discuss with the alien.

     First, identify the K. It is no use giving its name, since the alien will certainly call it something else, but we can identify it by something we will agree about: its mass. It weighs in at slightly more than half the mass of a proton or antiproton and there are no other particles than can be confused with it. So tell the alien that we are interested in a particle whose mass is slightly more than half that of the massive particle that exists in the ‘nucleus’ at the center of the alien’s simplest atom, the proton in the hydrogen atom (or antiproton in an atom of antihydrogen.) That identifies the K.

     In addition to the neutral K, with no electric charge, there are also a K-plus and K-minus with positive or negative charge. So we much make sure that the alien and we are talking about the electrically neutral version. We must say that the property that holds the atom together is what we call ‘charge’ and that we are interested in the K that has no charge. The alien will be aware that this neutral K has two forms: one with a short life and one with a relatively long one. It is the latter that we will focus on.

     Now we come to the critical bit. In our world of matter, when the long-lived K decays into a pion and an electron or positron, it is the positron mode that is the most likely. So we ask the alien: ‘Is the lightweight particle that is produced most often in these decays the same as you find in your atoms, or is it the opposite?’ If the alien answers that it is the same, it is a positron, the alien is made of antimatter and we should look but not touch. If the alien replies that it is the opposite, an electron, then we are all made of matter and it is safe to land.

Antimatter, Frank Close

Filed under antimatter positron aliens extraterrestrials physics particle physics theoretical physics ET Frank Close