Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical
Assumptions Are Wrong?
6/11/2012 K Kehrer
Abstract.
The realms of the validity of the physical
constants are discussed and a hypothesis about the end of the existence of the
Black Holes is presented.
Questions
about the constants of physics and their possible dependency on the environment.
Great physicists of
nineteenth and the twentieth century have found and measured with incredible
accuracy the fundamental physical constants on which our worldview and physical
knowledge rests. The variety of the constants cover all disciplines of science,
but the most sacrosanct are the universal ones like the Plank constant (h), the magnetic constant (mu μ0)
the electric constant (epsilon ε0 ),the fine structure
constant α
α=e^2/hbar*c
since it depends on the speed of light (c) whose exact value has been declared
as an unchangeable fixed number ( 299, 792, 45 8 m s-1
).
All of these constants
were rigorously checked and rechecked several times on the surface of the Earth.
Centuries earlier another all-important constant of the
gravitational interaction (G) had
been discovered by Newton, the genius of the seventeen century. Although its
value still has ~0.013% uncertainty due to the weakness of gravity, Newton’s
gravitational theory has been proven unchallengeable in our solar system.
The first high accuracy measurements of G were carried out by Cavendish and
later Eötvös. They had established its value of approximately 6.754 × 10−11
m3 kg−1 s−2. The exact value is still unknown.
(The relative standard uncertainty today is 1.2 x 10-4
).
There is an other “constant” that is constantly changing
with new observation; the hotly debated “cosmological “constant, λ. The
uncertainty about the meaning of lambda reveals the shortcoming of our
knowledge about our larger environment what we call the Universe, for depending
on the slight variation of this number the Universe is thought to be
either curved and closed, or flat and
open, or its expansion will newer end.
In the early part of the twentieth century Einstein
had published his Special and General Theory of Relativity (SR and GR, for
short) in the German scientific paper, the famous Annalen der Physik. His theory was based on the negative results of
the experiment of A. A. Michelson and Morley (MM). The purpose of the
measurement was to check the “aether” draft - a theoretical medium filing the interplanetary
space - by measuring the speed of light parallel and perpendicular to the
movement of the Earth. Since no difference had been found, the test was interpreted
as a proof that there is no physical medium in the interstellar space.
The validity of negative - or null - results is always
questionable. It might as well mean that they just could not find what they
were looking for, because the resolution of the measurement apparatus was not
adequate, or the assumptions were faulty, or environmental effects had hidden
the results? It is also imaginable that what they were looking for was there,
but they were looking for it in the wrong place, or in a wrong way. Even positive results can only be accepted
when multiple independent sources are able to verify it.
It is worth taking the conclusions of the MM
measurement with a grain of salt. When the
relativity theory was formulated it had assumed
this negative result as a positive proof, that the interstellar space-vacuum
consists of nothing, it is an absolute void. Based on this approach, and
adopting the thought of contemporary physicists and mathematicians like Mach, Lorenz
and Riemann, the velocity of light was declared as an absolute and
unchangeable, fixed value.
A few years later the general understanding about
the nature of the vacuum started to change because new quantum mechanical
theories and observations in both the micro cosmos and macro cosmos became
available.
Dirac had theorized that the vacuum was filled with
virtual particles. These virtual ghosts were coming to life for a fleeting
moment and annihilate each other as Heisenberg’s uncertainty law permitted it
i.e. they disappeared before they could have been detected. Some scientist began
to investigate the possibility of the existence of vacuum energy. When a few decade ago, in the 1970s, Vera Rubin measured
the orbital velocity of the stars around the galaxy’s core, she shocked the establishment
by telling the curve was flat, a fact - the violating Kepler's third law - had raised serious questions in
scientific circles about the validity of Newton’s gravity.
Newton's gravity is based upon Kepler's calculations about the solar system where the mass of the central star represent 98% of the total mass. In a galaxy the gravitational interaction of hundred-billions of stars may pose a different problem.
Newton had formulated his gravitational theory using
Kepler’s calculations of the planets’ orbital speed in our solar system. Kepler
had summed up his observation in his famous three laws that ever since provide the tools of calculating our
rocket’s trajectories. One of these laws says the farther the planet is from
the Sun the longer it takes to complete one orbit. (The
square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube
of the semi-major axis of its orbit)
Trying to explain why the stars are not obeying to
Kepler’s laws and Newton’s proven gravitational equations, speculation has surfaced
about the presence of dark matter.
When it became the proven fact that the expansion of
the Universe accelerates dark energy
has been invoked as a possible cause of the acceleration, along with modified
gravitational theories and questions about the limits of gravitational attraction.
The best cosmologists have made calculations about the amount dark energy and
dark mater (energy represent a certain amount of matter, for m=E/c2). The result has predicted
that only 4% of the mater in the Universe is visible for the observers, the other
96% is thought to be yet undetected dark matter and dark energy. If it turns
out to be true then our ignorance about the Universe is almost complete.
Most
recently a substantial effort is under way at LHC (Large Hadron Collider built
in France for about three billion Euros) to verify Higgs’ prediction of a
homogeneous field that permeates the intergalactic space and endows the heavy
particles with mass. Since it is a scalar field it is also the same to every
observer, regardless of how fast one moves relative to the cosmic background.
Particles see the same Higgs field unaffected by their state of motion. It
rather sounds like an absolute space, therefore some refers to it as “Higgs
Aether”.
UCSD
physicist Kim Griest have theorized that if this field exists, it would weigh about
a trillion kg /cm3,or ~7.44 trillion pound per inch3, an
astonishing figure. When the characteristic of the Higgs field are inserted
into the equations of GR the energy content of “vacuum” comes out either zero,
or 10110 eV, both are highly unlikely figures!
I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field
concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my
entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of
modern physics. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
Dr.
Wolff introduced a vibrating space theory (SR for short) two decades ago, which
answers to Occam’s razor, that is, it finds the simplest solution for many
unanswered question. In essence it states that whatever the space-fabric is,
its constant vibrations are creating material and energy. The theory eliminates
singularities, infinities and conforms to Heisenberg’s important insight:
“Atoms are not things”
In
other words, they are not tiny billiard balls, or mathematical points with zero
volume.
All
this tells us that understanding the fabric of the vacuum is the most important
thing
if one want to understand physics.
Due
to more and more sophisticated instruments, one can look deeper and deeper into
space and see more and more details. It is correct to say that our perception of the Universe has drastically
changed over the past hundred years.
When the first theories had been hatched about the laws of cosmology in
the early twentieth century the scientist had thought that the expanse of the
universe was the Milky Way with some mysterious nebulae inside it. And it
seemed to be static and a most peaceful place in the heavens, so to counteract
the well-known gravitational pull a cosmological” constant” had to be introduced to balance this mighty system on
knife’s edge. [Note that any theory that requires and ad-hock constant to meet the reality is questionable]
When
Hubble had discovered that the universe was expanding and the nebulae are other
galaxies just like our Milky Way, the cosmological constant became the biggest blunder of the respective theory. It
had turned out to be anything but constant.
Since
that time the scientist had an avalanche of new information about the size of
the Universe, the accelerating expansion, and the incredible super-massive
objects populating the space, like black holes a few billon times more massive than
our Sun, mysterious Quasars, (quasi-stellar radio source) and detectable interstellar/intergalactic/interplanetary
(IS, IG, IP) medium. All of these new observations are significantly altering
the density figure (ρ) of the observable Universe.
Since
density (ρ) is an all-important
component for most of the cosmological theories, when this constant has to be constantly adjusted to conform to new observations, it can invalidate earlier theories,
and, also, may alter the universal constants whose values were dependent of ρ and c.
"(
Special relativity is founded ) on the basis of the law of the constancy of
the velocity of light. But the general theory of relativity cannot retain
this law. On the contrary, we arrived at the result that according to this
latter theory the velocity of light must always depend on the coordinates
when a gravitational field is present." (Albert Einstein, Ideas and
Opinions, 1954)
The last hundred years has seen surfacing many new theories to explain
new observations. In some cases the realm of the validity of old and well
established constants had to be reevaluated, like the constant of
gravity, G, or in other cases they had to be constantly changed like in the
case of the cosmological constant. Since the values of the universal constants
are interdependent there is a high probability they will keep changing. Those constants,
whose values depend on the environment, may have constant values only under
certain physical conditions.
Since there is not convincing evidence of the state
of the vacuum, or its homogeneity, (whether it consists of virtual particles,
space foam, or is permeated by Higgs field), one still can find in-homogeneity
everywhere in SPACE. It is known with reasonable certainty that the detectable interstellar, intergalactic,
interplanetary (IS, IG, IP) mediums - according to the latest measurements – have
significantly different densities, (ρIS
ρIG and ρIP),
and different levels of ionizations, that may influence the values of constants
at in different parts of space.
Even
if only very little is known anything about
the
undetected substances that may fill the
vacuum, the followings are indisputable facts:
· The
energy radiated by the celestial bodies represents m=E/c^2 material.
· This
energy/material density dilutes by 1/d3, where d is the diameter of the radiating object and the multiples of d are the distances from the surface of
it.
· Therefore,
the density level of the material/energy
in the vicinity of any object is inversely proportional to the distance from
that object even if the other, insofar undetected intergalactic material is assumed
to be homogenous.
· If
it is true - as measurements strongly support it - that the velocity of
electromagnetic radiation is
c=1/ sqrt(μ0*ε0)
then c may not be constant, for it is
probable that permeability and permittivity of the free space - μ0
and/or ε0 - may
depend on the interstellar energy/mater density. It may seem to be
constant in our vicinity, but it may not be the case at larger distances from a
celestial body or a galaxy.
There is some
possibility that the product of μ0*ε0 remains constant, but at the
present there is no measurement that would support the fact that when this two
“constants” are changing, they would conspire in such a way (when one is
decreasing the value the other would increase) to keep their product unchanged.
In the case of our Sun
the difference between apogee and perigee is ~5 million km. The energy emission E of the Sun dilutes at the apogee position of the Earth 11%
relative to the perigee position. It could be of interest measuring the effect
of the dilution, on μ0 and ε0 , or at least calculate
if the differences in their product c could be detected by present day
instruments.
The first law of Kepler states the the planets circle the Sun on an elliptical orbit where the Sun is in one focus ft the ellipse.
When the Earth is farther from the Sun, (there is 5 million km between Perihelion and
aphelion positions) the
energy density is dropping by 11% relative to the perigee position, a
substantial change that the interferometry measurements of c was not
registered. If a slightest variation would be detected in the future then our
understanding of the twentieth century physics should be reconsidered.
There
is some probability that away from the solar system’s magnetic and
gravitational sphere the measurement of μ0 , which is the
measurement of force between two wires in vacuum, or the measurement of ε0 , which is the
measurement of the repelling force between like charged particles may show
different results from the values established by extremely high accuracy on the
surface of Earth. (µ0 = 4π×10−7 V·s/ or A·m, and ε0 ≈ 8.854187817620... × 10−12
F·m−).
Uncertainties
discussed in this paper are highlighting the problem of constants and, therefore,
the possible reconciliation/unification of the GR theory with the laws of a
well-established quantum mechanics remain questionable.
The
behavior of degenerated matter in the super-massive Black Holes and the
breakdown of the gravitational theories beyond the event horizon take the
scientists into uncharted and unfamiliar waters. The validation of the
constants under such circumstances is beyond the capacity of the present day
science. Such an environment may render the universal constants even meaningless.
The
poorly understood laws of the degenerated matter prevent the scientist
hypothesizing about the evolution of the super-massive black holes. Although, if
one rejects the idea that singularity and infinite density exist, and accept
the fact that at different stages the repelling strong forces of the neutrons,
or in later phase the repelling forces between the quarks prevent singularity from forming, a balanced state of
a Black Hole may be possible. The question still remains whether there exist an
upper limit (similar to the Chandrasekhar limit that sets the minimum size of
mass that can form a Black Hole) of these objects above which the balance
brakes down, and additional material would cause the Black Hole to explode. It
would be a mighty explosion. The mass of hundred million Sun is about 1.99x1039
kg; the energy released at such an explosion would be 1.8x1054
watt. Would it be a local “Big Bang?”
Would
it mean when the temperature has fallen below a certain value the quarks would
form new Hydrogen and Helium atoms?
References
To
equivalence
· ^
R. v. Eötvös, in Verhandlungen der 16 Allgemeinen Konferenz der
Internationalen Erdmessung, G. Reiner, Berlin, 319,1·
^
P. G. Roll, R. Krotkov, R. H. Dicke, Annals of Physics, 26, 442, 1964.
910
^ P. G. Roll, R. Krotkov, R. H. Dicke, Annals of
Physics, 26, 442, 1964.
To
Gravity constant
Berlinski, David. Newton's Gift: How Sir Isaac Newton
Unlocked the System of the World. (2000). 256 pages. excerpt and text search ISBN
0-684-84392-7
· ^
"University
of Washington Big G Measurement". Astrophysics Science Division.
Goddard Space Flight Center. 2002-12-23. "Since Cavendish first measured
Newton's Gravitational constant 200 years ago, "Big G" remains one of
the most elusive constants in physics."
·
^
Fundamentals of Physics 8ed,Halliday/Resnick/Walker, ISBN 978-0-470-04618-0
p 336
Einstein, A., A. (1916). "Die
Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie" (PDF). Annalen der
Physik 49 (7): 769–822. Bibcode 1916AnP...354..769E.
doi:10.1002/andp.19163540702.
V. Rubin, N. Thonnard, W. K. Ford, Jr, (1980).
"Rotational Properties of 21 Sc Galaxies with a Large Range of
Luminosities and Radii from NGC 4605 (R=4kpc) to UGC 2885 (R=122kpc)". Astrophysical
Journal 238: 471. Bibcode 1980ApJ...238..471R.
doi:10.1086/158003.
To QM field theories^ a
b
c
d
"CERN
experiments observe particle consistent with long-sought Higgs boson".
CERN press release. 4 July 2012. Retrieved 4 July 2012.
^ a
b
Higgs, Peter (1964). "Broken
Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons". Physical Review Letters 13 (16):
508–509. Bibcode
1964PhRvL..13..508H.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.508.
To
Supermassive objects
· ^ p.
55, How A Supernova Explodes, Hans A. Bethe and Gerald Brown, pp. 51–62 in Formation
And Evolution of Black Holes in the Galaxy: Selected Papers with Commentary,
Hans Albrecht Bethe, Gerald Edward Brown, and Chang-Hwan Lee, River Edge, NJ:
World Scientific: 2003. ISBN
981-238-250-X.
· ^ a
b
On
Stars, Their Evolution and Their Stability, Nobel Prize lecture,
Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, December 8, 1983.
To
Einstein’s Quotes
Ideas
and Opinions (Modern Library) by Albert
Einstein and Alan Lightman (Jun 21, 1994)
Replies
This essay's rating: Public = excellent
Author's Bio
Have bachelor degrees in mechanical engineering and master degrees in civil engineering. Provided theoretical analyses and detailed design for electrodynamically levitated vehicles using permanent magnets for US Urban Transportation and carried out performance test on a full size vehicle. The program was financed by The Federal Transit Authority and private investors. Have several publications on the design and stability issues of Electrodynamic levitation.
Have bachelor degrees in mechanical engineering and master degrees in civil engineering. Provided theoretical analyses and detailed design for electrodynamically levitated vehicles using permanent magnets for US Urban Transportation and carried out performance test on a full size vehicle. The program was financed by The Federal Transit Authority and private investors. Have several publications on the design and stability issues of Electrodynamic levitation.
Works on theoretical explanations of magnetism and gravitation, the least known fundamental force.
Frank Makinson wrote on Aug. 29, 2012 @ 18:21 GMT
Karoly,
"All of these constants were rigorously checked and rechecked several times on the surface of the Earth."
You are one of the few authors that properly qualifies where the "constants" have been measured. I put "constants" in quotes because there is evidence that many so-called constants are not constant. Radioactive decay time variations have been measured which show a dependency upon the distance to the Sun.
I consider it an absurdity that the velocity of electromagnetic (EM) waves everywhere in space (wherever that is) are precisely the same as measured in a vacuum some place on the Earth's surface.
Please read the comments on Topic 1419. I did not realize "dark matter" was created to provide a correction to Newtonian gravity as applied to orbital mechanics for large groupings of stars as compared to a solar system.
Newtonian gravity requires an "instantaneous influence at a distance" for solar system planetary distances. An assumption was made this "influence" has infinite velocity, everywhere.
"All of these constants were rigorously checked and rechecked several times on the surface of the Earth."
You are one of the few authors that properly qualifies where the "constants" have been measured. I put "constants" in quotes because there is evidence that many so-called constants are not constant. Radioactive decay time variations have been measured which show a dependency upon the distance to the Sun.
I consider it an absurdity that the velocity of electromagnetic (EM) waves everywhere in space (wherever that is) are precisely the same as measured in a vacuum some place on the Earth's surface.
Please read the comments on Topic 1419. I did not realize "dark matter" was created to provide a correction to Newtonian gravity as applied to orbital mechanics for large groupings of stars as compared to a solar system.
Newtonian gravity requires an "instantaneous influence at a distance" for solar system planetary distances. An assumption was made this "influence" has infinite velocity, everywhere.
In fact, as
Einstein himself noted in 1917 [16],
The
most important fact that we draw from experience as to the distribution of
matter is
that
the relative velocities of the stars are very small as compared with the velocity
of light.
So
I think that for the present we may base our reasoning upon the following approximate
assumption.
There is a system of reference relatively to which matter may be looked upon as
being
permanently at rest.
Thus,
he justified the assumption of a cosmic rest-frame—and a corresponding cosmic
time—in deriving his
‘cylindrical’ model.
No comments:
Post a Comment