1 HOW TO BUILD A UNIVERSENO MATTER

百度搜索 A Short History of Nearly Everything 天涯 或 A Short History of Nearly Everything 天涯在线书库 即可找到本书最新章节.

    HOW hard you try you will never be able to grasp just how tiny, how spatiallyunassuming, is a proton. It is just way too small.

    A proton is an infinitesimal part of an atom, which is itself of course an insubstantial thing.

    Protons are so small that a little dib of ink like the dot on this i  hold something in theregion of 500,000,000,000 of them, rather more than the number of seds tained in halfa million years. So protons are exceedingly microscopic, to say the very least.

    Now imagine if you  (and of course you ’t) shrinking one of those protons down to abillionth of its normal size into a spaall that it would make a proton look enormous.

    Now pato that tiny, tiny space about an ounatter. Excellent. You are ready to starta universe.

    I’m assuming of course that you wish to build an inflationary universe. If you’d preferio build a more old-fashioned, standard Big Bang universe, you’ll need additionalmaterials. In fact, you will o gather up everything there is every last mote and partiatter between here and the edge of creation and squeeze it into a spot so infinitesimallypact that it has no dimensions at all. It is known as a singularity.

    Iher case, get ready for a really big bang. Naturally, you will wish to retir<u></u>e to a safeplace to observe the spectacle. Unfortunately, there is o retire to because outside thesingularity there is no where. When the universe begins to expand, it won’t be spreading outto fill a larger emptiness. The only space that exists is the space it creates as it goes.

    It is natural but wrong to visualize the singularity as a kind nant dot hanging in adark, boundless void. But there is no spao darkness. The singularity has no “around”

    around it. There is no space for it to occupy, no place for it to be. We ’t even ask how longit has been there—whether it has just lately popped into being, like a good idea, or whether ithas been there forever, quietly awaiting the right moment. Time does. There is no pastfor it to emerge from.

    And so, from nothing, our universe begins.

    In a single blinding pulse, a moment of glory much too swift and expansive for any form ofwords, the singularity assumes heavenly dimensions, space beyond ception. In the firstlively sed (a sed that many ologists will devote careers to shaving into ever-finerwafers) is produced gravity and the other forces that govern physics. Ihan a miheuniverse is a million billion miles across and growing fast. There is a lot of heat now, tenbillion degrees of it, enough to begin the nuclear reas that create the lighter elements—principally hydrogen and helium, with a dash (about oom in a hundred million) oflithium. In three minutes, 98 pert of all the matter there is or will ever be has beenproduced. We have a universe. It is a place of the most wondrous and gratifying possibility,aiful, too. And it was all done in about the time it takes to make a sandwich.

    When this moment happened is a matter of some debate. ologists have long arguedover whether the moment of creation was 10 billion years ago or twice that or something iween. The sensus seems to be heading for a figure of about 13.7 billion years, but thesethings are notoriously difficult to measure, as we shall see further on. All that  really besaid is that at some ierminate point in the very distant past, for reasons unknown, therecame the moment known to sce as t = 0. We were on our way.

    There is of course a great deal we don’t know, and much of what we think we know wehaven’t known, or thought we’ve known, for long. Eveion of the Big Bang is quite aret ohe idea had been kig around sihe 1920s, when Gees Lema?tre, aBelgian priest-scholar, first tentatively proposed it, but it didn’t really bee an activenotion in ology until the mid-1960s when two young radio astronomers made araordinary and ient discovery.

    Their names were Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. In 1965, they were trying to make useof a large unications antenna owned by Bell Laboratories at Holmdel, New Jersey, butthey were troubled by a persistent background noise—a steady, steamy hiss that made anyexperimental work impossible. The noise was uing and unfocused. It came from everypoint in the sky, day and night, through every season. For a year the young astronomers dideverything they could think of to track down and elimihe hey tested everyelectrical system. They rebuilt instruments, checked circuits, wiggled wires, dusted plugs.

    They climbed into the dish and placed duct tape over every seam and rivet. They climbedbato the dish with brooms and scrubbing brushes and carefully swept it  of whatthey referred to in a later paper as “white dielectric material,” or what is known moreonly as bird shit. Nothing they tried worked.

    Unknown to them, just thirty miles arion Uy, a team of stists led byRobert Dicke was w on how to find the very thing they were trying so diligently to getrid of. The Prion researchers were pursuing ahat had been suggested in the 1940sby the Russian-born astrophysicist Geamow that if you looked deep enough into spaceyou should find some ic background radiatio over from the Big Bang. Gamowcalculated that by the time it crossed the vastness of the os, the radiation would reachEarth in the form of microwaves. In a more ret paper he had even suggested an instrumentthat might do the job: the Bell antenna at Holmdel. Unfortunately, her Penzias andWilson, nor any of the Prion team, had read Gamow’s paper.

    The hat Penzias and Wilson were hearing was, of course, the hat Gamoostulated. They had found the edge of the universe, or at least the visible part of it, 90 billiontrillion miles away. They were “seeing” the first photons—the most a light in theuniverse—though time and distance had verted them to microwaves, just as Gamoredicted. In his book The Inflationary Universe , Alan Guth provides an analogy that helps toput this finding in perspective. If you think of peering into the depths of the universe as likelooking down from the huh floor of the Empire State Building (with the huh floorrepresenting now and street level representing the moment of the Big Bang), at the time ofWilson and Penzias’s discovery the most distant galaxies anyone had ever detected were onabout the sixtieth floor, and the most distant things—quasars—were on about the tweh.

    Penzias and Wilson’s finding pushed our acquaintah the visible universe to within halfan inch of the sidewalk.

    Still unaware of what caused the noise, Wilson and Penzias phoned Dicke at Prion anddescribed their problem to him in the hope that he might suggest a solution. Dicke realized atonce what the two young men had found. “Well, boys, we’ve just been scooped,” he told hiscolleagues as he hung up the phone.

    Soon afterward the Astrophysical Journal published two articles: one by Penzias andWilson describing their experieh the hiss, the other by Dicke’s team explaining itsnature. Although Penzias and Wilson had not been looking for ic background radiation,didn’t know what it was when they had found it, and hadn’t described or interpreted itscharacter in any paper, they received the 1978 Nobel Prize in physics. The Prionresearchers got only sympathy. Acc to Dennis Overbye in Lonely Hearts of the os, her Penzias nor Wilson altogether uood the significe of what they had founduntil they read about it in the New York Times .

    Ially, disturbance from ic background radiation is something we have allexperieune your television to any el it doesn’t receive, and about 1 pert of thedang static you see is ated for by this a remnant of the Big Bang. The imeyou plain that there is nothing on, remember that you  always watch the birth of theuniverse.

    Although everyone calls it the Big Bang, many books caution us not to think of it as anexplosion in the ventional se was, rather, a vast, sudden expansion on a whoppingscale. So what caused it?

    Oion is that perhaps the singularity was the relic of an earlier, collapsed universe—that we’re just one of aernal cycle of expanding and collapsing universes, like the bladderon an oxygen mae. Others attribute the Big Bang to what they call “a false vacuum” or “ascalar field” or “vacuum energy”—some quality or thing, at any rate, that introduced ameasure of instability into the nothihat was. It seems impossible that you could getsomething from nothing, but the fact that ohere was nothing and now there is a universeis evident proof that you . It may be that our universe is merely part of many largeruniverses, some in different dimensions, and that Big Bangs are going on all the time all overthe place. Or it may be that spad time had some other forms altogether before the BigBang—forms too alien for us to imagine—and that the Big Bang represents some sort oftransition phase, where the universe went from a form we ’t uand to one we almost. “These are very close tious questions,” Dr. Andrei Linde, a ologist atStanford, told the New York Times in 2001.

    The Big Bang theory isn’t about the bang itself but about what happened after the bang.

    Not long after, mind you. By doing a lot of math and watg carefully what goes on inparticle accelerators, stists believe they  look back to 10-43seds after the moment ofcreation, when the universe was still so small that you would have needed a microscope tofind it. We mustn’t swoon over every extraordinary hat es before us, but it isperhaps worth latg on to one from time to time just to be reminded of their ungraspableand amazing breadth. Thus 10-43is 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001, orone 10 million trillion trillion trillionths of a sed.

    **A word on stifiotation: Since very large numbers are cumbersome to write and nearly impossible to read, stistsuse a shorthand involving powers (or multiples) of ten in which, for instance, 10,000,000,000 is written 1010 and 6,500,000bees 6.5 x 106. The principle is based very simply on multiples of ten: 10 x 10 (or 100) bees 102; 10 x 10 x 10 (or1,000) is 103; and so on, obviously and indefinitely. The little superscript number sighe number of zeroes followingthe larger principal number. ive notations provide latter in print (especially essentially a mirror image, with thesuperscript number indig the number of spaces to the right of the decimal point (so 10-4 means 0.0001). Though I salutethe principle, it remains an amazement to me that anyone seeing &quot;1.4 x 109 km3’ would see at ohat that signifies 1.4Most of what we know, or believe we know, about the early moments of the universe isthanks to an idea called inflation theory first propounded in 1979 by a junior particlephysicist, then at Stanford, now at MIT, named Alan Guth. He was thirty-two years old and,by his own admission, had never done anything much before. He would probably never havehad his great theory except that he happeo attend a lecture on the Big Bang given byher than Robert Dicke. The lecture inspired Guth to take an i in ology, andin particular in the birth of the universe.

    The eventual result was the inflation theory, which holds that a fra of a moment afterthe dawn of creation, the universe underwent a sudden dramatic expansion. It inflated—i ran away with itself, doubling in size every 10-<q></q>34seds. The whole episode may havelasted no more than 10-30seds—that’s one million million million million millionths of ased—but it ged the universe from something you could hold in your hand tosomething at least 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times bigger. Inflation theoryexplains the ripples and eddies that make our universe possible. Without it, there would be noclumps of matter and thus no stars, just drifting gas and everlasting darkness.

    Acc to Guth’s theory, at oen-millionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionthof a sed, gravity emerged. After another ludicrously brief interval it was joined byeleagism and the strong and weak nuclear forces—the stuff of physics. These werejoined an instant later by swarms of elementary particles—the stuff of stuff. From nothing atall, suddenly there were swarms of photons, protorons, rons, and much else—between 1079and 1089of each, acc to the standard Big Bang theory.

    Such quantities are of course ungraspable. It is enough to know that in a single craginstant we were endowed with a universe that was vast—at least a hundred billion light-yearsacross, acc to the theory, but possibly any size up to infinite—and perfectly arrayed forthe creation of stars, galaxies, and other plex systems.

    What is extraordinary from our point of view is how well it turned out for us. If theuniverse had formed just a tiny bit differently—if gravity were fraally stronger orweaker, if the expansion had proceeded just a little more slowly or swiftly—then there mightnever have been stable elements to make you and me and the grouand on. Had gravitybeen a trifle strohe universe itself might have collapsed like a badly erected tent,without precisely the right values to give it the right dimensions ay and poparts. Had it been weaker, however, nothing would have coalesced. The universe would haveremained forever a dull, scattered void.

    This is one reason that some experts believe there may have been many  bangs,perhaps trillions and trillions of them, spread through the mighty span of eternity, and that thereason we exist in this particular one is that this is one we could exist in. As Ed. Tryonof bia Uy o it: “In ao the question of why it happened, I offer themodest proposal that our Universe is simply one of those things which happen from time tobillion cubic kilometers, and no less a wohat they would choose the former<var></var> over the in a book designed for the generalreader, where the example was found). On the assumption that many general readers are as unmathematical as I am, I will usethem sparingly, though they are occasionally unavoidable, not least in a chapter dealing with things on a ic scale.

    time.” To which adds Guth: “Although the creation of a universe might be very uryon emphasized that no one had ted the failed attempts.”

    Martin Rees, Britain’s astronomer royal, believes that there are many universes, possibly aninfinite number, each with different attributes, in different binations, and that we simplylive ihat bihings in the way that allows us to exist. He makes an analogy witha very large clothing store: “If there is a large stock of clothing, you’re not surprised to find asuit that fits. If there are many universes, each governed by a differi of numbers, therewill be one where there is a particular set of numbers suitable to life. We are in that one.”

    Rees maintains that six numbers in particular govern our universe, and that if any of thesevalues were ged even very slightly things could not be as they are. For example, for theuniverse to exist as it does requires that hydrogen be verted to helium in a precise butparatively stately manner—specifically, in a way that verts sevehousandths ofits mass to energy. Lower that value very slightly—from 0.007 pert to 0.006 pert,say—and no transformation could take place: the universe would sist of hydrogen andnothing else. Raise the value very slightly—to 0.008 pert—and bonding would be sowildly prolific that the hydrogen would long since have been exhausted. Iher case, withthe slightest tweaking of the he universe as we know and  would not be here.

    I should say that everything is just right so far. In the long term, gravity may turn out to be alittle to, and one day it may halt the expansion of the universe and bring it collapsingin upon itself, till it crushes itself down into another singularity, possibly to start the wholeprocess ain. Oher hand it may be too weak and the universe will keep ragaway forever until everything is so far apart that there is no aterial iions, sothat the universe bees a place that is i and dead, but very roomy. The third option isthat gravity is just right—“critical density” is the ologists’ term for it—and that it willhold the universe together at just the right dimensions<s>藏书网</s> to allow things to go on indefinitely.

    ologists in their lighter moments sometimes call this the Goldilocks effect—thateverything is just right. (For the record, these three possible universes are known respectivelyas closed, open, and flat.)Now the question that has occurred to all of us at some point is: what would happen if youtraveled out to the edge of the universe and, as it were, put your head through the curtains?

    Where would your head be if it were no longer in the universe? What would you find beyond?

    The answer, disappointingly, is that you ever get to the edge of the universe. That’s notbecause it would take too long to get there—though of course it would—but because even ifyou traveled outward and outward in a straight line, indefinitely and pugnaciously, you wouldnever arrive at an outer boundary. Instead, you would e back to where you began (atwhich point, presumably, you would rather lose heart in the exercise and give up). The reasonfor this is that the universe bends, in a way we ’t adequately imagine, in ahEinstein’s theory of relativity (which we will get to in due course). For the moment it isenough to know that we are not adrift in some large, ever-expanding bubble. Rather, spacecurves, in a way that allows it to be boundless but finite. Space ot even properly be saidto be expanding because, as the physicist and Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg notes, “solarsystems and galaxies are not expanding, and space itself is not expanding.” Rather, thegalaxies are rushing apart. It is all something of a challeo intuition. Or as the biologist J.

    B. S. Haldane once famously observed: “The universe is not only queerer than we suppose; itis queerer than we  suppose.”

    The analogy that is usually given for explaining the curvature of space is to try to imaginesomeone from a universe of flat surfaces, who had never seen a sphere, being brought toEarth. No matter how far he roamed across the pla’s surface, he would never find an edge.

    He might eventually return to the spot where he had started, and would of course be utterlyfouo explain how that had happened. Well, we are in the same position in space asour puzzled flatlander, only we are flummoxed by a higher dimension.

    Just as there is no place where you  find the edge of the universe, so there is no placewhere you  stand at the ter and say: “This is where it all began. This is the termostpoint of it all.” We are all at the ter of it all. Actually, we don’t know that for sure; we’t prove it mathematically. Stists just assume that we ’t really be the ter of theuniverse—think what that would imply—but that the phenomenon must be the same for allobservers in all places. Still, we don’t actually know.

    For us, the universe goes only as far as light has traveled in the billions of years siheuniverse was formed. This visible universe—the universe we know and  talk about—is amillion million million million (that’s 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) miles across. Butacc to most theories the universe at large—the meta-universe, as it is sometimescalled—is vastly roomier still. Acc to Rees, the number of light-years to the edge ofthis larger, unseen universe would be written not “with ten zeroes, not even with a hundred,but with millions.” In short, there’s more space than you  imagine already without going tothe trouble  to envision some additional beyond.

    For a long time the Big Bang theory had one gaping hole that troubled a lot of people—hat it couldn’t begin to explain how we got here. Although 98 pert of all thematter that exists was created with the Big Bang, that matter sisted exclusively of lightgases: the helium, hydrogen, and lithium that we mentioned earlier. Not one particle of theheavy stuff so vital to our own being—carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and all the rest—emergedfrom the gaseous brew of creation. But—and here’s the troubling point—te these heavyelements, you he kind of heat and energy of a Big Bang. Yet there has been only oneBig Bang and it didn’t produce them. So where did they e from?

    Iingly, the man who found the ao<big></big> that question was a ologist whoheartily despised the Big Bang as a theory and ed the term “Big Bang” sarcastically, as away of mog it. We’ll get to him shortly, but before we turn to the question of how we gothere, it might be worth taking a few mio sider just where exactly “here” is.

百度搜索 A Short History of Nearly Everything 天涯 或 A Short History of Nearly Everything 天涯在线书库 即可找到本书最新章节.