Read Ultimate Explanations of the Universe Online
Authors: Michael Heller
Tags: #Philosophy, #Epistemology, #Science, #Cosmology
| |
| 14. Ibid., p. 193 . |
| |
| 15. Quoted from F. Hoyle, The Nature of the Universe , after Kragh, op. cit., p. 192 . |
| |
| 16. Cf. H. Kragh, op. cit., p. 192. |
| |
| 17. Quoted after Kragh, op. cit., p. 193 . |
| |
| 18. More on this subject in M. Heller, Granice kosmosuikosmologii [The Boundaries of the Cosmos and Cosmology (in Polish)], Warszawa: Scholar, 2005 , Chap. 16. See also |
| |
| A. Liddle, An Introduction to Modern Cosmology , Chichester: John Wiley, 1999 , Chap. 11. |
| |
| 19. For more on this subject see W .T . Sullivan, “ The Entry of Radio Astronomy into Cosmology: Radio Stars and Martin Ryle's 2 C Survey,” Modern Cosmology in Retrospect , ed. B . Bertott i, R. Balbinot , S. Bergia, A. Messina, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990,pp. 30 9–33 0; P . Scheuer, “Radio Source Counts,”ibid., p p. 331–362. |
| |
| 20. See M. S chmidt, “The Dis covery of Quasars,” Modern Cosmology in Retrospect , pp. 347–354. |
| |
| 21. H. Kragh, op. cit., p. 343. |
| |
| 22. I gave an account of the history of the discovery of this radiation in Granice kosmosu i kosmologii , Chap. 19 . See R.W. Wilson, “Discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background,” Modern Cosmology in Retrospect , pp. 291 –307 . |
| |
| 23. H. Kragh, op. cit., p. 373 . |
| |
| 24. Cf. ibid., pp. 358 –368 . |
| |
| 25. The philosopher of science interested in the “invalidation”o f the steady-state cosmology by the discovery of background radiation should consult T.M. Sierotowicz, Mikrofalowe promieniowanie tla jako experimentum crucis w kosmologii? [The Microwave Background Radiation as the Experimentum Crucis in Cosmology? (in Polish)], Krak ów: Wydział Filozoficzny Towarzystwa Jezusowego w Krakowie, 1993 , where the rivalry between the steady-state and relativistic cosmologies is viewed as a rivalry of research programmes in Lakatos’ sense. |
| |
| 26. See, for instance, M. Heller, Z. Klimek, L. Suszycki, “Imperfect Fluid Friedmannian Cosmology,” Astrophysics and Space Science 20, 1973 , pp. 205 –212 . |
| |
| 27. Cf. M. Heller, M. Ostrowski, A. Woszczyna, “Steady-State Versus Viscous Cosmology,” Astrophysics and Space Science 87 , 1982 , pp. 425–433. |
| |
| 28. Incidentally, cosmological models entailing volume viscosity later entered the theory of superstrings, in view of which some modifications have been proposed for the “mechanism of viscosity.”See D. Pavón, J. Bafaluy, D. Jou, “Causal FriedmannRobertson-Walker Cosmology,” Classical and Quantum Gravity 8 , 1991 , pp. 347–360 . |
| |
| CHAPTER 6 |
| 1. The reader will find a straight forward but precise account of the horizon problemin A. Liddle, An Introduction to Modern Cosmology , Chichester: John Wiley, 1999,Chap.12.1.2 |
| |
| 2. For the flatness problem, see ibid., Chap. 12. 1 .1 . |
| |
| 3. As well as several other problems with which standard cosmology has not been able to cope, which we shall not go into here. |
| |
| 4. A.H. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problem,” Physical Review D23 , 1981 , pp. 347–356 . |
| |
| 5. A.D. Linde, “ A New Inflationary Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems,”Physics Letters 108B, 1982, pp. 389 –393 . |
| |
| 6. A. Albrecht, P.J. Steinhardt, “Cosmology for Grand Unified Theories with Radiatively Induced Symmetry Breaking,” Physical Review Letters 48 , 1982, pp. 1220 – 1223. |
| |
| 7. A.D. Linde, “Chaotic Inflation,” Physics Letters 129 B, 1983, pp. 117 –181 . |
| |
| 8. Hawk in g queried Lind e’s argumentation , pointing out that the scheme Linde proposed was not invariant but essentially depended on the resolution of space- time into time and momentary s paces; see S . Hawking, “Cosmology from the Top Down,” Universe or Multiverse? ed. B . Carr, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 20 07 ,pp. 91 –98 . |
| |
| 9. See below, Chap. 9 . |
| |
| 10. We should bear in mind that energy density = energy/volume; hence in an increasing volume energy density can only remain constant if energy is accruing. |
| |
| 11. This claim has been put forward by Albrecht and Steinhardt in the article cited. |
| |
| 12. Readers interested in the diverse inflationary models may refer to Inflationary Cosmology , ed. L.F. Abbott, Singapore: So-Young-Pi, World Scientific, 1986, which contains all the original publications on inflation. |
| |
| 13. G. McCabe, “The Structure and Interpretation of Cosmology: Part II. The Concept of Creation in Inflation and Quantum Cosmology,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 36 , 2005 , pp. 67– 102. |
| |
| CHAPTER 7 |
| 1. See A.H. Guth, The Inflationary Universe. The Quest for a New Theory of Cosmic Origins , Perseus, 1997, Chap. 17. |
| |
| 2. The energy of the gravitational field is negative, since work has to be performed to separate two pieces of gravitational matter from each other. |
| |
| 3. C.J. Isham, “ Quantum Theories of the Creation of the Universe,”Quantum Cosmology and the Laws of Nature , eds. R.J. Russell, N. Murphy, C.J. Isham, Vatican Observatory Publications – Berkeley and the Vatican City State: The Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, 1993 , pp. 49 –89 ; quoted from pp. 56 –57. |
| |
| 4. R. Brout, F. Englert, E. Gunzig, “The Creation of the Universe as a Quantum Phenomenon,” Annals of Physics 115 , 1978 , pp. 78 –106. |
| |
| 5. Cf. E.P. Tryon, “Cosmic Inflation,” The Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology , Vol. 3 , New York: Academic Press, pp. 537–571 . |
| |
| 6. J.B. Hartle, S.W. Hawking, “Wave Function of the Universe,” Physical Review D 28 , 1983 , pp. 2960 –2975. |
| |
| 7. Viz. the Riemann metric, which defines the geometry for a given 3 -dimensional space. |
| |
| 8. This description is very simplified. In fact what is meant is not the actual value of the wave function, but the square of its module. |
| |
| 9. Thanks to this the integration is performed over 4-dimensional compact Riemannian spaces, which prevents the integrals from being divergent. |
| |
| 10. Moreover, Hartle and Hawking seem to identify compactness of space with the absence of boundaries. However, these concepts do not overlap: a compact space may or may not have a boundary. |
| |
| 11. G. McCabe, “The Structure and Interpretation of Cosmology: Part II. The Concept of Creation in Inflation and Quantum Cosmology,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 36 , 2005 , pp. 77 –78 . |
| |
| CHAPTER 8 |
| 1. Examples of such relationships are to be found in Chap. 7 of Hermann Bondi’s Cosmology , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960. |
| |
| 2. Viz. the inverse of the Hubble constant. |
| |
| 3. To obtain this result all the magnitudes have to be expressed in units for which the speed of light c = 1. This implies 1 s= 1 cm. |
| |
| 4. P.A.M. Dirac, “The Cosmological Constants,” Nature 139 , 1937 ,p. 323 ; idem, “ A New Basis for Cosmology,” Proceedings of the Royal Society, London A165 , 1938 , pp. 199 –208 . |
| |
| 5. R.H. Dicke, “Dirac’s Cosmology and Mach’s Principle,” Nature 192 , 1961 , pp. 440– 441 . |
| |
| 6. B. Carter, “Large Number Coincidences and the Anthropic Principle in Cosmology,” Confrontation of Cosmological Theories and Observational Data (IAU Symposium), ed. M. Longair, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1974, pp. 281–289 . |
| |
| 7. All the other cosmological tests work on the same principle. For example, we observe microwave background radiation, therefore we reject all the cosmological models which do not permit this phenomenon. |
| |
| 8. Lee Smolin wrote in The Life of the Cosmos , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997 , p. 203: “The strong form [of the anthropic principle] is explicitly a religious rather than a scientific idea. It asserts that the world was created by a god with exactly the right laws so that intelligent life could exist.” |
| |
| CHAPTER 9 |
| 1. L. Smolin, The Life of the Cosmos , New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. |
| |
| 2. Ibid., p. 93. |
| |
| 3. Ibid., p. 94 . |
| |
| 4. Ibid., p. 96. |
| |
| 5. K. Popper, Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography , Glasgow: William Collins, 1976 ,p. 168. |
| |
| 6. Ibid. |
| |
| 7. Cf. A . łomnicki, “Czy darwinowska teoria ewolucji jest falsyfikowalną ( teorią ( naukową ( ?”[ Is Darwin’s Theory of Evolution a Falsifiable Scientific Theory? ( in Polish)] , Otwarta naukaijejz wolennicy ,eds.M.Heller, J. Urbaniec, Kraków& Tarnów: OBI –Biblos, 199 6, pp. 11–21. This article s tirred up a heated discussion which may be traced in “Czy darwinizmjest metafizycznym programem badawczym czy teorią ( naukową ( ?”[ Is Darwinism a Metaphysical Research Programme or a Scientific Theory – in Polish], Zagadnienia Filozoficznew Nauce 22, 1998 , pp. 93–113. |
| |
| 8. G. McCabe, “ A Critique of Cosmological Natural Selection,”(2004) http://philsciarchive.pitt.edu/archive/00001648/01/NaturalSelection.pdf p.3. |
| |
| 9. Ibid. p . 9. My own critique of Smolin ’s concept to a large extent follows McCabe’s paper. |
| |
| 10. Cf. R. Penrose, “Before the Big Bang: An Outrageous New Perspective and Its Implications,” Proceedings of EPAC 2006 , pp. 2759 –2762. |
| |
| 11. Cf. R. Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics , Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1989,p. 354 . |
| |
| 12. M. Tegmark, “Parallel Universes,” Science and Ultimate Reality , eds. J.D. Barrow, P.C.W. Davies, C.L. Harper, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 459 –491 ; quotation from p. 465 . |
| |
| 13. He could start with A.F. Chalmers, What Is This Thing Called Science? Brisbane: University of Queensland Press, 1976 (revised edition 1999 ). |
| |
| CHAPTER 10 |
| 1. More, with more technical details, on structure deformation in C. Roger, “Déformations algébraïques et applications á laphysique,” Gazette des Mathematiciens no. 49 , juin 1991 , pp. 75–94 . |
| |
| 2. J. Barrow, F. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle , Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986 ,p. 265 . |
| |
| 3. Cf. G. McCabe, The Structure and Interpretation of the Standard Model , Amsterdam, Boston etc: Elsevier, 2007 ; especially Chap. 2 .6 . |
| |
| CHAPTER 11 |
| 1. For Wheeler’s concept see J.D. Barrow, F.J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle , Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986 , pp. 369–471. |
| |
| 2. S. Hawking, “Cosmology from the Top Down,” Universe or Multiverse? Ed. B Carr, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp. 91 –98 . See also a presentation for the general reader, A. Gefter, “Exploring Stephen Hawking’s Flexiverse,”New Scientist, No. 2548 , 20 April 2006 . |
| |
| 3. A. Gefter, op. cit. |
| |
| 4. M. Tegmark, “Parallel Universes,” Scientific American , May 2003 , pp. 41 –51 . |
| |
| 5. Ibid., p. 41 . |
| |
| 6. Tegmark reinforces this commonsensical argument by invoking the ergodic property of the distribution of initial conditions: the probability distribution on the set of initial conditions for all possible universes is the same as for diverse domains in a single universe. |
| |
| 7. M. Tegmark, “Parallel Universes,” Science and Ultimate Reality , ed. J.B. Barrow, P.C.W. Davies, C.L. Harper, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 459– 491 , quotation from p. 464. |
| |
| 8. Cf. M. Rees, Before the Beginning , London & Sydney: A Touchstone Book, 1998 . |
| |
| 9. Cf. J. Leslie, Universes , London & New York: Routledge, 1989. |