Remarkable scientific confirmation of Nigel Kerner's thesis about the origins of the physical universe
Primordial weirdness: Did the early universe have 1 dimension?
e! Science News (Physics & Chemistry) 20th April 2011
Did the early universe have just one spatial dimension? That's the mind-boggling concept at the heart of a theory that University at Buffalo physicist Dejan Stojkovic and colleagues proposed in 2010.
They suggested that the early universe -- which exploded from a single point and was very, very small at first -- was one-dimensional (like a straight line) before expanding to include two dimensions (like a plane) and then three (like the world in which we live today).
The theory, if valid, would address important problems in particle physics.
Now, in a new paper in Physical Review Letters, Stojkovic and Loyola Marymount University physicist Jonas Mureika describe a test that could prove or disprove the "vanishing dimensions" hypothesis.
Because it takes time for light and other waves to travel to Earth, telescopes peering out into space can, essentially, look back into time as they probe the universe's outer reaches.
Gravitational waves can't exist in one- or two-dimensional space. So Stojkovic and Mureika have reasoned that the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), a planned international gravitational observatory, should not detect any gravitational waves emanating from the lower-dimensional epochs of the early universe.
Stojkovic, an assistant professor of physics, says the theory of evolving dimensions represents a radical shift from the way we think about the cosmos -- about how our universe came to be.
The core idea is that the dimensionality of space depends on the size of the space we're observing, with smaller spaces associated with fewer dimensions. That means that a fourth dimension will open up -- if it hasn't already -- as the universe continues to expand.
The theory also suggests that space has fewer dimensions at very high energies of the kind associated with the early, post-big bang universe.
If Stojkovic and his colleagues are right, they will be helping to address fundamental problems with the standard model of particle physics, including the following:
- The incompatibility between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Quantum mechanics and general relativity are mathematical frameworks that describe the physics of the universe. Quantum mechanics is good at describing the universe at very small scales, while relativity is good at describing the universe at large scales. Currently, the two theories are considered incompatible; but if the universe, at its smallest levels, had fewer dimensions, mathematical discrepancies between the two frameworks would disappear.
- The mystery of the universe's accelerating expansion. Physicists have observed that the expansion of the universe is speeding up, and they don't know why. The addition of new dimensions as the universe grows would explain this acceleration. (Stojkovic says a fourth dimension may have already opened at large, cosmological scales.)
- The need to alter the mass of the Higgs boson. The standard model of particle physics predicts the existence of an as yet undiscovered elementary particle called the Higgs boson. For equations in the standard model to accurately describe the observed physics of the real world, however, researchers must artificially adjust the mass of the Higgs boson for interactions between particles that take place at high energies. If space has fewer dimensions at high energies, the need for this kind of "tuning" disappears.
"What we're proposing here is a shift in paradigm," Stojkovic said. "Physicists have struggled with the same problems for 10, 20, 30 years, and straight-forward extensions of extensions of the existing ideas are unlikely to solve them."
"We have to take into account the possibility that something is systematically wrong with our ideas," he continued. "We need something radical and new, and this is something radical and new."
Because the planned deployment of LISA is still years away, it may be a long time before Stojkovic and his colleagues are able to test their ideas this way.
However, some experimental evidence already points to the possible existence of lower-dimensional space.
Specifically, scientists have observed that the main energy flux of cosmic ray particles with energies exceeding 1 teraelectron volt -- the kind of high energy associated with the very early universe -- are aligned along a two-dimensional plane.
If high energies do correspond with lower-dimensional space, as the "vanishing dimensions" theory proposes, researchers working with the Large Hadron Collider particle accelerator in Europe should see planar scattering at such energies.
Stojkovic says the observation of such events would be "a very exciting, independent test of our proposed ideas."
Extract from Chapter 3 - (To Be or Not to Be - That is the Answer) 'The Song Of The Greys'
The first question I have tried to answer is: Was there "Space" before the "Big Bang". Was there in fact anything in terms of the UNIVERSE as we understand it in existence before the point of the bang, or was there just a "potential" for dimensionality to occur. It really doesn't matter for the purposes of what I am about to expound. We have to account in as simple terms as possible for the dimensional contour of Space as we know it. We have to try to discover if these dimensional contours were made by the BIG BANG, or existed prior to it. In other words, did atoms "make" Space in its three dimensional contour, or did they happen into an already existent "pro forma" and just take up their resolutions to the dictates of this pro forma. The conceptual expression necessary to define such a dichotomy is in my contention the same.
As I have said, I have to start the whole quest by taking a single conceptual element or "POINT" as our investigatory aid. I will give this "point" the "living" facilities of Awareness and WILL for the purpose of this exercise. The whole brief of this "POINT" is to create a "world" that is maximally different to itself as a point and so let's set about this in logical steps. The merest steps of logical progression possible at each and every stage.
What then defines the contours of physicality and how may they be derived. In the Final Effect of togetherness of all effect - in what we might call GODHEAD, there has to be centred the ultimate POTENTIALITY to BE or not to BE anything and everything, something, or nothing, somewhere, or everywhere. It is in the exercise of choice, through the guidance of AWARENESS and functioning capacity of WILL, that all existential effect comes to be. The expression of degree is the result of CHOICE.
In logical terms, the merest - minimum step away from such a state of POTENTIALITY, or "nothingness", to ACTUALITY, or "somethingness", is for an infinitely small point, or centre of effect, to occur. This point, or centre of isolationary effect, is the merest contour possible in what might be regarded as the "ALL", or WHOLE of "BEING". It is thus unique from what is ALL, as a 'point' and is, therefore, the initial singularity of separation itself. There would be nothing that exists away from it, that is the same as it, and so, it would have to "create" the scope - room - effect - to exist - completely new. We are used to seeing SPACE as extent - an allowance of "room" to fit things in - if you like, and so our "point" is LIMITATION itself. It is the scope to exist in limitation. (That seems a contradiction in terms I know - but there is no other way to see it, existentially.) In becoming the merest point of ACTUALITY and in creating its scope to exist as such, it is fixing itself in a certain pose - in a defined stance - and so it is completely unlike its status within the whole, where it would be in all positions at once. This stance of complete SINGULARITY can never be achieved absolutely, of course, because the centre - this merest point of actuality, is pure INTELLIGENCE itself. In other words we have made it at one and the same time - AWARENESS AND WILL, ready for the first posture of separate existence out of the ALL. Out of the WHOLE of existence in total and absolute fit. Out of what we might call the phenomenon of GODHEAD. The final absolute of all togetherness in total existential fit.
Our "POINT" in its now discrete aspect has no sense of itself, because it is now "alone" and has no way of "knowing" itself in its now complete and absolute isolation as a point. It is at the very first stage of achieving what it set out to do - namely the complete acquisition of SEPARATION from what is WHOLE, i.e. - Ultimate Chaotic Subversion. The complete opposite to Total UNION in ORDERED HARMONY. Our point is now Actuality itself, and we must remember, "KNOWINGNESS" itself, expressed through the co-ordinates AWARENESS and WILL as directives. It is ultimately ordered, but in separation from the WHOLE has paid the price and is slightly disphased into singular direction with an instinct for "every directionness" in its inherent make-up. It will seek "total" separation from the WHOLE through the merest logical steps in compromise of all these factors.
Our centre of Actuality, as a point, is in complete isolation from its previous situation. This makes it a Singularity, a completely new effect - alone. It has no reference of itself. This would not be true in the "WHOLE", when it was not a point, but in the separate state - it would have to have a reference against which it could view itself to simply "know" it exists. This will provide the constant drive for difference - whenever it becomes the next Logical singularity. -The drive to make dimensional space itself begins. In a series of merest logical steps, our point of ACTUALITY will find - LINE - PLANE - CURVE - Etc., tracing out the elbows of DIMENSIONAL SPACE - as it seeks difference, each time creating a home and living in it, so to speak, at the same time. It will be a most interesting exercise for the reader to trace the exact sequence in merest logic that our POINT will take in achieving all possible stances of SPATIAL DIMENSIONALITY. The correct sequence will give you an insight into a most startling and fantastic conclusion. You will arrive at a result where our "Point" will have no option but to take on a mathematical incongruity. -A conundrum of effect that will decide the scenario that we find ourselves in as BEINGS.