Ангорский Андрей Андреевич
The Time of the Universe or the Universe of Time?

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками Юридические услуги. Круглосуточно
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    The Big Bang Theory is a rather strange concept, even from the perspective of common logic. Not only because the theories we are familiar with are, in themselves, quite far from adequately perceiving the world (for example, see What is the Power of Mathematics, and What is a Theory?), but also for quite prosaic reasons, which I will explain here. /// Translation of the article Время Вселенной или Вселенная Времени?.
  The Big Bang Theory is probably one of the most well-known and significant in modern physics. Its popularization is so total and widespread that information about it, appearing in newspapers, online, in TV series and movies, podcasts and radio shows, books and journals, has become mundane and is taken for granted, without sufficient critical thought. And, like other aspects of pop culture, common knowledge about the structure of the universe-those accepted in everyday informational exchange, in the endless "re-chewing" of outdated material-has become so deeply ingrained in our lives that it has become very difficult to take a step back and ask new, often unexpected questions about it: it is seen, at best, as somewhat odd. Nevertheless, it is exactly such questions that give meaning to scientific research and lead to progress in the study of the world.
  
  Of course, any theory, striving to be perfect, is in reality far from it. Even the most general of the theories we have. The Big Bang Theory, and the theory of the evolution of the Universe in general (yes, with a capital letter!), raises a lot of questions when you start thinking about it. One of the most important questions is this: if the Universe encompasses everything accessible to our knowledge, including space-time (in the generally accepted sense in modern physics), then how can we describe the evolution of this ALL-ENCOMPASSING entity in terms of its components, as if space and time somehow surpass the Universe itself and are external factors to it? For example, how can we describe the development of time itself over time? In classical physics, as we know it, apparently-there's no way to do that. A fundamentally different approach and perspective on the problem is needed.
  
  Perhaps, to begin, we should distance ourselves from traditional views and clarify: what do we mean by "time" in the question posed above? And another step: what do we mean by the "Universe"? In answering the second question, physicists still demonstrate a certain rigidity and narrowness of view-out of habit. Philosophers, perhaps, are occupied with other matters and are not yet ready to provide an expanded definition of the entire World. However, even in physics, particularly in its field dealing with the micro-world (so to speak), new ideas are emerging that could radically change the approach to the evolution of the Universe. For almost a hundred years, scientists have been trying to understand the following statement: the outcome depends on HOW the observation is conducted. Perhaps, some quantum physicists think, "dark matter" and "dark energy," along with their "invisibility," are results that arise from the specific way we have chosen to observe and study them.
  
  The purpose of this essay is not to delve into the various ways to resolve the situation in physics, nor is it about raising more general philosophical questions or attempting to answer them. There has already been a lot written in my online notebook on matters such as the "coexistence of life and death" and "change without change." For example, Three Postulates of Temporalology is about a different perspective on defining time. And the attempt to visually connect the concepts of the micro-world, macro-world, and mega-world (i.e., the Universe) while considering the aspects of time discussed in other articles can be found in On the Structure of Space-Time.
  
  Actually, as for the geometry of the Universe, its geometrization, and the mathematical aspects of this problem, in my section, various and ambiguous arguments were presented. But, as far as I remember, there was no mention of modern mathematical intricacies like "closed boundless space," i.e., "closed manifold." Geometers and mathematicians refer to things like the three-dimensional sphere or a torus as such. You can walk as long as you want on a surface with a limited volume — let's say, on Earth — return to places you've already been, and not find the "edge of the Earth." This is a classic example of the absence of boundaries in a closed finite space. Another example sometimes given is a ball on which a little bug is traveling. At the same time, the ball can change the curvature of its surface — inflating or deflating from time to time. How does this affect the bug on the surface of the sphere? Now, imagine that, in addition to space, you have to incorporate time into this schematic. This is where difficulties may arise: time might be, on the contrary, infinite, but with boundaries, and these boundaries are defined by the space of the Universe. Such a "structure" is very schematically outlined in the article "On the Structure of Space-Time" (see above).
  
  In general, many theories and potential solutions to problems in modern science (including the problem of consciousness) have already been discussed in my notes. But I think it"s worth emphasizing once again: theories should not be overestimated. Theories are just theories. And nothing more.
  
  
  

  

  

Andrey Angorsky

 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"