I was talking with an amateur astronomer this morning who, in reference to another astronomer and blogger I mentioned, said “He’s great… except that he believes in black holes.”

The comment caught me off guard. Up until that moment I had no idea that “black holes” was a topic of controversy. I dug into research as soon as I got home.

A black hole is the name for a small body of matter floating in the cosmos that is incredibly dense. Like the entire sun being compressed into a ball the size of a city. It is black because the density creates such a strong gravitational field that light itself is pulled back into itself.

If light can’t get out, we can’t possibly see it to prove it exists. However, astronomers observe the outside affects of a black hole and determine, though they can’t point to it, exactly where the black hole must be.

Just like earth and our neighboring planets orbit around the sun (being the most dense, and thus our gravity boss), astronomers can see stars orbiting around a spot in space. Something must be there at the center creating the orbit, and the best guess is that the something is a black hole.

Another way to spot a black hole is from bursts of x-rays. As a star gets too close to a black hole it begins moving faster and faster, heating up in the process. When the gas of the star reaches such temperatures it begins to emit x-rays. Eventually, as the star spirals ever closer to the black hole it too will become invisible, but outside of the “horizon” of the black hole (the tipping point of the gravitational field, a point of no return) we can observe these strange happenings. The clues add up to the presence of a black hole.

Proving the existence of black holes seems to be a case of “if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…”, which leaves room for doubt as to whether or not there is a big duck at the center of our galaxy. Let’s take a look at the other side of the argument.

The anti-black-hole debate centers on one sticky issue, “The Information Paradox”. All the details are well beyond my understanding, but it boils down to this. You’ve perhaps heard of the law of conservation of energy… energy cannot be created or destroyed, but merely changed from one form to another. (A car’s forward momentum, through the friction of the brake pads, turns to heat dispersed into the air, etc.)

Well, there is a theory of quantum physics that says there must be a conservation of information. The information in question is sort of like DNA for particles at the smallest level. If matter was to collapse into a black hole, unable to escape, this information would no longer be accessible to the universe. To theoretical physicists, that’s a big problem.

Some of the proposed solutions involve fancy words like “11-dimensional supergravity” and other string-theory brain-busters that are well beyond the scope of the LSNED blog. If you will allow me to over-summarize, conveniently avoiding 500 more words of clumsy explanation, the leading anti-black-hole theory (the Holographic principle) is essentially arguing that a black hole is a mirage of sorts. Rather than a true physical black hole that gobbles up matter never to be seen again, it is a cosmic illusion that just appears that way to our simple three-dimensional brains.

Perhaps I will revisit that another day.

• Source: Black Holes – NASA
• Source: Black Hole Information Paradox – Wikipedia

There is a lot of hub-bub about a neutrino that was witnessed moving faster than the speed of light, a feat which was deemed impossible by Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. The science community is working overtime to figure out if the experiment can be repeated and confirmed, as it would have a major impact on our understanding of physics.

I’ve been doing some reading to get a better grasp of what, exactly, a neutrino really is. It is a rather elusive particle, which adds an air of mystery (not to mention difficulty) to any observation experiments.

One thing I do know is that, at this very second, billions of neutrinos are passing straight through your body without even slowing down.

The existence of the tiny neutrino particle was proposed as a solution to some “missing energy” observed in radioactive decay. It was theorized that some sort of particle was carrying this energy away. Shortly thereafter Enrico Fermi worked out the specific role that the mystery particle needed to fill, dubbing it the neutrino due to it having no electromagnetic charge… the particle was neutral.

The fact that it is neither negatively or positively charged is what makes it so hard to detect. It has so little interaction with other particles that it can zip right through objects without stopping, slowing, or changing direction. All the neutrinos that are generated from our sun not only pass through your body, but right through the core of the earth and out the other side on their journey across the universe.

That’s the trouble. If they pass through the solid granite of the earth without a second thought, how can our scientists “capture” neutrinos in any sort of observation equipment? Studying neutrinos is a bit like trying to spot bigfoot… if bigfoot was also invisible and moving about the speed of light. All they have to go on is the footprints and broken branches left behind.

The original experiment that caught a glimpse of neutrinos occured in 1956. There was a big water tank. While the vast majority of neutrinos pass through silently, due to sheer volume they would sometimes collide and interact with protons in the water. This would create positrons, which would in turn create a pair of gamma rays if it collided with an electron. The gamma rays excited a scintillator, which is  a material that absorbs gamma rays and emits light. Finally, the tiny flashes of light were recorded by sensors inside the tank.

It was a Rube Goldberg machine on the atomic scale, but it worked. The experiments recorded about three light flashes per hour. More intricate, modern experiments can not only catch the existence of neutrinos, but capture information about the direction and speed of travel. The largest neutrino-catcher actually uses the solid ice of Antarctica as its water tank. Through this we are able to see evidence of cosmic explosions and supernovas far beyond the range of our telescopes.

The complexity required to observe neutrinos is why physicists are being extremely cautious about this new “faster than light” hypothesis.

Does this really explain what a neutrino is? Perhaps I should just leave it at the description by Frederick Reines, telling us that a neutrino is “the most tiny quantity of reality ever imagined by a human being.”

• Source: All About Neutrinos – IceCube South Pole Neutrino Detector

I’ve already made my case for being skeptical towards global warming and climate change hysteria. The single biggest influence on the earth’s climate is the sun. It’s a burning ball of gas that is bigger than a million earths, and counts for 99.8% of all matter in our solar system. It’s kind of a big deal.

Researchers at the US National Solar Observatory are warning us that the sun might be taking a few years off. The sun has its moods, that tend to last about 11 years. These solar cycles are marked by the flow of plasma which determine the amount of solar flares and sunspot activity generating blasts of radiation. The more sunspots, the hotter it gets here.

From 1645 to 1715 the earth was at its coldest since the last great ice age. It’s known as the Maunder Minimum, referring to the lowest numbers in observed susnpots since they had started watching. The Maunder Minimum also corresponded with “The Little Ice Age” that brought a record cold winters to the northern hemisphere. The Baltic Sea froze over. Londeners held frost festivals on the Thames river. People in New York could walk across the harbour from Manhattan to Staten Island.

Back to current news, the NSO research trends seem to indicate that we could be heading into a solar cold-snap with the next cycle. They are expecting unusually low sunspot activity, which could lead to 30 years of cooler-than-average temperatures. The plasma flow that signals the beginning of new cycles doesn’t seem to be present, so it could mean a missing cycle, or perhaps just a delayed start. I’ve heard nothing about the possibility of a sun baby.

It could also mean a significant pay cut for a lot of environmentalist hype-mongers.

• Source: Next solar cycle could be a no-show – Science News

Yesterday I was talking about the hypersphere as one of the proposed shapes for the universe, but I ran out of space (trying to keep things snappy) before I got to the more interesting idea. Some theories peg the universe as having no shape at all… it just goes on forever.

Have you ever heard the expression that an infinite number of monkeys banging away on an infinite number of typewriters will eventually produce the complete works of William Shakespeare? Statistically, that is a guaranteed fact. Given enough time, the “random sequence” of letters that correspond with Hamlet will eventually turn up. That’s the curious thing about infinity.

If the universe is truly infinite, that means Shakespeare was not the only Shakespeare. If you traveled far enough you would come across another galaxy, with another solar system, and another planet very much like earth. (having been formed with the same random sequence of evolutions) Walking this planet would be people very much like you and I. It may be off by a bit… Mary would actually be Sara, and with red hair rather than brown. Their pet dogs would have six legs.

Given enough distance covered in the infinite sequence, you will eventually stumble upon a place which is identical in every way to Earth, with identical people hanging around. Actually, the physicist Max Tegmark once calculated (for fun) how far away this mirror world would likely be according to the mathematics of probability:

A mere 10 to the power of 10²⁹ meters. That’s a 1 with 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 zeros behind it.

In fact, if the universe goes on forever then anything that you can imagine… exists. It sounds crazy, but that is actually the simplest answer regarding the universe. It’s easy to explain how everything exists. However, it’s very difficult to explain why some things would exists while others would not. The question becomes the dividing line between can exist and can’t exist. How would such a rule come about? Does that mean our “laws of nature” are not universal?

Finally we come to the theory that the universe may not be the universe, but rather one little puddle of space in the infinite multiverse. As such, each pocket universe can be distinct unto itself, mind-numbingly large, but not infinite. More interestingly, each universe can then have it’s own unique set of natural laws forged as the universe was born.

As I said in Part 1, all this is theory. There is no way for us to know things on this scale, as we cannot see that far. The speed of light and the “cosmic horizon” means we can only observe a (relatively) very small portion of space around us. But as Richard Feynman said… “It’s fun to imagine!”

• Source: All this and more covered completely in “The Goldilocks Enigma” (Amazon link)
• Also, Max Tegmark has posted many of his articles regarding the Multiverse on his website.

I will begin with the only hard fact I have on this topic: Nobody knows the structure or form of the universe. It’s debatable whether or not we will ever be able to know with any certainty. Still, the scientific process marches on. We observe the available evidence, and make intelligent guesses.

One fundamental question is whether or not the universe is infinite. Is there an edge, or does space and time just keep on going forever? We may never know, as we can only observe as far as the cosmic horizon. That is the point at which we can no longer see anything because there has not been enough time (in the 13.7 billion years of existence) for light to travel to, and be seen by earth. So it’s a bit like trying to determine the shape of the earth without being able to get out of your chair.

We have decided that there is no noticeable center to our universe. When we think of the Big Bang origin we picture an explosion happening in one spot, and everything spreading outwards from that spot. But that’s not really the case, according to the available evidence. The way that every galaxy is moving away from every other galaxy suggests the big bang happened everywhere-all-at-once.

The way we think about the space around us is in three dimensions. There are a very limited number of ways we can move, and we’re stuck being in only one place at any given time. In order to make sense of certain things, scientists are seriously considering that there are more dimensions than meets the eye.

One proposed shape for the universe, and a solution to the everywhere-all-at-once conundrum, is called a hypersphere. It’s a round ball, but rather than having a flat surface (like the earth) the outside edge of this ball is in itself a three dimensional space. (I admit, I still haven’t really wrapped my head around that image) Perhaps you could picture a balloon. There’s nothing on the inside, but the balloon wall is “thick” with three dimensions. (is that more or less confusing?)

So now consider the Big Bang in context of this balloon being inflated. It starts as a little ball of solid latex. (that balloon, not the universe) As it is blown up, it expands outward and the hyperspherical wall grows. If you were to have dots on the surface of this balloon, all the dots would be moving farther away from all the other dots, just like our galaxies.

Note: While the balloon analogy hopefully helps to explain the affect of a hyperspherical universe and uniform expansion, it doesn’t get you any closer to actually picturing the true shape of a hypershpere. Sorry. It’s tough to grasp without advanced mathematics. When I understand it myself, you’ll be the first to know.

So, that’s just one concept for the shape of the universe. With the hypersphere, there is a finite volume of space. In fact, if you could travel in one direction long enough, you would eventually loop around back to where you started. (like walking around the globe, but in a crazy 4-dimensional way)

We’ll pick this up again in the next story as we consider the strange consequences of an infinite universe.

• Source: I just finished a great book about the origins and structure of the universe called “The Goldilocks Enigma” (Amazon link) It does a very good job explaining the many fascinating theories of cosmology to a layman like me.

Please put your desk chairs in the full upright and locked position. We’re not expecting any turbulence, but as we sit we are moving at an astronomical speed… literally. You and I are little blobs of stuff (and no, I’m not calling you fat) stuck like bubble gum to the side of earth. It feels like we’re sitting still, but that is so ridiculously far from the truth.

1 600 km/h – Once per day our planet completes a full rotation, creating the illusion of the sun setting and rising. If you were standing still at the equator, you would actually be moving at 1600 kilometers per hour! We don’t feel this movement because it’s so smooth and consistent.

107 000 km/h – Every year the earth completes a full trip in orbit around the sun. In order to stay on schedule it requires a speed of 107 thousand kilometers per hour. This also means you’re personally moving faster at night, when you are on the outside of the orbit and the earth rotation is in (more or less) the same direction as the solar orbit. Conversely, you’d be going a bit slower during the day… like running towards the back of a moving train.

70 000 km/h – This gets a bit mind-boggling now, but our sun is not sitting still either. The numbers get harder to calculate because there is no sign-post to measure our speed against. Relative to other stars in the “neighbourhood” of the milky way galaxy, our sun and solar system is slowly milling about at 70 thousand clicks.

792 000 km/h – Like the earth going around the sun every year, the sun has a “galactic year” that is 225 million earth-years long. We are located near the outside edge of the milky way galaxy that spins like a pinwheel. Every 225 million years our little patch of space makes one trip around. The speed of that trip clocks at 792 thousand km/h.

If all those motions were ever to line up and be working in the same direction we’d be trucking along at near 1 million km/h when sitting still! But hold on to your hats, folks… there’s one more thing to consider…

2 100 000 km/h – Our pretty little galaxy is moving too. Perhaps you’ve heard that the universe is expanding, well, apparently we’re caught up in a current moving at over 2 million km/h. This is calculated by comparing our movement to the “cosmic background radiation”, which is the most steady, constant thing found in the universe.

This, I believe, is the number one reason not to run at a swimming pool because really it’s not adding much to your speed in the big picture.

• Source: http://www.astrosociety.org/education/publications/tnl/71/howfast.html

It’s Tuesday! But we came very close to calling this “Marsday” instead of Tuesday. Originally, in the ancient civilizations of Babylon, Greece, and Rome, each day of the week was named for the planets. At the time there were seven planets visible to the naked eye; Mercury, Mars, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, the Moon and the Sun. (remember, in those days they assumed the sun revolved around the earth… well, everybody except for this guy)

Now those are the Roman names for the planets, named for their gods. So in Latin the days of the week were as follows: dies solis, dies lunae, dies Martis, dies Mercurii, dies Jovis, dies Veneris, and dies Saturni. All of the day names in the western European languages have descended from this, and some have not fallen far from the tree.

In French, for example, the Roman influence is strong: lundi, mardi, mercredi, jeudi, vendredi, and samedi. Dimanche, the french word for Sunday, derives from a later update changing the Latin day to dies Domenica, the “day of the lord”.

The English names of the days share in that ancestry as evidenced in our Sunday, Monday (moon-day) and Satur(n)day. The other days come from an Anglo-Saxon substitution of the gods. While the characters mostly remained the same, the Germanic people changed the names of the gods to Woden (Odin), Tiu, Thor, and Freya. If you add “day” on to those they begin to sound familiar. Woden’s day, Tiu’s day, Thor’s day, and Freya’s day.

So be sure to celebrate Tuesday today in honour of the one-handed god of heroic victory and glory.

• Source: http://www.cjvlang.com/Dow/dow1.html