A
REPORT ON THE SHAPE OF THE
UNIVERSE Analysis of recent data collected
about the cosmic background radiation has yielded some surprising insights into
the shape and size of the universe. As
reported in issue 114, the background radiation has an equator, and that
equator is the same as the ecliptic, the path the sun traces out through the
zodiac in the course of a year. In this
paper, however, we focus on the latest findings suggesting that the universe
may be a torus (doughnut, or donut, as we backwoods “Americans” spell it), or a
dodecahedron, or maybe a sphere after all. Introduction Imagine
a donut, a toroid. Now imagine that is
the picture of space. Rather than being
infinite in all directions, albeit bounded, as the common theory maintains, the
universe could be radically smaller in one direction than the others, even as a
donut has a thinner diameter for the circular cross-section of the toroid than
for its outer diameter. According
to Dr. Max Tegmark of the University of Pennsylvania, “There’s a hint in the
data that if you traveled far and fast in the direction of the constellation
Virgo, you’d return to earth from the opposite direction.”[1] He said that on the basis of temperature
measurements of the dark night sky, the radiation variously known as the Cosmic
Microwave Background (CMB) radiation, also known as the 3-degree black body
radiation. The Evidence In
July of 2003, Tegmark, his wife Angélica de Oliveira-Costa, and Andrew J. S.
Hamilton reported on the radiation what was left after subtracting out the
contribution due to the Milky Way.[2] They end their abstract with: “We argue that
our CMB map is clean enough that the lowest multipoles [the lowest multipole is
a dipole, where radiation is concentrated in two opposite areas of the sky, a
quadrupole has the radiation concentrated in four areas of the sky like at the
corners of a square, etc.—Ed.] can be measured without any galaxy cut
[meaning leaving the galaxy-covered area blank—Ed.], and obtain a quadrupole
value that is slightly less low than that from the cut-sky WMAP [Wilson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe —Ed.] team analysis.
This can be understood from a map of the CMB quadrupole, which shows
much of its power falling within the Galaxy cut region, seemingly coincidentally. Intriguingly, both the quadrupole and the
octopole [8 poles, positioned at the eight corners of a cube—Ed.] are
seen to have power suppressed along a particular spatial axis [direction—Ed.],
which lines up between the two, roughly towards Galactic coordinates (l, b)
~ (-110°, 60°) in
Virgo.” More
descriptively, this position lies in the plane of the Local Supercluster of
galaxies. The Supercluster is like a
galaxy made up of galaxy clusters instead of stars. It streams around the sky like a faint version of the Milky Way,
passing from Virgo, Coma Berenices (with a spur into Leo), on through Canes
Venatici, Ursa Major, and on to Camelopardalis where it thins out and fades
behind the Milky Way. It emerges in
Andromeda and continues through Pisces, Cetus, Sculptor, Grus, Indus, and
Pavo. In eastern Ara it is obscured
again by the Milky Way, emerging at Lupus, and from thence through Centaurus,
Hydra, and back to Virgo. Several spurs
branch off from the Supercluster, which is not mentioned much anymore in the
astronomical literature. The Implications If
true, the donut universe would force cosmologists to reconsider once again
their theories about what happened in the earliest moments of the Big
Bang. After all, the cosmic background
radiation is believed by most astronomers to be the afterglow of the Big Bang
itself, a portrait of the universe when it was allegedly 380,000 years
old. Since galaxies do not form in the
original Big Bang model, it was postulated that the early Big Bang did not
expand smoothly but became lumpy, and that the lumps became galaxies, and
clusters of galaxies, and platters or walls of clusters of galaxies, and so
forth. The latest view is to model
these irregularities as microscopic fluctuations born during the first instant
of time and then amplified into sound waves as the universe expands and matter
and energy slosh around. By
analyzing these waves, cosmologists can fine-tune their modifications until
they can “predict” many of the postulated characteristics of the universe such
as its age and density. Although there
has been much fanfare in the press that these observations validate the Big
Bang, the celebration is premature. The
observations yield yet another unexpected problem. According
to relativity, the Big Bang should produce a universe that is “infinite, yet
bounded.” Such a results allows the
earth to look like it is at a special place or center of the universe without
it having to be so. The relativistic
model of the Big Bang allows each and every spot in the universe to look as if
it is in the center and at rest. In
such a universe, the slosh-waves in the cosmic fireball should appear randomly
distributed around the sky at all sizes, but according to the new map, there
seems to be a limit to the size of the waves, with none extending more than 60
degrees across the sky. Thus
cosmologist James Peebles, of Princeton, continues to be vindicated when he
said, “Cosmologists have built a house of cards and it stands.” The
refined map by Tegmark et al., referred to earlier, shows that the universe
appears lumpier in one direction in space than it does in another. When the finer variations were taken out of
the map, the remaining large-scale variations formed a line across the
sky. If the universe is finite in one
dimension, like a cylinder or a doughnut, there is a limit to the size of
clumps that can fit in that direction.
They couldn’t be bigger than the universe in that direction; just as a
guitar string can only play a note down to a particular note such as an E, determined
by its length and diameter. So the
biggest blobs would have to squish out in a plane in other directions. The way
home around the doughnut would be perpendicular to that plane. Nobody is yet claiming that this is a revolution
I cosmology. The notion of a special
direction is not on as firm a ground as the discovery of a size limit on large
structures. Dr.
Alexei Starobinski, a theorist at the Landau Institute in Moscow, and Dr. Yakov
B. Zeldovich, proposed in 1984 that the universe could have been formed as a
donut. Dr. Starobinski emphasized that
an infinite universe with ordinary Euclidean geometry was the most natural
universe and still favored by theory.
“However, theory is theory, but observations might tell us something
different,” he said in response to being questioned about the donut universe
results. A Hall Of Mirrors? The
new work involves topology, the branch of mathematics which deals with
shapes. To a topologist, a donut is the
same shape as a human, with the digestive tract as the “donut hole.” This is because each object has one hole,
the two can be deformed into each other and are thus topologically
equivalent. The simplest topology is
the infinite space of the Euclidean geometry, but cosmologists have a hard time
conceiving how an infinite universe could have appeared in that kind of flat
space. To them, it seems more
reasonable that God created a finite universe which looks infinite. These models are called “compact universes.” The
simplest compact universe is one called a 3-torus, a donut wrapped in three
dimensions. This object is essentially
impossible to visualize: it is like a cube whose opposite sides are somehow
glued together. In a way, it is like
one of the old video games where an object disappearing on the right hand side
of the screen simultaneously reappears on the left hand side. Such a universe would be like being inside a
hall of mirrors. Instead of seeing new
stars deeper and deeper in space, you see the same things over and over again
as light travels out one side of the cube and back in the other. Such
a reflecting universe is not limited to cubes and doughnuts. Universes composed of various polyhedrons
glued together in various ways will also loop light around from one face to its
opposite face. Big and Little Loops Why
would the universe want to do this to us?
Partly to avoid the difficulties of the infinite, said Dr. Glenn
Starkman, an astronomer at the Case Western Reserve University in
Cleveland. Besides being difficult to
create, an infinite universe is philosophically unattractive. In an infinite volume, he pointed out,
anything that can happen will happen. Moreover,
the idea that dimensions could be curled in loops occurs naturally in theories
that try to unite gravity and particle physics. For example, according to string theory, the leading candidate
for a theory of everything, the universe actually has ten dimensions, nine of
space and one of time, instead of the four we normally think of. The extra dimensions are curled up into submicroscopic
loops, so tiny that we don’t notice them in ordinary life. The torus universe mentioned above is the
same idea, but on a very large scale. As we
mentioned earlier, a finite universe creates big problems for the reigning
theory of the Big Bang, inflation theory.
It posits that the universe underwent a burst of hyperexpansion in its
earliest moments. Among other things,
it implies that the observable universe today, a bubble 28 billion light-years
in diameter, is only a speck on the surface of a vastly greater realm trillions
upon trillions of light-years across.
“There’s no natural way yet proposed to get the inflation to stop and
give a space that’s big enough to house all the galaxies but small enough to
see within the observable horizon,” said Dr. Janna Levin, a Cambridge
University cosmologist who wrote about finite universes in her 1992 book, How
the Universe Got Its Spots, Diary of a Finite Time in a Finite Space. It seems that Tegmark’s observations rule
out inflation.” But I remind the reader
that the first inflationary model, reported circa 1972 and promptly ignored,
yielded the present universe in roughly 100,000 years, far too little time for
life to have evolved without God, and thus abhorrent to secular scientists of
this age. Dodecahedral Space In
a more recent paper, Jean-Pierre Luminet et al. reported the following in their
abstract:[3] Cosmology’s
standard model posits an infinite flat universe forever expanding under the
pressure of dark energy. First-year
data from the Wilkinson Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) confirm this model to
spectacular precision on all but the largest scales.... Temperature correlations across the
microwave sky match expectations on scales narrower than 60°, yet vanish on scales wider than 60°. Researchers are now seeking an explanation
of the missing wide-angle correlations....
One natural approach questions the underlying geometry of space, namely
its curvature ... and its topology. In
an infinite flat space, waves from the big bang would fill the universe on all
length scales. The observed lack of
temperature correlations on scales beyond 60°
means the broadest waves are missing, perhaps because space itself is not big
enough to support them. Here we present a simple geometrical
model of a finite, positively curved space—the Poincaré dodecahedral
space—which accounts for WMAP’s observations with no fine-tuning required. Circle searching [see below —Ed.] may
confirm the model’s topological predictions, while upcoming Planck Surveyor
data may confirm its predicted density of W0 @ 1.013 > 1. If confirmed,
the model will answer the ancient question of whether space is finite or
infinite, while retaining the standard Friedmann-Lemaître foundation for local
physics. Luminet
helped pioneer the study of cosmic crystallography and his work has been
reported before in Panorama.[4] Here he claims superiority for his model, by
virtue of a better fit, than the toroidal model. But Maybe the Universe
Is a Sphere after All So
far, searches for the repeating patterns of quasars or distant galaxy clusters
that would occur in a compact universe have been unsuccessful. The first encouragement of note was the
aforementioned discovery that the universe appeared to be deficient in
large-scale fluctuations. There were no
structures extending more than about 60 degrees across the sky. But the finding was subject to large
statistical uncertainties, astronomers said. There
are other possible explanations for the cutoff in size. According to inflation, the longest waves
appeared first, and thus the missing notes are the earliest ones that would
have been emitted. Some think that the
new evidence may, instead, say something about the beginning of inflation. Dr.
George Efstathiou of Cambridge University pointed out in a recent paper
submitted to the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society that
the Wilkinson satellite data are still marginally consistent with yet another
finite shape, namely a sphere. In that
case, fluctuations larger than the radius of the sphere might be dampened, he
said, producing the observed cutoff. The Circular Quest for
Observational Evidence The
most convincing sign of a donut universe, if it exists, could come from a
search of the satellite data now being performed by the team of Spergel,
Starkman, and Cornish of Montana State University. They are looking for circles in the sky. In
a 1998, they pointed out that if the universe were small enough, part of the
cosmic background radiation would hit the sides of the “box” and appear on the
other side. The result, in the simplest
case, would be identical circles on opposite sides of the sky with the same
patterns of hot and cold running around them.
The size of the circles depends on the distance between the walls of the
universe: the smaller the universe, the bigger the circles. If the universe is finite but much larger
than today’s observable universe (14 billion light-years in radius), the circles
will not show. The Infinite Universe
and the Bible What does the Bible have to say about
an infinite universe?[5] This was a hot topic of debate in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
The consensus was that the universe is finite. One reason given for that conclusion is that an infinite universe
could never be finished, but God ended creation of the universe in a finite
time, namely six days. [6] Later
arguments focused on physical evidence.
For instance, in an infinite universe every line of sight must end at
the surface of a star. Thus the entire
sky, both day and night, should be as bright as the surface of the sun. This is called Olbers’ Paradox.[7] Modern science has invoked the expanding
universe as a solution to Olbers’ Paradox but that merely transforms the
problem to another form. You see, an
infinite universe must also be eternal.
An infinite time must come to pass before this present and an infinite
time will follow after. Since energy
can neither be created nor destroyed, the energy density of the universe should
reach the same as expressed in Olbers’ paradox. Finally,
if the universe is infinite, it has the same properties as God, including
having no beginning. If that is so,
would God still be God? ————————————————— Of
Atom Bombs and Thunder Storms A single thunderstorm can release to the atmosphere energy equivalent to a megaton hydrogen bomb. And since some fifty thousand thunderstorms break forth on earth every day, the daily energy release equals a billion of tons of TNT. —Walter Orr Roberts, 1972. “We’re Doing Something About the Weather!” National Geographic Magazine, 141(4):518, (quote, p. 528). Comprehending Engineers
To an optimist, the glass is half full. To a pessimist, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. [1] Panorama, 2003. “Preferred directions in the universe?” B. A., 13(106):123-125. [2] Tegmark, M., A. de Oliveira-Costa, & A. J. S. Hamilton, 2003. “A high resolution foreground cleaned CMB map from WMAP,” to appear in Physical Review D, [arXiv.org/pdf /astro-ph/0302496]. [3] Luminet, J.-P., J. Weeks, A.
Riazuelo, R. Lehouck, & J.-P. Uzan, 2003.
9 October issue of Nature.
“Dodecahedral space topology as an explanation for weak wide-angle temperature
correlations in the cosmic microwave background,” a slightly different version of
the Nature paper can be found at arXiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0310253. [4] Panorama, 2002. “A small spherical universe after all?” B. A., 12(99):38-40. [5] Also see Byl, J., 2000. “God, Space and Time,” B. A., 10(94):10.
[6] Daneau,
Lambert, 1575. The Wonderful Workmanship
of the World, [7] Bouw, G. D., 1991. “Olbers’ Paradox: Why Is the Night Sky
Dark?” B. A., 1(56):11. |