Evidence of a Beginning from Space-Time Geometry Proofs
There are three pieces of evidence arising out
of space-time geometry proofs which indicate a beginning of our universe or any
speculative multiverse in which our universe might be situated. It also
indicates a beginning of oscillating universes – even oscillating universes in
higher dimensional space. These proofs are so widely applicable
that they establish a beginning of virtually every hypothetical pre-big bang
condition which can be connected to our universe. They, therefore, indicate the
probability of an absolute beginning of physical reality which implies the
probability of a Creator outside of our universe (or any multiverse in which it
might be situated).
Since 1994 two proofs and (and a series of
models) have been developed that show that not only our universe, but any
multiverse and inflationary bouncing universe must have a beginning: 1) The
1994 Borde-Vilenkin Proof, 2) The modeling of inflationary universes by Alan
Guth and others, and 3) The 2003 Borde-Vilenkin-Guth Theorem (the BVG Theorem).
The 1994 Borde-Vilenkin Proof
Arvin Borde (Kavli Institute of Theoretical
Physics at the University of California Santa Barbara) and Alexander Vilenkin
(Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University) formulated a proof
in 1994 that every inflationary universe meeting five assumptions would have to
have a singularity (a beginning of the universe/multiverse in a finite proper
time)[1]. Our universe meets all the conditions
in this proof. In 1997 they discovered a possible exception to one
of their assumptions (concerning weak energy conditions) which was very, very
unlikely within our universe. Physicists, including Alan Guth (the
Victor Weisskopf Professor of Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, and father of inflationary theory) did not consider this
exception to be relevant: “… the technical assumption questioned in the 1997
Borde-Vilenkin paper does not seem important enough to me to change the conclusion
[that the 1994 proof of a beginning of inflationary model universes is
required].”[2] Therefore,
the 1994 proof still has general validity today. (Refer to NPEG Chapter One,
Section IV.D)
Alan Guth’s 1999 analysis of expanding pre-big-bang models
Guth concluded his study as follows: “In my own
opinion, it looks like eternally inflating models necessarily have a beginning…
As hard as physicists have worked to try to construct an alternative, so far
all the models that we construct have a beginning; they are eternal into the
future, but not into the past.”[3]
(Refer to NPEG Chapter One, Section IV.D)
The 2003 Borde-Vilenkin-Guth Theorem (the BVG Theorem):
Borde, Vilenkin, and Guth joined together to
formulate an elegant and vastly applicable demonstration of a beginning of
expanding universes (in a famous article in Physical Review Letters). Alexander
Vilenkin explains it as follows:
“Suppose, for example,
that [a] space traveler has just zoomed by the earth at the speed of 100,000
kilometers per second and is now headed toward a distant galaxy, about a
billion light years away. [because of the expansion of the universe as a
whole], that galaxy is moving away from us at a speed of 20,000 kilometers per
second, so when the space traveler catches up with it, the observers there will
see him moving at 80,000 kilometers per second. [As the universe continues to
expand, the relative velocity of the space traveler will get smaller and smaller
into the future]. If the velocity of the space traveler relative to
the spectators gets smaller and smaller into the future, then it
follows that his velocity should get larger and larger as we follow his history
into the past. In the limit, his velocity should get arbitrarily close to the
speed of light [the maximum velocity attainable by mass energy in the
universe].”[4]
The point where relative velocities become
arbitrarily close to the speed of light constitutes a boundary
to past time in any expanding universe or multiverse. Though the
conclusion of Borde, Vilenkin, and Guth is somewhat technical for non
physicists, its importance makes their precise words worth mentioning:
Our argument shows that
null and time like geodesics are, in general, past-incomplete [requiring a
boundary to past time] in inflationary models, whether or not energy conditions
hold, provided only that the averaged expansion condition Hav > 0 hold along
these past-directed geodesics. This is a stronger conclusion than the one
arrived at in previous work in that we have shown under reasonable assumptions
that almost all causal geodesics, when extended to the past of an arbitrary
point, reach the boundary of the inflating region of space-time in a finite
proper time.[5]
This proof is vastly applicable to just about
any model universe or multiverse that could be connected with our universe.
Alexander Vilenkin put it this way in 2006:
We made no assumptions
about the material content of the universe. We did not even assume that gravity
is described by Einstein’s equations. So, if Einstein’s gravity requires some
modification, our conclusion will still hold. The only assumption that we made
was that the expansion rate of the universe never gets below some nonzero
value, no matter how small. This assumption should certainly be satisfied in
the inflating false vacuum. The conclusion is that past-eternal
inflation without a beginning is impossible.[6]
Physicists do not use the word “impossible” very
often. So, Vilenkin’s claim here is quite strong. The reason he is able to make
it is that there is only one condition that must be fulfilled – an expansion
rate of the universe greater than zero (no matter how small).
It is important to note that Borde, Vilenkin,
and Guth applied their theorem to the string multiverse as well as to higher
dimensional oscillating universes. I present their own words here (which might
be quite difficult for non-physicists) because it gives a sense of their own
appreciation of the vast applicability of their theorem:
Our argument can be
straightforwardly extended to cosmology in higher dimensions [arising out of
string theory/M Theory]. For example, [1] in [some models of a string
multiverse], brane worlds are created in collisions of bubbles nucleating in an
inflating higher-dimensional bulk space-time. Our analysis implies that the
inflating bulk cannot be past-complete [i.e. must have a boundary to past
time]. ¶ [2] We finally comment on the cyclic Universe model [in the higher
dimensional space of string theory] in which a bulk of four spatial dimensions
is sandwiched between two three-dimensional branes…In some versions of the
cyclic model the brane space-times’ are everywhere expanding, so our theorem
immediately implies the existence of a past boundary at which boundary
conditions must be imposed. In other versions, there are brief periods of
contraction, but the net result of each cycle is an expansion.…Thus, as long as
Hav > 0 for a null geodesic when averaged over one cycle, then Hav > 0
for any number of cycles, and our theorem would imply that the geodesic is
incomplete [i.e. must have a boundary to past time].[7]
The boundary to past time (required in the BVG
theorem) could indicate an absolute beginning of the universe or a pre-pre-big
bang era with a completely different physics. If it is the latter, then the
pre-big-bang period would also have to have had a boundary to its past time
(because it would have a rate of expansion greater than zero). Eventually, one
will reach an absolute beginning when there are no more pre-pre-pre-big-bang
eras.
This is an extraordinary conclusion, because it
shows that a beginning is required in virtually every conceivable pre-big-bang
scenario – including the string multiverse and oscillating
universes in higher dimensional space. By implication, then, even if there were
multiple pre-big-bang eras, it is likely that these eras would have to have an
expansion rate greater than zero, which means that they too would have to have
a beginning, which would make an absolute beginning virtually unavoidable. This
absolute beginning would be the point at which the universe came into
existence. Prior to that point the universe (and its physical time) would have
been nothing, which as we saw above, implies a Creator.
Exceptions to this theorem are very difficult to
formulate and are quite tenuous because they require either a universe with an
average Hubble expansion less than or equal to zero (which is difficult to
connect to our inflationary universe) or a deconstruction of time which is
physically unrealistic. (For an extended discussion of these
exceptions, you may consult Chapter One, Section III.D-E of NPEG). For this
reason all attempts to get around the BVG Theorem to date have been
unsuccessful. Even if physicists in the future are able to formulate a
hypothetical model which could get around the BVG Theorem, it would not mean
that this hypothetical model is true for our universe. It is likely to be only
a testimony to human ingenuity. Therefore, it is probable that our universe (or
any multiverse in which it might be situated) had an absolute beginning. This implies
a creation of the universe by a Power transcending our universe.
There is another impressive set of data which
corroborates the above three space-time geometry proofs, namely, the Second
Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. entropy). The constraints of time will
not permit me to address this topic, however, those interested in explication
of it may consult Chapter One (Section III A-C) of NPEG). In conclusion, the
evidence from physics (from both space-time geometry proofs and the second law
of thermodynamics) indicates the probability of a beginning of our universe. In
as much as a beginning indicates a point at which our universe came into
existence, and prior to that point, the universe was nothing, then it is
probable that the universe (and any hypothetical multiverse in which it might
be situated) was created by a transcendent power outside of physical space and time.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario