Once people thought and believed that the Earth was the center of the cosmos and that everything revolved around the Earth. When it came to the sun and the moon, everything turned out pretty smoothly. The moon is walking on Earth, and the sun is damn well showing. Fixed & # 39; the stars also appear around the earth and do not give any ammunition to offer otherwise.
But the wandering stars of the planets were different horses of different colors. Their movements, which were supposed to have circled around the earth, were difficult to reconcile with this fixed earth in the middle. Nobody (at that time) wanted to abandon Earth-oriented space, and therefore the planetary engines had to be tuned in order to get observation and theory for the gel. This epicyclic was invented.
Planes were supposed to go through various loop loops and other vibrations or acrobatics (collectively called epicycles) to match the observation. But the original epicycles, in turn, were equipped with second-generation epicycles, since the observations still did not correspond to the facts, and then the third-generation epicycles were tied to the second generation, tied to the original generation, from hand to hand, and complicated that everything simply collapsed into a bunch. It is rejected in the paradigm shift.
When the positions of the Earth and the Sun were canceled, everything fell into place, the theory corresponded to the observation (as soon as the ellipses were replaced with circles, the ideal circle was once more when people dictated to nature what nature should fulfill the requirement) and all these epicycles fell to the curb.
Today we are faced with a similar situation when it comes to modern cosmology. We have many observations that require that ever-increasing special epicycles take them into account.
Many observations have been made in the sciences, and then some general explanation is given to explain their group. This, in turn, leads to various problems or problems, and therefore to solve them requires another comprehensive explanation explaining that many of them, and this, in turn, is good, and so on. D. And so on. Explicit An example related to the standard cosmology model,
Obviously, astronomers are watching the universe. Some observations requiring explanation have generated only such an explanation, although it is incomplete and rather unsatisfactory. This trilogy of observations: 1) galactic redshifts; 2) cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR); and 3) the ratio / content of hydrogen and helium.
Observation of the galactic redshift boils down to the fact that almost all galaxies move away from each other, and the distances between them relate to their speeds, so that galaxies moving with a speed of X will be located at a distance Y; galaxies at a speed of 2X will be at a distance of 2Y from each other, and so on. Translated, this is what you expect to see with respect to all the bits and pieces flying on an exploding dynamite stick. So, we have an expanding Universe, and by running a “movie” or a clock back, the Universe will come to the point of & # 39; about 13.7 billion years ago.
Detection of cosmic microwave radiation (cosmic temperature, partially detected as static or spiky on your television when tuned between stations) corresponded to theoretical predictions if the cosmos began as an extremely strong explosion and slowly cooled as the universe expanded.
Finally, when the relative abundance of hydrogen and helium in the Universe is observed and calculated, the two simplest elements, this ratio is what you would expect if you could give known interactions of partial and partial particle physics at extreme temperatures and pressures that would be expected during a high-temperature explosion. .
So the Big Bang gets the head. Everything looks good. But, and there is always a "but."
There are several questions at once regarding this cosmic explosion, called the Big Bang. First, it created time (without explanation or recipe). secondly, it created a space (there were no explanations or recipes for this); thirdly, it created matter and energy (again, no explanations or recipes); Fourth, was not big. since cosmologists prefer to run the clock as far as possible, and thus squeeze the entire Universe back into a volume smaller than that of a pinhead; and, finally, not a single source of energy for "given. In fact, I often read that, apparently, no source of energy was really necessary (because the Universe is neutral to energy - it has as much positive energy as and negative energy), which I find more than slightly odd.
However, the postulation of the Big Bang to explain the aforementioned observation trilogy caused problems with another trilogy of observations. These observations focused on: 1) the horizon problem; 2) the problem of flatness and 3) the problem of monopoles
The problem of the horizon - the contact between the two regions - the problem is that if you look at the exact oppositional areas of the Universe; you tend to see almost the same thing, especially when it comes to temperature. So what? Well, in order for things to reach balance, your hot cup of coffee is cooled, and the kitchen gets a little warmer until the coffee and the room are at the same temperature, it requires that the two regions (coffee and room) are securely closed because the exchange can only happen with speeds equal to or less than the speed of light. If two opposite areas of the sky, looking deep into space, have the same temperature, it requires that these two areas are close to each other, close enough to equilibrium with the speed of light or less than the speed of light to even the conditions, Unfortunately, the distances observed between opposite points in the sky are such that homogeneity could not be possible. They are now not in contact with each other - beyond the horizon of each other. therefore, any bits of unevenness between regions that occurred in the past when they should have been preserved — and when we look deeper into space, we go back. We need some serious additional effort to achieve uniformity between the regions from the path, the path back (ie, immediately after the Big Bang) to the currently observed distances.
The problem of flatness revolves around the observation that the Universe is finely tuned with respect to the density of matter and energy contained within, density, which resolved in a similarly flat plane. Universe. In translation, the flat Universe is the one dominated by Euclidean geometry (the three angles of a triangle are up to 180 degrees). Now, if the density was greater, the Universe would be closed, like a sphere (ie, Earth), where the angles of the triangle on the surface are more than 180 degrees. If the density were less, the Universe would be an open (that is, saddle-shaped) hyperbolic Universe, where the angles of the triangle would be less than 180 degrees. If you have a potentially wide range of possible densities, it is surprising that our Universe has such a flat plane.
The problem of the monopole lies in the fact that in the conditions of the Big Bang it was necessary to create monopoles - magnets with a north pole or a south pole, but not with both. Alas, no monopoles were found and were not observed. They seem to be less likely than chicken teeth.
Well, the way to get around these problems is to offer not only the original Big Bang explosion, but also an extra super-explosion. ” which accelerated the expansion of the Universe, ever so briefly, very, very, very big factor. This secondary explosion was called inflation. Inflation made the rate of expansion of the universe caused by the Big Bang seemed almost insignificant.
So, how does an extreme, but short burst of expansion (i.e., inflation) solve the problems of flatness, horizon and monopole?
The horizon problem is solved by inflation. While the initial pre-inflation conditions of the Big Bang would provide the necessary close enough contact to achieve uniformity, areas flying apart from each other will soon acquire their own individual personalities. and be far enough away that this balance could never be restored between these regions even at the speed of light. However, this additional serious bout of inflation quickly expanded this uniformity, inflation, providing additional omf and frozen homogeneity at the distances that we see today.
The flatness problem is explained by the fact that the extremely fast inflation rate smoothes the Universe. If you are on the surface of a non-invasive balloon, you will see peaks and valleys - wrinkles. If this balloon is blown a thousand times larger, the surface will now appear flat - just like the surface of the Earth seems to be flat.
The monopole problem has been solved, because the volume of the Universe has increased thousands of times in nanoseconds in such a way that the monopoles are now scattered in an incredibly large amount, so that the chances that would be in our space region become vanishingly tiny.
It is strange that I sometimes read that inflation preceded the Big Bang, although this is usually an event after the fact. Obviously, cosmologists did not really know what was first - no, not a chicken or an egg, but a big bang or inflation.
Well, we explained cosmological observations through the Big Bang and inflation. Can we continue R & R? No, not at all. You see, another very unpleasant observation came up, which requires another special explanation, which explains well.
We realized that our Universe is expanding in order to go for almost a century. Of course, we also realize that from a fairly significant early time, what goes up should go down. In other words, gravity captures. The Universe has a lot of gravity and a lot, therefore, apparently, what rises (i.e. the expansion speed) should be lowered (i.e., the expansion speed should at least slow down, maybe even stop and restore). Cosmologists really wanted to know what is the rate of inhibition. How quickly the rate of expansion of the universe decreased? It looks like you can move uphill, but slower and slower.
So, several groups of astronomers made the corresponding observations and turned down the numbers and guessed that - the rate of expansion of the universe accelerated, and gravity was cursed. It is like driving a car uphill and accelerating and accelerating it without putting the pedal to the metal. Well, that was a surprisingly unexpected result. Therefore, they need an explanation. Astronomers (warlords anyway) received the Nobel Prize, but this was for the discovery, not for an explanation. You see, there was no explanation. So, what we want is an epicycle. When we want this - now! What would a special epoxy be? It was called “Dark Energy”, a kind of anti-gravity, which was pushing the Universe faster and faster. The problem is that no one, or now, has a vague idea of what Dark Energy is, but in order to explain what this epicycle does, it should represent approximately 70% of what the Universe does. This is a lot of epicycle, which has no plausible explanations. Did someone talk about bunnies and hats?
Now can we go home? Unfortunately not yet.
There is another astronomical observation, which actually dates back to the first half of the 20th century, which must deal with, at least initially, our own cosmic neck of the forest, the Milky Way Galaxy. You will now be well aware of the fact that in our solar system Mr. Sun is a big cheese and keeps all the planets in orbit through its gravity. However, gravity is weakened when you move away from the source (the ratio of the inverse square), so it is not surprising that the farther the planet leaves the Sun, the more its orbit around the Sun increases, the less it rotates; the more his year. Now this relationship applies to all bits and parts (i.e. Stars) that revolve around the center of our galaxy? Well, actually not. External stars whistle as fast as internal stars, so much so that external stars, considering that gravity seems to have a galaxy, should actually avoid height and go into intergalactic space. The fact that they do not mean that the galaxy has much greater gravity than it seems to meet the astronomical eye. Oh, there is another epicycl. This time the special explanation is Dark Matter. It is dark because we cannot see it. This is a question because it has (everything that requires additional) gravity. Of course, this constitutes the majority of matter in our galaxy; Of course, no one knows what it really is, although astronomical forces that were able to exclude many dark, but common things, such as interstellar gas and dust, black holes, etc., are here and now Dark Matter - another epicycle, and that relates to our galaxy, is also observed for other galaxies.
The concept of epicycles was originally used to explain observations. This is how it remains in modern cosmology, but only special explanations require an explanation.
In conclusion, the state of cosmology and our understanding of the universe, its essence and structure is largely located at the crossroads where the state of our solar system was all these centuries ago. Once the epicycles were heaped on epicycles to explain the solar system until everything collapsed. I suspect that history will repeat itself when it comes to the current state of cosmology. Explanations of observations are too legible; too many things left unexplained by these special epicycles. We had the Copernican revolution; it is time for an equivalent revolution in cosmology.
SUMMARY
Observation: Galactic redshifts
Observation: Cosmic Microwave Radiation (CMBR)
Observation: Ratio / Abundance Hydrogen and Helium
Ad Hoc Epicycle: Big Bang (without power source)
Observation: the horizon problem
Observation: the problem of flatness
Observation: magnetic monopoles
Ad Hoc Epicycle: Inflation (many varieties, like Heinz)
Observation: Accelerating Universe
Ad Hoc Epicycle: dark energy (unexplained)
Observation: Galactic spins with gravity out of sync
Ad Hoc Epicycle: Dark Matter (unexplained)
