John Barrow observed that the secret of how galaxies came into being may well be comprehended by the study of the most elementary particles of matter in particle detectors buried deep underground
It's a given that anyone who has been 'initiated' into the etymologies of science would know that the universe, at the beginning of time, was a blaze of radiation, too hot for any atoms to survive. In the first few moments, thereafter, it cooled down somewhat for the nuclei of the lightest elements to form. Yet, it wasn't enough for whole atoms to appear. It was only millions of years later that the cosmos became cool enough for simple molecules to form. After that, the wait was almost eternal. Of billions of years for a complex sequence of events to take place - one that led to the condensation of material into stars and galaxies.
It was, doubtless, an astonishing cosmic act, followed by the appearance of a stable planetary environment, replete with biochemical processes so complicated that we have difficulty in understanding them. Also, one big question remains - how and why did this elaborate chain of events begin in the first place? There are as many theories as there are models. Yet, a majority of theories reveal nothing new about the structure of the world. All they do is simply efface the spectre of the unknown from our own imaginings.
Our biggest, and most profound, challenge today is not only a need to achieving much more than explaining what-is-what-as-it-is, but also bringing in coherence, juxtaposed by a strong sense of unity to assemblages of disconnected facts - and, not just broad accounts. That such a method would be handy, without hyperbole, but not as justifiably obvious as it may sound, is archaic. Not that it'd be 'flawed,' because of its appropriate assumption that the laws governing the workings of the living planet earth apply throughout the universe - until one is coerced to conclude with just the opposite view.
Our exploration of the universe has been loaded with myriad assays, even directions - from telescopes, satellites, spacecraft, atom-smashers to computers and human thinking. This is also one reason why we have begun to appreciate the labyrinthine subtlety within the depths of inner space.
As John Barrow, the renowned English professor of astronomy, put it, "We have not only explored the world of outer space, the stars, galaxies, and great cosmic structures, but also the subatomic world." In other words, the world of the nucleus and its parts - the basic building blocks of matter.
Barrow observed that the secret of how galaxies came into being may well be comprehended by the study of the most elementary particles of matter in particle detectors buried deep underground. Of classy precepts that have given us a handful of speculative theories about the nature of time. Of the 'inflationary universe' and 'wormholes,' not to speak of the significance of COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer) satellite observations - all of which have led us to the realm of new dimensions, a theory of everything, as it were. This is also, in essence, the fundamental of the fundamentals and the cardinal of the rudiments.
This explains why research has given importance to alternative theories. To highlight one theory - no matter how the universe began, there would have been a certain region small enough to be kept smooth by interactions between matter and radiation, placed alongside a certain time of accelerated expansion. To draw another - one that investigates whether there were principles that dictated the initial state of the universe, a new sort of law of nature governing the initial conditions 'in toto.' Here's another celebrated example - the 'no-boundary condition' proposed by James Hartle and Stephen Hawking. There are others too - of rival specifications, including Roger Penrose's 'composition' to measuring the level of chaos in the gravitational field of the universe, a universal 'gravitational entropy.'
While Penrose's 'disorder' principle is most likely to exist, Hawking's work accentuates that the gravitational fields of black holes are not expanding in time, as our universe is. However, it goes without saying that we do not, as yet, know what determines the gravitational entropy of an expanding universe. All the same, Hawking's axiom is an advance. A black hole is different, even simple; the surface area of the boundary of a black hole determines its gravitational entropy. Yet, it is complex. Like other theories, this more than explains why one cannot recommend any one particular principle, among the many, concerning the origins of the universe.
To highlight yet another credo. No stable atoms existed in the early universe. This was because collisions between particles of light called photons and matter kept knocking electrons away. This meant that the cosmos was opaque, primarily because photons could not travel far. Well, approximately 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the expansion of the universe allowed the first stable atoms to form. This event, called 'recombination,' made the cosmos translucent. The fitting together of electrons to nuclei produced a great deal of light that could now travel through the less 'soupy' universe and reach us about 13 billion years later. Light from recombination was extremely energetic; it cooled off with the rest of the universe, until it reached the microwave portion of the spectrum. Today, we see this light as the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). It provides the best data on the early universe, including the structure of the cosmos.
"The structure of the universe today," to quote Barrow, "is just the expanded image of conditions in some tiny region of the initial state. (What) we need to know is about the particular local state of affairs that existed in the tiny region of the initial state that grew into our universe." His conclusion - the task isn't easy, thanks to the restriction of our empirical knowledge about the universe that has, more or less, allowed us to perceive just its evolutionary consequences. In other words, a 'Lilliputian' part of that incipient state.
Nidamboor is a wellness physician, independent researcher and author
