Questions in Need of Free Ideas
I need some ideas to answer some questions I have wondered about. My fascination with Physics has not ebbed since I was in my early teens. My dad would tell me the wonders of science *Quasars, Pulsars and Quantum Physics, Relativity and all that. Can not still get enough of it. And the more I learned, the more questions I have. So I thought I would share a few with you.
1. Relativity says that there are 3 dimensions of space and one of time and the translation of space into time is defined by the speed of light, which is constant in all reference frames for any observer. Lets call the speed of light C which is about 186,000 miles per second. Thus going one second in the time direction is going 186,000 miles in a space direction, etc.
My confusion on the 4th dimension is that we are moving through time at 1 second per second. And if one second is 186,000 miles, we are moving through time at the speed of light. Relativity also says no physical object (with mass) can do that. What do I have wrong?
If the 4th dimension is really a dimension, it should follow all the rules. Else it is NOT a dimension. There for what is it that looks like a dimension? Or what do we change to make it identical to the other dimensions?
Note that the 3 forces of nature that have been combined used symmetry breaking to combine them. At high enough temp (energy level) the forces are identical. Does time become a full dimension at high temp? What is the symmetry that is broken?
*** Solved: Thanks to Brian Greens book Elegant Universe. The answer is everything in the universe is moving at C but only in one of the 4 dimensions can it move at C. So if it moves at say 50%C in one Dim it can only move at 50% in another (Time) so that is why time slows down as you speed up. Light always moves at C so it is timeless and so we still see the Big Bang light. Objects move mostly in time at 1 sec per sec.
2. In a Black hole, there are only three parameters to define everything that can be known about it. Charge, mass and momentum. What happens when we feed the Black hole more mass with more and more angular momentum? At some point it will be spinning so fast that its (Schwarzschild) surface speed will be approaching the speed of light.
In linear acceleration, when we try to make an object go faster, it just gets heavier and only slightly faster, never getting to the speed of light. In the angular momentum case, what happens? Does it just build up mass at the surface? But gravity is pulling in and momentum is trying to pull it in a straight line tangent to the surface. It can not fall in because to do so would speed it up past the speed of light. So I assume the momentum builds due to the increase of mass. Never actually falling into the hole. but what happens when more and more mass is added? At some point the local mass will be great enough to make a local Black hole in many places over the surface. What happens then?
And then, what would happen if the original hole had a gigantic charge on it by having been fed lots of electrons, say. Now instead of sending just mass, we send protons as the mass (stripped hydrogen). Now the mass at the surface has more attraction inward than just the gravity. It has electrostatic force and there is no mass increase to counter the pull like in the earlier case. Does it fall in and increase mass too?
3. Right after the big bang, the size of the Universe is quite small but expanding fast. Since the mass is the same as it is now, due to the conservation of energy (and also that E=MC**2 or M=E/C**2), the mass of the Universe must at some point be great enough to make a black hole and the Schwarzschild Limit would be bigger than the Universe. What does that mean? How did we get out of the Black hole, or are we still in it? Is the Big Bang a White Hole?
Or if we look at it in another way, going backward in time till the Universe was as big as the Schwarzschild Limit, it seems to me it could not get past that as it was expanding, since nothing can escape. Remember that the Universe itself is expanding, not the material in it exploding. Thus, the material is inside the Schwarzschild Limit up to this point. As the universe gets larger, the material of the universe can not continue to expand with the Universe "space" or Vacuum. Once in a hole, forever in one. Well, it can leak out over time via Hawking radiation but that is not the case here. Is the Schwarzschild Limit larger than the Universe?
4. If the Inflationary period of the Universe (in the Big Bang theory) started at the Big Bang, rather than usually shown as shortly after (as in small fractions of a second), then very high gravity (due to the very high density) could have caused a very significant slowing of time? Which might be interpreted as inflation to our slower time (in retrospect)? That is, slow time with normal expansion looks like inflation?
You got some 'splaining to do Lucy.
5. The quantum Theory says, among other oddities, that virtual particles pop in and out of existence constantly in a kind of vacuum froth. There is no free lunch here, the energy of the particles cancel out before there is an energy imbalance. This all happens very fast and very small. But there is several lines of direct proof of the concept. One thing I ask here is, if the particles are of mass (and some are), then they must exert a gravitational effect on the universe. although the particles are quite small, the entire universe vacuum is constantly producing (and annihilating) them, making a pretty sizable contribution (on average). Could this be the Dark Matter? Unless anti mater is also gravitationally repulsive instead of attractive as assumed. An experiment at UC Riverside may determine this last question. Could it be that the "mass" is not in existence long enough (Plank time) to send out Higgs (gravity waves)?
6. Where does the energy come from to create the particles made in the Vacuum Foam? If an electron and a positron collide and annihilate there is a big energy release. Where is that energy when the virtual particles collide? The vacuum of space should be aglow with it. I don't understand why the creation and annihilation of particles is energy neutral. Is it that energy is "borrowed" from the universe to create the particles and then returned quickly enough (Plank time?) that the uncertainty principle does ignores it?
7. So if the Higgs is confirmed and we now are studying its properties, I wonder if we can find a way to shield from the Higgs and therefore reduce or eliminate its effects (mass) making things "mass less"? And more importantly, since there are Anti particles for every particle, would the Anti-Higgs make Anti (negative) mass?
8. Might it be possible to see light from BEFORE time began? Dont laugh yet. We can see only up to a point where can reach us and since the speed of light is fixed, that would be the distance light travels over the age of the universe. OK, but the universe is expanding and so we could conceivably see farther since could travel farther (proportionally) in a smaller universe. That is, if a photon was traveling in a direction that would eventually reach us, it could travel a larger percentage of the ancient universe than it could today. Could it travel farther than 13.7 light years (the current age of the universe)? We would have a blind spot of about 600K light years due to the opaqueness of the early universe. Not clear.
9. Now that we can "See" inside of black holes somewhat, using the gravity wave detectors, I would think there should be some info on internal structure, if any. IE, if everything stops at the event horizon, per the Holographic theory, it should look different than a minimum size quantum description or a Singularity.