“Closer to truth” congratulated Roger Penrose with his Nobel Prize in Physics by posting this interview with him: “Why did our universe begin”. There was some discussion in the comments section, also about general theory of science. I participated in the discussion and use my comments here.
Congratulations. And a question about Conformal Cyclic Cosmology.
Congratulations, Sir Penrose. I was really delighted to hear this. I have a question about Conformal Cyclic Cosmology. As far as I remember he said in an interview that gravitational waves for an earlier universe could make pattern in the cosmic background picture, because it has an enormous energy. Maybe I misunderstood? One arm of LIGO is 4 km and gravitational waves changed it’s length with 1/000 og the size of a proton. That is like the with of a hair compared to the distance to our nearest star outside the solar system. Gravitational waves from an earlier universe would be squeezed down together with the whole universe, right? How could it then be detectable in the new universe? Wouldn’t it even be smaller than the Plank length? In a resent interview he said that huge entropy in evaporating black holes in a former universe may have become Hawking points in the new Big Bang and the Hawking rings in the cosmic background picture.
General theory of science. Is the theory of black holes scientific?
Someone claimed that from our point of view it will take an infinite amount of time for the black cave to be formed (as singularity), so it has not happened yet and therefore the theory of black holes is not scientific.
Finally, I gave him this answer:
“You are quite right and it is very interesting to think it over. Penrose got half of the prize “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity” The other two shared the other half “for the discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy”. It seems to be something special that he got the prize as a mathematician and theoretical physicist. I like to compare with other perspectives and with what other physicians have said, it makes it even more interesting, it’s some of a puzzle. I don’t know if you will talk any more about it, maybe you also have stopped looking on this page. Anyway tanks so far and good luck.”
Penrose got half of the prize “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity” The other two shared the other half “for the discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy”. It seems to be something special that Penrose got the prize as a mathematician and theoretical physicist. In this video Don Lincoln in Fermilab tells us how we can know that black holes are there. Supermassive black holes are in the center of galaxies and are truly made in the beginning of the universe, but we don’t know how. We can not see black holes, but Cygnus X1 is locked in I tight orbit with a star and mass from the star spirals into the black hole. So black holes can be indirectly seen when the com into orbit with a star. With LIGO we detect gravitational waves from collision between black holes. With radio-telescopes we can see how stars orbit something much heavier than ordinary stars. But the most compelling evidence for the existence of black holes came in April 2014, when astronomers used radio telescopes across the globe and directed them toward M87 and photographed the black hole in its center. It has the mass of 65 000000000 sun-masses. The picture has been showed and compared to data-animations or artists pictures, also in this video. This black hole is as big as the solar system. If somebody falls into it they will not be extended like spagetti as they reach the event horizon.
Empirical proof, evidence, serves as proof in a trial, at court, and to set a diagnosis and lets the doctor decide the treatment. But it does nok serve as a proof of a scientific theory, it can only disproved by evidence (Karl Popper). You say that we have not seen black holes, simularly way we have not seen elementary particles either. According to the theory they can also exist and not exist at the same time. So according to your reasoning the standard model of particle physics is not a scientific theory. We don’t see the center of mass in Newtons laws either, it is mathematical formulas that is invisible to us. So in natural sciences it is mostly the mathematical theory that is the best scientific theory. That you kan try and test and adjust according to experience. So I find it very strange that you claim that the theory of black holes is not at scientific theory. It looks like you will allow to use mathematics in some areas, but not in other areas.
Einstein got the nobel prize for discovering the photoelectric effect, with that he was one of the founders of quantum mechanics and that he criticized the rest of his life without finding anything wrong about it. Now it sounds strange that he didn’t get the prize because of the relativity theory, but at that time it was very difficult to verify it by experiments. Still it was a scientific theory, because it was noting fundamental wrong with the theory itself, so that is should not be possible to verify it. Hawking and Penrose deduced the singularity theorem with the theory of black holes from the relativity theory. They acknowledged that there was something incredible with the singularity and criticized it and searched for an alternative explanation. More like Einstein criticized quantum mechanics. That is in accordance with Poppers method and demonstrates pure scientific interest. The conclusion of the singularity theorem so far seem to be that there are limitations to our theories, including general relativity theory itself. To bring political interests into this context is unreasonable. Science has had philosophical and political consequences will still have, but that must be secondary, so that we can remain reasonable. The general relativity has been confirmed by many experiments and observations and this Nobel prize is given to one of them. Penrose discovered that black hole formation is a robust prediction of general relativity and the other two has confirmed it with observations.
If the escape-velocity is higher than the speed of light from a celestial body, not even light can come out of it. This is the main characteristic of a black hole, the definition. How to verify that? No light comes out of it, so that we can’t see it. That is the visual observation. This is also the case with elementary particles. We don’t even see the photons, but the makes us see what is around us. This is not dependent on the original theory of a singularity, the simple explanation that all its mass was in the center of mass. We could imagin that in a remote future, in eternity to a remote observer, but it is difficult even to imagine. We don’t know. But the theory of black holes is no longer dependent on that. They observed the accretion disk, it rotates and we get the pirouette-effect both in the accretion disk and in the black hole. The Penrose process is that objects in the accretion disk can “steel” rotational energy from the black hole. And since it rotates it can’t have all its mass in the center of mass, in a singularity.
Is God real or just a concept.
Someone claimed that god exists only as a concept and wanted to “prove” such a concept with a theory of everything.
I answered in this way:
By using scientific methods we discover more and it reveals for us how the universe is functioning. According to the Bible God has revealed himself for us by his witness about his Son, Jesus Christ, he has made God known to us. The method to get to know him and come into his presence is given us by the gospel. We can use this method at the same time as we use scientific methods, but for different purposes.I don’t intend to prove it, just like I don’t try to prove a scientific theory, but just like evidence underpins scientific theories, nature witnesses of it’s creator, he created it by his Word, that’s why it is understandable. He created humans in his image, that’s why we understand som much of it. Humans were fooled and fell out of the near society with him and got problems, even with the god-concept. But he revealed for us salvation in Christ, when we turn to him, he reveals himself in him. The point is to let him “prove” himself for us in this way. If there really is a creator of everything, no one can prove him better for us than himself. And that is actually how it is functioning.In the Bible it is told that people believed that the celestial bodies were gods and the made gods of sticks and stones and worshipped them too. But through his prophets God told his people that they were not gods. Those gods that did not create heaven and earth were not gods. He was the only God, but how could they know? Because he talked and what he said through his prophets in advance, happened. And he saved. This he showed in Christ, he talked trough him and what he said happened. Then they killed him, but the true and living God made him alive and raised him from the grave. The first Adam came from earth and died, but Jesus is the last Adam that is from heaven and for us he has become a lifegiving spirit, with this he raises us up to live in society with him and his heavenly Father. He talks to me and I talk to him. So it was at the same time as I studied real sciences so it still is. This I thank him, so I praise God both as creator and savior. Then I also thank him for mathematics and the natural sciences, it shows us the universe and reveals for us how it is functioning, so it tells us the truth with it’s own methods. This was also my interest when I started to write here.In the Bible the gods made of sticks and stone are called “Lie”. In contrast to that Jesus is the truth that sets us free from slavery under the Lie. The priests and the Pharisees put heavy burdens upon the people in a similar way, but he freed them from it. How? The living God was with him and did wonders through him, for example by healing sick people. In this way and by raising him from the dead he witnessed that he is the Son of God. Through those who believe in him and turns to him he still witnesses. Nowadays there are a lot of evidence that he heals sick people. I have looked a bit at your writing, but I don’t mind to read it. Why? Because like the priests and the Pharisees you load heavy burdens upon the people, but likely even on yourself. To me it is useless more like it is useless to serve gods made of sticks and stones. So my witness in this context is that Jesus frees me from such useless burdens. I believe he is the truth so by turning to him I search the truth. In this way I am also interested in real sciences, but I must acknowledge that it is with the use of the scientific methods.To me your slavery thinking belongs to the past, praise be to Jesus who died instead of me and to the living God who leaded him to it and rose him from the dead and revealed his salvation to me this way.So you are looking for a fundamentaly wrong way of «prooving» the concept of a false god, just to fool people to slave for him. But this is exactly what the true and living God frees us from and saves us from.
Hello Mr. Fish.
I am a fisherman from Norway, so watch out, I’ll probably catch you in the trawl. This is about science and I was a bit surprised that it should com to be so much about philosophy and theology, even though this also is the topic for closertotruth. I expect people who are interested I science to be reasonable, so I find it strange that someone can introduce a god-concept and conclude that anyone who is not interested in it is just to enjoy their delusions. According to Karl Popper a scientific statement shall be falsifiable, so that it can be possible to argue against it. This statement is not and it is very boring that it is used in a conversation, it just destroys what else could be a good conversation. I have worked as a fisherman for many years, I have learned it by practice and experience, so I find it even more strange that someone can answer me like that. What does it witness to me, what does it tell me? He is trying to fish people by stating that they are delusional, then he uses his god-concept as a baith to fish them. But it will just make them more delusional. That is the history that has repeated itself so many times. He is not as polite as people who are used to deal with other people and talk with them as grown up people usually do, his arguing shows that this is something for people who are not quite grown up, so it is no possible to talk with them as grown up people, in that way they may become socially disabled, they are not quite used to practical work and are not used to argue in a rational way, in this way they may become more like disabled people both in their mind and in their body. Shit happens, to fertilze the soil. In this way he is of more value to the world than his empty god concept.
The Creation history and science.
- Lik dette
It has often been said that according to the Bible God created heaven and earth on 6 days and rested the seventh day. And many think of it like earth-days and use it as argument against the Bible, while Christians say we must be faithful to what is written, but this is not what is written. For the forth day God put the to lights on the sky, to divide between day and night. Then there was earth-days. But he had created quite a lot before that. It is said that in the beginning God created heaven and earth, the earth was dark, but gods Spirit hoovered over the ocean. Then he said that it should become light and it became light. He saw that the light was good and divided it from the dark, the light he called day and the dark he called night. The following days we can call light-days, to distinguish them from the earth-days. Then we can compare it to science, when the sun started to shine, there was still much of the gasscloud left in the inner solar system, but the radiation from the sun pushed it to the outer solar system. This was mainly light elements including water, but it came back to inner planets like meteors, so we have ocean and atmosphere. The atmosphere could very well be dusty and cloudy for long time, light could shine through, without sun and moon being visible. So to the symbolic point. Apostel Paul said that he who said that light should shine in darkness, has let it shine in our hearts, so that the knowledge of Gods glory in Jesus’ face, shall shine through, 2.Corint.4,6. He is the image of God and the point is that he creates in his image. Apostel John said that in the beginning was the Word, it was with God and it was God. In him was life and the life was the light for the humans, John.1,1… So the symbolic point is that God is doing his work inside us with his Spirit and his Word and this is the perspective in the second creation history in Genesis.2. I think it is interesting to compare this to Penroses’s view on consciousness. Still it is interesting to compare this to Penrose’s Comformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC), because a photon does not experience time and in this theory it is always there, even from an earlier eon.The 6 days in Genesis1 goes like this: God said something, it happened and he saw that it was good. Now we know that these days were long periods of time, then it seems like it took long time for God to say it, for it to happen and for God to look at it and draw the conclusion that it was good. Why should he look after it? Because he is not like a dictator who determines everything in advance, so when it is left for itself, there is a matter of chance and probability, even for God. This reminds me of quantum mechanics. Einstein didn’t like it and said that God does not throw dices. Hawking answered in one of his book that he is a big gambler and I think he was right. Still he is mighty to do like he wants, he has given us his Word and it does what he sends it to.God rested the sevent day, humans could also rest with him, but fell out of it. But he has promised that if his Word with the faith comes together with us in our hearts, we will come into his rest. In this way the seventh day is still in the future and it shows that these days are long periods of time, the seventh day seems to be eternal.
Doomsday and cosmology
The Bible tells us that there will come a doomsday, when the “stars” will fall down on earth. These “stars” must be small, it can be comets and asteroids. If an asteroid will hit the earth is, according to the astronomers, more a question of when it will happen.The apostle Peter talks about it as if he calls the atmosphere “heavens”, the earth is reserved for fire. The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be destroyed by fire (2.Pet.3,3-10). What kind of elements? Aristoteles’ elements were soil, water, air and fire. But you don’t say that fire caught fire. It fits better to Demokrits atom-model. They can be destroyed in nuclear reactions. But molecules can be split into smaller molecules and atoms. It is also put this way; heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat.In Hebrews.1,10-12 it is said that in the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth and the heavens are work of your hands, they will perish, but you will remain, they will all wear out like garment. You roll them up like a robe, like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same.This makes me think of a star that has used its hydrogen and starts to fusion helium and grows big until it explodes as supernova. The sun will grow out to its inner planets and include them. But that takes quite a long time.It also makes me think of a galaxy that ends up in the black hole at its center. You can thing of an overall being rolled up from the middle, so that feet, arms and hood points out and compare it to the arms of a spiral galaxy. This take even more time.Here it is also said that like a garment they will be changed, but you remain the same, your years will never end. Then it is interesting to compare this to Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC). This takes incredible long time. But photons for photons there is not time. What about God? Apostel Peter said that for the Lord a day is like thousand years and thousand years like a day (2.Pet.3,8). With one Word God created everything and with one Word he can destroy it all, but he loves us and has mercy with us.
Astronomers: astroides may collide with the earth, get warm and explode in the atmosphere, it is more a question of when or of if. So that’s science.Jesus talked about his coming in two ways, everything seems good and normal and he comes as a surprise to everyone. And in a dramatic situation, so many believe he comes two times. He said that not even he knew when, only the Father in heaven. I’m not like those traditional dooms-days prophets that scared the people. Everyone who received Jesus he gave the right to be God’s child. He is the way to the heavenly Father. By going that way we will find that he loves us and cares for us as his children. Then this is important for us in our daily life. To me science and technology is included in that.
How do we know there is a black hole in the centre of the Milky Way?
Nobel Prize winner in physics 2020, Andrea Ghez gives a lecture (World Science U) on their research on the black hole at the center of our galaxy. 34 minutes into the lecture, she shows an animation of how stars at the center of the galaxy have been orbiting around it for the past 24 years. SO2 takes 16 years on an elliptical round and it shows that there is a supermassive black hole in the center of the galaxy. 10 min later, she shows a great three-dimensional animation of how the stars at the center of the galaxy orbit around the supermassive black hole. Fascinating.
Here we don’t see the accretion disk, so we don’t know how the black hole may be rotating. I think they must have stronger telescopes to see it, the stars orbit around it also.The picture of the black hole in M87 was a picture of the accretion disk, from that we could conclude that the black hole was inside and likely it was spinning like the accretion disk.Penrose started with the idea of Oppenheimer and Schneider, and they started with a homogenous gass-cloud in rest that collapsed by it’s own gravity. Mass has two fundamental properties, gravity and inertia. Likely the motion in the gass cloud will result in a spinning accretion disk with it’s piroett-effekt, the speed increases towards the speed of light so that the relativistic mass increases. By thinking of this we take into account the ineria-property also. It can not be excluded from the mass. But then it is very unlikely that all the mass should end up in the mass-center.But according to the Penrose-process the black hole can loose rotational energy to the accretion disk.
- Lik dette