Big Bang and Beyond

Did someone monkeyed with the laws of nature ?

Theories of the Origin of the Universe

Theological Theories:
Greek Mythology (Chaos) Hinduism (Cosmic sleep of gods) Chinese creation myth (Pangu) Biblical account of the creation (God)

Scientific Theories:
Continuous creation Big Bang Theory the commonly accepted theory

Big Bang
Technically, there was no bang Technically, galaxies are not moving away from each other Reality: space expands
When there are more space between galaxies, they move away from each other Analogy: dots on an expanding balloon

Isaiah 45:12
I have stretched out the heavens... Its only ancient document that mentions an expanding Universe

Evidence for the Big Bang

Theory predicts an expanding universe
Confirm by Red Shift (Doppler effect) in spectrum

Theory predicts cosmic background radiation

Background radiation was discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, who later won the Nobel Prize for this discovery

Beyond the Big Bang

Big Bang Theory explains how the Universe first started but leaves many unanswered questions Time, Space and Matter were created in the Big Bang
Before the bang, there were no time, no space and no matter Physics has not solved the question Whats before the Big Bang

If I hear a small bang, I will ask Who or what caused it

So Who or what caused the Big Bang ?

Other factors determine how the Universe will develop:

Amount of matter in the Universe Physical properties of the matter Strength of the fundamental forces

Fundamental Forces in Physics

Gravitational force
Attractive force between objects with mass Weakest, long range

Electromagnetic force
Attractive and repulsive Long range, 1039 times stronger than gravity

Nuclear Weak force

Cause neutrons to decade into a protons Range <10-17 m, 1028 times stronger than gravity

Nuclear Strong force

Hold the nucleus together Range <10-15 m, 1041 times stronger than gravity

Gravitational Force
Law of Gravity:

M = mass of one object m = mass of second object G = 6.67 x 10-11 Nm2/kg2 r = distance between the objects

Electro-Magnetic Force
Coulomb Law: proton electron

Strength of EM-force determines how strongly electrons in an atom are held in orbit

Nuclear Weak-force
Repelling force that cause beta-decay
neutron
proton anti-neutrino electron (beta-particle)
The strength of the nuclear weak-force determines how fast neutrons are converted into protons and electrons

Nuclear Strong-force
Hold nucleus together by overcoming the repelling protons in nucleus:

neutron

proton neutron

proton

Strength of the nuclear strong-force determines how fast nuclear reactions will proceed

Thinkering with the Force...

Fact:
The fundamental forces in nature have strength that is determined by a number of physical constants For example: gravitational constant in the Law of Gravity, Coulumb constant in the Electro-magnetic force

Question: what would happen to the Universe if the values of these physical constant were changed ?
Say, what would happen if the gravitational (or some other) constant would be off a little bit ?
We would surely weight a bit more on EarthBUT... Physicists did NOT expect earth-shattering consequences

Precondition for Life

Stars of the right type for sustaining life supportable planets only can occur during a certain range of ages for the universe.
stars of the right type only can form for a narrow range of values of the gravitational constant

Living cells consists of light and heavy elements (Hydrogen, Carbon, Oxygen, and metals such as Iron, Copper, ect)
To make both light and heavy elements, the strengths of the fundamental forces must lie within a very narrow range of values

Many many other preconditions exists

Amazing Findings...
Brandon Carter presented his ideas about the anthropic principle in 1973 in Poland during the 500th birthday of Copernicus The anthropic principle states that
All the seemingly arbitrary and unrelated constants in physics have one strange thing in common these are precisely the value you need if you want to have a universe capable of sustaining life

Astronomer Fred Hoyle once said:

A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a SUPERINTELLECT has MONKEYED with physics . . . and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. And Fred Hoyle was an..Atheist

The strength of the Gravitational force

If gravitational force was made a bit stronger, stars will be more massive and burn more violently and unstable: More harmful radiation to life deadly to life If gravitational force was made a bit weaker, stars are too light and do not become super-novae: Element heavier than iron are only formed when stars explode as a super-novae; no life possible without them

The strength of the EM-force

If the electro-magnetic force is slightly weaker:
Too weak to hold electrons in orbits about nuclei Universe will consists of loose protons and electrons, no atoms, and thus no life will be possible

proton

electron

If the electro-magnetic force is slightly stronger:

atom could not "share" an electron orbit with other atoms No chemical reactions possible and no life

Strength of the Nuclear Weak-force

If Nuclear Weak-force is made a bit stronger:
neutrons would decay more readily, and there would be little to no neutrons left Neutrons are necessary to form heavier elements used in living cells no neutrons, no heavy elements, no life.

If Nuclear Weak-force is made a bit weaker:

Plenty of neutrons will be available Stars can use neutrons to burn most or all of the hydrogen into helium (and subsequently to heavy elements) But little or no hydrogen will be left no hydrogen, no water, and no life

Strength of the Nuclear Strong-force

If Nuclear Strong-force is made a bit stronger:
Nuclear reactions will be very efficient (fast) Most or all hydrogen will be converted to Helium and then on into Iron No hydrogen, no water, and thus, no life possible

If Nuclear Strong-force is made a bit weaker:

Force is too weak to overcome electro-magnetic repulsion of protons in nuclei multi-proton nuclei would not hold together No carbon or oxygen, no proteins, no water, and thus no life possible

Thats just the beginning...

Many more amazing coincidences that make life possible have been discovered
The composition of our sun is just right, the distance of the Earth to the sun is just right, the size of the Earth is just right, the orbit of the Earth is just right, the size of our moon is just right and even the giant planets (Jupiter) are just right for life on Earth

Other amazing coincidences makes it possible for the stars and galaxies to form

A coincidence at nuclear scale

The following is an account of a series of amazing coincidences in nature that dazed an atheist astronomer and many others I have to take you into nuclear Physics Brace for the ride please ask questions if you dont understand something

Nuclear Reaction
Electrons can only occupy a number of specific orbits around the nucleus each orbit represents a certain energy level So also, nucleus of atoms can occupy a number of specific energy levels In a nuclear reaction, the Law of Conservation of Energy must hold:

Kinetic + nuclear energy before =Kinetic + nuclear energy after

Nuclear Reaction 2
When nuclei collide, they form a new nucleus:

If the energy level of the new nucleus is very different from one of its natural energy state, the new nucleus is unstable and will decompose (radio-activity):

Nuclear Resonance

If sum total of kinetic and nuclear energy before and after are very close to each other, the nuclear reaction will proceed very rapidly
In such case, we say there is Nuclear Resonance

Resonance between atomic nuclei depends on:

Structure of the nuclei involved Temperature under which the nuclear reaction takes place

Resonance between atomic nuclei are extremely rare in nature.

Nuclear Reaction in Stars

Matter are converted into energy in stars through a number of nuclear reactions The three primary nuclear reactions (after these, the star is almost burned up) are:

Proton-proton cycle Helium fusion Carbon cycle

Proton-proton cycle

The proton-proton cycle will burn Hydrogen into Helium (first phase of star development) When all Hydrogen are burned, phase 2 kicks in

Helium Fusion
After all the Hydrogen is converted to Helium, the star converts Helium to. What ? Here we have a major problem... When two Helium nuclei are fused into Beryllium-8, the resulting Beryllium-8 isotope is highly unstable
Beryllium-8 has a half life of 10-16 seconds !!!
Helium Beryllium-8 Helium

< 0.0000000000000001 sec

According to the physics of Beryllium-8, stars cannot burn Helium

A Stellar Mystery
Dilemma:
According to the physical properties of Beryllium-8, stars cannot burn beyond Helium Yet, Helium is being converted in Carbon in stars all the time

First proposed solution: Triple collision

Helium Carbon-12 Helium

Helium

Triple collisions are extremely rare and the rarity cannot explain the abundance of carbon

Ed Salpeters solution...
Faced with the dilemma that stars convert Helium into Carbon at great rate, and no plausible explanation for this process, the astrophysicist Ed Salpeter proposed the following solution in 1952: Helium
Helium

Beryllium-8
Helium

BUT Beryllium is extremely unstable

Carbon-12

Fred Hoyles insight

Fred Hoyle realized that the only way that Salpeters solution can produce Carbon at the rate that is happening in stars is:
Helium Helium Beryllium-8 Helium Nuclear resonance !!! (Very fast reaction)

Problem: there is no known energy level of the Carbon-12 nucleus that is near the sum total energy values of He and Be

Carbon-12

Fred Hoyles wild guess

So Fred Hoyle hypothesized (guessed) that there must be such a natural energy level of the Carbon-12 nucleus Hoyle calculated the temperature inside a large star to be about 100 million degrees and worked out how much kinetic energy this would give to the particles rushing around in the star's atmosphere. Knowing the masses of both beryllium-8 and Helium, his hypothesis predicted that there must be an excited state at an energy of 7.6 million electron volts in the nucleus Carbon-12 I did tell you that nuclei resonance was rare everyone was skeptical about Hoyles prediction... A team at Cal. Tech. led by Willy Fowler (later a Nobel Prize winner) began the search for the mysterious resonant state in carbon-12, and discovered it - just 4 percent above Hoyle's prediction !!!

Yet another amazing coincidence...

We are not out of the wood yet... Heavier elements must be formed specifically:
Carbon-12 Oxygen-16

Helium

You want to form Oxygen (necessary for life !) But you want to keep some Carbon (also necessary for life)

A missed resonance
In order to have this nuclear reaction going:
Carbon-12 Oxygen-16 Helium

You need a natural energy level of Oxygen-16 close to the sum total of the energy levels of Carbon-12 and Helium But not too close - if the level is too close, most or all Carbon-12 will be converted, so you want this energy level to be off a bit

Another coincidence
Wellthey did find that resonance level of Oxygen-16 and it did miss the resonance level to slow the production of Oxygen-16 These two coincidences caused atheist atronomer Fred Hoyle to comment:
If you wanted to produce carbon and oxygen in roughly equal quantities by stellar nucleosynthesis, these are the two basic levels you would have to fix, and your fixing would have to be just about where these levels are actually found to be.... A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a SUPERINTELLECT has MONKEYED with physics . . . and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature

Flatness-oldness problem
The following incredibly precise tweaking of the Universe is known as the Flatness-oldness problem The amount of matter created in the Big Bang has a profound impact on how the Universe will develop
Matter attract and will pull the Universe back together towards one point There is a critical amount where the attraction will halt the expansion and the Universe will slow down and stop expanding If the total mass in the Universe is less than critical, the Universe will keep expanding If the total mass in the Universe is more than critical, the Universe will stop expanding and contract (Big Crunch)

Place your bet...

Suppose X represents the critical mass of the Universe, what do you think that the total of mass of the Universe is ? 0 X

There are so many possible values to pick from for the total mass of the Universe
An does it matter how much mass there is in the Universe ?? (You will be amazed by the results)

Some results from Theoretic Physics

Interpretations of the results

IF the density of the matter after 1 nsec from the Big Bang is equal to 447,225,917,218,507,401,284,017 mg/cc, the Universe would have collapsed by now. IF the density of the matter after 1 nsec from the Big Bang is equal to 447,225,917,218,507,401,284,015 mg/cc, the Universe expands so rapidly that galaxies and stars cannot form. To get the (flat) Universe in which we (probably) live in, the density of the matter after 1 nsec from the Big Bang must be equal to 447,225,917,218,507,401,284,016 mg/cc not one gm more nor one gm less No wonder than many scientists believe that, the Universe was designed

And there is much more...

There are many more examples of coincidences in nature without which life could not have developed Science has coined a term to describe these strange coincidences: Anthropic Principle (The Universe is destined to support (human) life) For more examples:
http://cheungpc.mathcs.emory.edu

(Not) The End

(just out of time)