Been reading Martin Rees's Before the Beginning: Our Universe and Others over the past couple of weeks. It covers particle physics, string theory, the possibility of a multiverse, and a few other things. Is it a little over my head? Probably. Rees—a friend and colleague of Stephen Hawking―is a clear enough writer that you don't go away empty handed, though.
One thing I was glad to find out is that red shift only occurs between galaxies, not within them. So while other galaxies are hurtling away from us, even accelerating, other stars within the Milky Way or not. And Mars isn't creeping away from us or anything. It could come to that in the heat death of the universe, but so far we're good.
Other interesting bit, I guess you'd call it trivia, is about the steady state hypothesis, which proposed that the density of matter in the universe remains constant. Fred Hoyle and a couple of other physicists saw the British horror movie Dead of Night and the film's framing device helped inspire this hypothesis. Guess they weren't quite high enough to bring evil ventriloquist's dummies into it.
One thing I was glad to find out is that red shift only occurs between galaxies, not within them. So while other galaxies are hurtling away from us, even accelerating, other stars within the Milky Way or not. And Mars isn't creeping away from us or anything. It could come to that in the heat death of the universe, but so far we're good.
Other interesting bit, I guess you'd call it trivia, is about the steady state hypothesis, which proposed that the density of matter in the universe remains constant. Fred Hoyle and a couple of other physicists saw the British horror movie Dead of Night and the film's framing device helped inspire this hypothesis. Guess they weren't quite high enough to bring evil ventriloquist's dummies into it.
2 comments:
This one sounds pretty interesting and I'm glad you're exploring the fascinating world of physics. There's something very relaxing about the mind expanding nature of pondering the essentials of intellectual theories.
Reading books about science written by scientists has been one of my favourite preoccupations for a long time, never mind the fact that I could only ever grasp a small percentage of whatever was being discussed. You never know when one thing will click with another even years later making something otherwise incomprehensible make sense. Having a basis in physics and astronomy has made easier reading of what's known as hard sci-fi.
I've read Stephen Hawking's 'A Brief History of Time' and Roger Penrose's 'The Emperor's New Mind' and even attempted Hofstadter's 'Gödel to Escher to Bach' on several occasions without ever finishing it. I do tend to prefer fiction but there are a number of science books in my non-fiction shelves including the very cool 'Surely You’re Joking, Mr Feynman!' and a couple of others by him. He also had a powerful ability to make difficult concepts seem straightforward. I was never going to get the math but I did get the idea and just that made me happy.
One of his famous quotes was
“Nobody ever figures out what life is all about, and it doesn't matter. Explore the world. Nearly everything is really interesting if you go into it deeply enough.”
With that idea in mind and since I don't have to defend a dissertation to a PhD committee, I've been exploring the approach to cosmology of the 'Electric Universe' theorists. They have some very compelling arguments that are being supported by more than a few retired scientists. It's dangerous to one's career to even step gently away from the path of received thought in these matters, but as Feynman said 'nearly everything is interesting' and I think he would have given them a hearing.
I remember that movie and never have trusted a ventriloquist's dummy since.
I'll have to read some Feynman. The idea of "nearly everything is really interesting if you go into it deeply enough" is one that I support. Although I initially read it as "nothing is really interesting." Which you could also make a case for. :)
The universe is so big in relation to us, and it's got so many weird parts and contrasting principles, that I don't think we're in danger of ever understanding all of it. We can continue to learn, though, and gain new perspectives.
Penrose I'm not really familiar with either, although I know the name.
Post a Comment