Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Tuesday November 29 2016, @05:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the warp-factor-3-mr-sulu dept.

A report from researchers at Imperial College London suggests that, contrary to Einstein's theories, the speed of light in a vacuum may not be constant. The proposed new theory provides a prediction that could be used to test its validity.

Scientists behind a theory that the speed of light is variable - and not constant as Einstein suggested - have made a prediction that could be tested.

[...] The assumption that the speed of light is constant, and always has been, underpins many theories in physics, such as Einstein's theory of general relativity. In particular, it plays a role in models of what happened in the very early universe, seconds after the Big Bang.

But some researchers have suggested that the speed of light could have been much higher in this early universe. Now, one of this theory's originators, Professor João Magueijo from Imperial College London, working with Dr Niayesh Afshordi at the Perimeter Institute in Canada, has made a prediction that could be used to test the theory's validity.

[Continues...]

Professor Magueijo said: "The theory, which we first proposed in the late-1990s, has now reached a maturity point – it has produced a testable prediction. If observations in the near future do find this number to be accurate, it could lead to a modification of Einstein's theory of gravity.

"The idea that the speed of light could be variable was radical when first proposed, but with a numerical prediction, it becomes something physicists can actually test. If true, it would mean that the laws of nature were not always the same as they are today."

The testability of the varying speed of light theory sets it apart from the more mainstream rival theory: inflation. Inflation says that the early universe went through an extremely rapid expansion phase, much faster than the current rate of expansion of the universe.

'Critical geometry of a thermal big bang' by Niayesh Afshordi and João Magueijo is published in Physical Review D.

Article text (excluding photos or graphics) available under an Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike Creative Commons license.

The above-referenced journal article is paywalled, but arXiv.org has a preprint available.

It is well-worth reading if for no other reason than they posit the actual existence of a warp factor! Its Introduction raises some interesting shortcomings of the current theory:

1. Introduction. In spite of its mathematical simplicity and observational triumphs, the Big Bang model of the Universe remains an unfinished work of art. Many of its late-time successes can be traced to the initial conditions postulated for its early stages, and these are put in by hand, without justification, other than to retrofit the data. The main culprit for this shortcoming is the so-called horizon problem: the cosmological structures we observe today span scales that lay outside the ever-shrinking "horizons" of physical contact that plagued the early universe. This precludes a causal explanation for their initial conditions.

Several extensions of the Big Bang model have been proposed with the aim of opening up its horizons. An early bout of accelerated expansion [1–3], a contracting phase followed by a bounce [4], a loitering early stage [5], and a varying speed of light (VSL) [6, 7] have all been considered. None of these proposals evades the criticism that retrofitting the data is still used to select in detail the primordial fluctuations that the model should produce. Once primordial causal contact is established, work can start on concrete physical mechanisms for spoiling perfect homogeneity (e.g. vacuum quantum fluctuations or thermal fluctuations). Typically it is found that one can produce a wide range of initial conditions including, but not circumscribed to those explaining the observations.

Are there any cosmologists/astrophysicists in the house who can weigh in? Years ago when I was in college, I took several astronomy courses, so I understand enough of the material to get the general idea, but it is well beyond my background to follow the details.

Specifically, if the spectral index is found to match their prediction, does that mean that the speed of light did, or did not, vary? And, if it DID vary, what impact would that have on our current understanding of the universe?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @06:57PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @06:57PM (#434616)

    Essentially "God" is the server admin if we are a simulation, and from our perspective he indeed would be omnipotent: he could delete any person, place, or thing at whim. He may even want us to sing praises to him every 7 days to pump his ego, and personally hate it when we yank off.

    But even if there is such a server admin, I doubt humans (inside) got his preferences correct. If he really wanted to send a "wish list" of our behavior, he wouldn't use old scrolls and rely on "faith" to get word around, but blast it all over the sky in bright colors: "PEOPLE OF EARTH, STOP YANKIN' OFF, OR I'LL DELETE YOU! -GOD"

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Funny=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by EvilSS on Tuesday November 29 2016, @07:10PM

    by EvilSS (1456) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 29 2016, @07:10PM (#434623)
    "These 'humans' are acting weird"

    "Have you tried turning it off and back on again?"
    • (Score: 3, Funny) by mhajicek on Tuesday November 29 2016, @07:19PM

      by mhajicek (51) on Tuesday November 29 2016, @07:19PM (#434627)

      Does 1+1=2 even if there's no one to think about it? If so, should not all possible postulations already already have their solutions? If so, then all possible universes exist in logic space.

      --
      The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday November 29 2016, @07:46PM

    by Arik (4543) on Tuesday November 29 2016, @07:46PM (#434640) Journal
    "But even if there is such a server admin, I doubt humans (inside) got his preferences correct. If he really wanted to send a "wish list" of our behavior, he wouldn't use old scrolls and rely on "faith" to get word around, but blast it all over the sky in bright colors: "PEOPLE OF EARTH, STOP YANKIN' OFF, OR I'LL DELETE YOU! -GOD""

    That's actually strong thread in judaeo-christian thought, found in many different writers from many different schools and sects at many different times. They hold that the creator indeed writes his commands so we can't help but see them - that virtue is visibly rewarded, and vice visibly discouraged, right here in this world. Gluttony does tend to make one unhealthy, pig flesh brings more than its share of health problems, etc.

    It's easy to see how some, perhaps even all the 'sins' are bad things that actually hurt one, so it makes sense to a point. However, on the other side, is virtue necessarily rewarded? That point seems much harder to swallow, but for those who do, we've probably all seen examples of this, "success" itself is seen as tantamount to proof of virtue, and proof of divine favor.

    On the positive side this can really spur people to develop work ethics - because they expect to be rewarded. On the other hand it can lead them to adore, to practically worship, the wealthy, to the point where they become blind to how well crime can and does pay in this world. This extreme is sometimes parodied as 'worshipping the god of Darwin' though for the most part people actually doing it would certainly not identify with Darwin - yet the scientific thinker may find it hard not to draw the implication. The little bug gets eaten by the big bug gets eaten by the little fish gets eaten by the bigger fish etc. - sheer amoral survival of the fit - and the creator of this universe, who set its laws in motion, surely intended it to work this way, this is your objective standard of morality, right?

    At any rate, for my own contribution to the discussion I would propose that, for the most part, Admin does not tell us what he wants, and further that the reason for this is simply that we lack the capacity to understand what he wants.

    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 3, Touché) by HiThere on Tuesday November 29 2016, @08:18PM

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 29 2016, @08:18PM (#434664) Journal

      It can also lead people to observe what actually does enable one to become wealthy, and to redefine that as good. In large societies this can be quite destructive.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
      • (Score: 2) by jimshatt on Wednesday November 30 2016, @07:49AM

        by jimshatt (978) on Wednesday November 30 2016, @07:49AM (#434840) Journal
        That sounds like some form of theological egoism or something. Not quite Ayn Rand's philosophy, but close.
        • (Score: 2, Informative) by Arik on Wednesday November 30 2016, @01:59PM

          by Arik (4543) on Wednesday November 30 2016, @01:59PM (#434901) Journal
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology
          --
          If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 30 2016, @03:56AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 30 2016, @03:56AM (#434801)

      At any rate, for my own contribution to the discussion I would propose that, for the most part, Admin does not tell us what he wants, and further that the reason for this is simply that we lack the capacity to understand what he wants.

      a) the admin is a woman. e.g. It's not the same if she has to tell us ;).
      b) it's for entertainment. So reasonable levels of doing bad or good is fine as long as it results in entertaining/interesting situations. Of course you eventually getting punished for doing bad stuff could be part of the entertainment too...

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by bd on Wednesday November 30 2016, @06:05AM

      by bd (2773) on Wednesday November 30 2016, @06:05AM (#434825)

      I think at this point it is pretty clear what the server admin really wants: round rocky things circling around round shiny things...

      I mean, that is what I don't get about the judeo-christian viewpoint, and most other god-fearing religions. You have to ignore some obvious stuff if you think your behavior is the most important thing on god's mind.

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @08:35PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @08:35PM (#434673)

    If God is like our universe's server admins, He wants us all to stop wanking off except for the hot chicks.

  • (Score: 3, Funny) by q.kontinuum on Tuesday November 29 2016, @09:49PM

    by q.kontinuum (532) on Tuesday November 29 2016, @09:49PM (#434696) Journal

    Yeah, and the Great Flood was not actually a punishment from god. It was an automation script gone bad. Also the locusts plague was a mod for his minecraft gone wrong.

    --
    Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
  • (Score: 1) by Demena on Thursday December 01 2016, @05:31AM

    by Demena (5637) on Thursday December 01 2016, @05:31AM (#435284)

    One thing we can be certain of; that if there is a god he does not have good intentions.

  • (Score: 2) by jasassin on Thursday December 01 2016, @07:51AM

    by jasassin (3566) <jasassin@gmail.com> on Thursday December 01 2016, @07:51AM (#435331) Homepage Journal

    "PEOPLE OF EARTH, STOP YANKIN' OFF, OR I'LL DELETE YOU! -GOD"

    Looks like I've got my new /etc/motd thanks!

    --
    jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A