On the morning of June 19, 2006, Professor Stephen Hawko, World Science, participated in the opening ceremony of the 2006 Cord theory Conference in the Great Hall of the People, and made a "universe" theme lecture. According to the Institute of Theory Physics, one of the Organizers of the Organizer, during Beijing, Professor Hawko will give two "universe origins" theme lectures.
The following is the full text of Hawko this morning:
According to the legend of China Africa, the world has only dark, water and great Bumba God. One day, BUMBA stomach pain, vomiting the sun. The sun burns some water and leaves the land. He still stomach pain, and spit out the moon and stars, then spit out some animals, leopards, crocodiles, turtles, and finally people.
This myth of this creation, like many other myths, trying to answer us, everyone wants to ask questions: Why are we here? Where did we come from? The average answer is that the origin of human beings is in a relatively recent event. Humanities are constantly making progress in knowledge and technology. In this way, it can't exist for so long, otherwise it should make greater progress. This should be very clear even earlier.
For example, in accordance with the USHER Bishop "Genesis", the world's birth is scheduled to be on October 23, 4 004, for example, October 23. On the other hand, there are natural environments such as mountains and rivers, in the life cycle of people. So people usually treat them as a constant background. Either as a vacuum scenery already exists, or it is created in the same moment in the same moment.
But not everyone likes the universe with a beginning. For example, Greece's most famous philosopher Aristotle, believes that the universe has existed an unlimited time. Some eternal things are more perfect than some kind of creative thing. He proposed that we see the development in this case, that is because of flood or other natural disasters, continuously recover civilization to the germination phase. The motivation of the belief in the eternal universe is to avoid the interference of God, with the creation of the universe and start running. Conversely, those who believe that the universe has the beginning of the opening as the argument of God, regarding God as the first cause or original power of the universe.
If people believe that the universe has a beginning, then obvious question is what happened before the beginning? What did God do before creating the universe? Is he preparing hell for those who ask this kind of question? German philosopher Imanur. Kant is very concerned about the universe. He thinks that no matter how the universe has no start, it will cause logic contradictions or two laws. If the universe has a beginning, why wait for an unlimited time before it starts. He will be called this as a topic. On the other hand, if the universe has existed, why it takes an infinite time to reach this stage. He called this as a counterpol. Regardless of the topic or the counter-title, it is based on Kant's assumption. Almost everyone is also doing this. That is, the time is absolute, that is, the time passes from infinite past to infinite future. The time is independent of the universe, in this background, the universe can exist, or there is no existence.
Until today, in the hearts of many scientists, this picture is still maintained. However, 1915 Imble in 1915 proposed his revolutionary broad relativeism. In this theory, space and time are no longer absolute, no longer a fixed background of events. Conversely, they are moving power, the substances and energy in the universe determine their shape. They can only be defined in the universe. This is meaningless to talk about the time before the opening of the universe. This is a bit like looking for a little more meaningless than the South Pole. It is not defined.
If the universe is inherently unchanged, as it is generally considered before the 1920s, there is no reason to prevent the time from any early time in the past. People can always extend history earlier, in which any so-called universe starts are artificial. So, the situation can be like this, this universe is created last year, but all memory and physical evidence seem to be more old. This has produced a highly deferred question about existence. I will use the so-called empirical approach to deal with these issues. In this method, the idea is that we will explain your senses in accordance with our model of the world. People can't ask if this model is actually real, can only ask if it can do it. First, if a simple and elegant model can explain a large number of observations; secondly, if this model can be observed, it is also a clear prediction of the certificate. This model is a good model. According to an empirical approach, people can compare two models of the universe. The first model, the universe was created last year, and the other is that the universe has existed long for a long time. A pair of twins were born earlier than a year ago, and there have been a model for universe the one year to explain things like twins.
On the other hand, the model of the universe last year cannot explain such an event, so the second model is better. People can't ask if the universe does exist a year ago, or just like that. In an empirical approach, they have no difference.
In a constant universe, there is no natural start. However, in the 1920s as Edwin. Hubble started using a 100-inch telescope on Wilson Mountain, the situation has changed fundamental changes. Hubble found that the star is not evenly distributed throughout the space, but a large number of gathered in a group called galaxy.
Hubble measures light from the galaxy, which in turn can determine their speed. He expects us to fly the galaxy and the galaxies from us. This should be in a universe that is unchanged over time. But what is surprised is that he found that almost all galaxies will go away from us. In addition, the farther of the galaxy leaves, the faster it is separated. The universe will not change with time, not as the original all. It is expanding. The distance between the galaxies increases over time.
The expansion of the universe is one of the most important intelligence discovery of the 20th century or any century. It turns out whether the universe has a start-up debate. If the galaxies are now moving separately, they are more close to the past. If they have passed the speed, it is about 15 billion years ago, all galaxies should fall on another. Is this time the opening of the universe?
Many scientists still don't like the universe with start. Because this seems to mean that physics has collapsed. People have to help to help the outside world. For the convenience, you can call it as God and determine how the universe starts. So they put forward some theories. In these theories, the universe is expanding at this moment, but there is no start. One of them is the steady-state theory that Bondi, Gord and Hoyer have proposed in 1948.
In the steady state theory, its idea is that as the galaxies leave, a new galaxy is formed by the hypothesis in the consecutive basis in the entire space. The universe will always exist and look like all time. From the perspective of empiricalism, this last nature is a clear prophecy that can be tested with observations. In the leadership of Martin. Journal of Cambridge Surveying Astronomical Text, in the early 1960s, the negative power supply was investigated. These sources are quite uniform in the sky, indicating that most sources are outside the Milky Way. On average, the weaker source is far away.
The steady state theory predicted the number of sources corresponding to the shape of the source intensity. But observations indicate that the weak source is more than the prophecy, indicating that the density of the past source is high. This is a basic hypothetical conflict with anything of the steady state theory. Due to this, the steady state theory is abandoned due to other reasons.
There is another attempt to avoid the opening of the universe, it is recommended that there is a previous shrinkage phase, but the substance does not fall to the same point due to rotation and local random. On the contrary, the different parts of the substance will be confident, the universe will re-expand, and the density is limited. Two Russian Lifven and Haranekov actually claim that they prove that there is no strict symmetrical general contraction will always cause a rebound, but the density is limited. This result is very convenient for Marxism Leninism's materialistic dialectics because it avoids the problem of difficult to cope with the cosmosphere. Therefore, this is an article for a belief in the Soviet scientist. When Palv Hedz and Hara Nikov issued its assertion, I am a 21-year-old graduate student. In order to complete the doctoral thesis, I am looking for a problem. I don't believe in the so-called proof, so I started to develop new mathematics methods together with Roger. Peng Roth. We prove that the universe cannot rebound. If Einstein's broad sense is correct, there is a singular point, which is a point with infinite density and infinite time and space, there is a start.
After I got the first singular result, I got the observation of the observation of the universe that had a very intensive thoughts, which was found throughout the spatial microwave background. These microwaves are the same as microwaves you use, but it is more weak than it. They can only heat up the pizza to 270.4 degrees Celsius, can't even seize the pizza, not to say to bake it. In fact, you can observe these microwaves. Turn your TV to an empty channel, attribute a few percent of the snowflakes seen on the screen to this microwave background. The radiation under the early very hot and intensive state is only a reasonable explanation of this background. With the expansion of the universe, radiation has been cooled until we observe its weak residue today.
Although Pengros and my own singularity predict, the universe has a beginning, and these theorem did not tell the universe how to start. Generalized relatively discipline collapsed at the odd point. In this way, Einstein theory can't predict how the universe starts, it can only predict how it will evolve once it starts. People can have two attitudes to Pengros and my results. One is God who chooses the beginning of the universe because of the reason we can't understand. This is the view of John Paul. At the Arms Conference on the Vatican, the Pope told the representative to study it after the universe started. But they should not explore the initial itself, because this is a creative moment, this is God's affairs. I was secretly fortunate, he didn't realize that I published a papers at the meeting, just proposed how the universe started. I don't want to be submitted to the religious referee.
This is also an explanation of most scientists to our results. This result shows that in the very powerful gravitational field in the early universe, the general relative theory has collapsed, and it must be replaced with a more complete theory. Because general relativity does not pay attention to the small scale structure of the material, the latter is constrained by the quantum theory, so people are expected to be substituted. Under normal circumstances, because the microscopic scale of the universe and the quantum theory is extremely huge, it is not a case. But when the universe is in the Prance, it is 1 billion billion yuan of meter, and the two dimensions become the same, and the quantum theory must be considered.
In order to understand the origin of the universe, we must combine generalized relative theory and quantum theory. Ricide. Ferman Fernand seems to be the best way to achieve this goal. Ricide. Fernman is a colorful figure. He knocked on the drum in the undressing bar of Pashadi, and was an excellent physicist of the California Institute of Technology. He proposes a system from state A to state B through all possible paths or history. Each path or history has a certain amplitude and intensity. The system from the probability from A to B is to add the amplitude of each path. There is a history of a moon by Lanny. But its amplitude is very low. This is not a good news for the mice.
The probability of the current state of the universe can add all the history of this state. But how do these history start? This is the origin problem of a change to the face. Do you need an creation of the master and date, the universe starts? Is it a scientific law to determine the initial conditions of the universe? In fact, even if the history of the universe returns to infinite past, this problem still exists. But if the universe starts at 15 billion years ago, this problem is more eager. Asking what happens at the beginning of time, a bit like people think that the world is flat, asking what happens in the world's edge. Is the world a plate? Is the ocean poured from the edge of it? I have used experiments to verify this. I have a global travel, I didn't fall.
As everyone knows, when people realize that the world is not a plate, it is solved when a curved face, what happens in the edge of the universe. However, the time seems to be different. It looks separated from the spatial phase. Like an iron rail model. If it has a start, someone must start the train to run the train.
Einstein's broad relativity will unify time and space in time and space. But the time is still different from the space, it is like a channel, either start and end, or unlimitedly stretch out. However, Jame Hartr and I realized that when general relativity and quantum theory, in extreme cases, time can be act like in the other direction in space. This means that it is similar to what we get rid of the world's edges, and you can get rid of the time of the problem.
Assuming the opening of the universe is as the South Pole in the earth, the latitude takes the role of time. The universe is in the Antarctic as a starting point. With the round of the north, the circles represent the cosmic scale are expanded. I asked what had no meaningful issues before the opening of the universe. Because there is no thing in the south side of the Antarctic.
Time, measurement with latitude, there is a start in the South Pole. But the Antarctic and other points are very similar. At least I listened to others. I have been to Antarctic, did not have to go to the Antarctic.
The same natural law is just as elsewhere, it is established in the South Pole. For a long time, people say that the opening of the universe is the failure of normal law, so the universe should not have the beginning. Now, the beginning of the universe is restricted by scientific law, so the argument against the universe is no longer established. Jame Hartr and I develop a spontaneous creative picture of the universe, there is a bit of bubbles in the boiling water.
Its idea is that the most likely history of the universe is the surface of the bubble. Many small bubbles appear, and then disappear. These correspond to the small universe, they expand, but it is still collapsed again when it is still in the microscopic scale. They are other possible universities, because they can't maintain a long enough time, it is not easy to develop galaxies and stars, don't talk about wisdom, so we don't have much to them. However, some of these small bubbles will expand to a certain scale, and it can safely escape the collapse. They will continue to expand with increasing rates to form the bubble we see. They correspond to the universe that begins with increasing rates. This is the so-called expansion, just as the price increases every year.
The world record of inflation should be in Germany after a war. The price increased by 10 million times during the 18 months. However, it is insignificant compared with the expansion in the early universe. The universe expands 10 times more than one time than a second. Unlike inflation, the expansion of the early universe is very good. It produced a very huge universe, as we observed. However, it is not completely uniform. In historical summation, a slightly random history and the probability of complete uniform and rule history are almost the same. Therefore, theoretical prophecy is likely to be slightly not uniform. These randoms cause small changes in the microwave background strength from different directions. The microwave background has been observed using MAP (microwave anisotropy) satellite, and the changes in the pre-synonym are discovered. In this way, we know that we are moving in the correct road.
The random of the early universe means that in some areas of density, slightly higher than other places. These additional density attracts the expansion of this area to slow down, and eventually can collapse these regions to form galaxies and stars. Please see this microwave sky map carefully. It is a blueprint for all structures in the universe. We are the quantum of the universe. God is indeed a dice. In the past few years, we have achieved amazing progress in cosmology. The discovery of general relativism and cosmic expansion, crushing the ancient image of the universe that will always exist and will continue to exist. Instead, the broad relativity prophecy, the universe and the time itself starts at the big explosion. It also predicted that time in black hole. The discovery of the universe microwave background, as well as the observation of the black hole, supports these conclusions. This is our universe image and a deep change in itself.
Although the broad relativity predicts, the universe comes from a period of high curvature in the past, but it cannot predict how the universe is formed from a big explosion. In this way, the broad relativity itself cannot answer the core problem of cosmology, why is the universe so? However, if general relativity and quantum disciating are merged, it may predict how the universe starts. It begins to expand with increasing rates. The combination of these two theories, during this period, tiny fluctuations develop, leading to the formation of all other structures in the galaxy, star, and universe. The observations of small non-uniformity in the cosmic microwave background, fully confirmed the nature of the prophecy. In this way, we seem to be moving in the correct direction of understanding the origin of the universe, although there are still many jobs to do. When we can detect the distance between the space aircraft, we can detect the new window of the extremely early universe. The gravity wave spreads from the earliest time to us, all involvement materials cannot hinder it. Compared with this, the free electrons are scattered multiple times. This scattering has been carried out before the electron is condensed after 300,000 years.
Although we have achieved some great success, it is not all resolved. We observed that the expansion of the universe was accelerated again after long-term slowing. It can't understand this theory. Lack of this understanding, the future of the universe cannot be determined. Will it continue to infinitely infinitely expand? Is the expansion a natural law? Or will the universe never collapsed again? The new observation results, the progress of theory is rapidly incorporated. Cosmology is a very exciting and active discipline. We are approaching this ancient question: Why are we here? Where did we come from?
Thank you.
