Thursday 28 October 2021

The Cosmic Web

Last night, in the first episode of a new TV series about the universe, Brian Cox said that the early universe was a void filled with a web of filaments of dark matter and that atoms of hydrogen and helium gathered at the intersections of the filaments where they condensed into galaxies. I never heard that before. The void sounds like the beginning of Norse mythology.

Cox described the nova and supernova process, recalling Poul Anderson's "Lodestar" and Mirkheim. He also said that, after all the stars are extinguished, the dark, dead universe will continue to expand forever. Nothing was said of any grandiose schemes for consciousness to survive within slow energy processes in that epoch. But I think that Anderson's Danellians might import energy and set up bases or habitats in an expanding quiescent universe.

12 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I'm inclined to be skeptical of the POV of people like Brian Cox because he doesn't seem to offer any suggestions on how we DID, after all, come to have a LIVING universe.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

You mean he doesn't say that God created it?

Paul.

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

These guys are trying. A quantum fluctuation in a vacuum sounds very like something emerging from nothing. Remember quantum events are uncaused.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

No, I did not have the idea of Cox saying God created the universe in mind.

It's all very well for some scientists to say a quantum fluctuation caused the universe to exist. But what caused that quantum fluctuation? That kind of thinking leaves open the idea of an endless regression of "causes." Compared to that, the notion of the universe being created by a First Cause called God seems simpler.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

Quantum events are uncaused.

Paul.

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

A first cause would be a past event, not an eternal person. Why should a chain of causation not be beginningless?

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Because I simply don't buy, in effect, eternal, un-created matter or energy.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

Why not?

(Also remember a quantum event is uncaused.)

Paul.


paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

To assume that mass-energy must have been "created" is simply to assume the truth of the very proposition that is up for discussion.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

And I am still not convinced of the opposite view being true.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

But that is not enough. If asked why you believe what you believe, your only reply is that you believe it.

Paul.

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

It is not enough to keep asking, "But what caused x, y or z?" especially when the x, y or z is a quantum fluctuation which by definition is uncaused! It is far from obvious that the answer to "But what caused...?" should be "God." You have been brought up to believe this so it seems obvious to you.