Tag Archives: louis del monte

A glowing sunrise over Earth from space with text about exploring the universe's mysteries.

The Universe’s Unsolved Mysteries – Part 1/2

Categories, Universe Mysteries, , ,

This is the Introduction section of my book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries. Enjoy!

The strides that science made in the Twentieth and early part of the Twenty-First Century are astounding. At the beginning of the Twentieth Century, science held three theories as universal truths, namely:

  1. Time was an absolute, independent of distance and movement of observers relative to an event.
  2. The universe consisted of the Milky Way galaxy.
  3. The universe was eternal and static.

However, the strongly held theories of the greatest scientific minds of the time proved to be false. I will briefly examine each theory and the empirical evidence that caused its demise.

First, the science community up to the early part of the Twentieth Century believed that time was an absolute. This meant time was independent of the position and movement of an observer relative to an event. This almost self-evident theory about time was about to be shattered. In 1905, a young Albert Einstein developed his special theory of relativity. It is termed “special” because it applied only to inertial frames of reference. An inertial frame of reference is one that is at either rest or moving with a constant velocity.

The special theory of relativity offered two hypotheses. 1) The laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference. 2) The speed of light is a constant in a vacuum—independent of the movement of the emission source in all inertial frames. To understand the second hypothesis, consider this example. If you are in an open-top convertible car that is traveling down the highway at sixty miles per hour, you are in an inertial frame of reference. If you throw a ball in the same direction that the car is going, the total speed of the ball will be equal to the speed of the car plus the speed of ball as it leaves your hand. If you are able to throw the ball at thirty miles per hour, the total speed of the ball as it leaves your hand is ninety miles per hour. We get this speed by adding the speed of the car to the speed you are able to throw the ball. Now, let’s pretend you have a flashlight, an emission source, and an observer is able to measure the speed of light as it leaves the flashlight. The result the observer would measure is that the speed of light would independent of the car’s speed. In effect, the speed of the car does not make the light go faster. Even if the car stops, the speed of light from the flashlight would equal the speed of light of the moving car. For this example, I have ignored atmospheric effects and considered the observer stationary. This is counter intuitive, but true. The speed of light is the same regardless of the speed of the car (inertial frame). The implications of special relativity became enormous. One significant implication demonstrated that time was highly dependent on the relative motion of both the observer and the event. This discovery eventually led to the development of space-time as a coordinate system. The special theory of relativity and the general theory of relativity, two highly successful theories of modern science, use space-time as a coordinate system.

A second theory that the science community held about the universe related to its size. Until the 1917 completion of the 100-inch Hooker Telescope at the Mount Wilson Observatory, science had no way of knowing other galaxies existed. Therefore, the scientific community held that the universe consisted of the Milky Way galaxy, and nothing else. In fact, this is what they taught our grandparents as schoolchildren.

Surprisingly, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), using reasoning, suggested a hundred years earlier that our galaxy was one of numerous “island universes.” Unfortunately, Kant’s view would have to wait more than a hundred years for telescope technology to prove him right. Even when early astronomers saw the faint lights of other galaxies in their crude telescopes, they believed the observed phenomena to be part of the Milky Way. That view of the universe was about to dramatically change.

In 1919, a young astronomer, Edwin Hubble, arrived at the Mount Wilson Observatory in California. As chance would have it, his arrival coincided with the completion of the Hooker Telescope. At the time, it was the world’s largest telescope, and the only one able to observe other galaxies beyond the Milky Way. In 1924, Edwin Hubble, using the 100-inch telescope at Mt. Wilson, discovered the Andromeda galaxy, a sister galaxy similar to our own Milky Way. This completely shattered another strongly held scientific belief. The universe was larger than previously thought. In fact, today we know that the universe has billions of galaxies.

Lastly, science held that the universe was eternal and static. This meant it had no beginning. Nor would it ever end. In other words, the universe was in “steady state.” At the beginning of the Twentieth Century, as I mentioned above, telescopes were crude and unable to focus on other galaxies. In addition, no theories of the universe were causing science to doubt the current dogma of a steady-state universe. All of that was about to change.

In 1916, Albert Einstein developed his general theory of relativity. It was termed “general” because it applied to all frames of reference, not only frames at rest or moving at a constant velocity (inertial frames). The general theory of relativity predicted that the universe was either expanding or contracting. This should have been a pivotal clue that the current scientific view of the universe as eternal and static might be wrong. However, Einstein’s paradigm of an eternal and static universe was so strong, he disregarded his own results. He quickly reformulated the equations incorporating a “cosmological constant.” With this new mathematical expression plugged into the equations, the equations of general relativity yielded the answer Einstein believed was right. The universe was in a steady-state. This means it was neither expanding nor contracting. The world of science accepted this, and continued entrenched in its belief of a steady-state universe. However, as telescopes began to improve, this scientific theory was destined to be shattered.

In 1929, Edwin Hubble, using the new Mt. Wilson 100-inch telescope, discovered the universe was expanding. In time, other astronomers confirmed Hubble’s discovery. This forced Einstein to call the cosmological constant his “greatest blunder.” This completely shattered the steady-state theory of the universe. In fact, this discovery was going to pave the way to an even greater discovery, the Big Bang theory, but more about that later.

In 1900, and for centuries before that, the greatest scientific minds of the time held the above three theories sacred. However, each theory crumbled as measurement techniques improved, and new theories evolved. This is a pivotal point. Science is rapidly evolving, and scientific knowledge doubles about every 10 years. We are constantly gathering new data that challenges our understanding of science, and that often leads to new mysteries. As soon as we become confident and comfortable in our grasp of reality, a new discovery turns our world upside down. For example, until 1998, every cosmologist knew the universe was expanding, but commonly held the belief that gravity would eventually slow down the expansion, and cause the universe to contract in a “Big Crunch.” The Big Crunch would result in an infinitely dense energy point similar to the infinitely dense energy point that existed at the instant before the Big Bang. In effect, the commonly held view was the universe would first expand, via the Big Bang, and then gravity would eventually cause it to contract, via the Big Crunch, to the infinitely dense energy point just prior to the expansion. Their confidence in this view abounded, and three scientists, Saul Perlmutter, Brian P. Schmidt, and Adam G. Riess, decided to measure it. To the scientific world’s astonishment, they discovered the universe was not only expanding, but the expansion was accelerating. In 2011, these three received the Nobel Prize for this remarkable discovery.

Stay tuned for part 2.

science of time & time dilation

The Philosophy of Time and Time Travel – Part 2/2 (Conclusion)

Categories, Time Travel, , , , ,

This is taken from Appendix 4 of my new book, How to Time Travel, to be published by early September 2013.

Let us examine the three major philosophical schools on the nature of time and their implications regarding time travel.

1. Presentism theory of time

The presentism theory of time holds that only the present is real. The past is over. Therefore, it is no longer real. The future has yet to occur. Therefore, the future is not real. Presentists argue that our mind remembers a past and anticipates a future, but neither is real. They are mental constructs.

Arguably, the most famous presentist is Augustine of Hippo (a.k.a. St. Augustine), who compared time to a knife edge. The present represents a knife edge cutting between the past and future. Ironically, this means Augustine of Hippo is not real, since he lived and died in the past. Therefore, should we study Augustine of Hippo, who, by his own philosophy, is not real? Of course, I am only being contentious to make a point.

Presentism has a large following, especially among Buddhists. Fyodor Shcherbatskoy (1866–1942), often referred to as the foremost Western authority on Buddhist philosophy, summed up the Buddhist view of presentism with these few words: “Everything past is unreal, everything future is unreal, everything imagined, absent, mental…is unreal…Ultimately real is only the present moment of physical efficiency.” Uncountable millions of Buddhists still ascribe to this view of time and reality.

A cogent philosophical argument can be made for presentism, but presentism is problematic from a scientific viewpoint. When we discussed the special theory of relativity, we learned that the present is a function of the position and speed of the observer. Therefore, what is the present to one observer may be the past to another.

From the standpoint of time travel, presentism renders the question “how to time travel” moot. If we embrace presentism, there is no past or future, and time travel is meaningless. Fortunately, though, other philosophies of time open the door to time travel. Let us examine the next one.

2. Growing universe theory of time

This theory of time is also referred to as “growing block universe” and “the growing block view.” However, regardless of the name, they all hold the same philosophy of time. The past is real, and the present is real. The future is not real. The logic goes something like this: The past is real because it actually happened. We experience it, and we document it. We call it history. The present is real because we experience it. We often share the present with others. The future is not real because it has not occurred.

Why do all the names for this theory of time start with the word “growing”? The concept is that the passage of time continually expands the history of the universe. Actually, this is logical. The history of the world, and the universe, continues to expand with the passage of time. The history section of any library is destined to grow with time.

In this philosophy of time, only time travel to the past makes sense, since for growing-universe philosophers, the past is real. We cannot time travel to the future, since the future has yet to occur. Therefore, it is not real.

As logical as this theory of time may appear, there is scientific evidence that the future is real and can influence the present. We discussed this evidence in the section titled “Twisting the arrow of time” in chapter 1. Now, let us examine the last significant philosophy of time.

3. Eternalism theory of time

The eternalism theory of time holds that the past, present, and future are real. The philosophy of this theory rests on Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Essentially, the special theory of relativity holds that the past, present, and future are functions of the speed and position of an observer.

While Einstein never equated time with the fourth dimension, Minkowski’s geometric interpretation of Einstein’s special theory of relativity gave birth to four-dimensional space, with time as part of the fourth dimension. In Minkowski’s interpretation, often termed “Minkowski space” or “Minkowski spacetime,” the fourth dimension includes time and is on equal footing with the normal three-dimensional space we currently encounter. However, Minkowski’s fourth dimension borders on the strange. In Minkowski spacetime, the fourth dimension, X4, is equal to ict, where i = √-1, an imaginary number, c is the speed of light in a vacuum, and t is time as measured by clocks. The mathematical expression ict is dimensionally correct, meaning that it is a spatial coordinate, not a temporal coordinate, but is essentially impossible to visualize, since it includes an imaginary number. What is an imaginary number? It is a number that when squared (multiplied by itself) gives a negative number. This is not possible to do with real numbers. If you multiply any real number, even a negative real number like minus one, by itself, you always get a positive number. Therefore, it is impossible to solve for the square root of minus one.

Although we can express it mathematically as √-1, it has no solution, and it is termed an imaginary number. Does that mean Minkowski was wrong about the fourth dimension? Actually, it does not. It does say that it is a mathematical construct, and intuitively, for most of us, impossible to visualize. However, the special theory of relativity continues to be taught using Minkowski spacetime, which the bulk of the scientific community considers a valid geometric interpretation. In either its algebraic form, as first presented by Einstein, or its geometric form, as interpreted by Minkowski, the majority of the scientific community considers the special theory of relativity the single most successful theory in science. It has withstood over a century of experimental investigation, and it is widely considered verified.

Because of its scientific underpinnings, the eternalism theory of time is widely accepted in the scientific community. If we adopt the eternalism theory of time, then time travel to the past or future becomes equally valid. In addition, no scientific theory contradicts or prohibits time travel. Said more positively, based on Einstein’s theories of relativity, which lay a theoretical foundation for time dilation (i.e., time travel to the future) and closed timelike curves (i.e., time travel to the past), most of the scientific community would support the scientific possibility of time travel.

science of time & time dilation

The Philosophy of Time and Time Travel – Part 1/2

Categories, Time Travel, , , ,

This is taken from Appendix 4 my new book, How to Time Travel, to be published by early September 2013.

What does philosophy have to do with science? The answer is simple. Your philosophy of time will determine whether you believe time travel is even a scientific possibility. Of the three major philosophical schools on time, only one allows for the possibility of time travel to both the past and future. From this standpoint, it is critical that you know the major philosophies of time and know where you stand on the subject.

Philosophers have been pondering the nature of time for thousands of years. A philosophy of time weaves through almost every ancient culture. For example, the earliest view of the nature of time by a Western philosopher dates back to ancient Egypt and the Egyptian philosopher Ptahhotep (2650–2600 BCE). Indian philosophers and Hindu philosophers also wrote about time dating back to roughly the same period. The ancient Greek philosophers, such as Parmenides, Heraclitus, and Plato, wrote essays about the nature of time roughly around 500 BCE to 350 BCE.

Many early writers questioned the nature of time, the cause of time, and the unidirectional flow of time, often referred to as the “arrow of time.” One of the most interesting aspects when studying the philosophy of time is that some cultures, like the Incas, dating back to about the thirteenth century, considered space and time woven together. Centuries before Einstein published his now-famous special theory of relativity, which scientifically unified space and time (i.e., spacetime), the Incas philosophically unified space and time into a single concept called “pacha.”

There is a question about time that has ancient roots and that continues to trouble modern scientists and many religions, namely: Did time have a beginning? Through the ages, philosophers and scientists have struggled with this question, and no widely accepted answer has emerged. Not surprisingly, the “time had no beginning” camp, which originated with the ancient Greeks, held solid ground for over several millennia. The Greeks were formidable philosophers. However, the emerging world religions, including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, slowly chipped away at the Greek philosophy of an infinite past. They simply taught that a deity made the world, and this suggests a beginning of time. Religious philosophers backed these teachings. Christian philosophers, such as John Philoponus, Muslim philosophers, such as Al-Kindi, and Jewish philosophers, such as Saadia Gaon, argued mathematically that infinities do not exist in reality. If you accept this premise, logically you are backed into a corner and must concede that time had a beginning. In other words, if infinities do not exist in reality and are merely a mathematical construct, then time cannot have an infinite past. This argument was refined and became known as the “argument from the impossibility of completing an actual infinite by successive addition.” Simply stated, you cannot complete infinity by adding successive events. Since an infinite past would imply the addition of success events, it ruled out an infinite past. Some notable scientists aligned with this thinking, the most famous today being Stephen Hawking, who argued that time began with the big bang. Dr. Hawking believes that events before the big bang have no observable consequence. It is not clear that this proves time had a beginning. Other physicists, such as Lawrence Krauss, author of A Universe from Nothing (2012), and I, author of Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries (2012), argue events occurred that preceded and caused the big bang, which implies time preceded the big bang. It does not prove, though, that time has an infinite past or a beginning.

Almost all of us believe we understand time. In fact, when first asked a question about the nature of time, most of us will begin to explain it. However, as we attempt to explain it, the complexity of time’s nature emerges. Augustine of Hippo (354 CE–430 CE), known to Christians as St. Augustine, eloquently made this observation: “What then is time? If no one asks me, I know: if I wish to explain it to one that asketh, I know not.” The most difficult thing I encountered regarding the nature of time was trying to explain it to my six-year-old grandchild. That is when Einstein’s famous quote hit home: “If you can’t explain it to a six-year-old, you don’t understand it yourself.”

Fortunately, though, as the sands of time counted millennia after millennia, three major philosophical schools on the nature of time emerged. We will examine them and discuss their implications regarding time travel in our next post.

A vibrant cosmic scene showing a swirling blue nebula with bright stars scattered across the dark space background.

Most of the Universe Remains a Mystery to Science

Categories, Universe Mysteries, , , , , ,

Despite advances in astrophysics in the past decade, such as the discovery of exoplanets beyond our solar system, we do not know what makes up the majority of the universe. The visible matter (stars, planets, stellar objects) only accounts for 2% of the mass of the universe. What makes up the rest? The rest is “dark matter and “dark energy,” but whatever they are remains a mystery. I forward the latest scientific theories to explain them in my book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries, available on Amazon.

In essence, the bulk of the scientific community believes that dark matter is a weakly interactive massive particle (WIMP), but there is no sound theoretical evidence or any physical evidence to support this theory. In my book, I suggest we view it as a form of energy and consider theories and experiments to confirm/refute this conjecture.

Dark energy is the term science uses to describe the cause of the accelerating expansion of the universe. I put forward a new theory to explain dark energy, namely, the existence equation conjecture. This theory is derived from Einstein’s special theory of relativity. The resulting equation implies that existence (movement in time) requires energy, which is being siphoned from the vacuums of space. Science can prove and accepts vacuums contain energy and give rise to “virtual particles.” As energy is removed, the vacuums become less mass dense (since energy and mass are related by Einstein’s ionic equation, E = mc^2), and the gravity that defined the vacuums becomes weaker, causing the vacuums to expand. This causes the expansion of the universe to accelerate for the furthest and oldest galaxies.

I discuss dark matter, dark energy, virtual particles and the latest scientific theories on my YouTube Channel, Del Monte On Science.

 

A cosmic scene of Earth with bright light rays and the title 'Unraveling the Universe's Mysteries' highlighting space exploration themes.

The Del Monte Paradox

Categories, Universe Mysteries, ,

This is from the introduction of my book, Unraveling the Universe’s Mysteries.

The Twentieth Century stands as the golden age of science, yielding more scientific breakthroughs than any previous century. Yet, in the wake of all the scientific breakthroughs over the last century, profound mysteries emerged. To my eye, there appears a direct correlation between scientific discoveries and scientific mysteries. Often, it appears that every significant scientific breakthrough results in an equally profound mystery. I have termed this irony of scientific discovery the Del Monte Paradox, namely:

Each significant scientific discovery results in at least one profound scientific mystery.

I’ll use two examples to illustrate this paradox. For our first example, consider the discovery of the Big Bang theory. We will discuss the Big Bang theory in later chapters. For this discussion, please view it as a scientific framework of how the universe evolved. While the scientific community generally accepts the Big Bang theory, it is widely acknowledged that it does not explain the origin of the energy that was required to create the universe. Therefore, the discovery of the Big Bang theory left science with a profound mystery. Where did the energy originate to create a Big Bang? This is arguably the greatest mystery in science, and currently an area of high scientific focus. For the second example, consider the discovery that the universe’s expansion is accelerating. This leaves us with another profound mystery. What is causing the universe’s expansion to accelerate? Numerous theories float within the scientific community to explain these mysteries. None has scientific consensus.