|Books and publications on the interaction of systems in real time by A. C. Sturt
Economics, politics, science, archaeology. Page uploaded 14 January 2002, minor edit 30 June 2004.
|The Timeless Universe|
|I. A Model of Stochastic Regeneration and Redistribution|
|by A. C. Sturt|
Summary. The model set out in these three papers considers the Universe as a system. The new model is consistent with all observations, including background radiation, though it differs in interpretation. The first paper develops the model. The other two papers explore the implications for the interpretation of light and mass.
The systems model uses the concept of homogeneity through time to show that the Universe is infinite in time and space with no beginning and no end. It is suggested that entropy, or time’s arrow, applies to the parts of the Universe i.e. its subsystems, but not to the whole system, the Universe itself. Hence the 'timeless' Universe. The parts of the Universe are stochastically regenerated and the products redistributed through collision, fusion, fission and explosion, but the system as a whole does not change. The Universe is regenerated part by part.
Redshift is caused by a gravitational effect, similar to the Einstein shift, rather than by the movement of the source of the radiation. The same sort of phenomenon could be occurring in the immense gravitational fields of black holes. Redshift is therefore proportional to distance.
The implications of the stochastic regeneration model run deep. Space is entirely permeated by an electromagnetic field. Space is differentiated. Time intervals between events may appear to be differentiated, if
measured by electromagnetic radiation. Mass cannot be considered except in a time frame.
The fact that the constant velocity of light and the upper limit on the velocity of matter are the same, suggests that they are manifestations of the different interactions of photons and particles having the property of mass with the same field i.e. it implies a Universal field which is both electromagnetic and gravitational. The form of the interaction for mass is suggested.
It is through this Universal field that redistribution takes place. Redistribution provides the system of the Universe with the feedback which keeps it in equilibrium. In the absence of redistribution, regeneration would be restricted, and equilibrium of the whole system could not be maintained.
The difficulty of discussing cosmological models is that it is almost impossible to arrive at results without using the conclusions to prove the analysis, particularly if space/time is considered to be expanding. In the new systems model the problem has been addressed by using space/time frames of reference. There is a good precedent for this. Einstein himself seems to have thought there was no other possibility.
1. Homogeneity through Time
Homogeneity through time is the most fundamental assumption of science, so much so that it is seldom considered necessary to mention it. However, it fits uneasily with the theory that the Universe began with a singularity and will continue to expand for ever, which suggests a need for some reconsideration.
Ever since Democritus conceived his atomic theory, homogeneity through time has been a fundamental principle of the science of matter, and modern science extended the same principle into the other fundamental relationships which have been discovered, right from Galileo's time to the latest particle physics.
Homogeneity through time in an atom, for instance, means that there is only one kind of atomic building block called, for the sake of argument, hydrogen. You cannot tell one atom of hydrogen from another except by its container. It is exactly the same as hydrogen has always been, and will always be, whence homogeneity through time. Nor are there any distinguishing marks that tell you where it is in space, apart from the 'container': in the laboratory, in a refinery or in natural gas; on earth, in the sun or in a star. Homogeneity through time is also homogeneity through space. Hydrogen atoms are not differentiated in the way that biological entities are differentiated, say insects or animals.
The same arguments apply to chemical compounds. When hydrogen combines with oxygen to form a water molecule, that molecule is indistinguishable from all other water molecules throughout the universe, whether it comes out of a tap or frozen from a comet. You cannot tell one bottle of absolutely pure water from another except by the bottle. This is true of all chemical compounds. The only exceptions are polymers, in which there is a distribution of molecular weights, but these are not molecules in the same sense, which is why they are called macromolecules.
If all the atoms of the periodic table are homogeneous through time, so by extension are all the fundamental particles of which they are composed. They do not change into a new version of the same entity with time. To make the point with an absurd comparison, they do not change like tadpoles into frogs with time. They do not even become different sorts of tadpole, some fatter, some longer etc. So we can be quite confident in the assumption that in 'measuring' the elemental composition of a distant star from its spectrum, the elements will be the same as on earth, with the same spectra but different ratios etc.
The energy levels which give rise to spectra are also homogeneous through time and space. An atom may become distinguished from another of the same element by reaching a higher energy level, if it is excited by some external factor. However, these energy levels are discrete; all atoms of the same element at the same excitation level will be identical in their turn, wherever they are. They too are homogeneous through time and space, and you might equally well apply the description to the excitation levels themselves. When the atoms settle down to the ground energy level, they will all become identical unexcited atoms. In doing so, they emit identical photons of light which are also homogeneous through time. Alternatively, the light may be considered as waves with frequencies which are homogeneous through time.
When the electron, the proton and the neutron were discovered, they were automatically viewed in just this way. The electron is a phenomenon or 'particle' which is absolutely identical throughout the universe, and always has been. Nothing else would make sense. When new particles are discovered, they too are considered as entities which are homogeneous through time, and so each is given its own name or label: quarks, neutrinos etc. If other particles are discovered, they will be expected to be similarly well characterised in time, for as long as they last.
For this does not mean that such entities stand alone for ever. A hydrogen atom may be smashed apart by various means, and so cease to exist as such, but the parts are also homogeneous through time: say, the electron and the proton. They will not be fragments of material like shrapnel. The atom may even be reconstructed by contriving to put the parts back together again. It will not be slightly overweight or misshapen like an apple. It must be absolutely identical, or it could not fit into the universal scheme of things, enter into hydrogen bonding, form the same compounds etc. If we come across hydrogen which appears to be overweight, it is always by the same amount. It has acquired another particle, which is homogeneous through time, and we call it an isotope. The products of the decomposition or association of fundamental particles will be other particles which are homogeneous through time for their lifetimes.
Having identified a fundamental particle, you may not know exactly where it is at a particular time, or how fast it is moving i.e. the uncertainty principle, but this is to do with the scale of fundamental particles in relation to our human scale, the tools available to us to carry out the measurements, or even the meaning of the measurements themselves. It is not because the particles have decided to become something else in an unspecified way, the 'tadpole effect'. Still less does it mean that an individual particle has decided for some unaccountable reason that it will behave quite differently from all other particles of the same sort on the occasion when you make your measurement, with the implication that it could do something completely different next time e.g. adopt an electrical charge, or part of one, or an electrical charge in the opposite sense. Even probability distributions for the mysterious behaviour of particles are homogeneous through time, like all mathematics, or you would not be able to draw them.
homogeneity through time
fundamental assumption of science
in fundamental particles
in energy levels
in electrons, protons, neutrons
in division not fragmentation
in Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
in mathematical relationships
|Copyright A. C. Sturt 21 September 2001||continued on page 2|