Black Holes and Time Warps

Last month for book club we read Black Holes and Time Warps by Kip Thorne. It was a behometh of a book. 500+ pages. I confess I didn't make it to the "time warps" part. I got to about page 400.
It was an excellent book in the sense that it gave a more than comprehensive history of black hole research. The book also included a pre-history as it were of astrophysics, a detailed description of the world-wide scientific community, it's complexities, and tendencies during the 1920's right up through the 1990's. It discussed Einstein, the Cold War, the Soviet versus American race to make the biggest most destructive bomb ever, and vignettes into the lives of scientists like Robert Oppenheimer, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, Stephen Hawking, , Karl Schwarzchild, and Borisovich Zel'dovich.
The historical accounts were easy to read, and very interesting. The parts that actually delved into the  physics of black holes and neutron stars etc. was a little bit more difficult to get through. That being said, it's not on account of the math on which most of the subject is based. In fact, that may be the greatest triumph of this book! For as mathematical as the subject is, there were very few equations in the book. Awesome!
That being said, the concepts (on which the math is based) were pretty...out there. No pun intended. Any time you are dealing with relativity, space, time, space-time, and all that, things get pretty weird.
I can't explain everything in the book, but I'd like to relate a few anecdotes that I think every one should know about black holes. Ha ha...

Black holes and breakfast at the Cafe!

One of the most surprising things to me was that the idea of a black hole didn't come about from people looking out into space. It seems like they would have been discovered by astronomers, but that was not the case. The first inkling of a black hole actually came from calculations done by physicists in the early part of the 20th century when they mathematically tried to describe what would happen to a large star once it exhausted its fuel and began to collapse. Their calculations were telling them that  a star above a certain mass, would collapse in on itself, and then keep collapsing down to a super small, super massive point that would curve the space around it so much that it would cease to exist in the observable universe!
At the time, most physicists figured that their calculations were wrong. But as time passed it became more and more clear that it wasn't the math that was wrong. Eventually technology caught up to the equations and optical, X-ray and gamma-ray telescopes coroberated the existence of black holes.
The second, and last thing, I will try to explain is the relationship a few of the cool things concerning mass, space and time. E=mc2. But what does that mean? It means that anything that has mass (i.e. you , me, a chair, the earth, the galaxy) can be described as energy. Mass and energy are sort of two different expressions of the same thing. I'm simplifying this a bit (because of the c (which is the speed of light) squared) but that's pretty much the gist of it. How weird and cool is that?
And that the larger the mass of an object the more it can literally distort time! Black holes swallow up everything in their path, and shove it all down to a thing called a singularity. And that super massive teeny-tiny point creates a almost infinitely deep and narrow pucker in space-time that does some really freaky things. The one I will mention is that it bends space-time in such a way that if you had two people observing it, one outside the hole and one (unfortunate soul) descending into it this is how it would play out:

Space, seen from my patio.

To the person going into the hole, they would approach it, pass through the event horizon, and be strung out atom by atom into the singularity. BUT from the perspective of the person outside, it would look like they approached the event horizon, and then froze just on the edge of it forever (well, almost forever)! From the perspective of the outsider, in a less curved part of space, time moves so fast that they cannot detect even the slightest movement from their counterpart. Again, I am so...baffled by that I don't even know if I could ever hope to explain it any better than I just have.
If you find this interesting then I would highly suggest you read this book to get a more inclusive and scientific account of all the things I'm saying. If you don't, well then, know that I am NOT making this stuff up. Black holes are real, they happen, there is one at the center of our galaxy, and it warps space and time. Bwaa-haa-haa. Cool.

Richard Feynman

In between the books for book club I have been reading The Pleasure of Finding Things Out by the late Richard Feynman. He was a theoretical physicist who did great things (that neither you or I would probably understand) in quantum mechanics and electrodynamics. He was also on the Manhattan Project, which you will recall was a group of scientists commissioned by the Army to build the first atomic bomb.

But the thing that I like about him, and about reading about him is that he seems like he was a cool (but quirky) guy. Sure he could do calculus in his head, but he was also really funny, and almost...like a kid. He wasn't arrogant, nor did he act super intellectual. He was just a big curious kid that happened to be good at math!

The part of the book I am reading now is about his time in Los Alamos when he was working on the bomb. And the story I just read was so funny I just have to share it with you!

So the way things were back then was that all the scientists were in Los Alamos, but the location of the plant where the Uranium was to be processed was elsewhere, and the people handling the stuff had no idea what they were doing. At the time the Army didn't want the two groups to mix, because they were afraid it would become easier for secrets to get out. They wanted the plant people to be in the dark. But it became apparent that they had to learn at least a little bit about what was going on in order to design the plant properly and not blow themselves to smithereens accidentally. So they sent Feynman up there to explain it all to them. Apparently they were amazed by him. In his own words "So I sat down and told them how it works...yak yak-all stuff which was elementary primer stuff back at Los Alamos, but they'd never heard any of it, so I turned out to be a tremendous genius to them. So from being rather primitive back there in Los Alamos, I was a super genius on the other end."

After he explained everything and everyone was amazed, the contractors etc. said they understood and asked him to come back in a month so they could show him their plans. So a month later he goes back and they take him into a giant room with a huge table covered in tons of blueprints (which he, Feynman, doesn't know how to read). They started explaining their strategy to him how all these valves and ventilators work but  because he is such a "genius" they didn't bother to explain to him how to read the plans assuming he already knew. Of course he did not. Feynman tried to follow, but he had no idea what the little boxes with crosses that were all over the plans were. Clearly they were important. At first he thought they were windows but that didn't work because some were not on walls, then he thought they might be some sort of valves. But he'd waited too long to ask! In his words "I want to ask them what it is. You must have been in this situation like this- you didn't ask them right away, right away would have been OK. But they have been talking a little bit too long. You hesitated too long. If you ask them now they'll say what are you wasting my time for?"

He looks at all the plans spread out everywhere. What was he going to do?! So he came up with a plan. He decided to point to one of the little boxes and ask "What happens if this valve gets stuck?" That way they would say either "nothing" which confirmed it was a valve, or they would say "That's not a valve that's a...whatever" and then he would know what it was. 

So he chose a random box and cross and pointed to it. In his words "What happens if this valve gets stuck? figuring they're going to say "That's not a valve sir, that's a window." So one looks at the other guy and says "Well, if that valve gets stuck," and they go up and down on the blueprint, up and down, the other guy up and down, back and forth, and they both look at each other and they turn around to me and say "You're absolutely right sir." So they rolled up the blueprints and away they went and we walked out."

Isn't that hilarious? He found the one mistake on the entire plan set by accident!

As he was leaving the Lieutenant that he was with said "You're a genius. I want to know how, how you do something like that." And Feynamn responded " You try to find out whether it's a valve or not."

The book is filled with stories like that! There is another one about how he stole top secret papers to prove that the security was less than stellar, or he used his wife's lingerie to secure a room for himself instead of sharing like everyone else did. He really just seems like a fun-loving likable brilliant guy.

The book before this one is called Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman! and also has some great stories in it.  His books have very little to do with describing physics. They are more a memoir of his life while he was doing physics. If you are looking for some light and fun reading, I highly recommend either of these books!

A Universe From Nothing

Last month's book for book club was called A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss. It was an interesting book, one of those astrophysics type where half of what you read you can't quite wrap your brain around, and the other half seems like it should be physically impossible, but apparently it's not.
Our book club was undecided about whether they loved it, but we are a pretty critical bunch, and I think over all it was a pretty good book. And ,since it was fairly short, I'd recommend it to those of you that are interested in the history of the search for dark matter and energy, and the origin of the (our) universe as well.
One of the biggest questions in cosmology is what produced the Big Bang? Most of us generally think in terms of cause and effect, and it only makes sense to us that if there was a Big Bang it had to come from somewhere, and be made out of something that was there before...only it's turning out that may not be true.
(See, this is what I mean about seeming physically impossible!) It certainly isn't true on a quantum scale where in the empty space between quarks (which make up protons and neutrons) particles pop into and out of "thin air" all the time! (The photo below was borrowed from a website called omnispace.org and if you click on the link below the image you can see a gif file animation that's pretty amazing!) That was one of the most interesting things I learned from this book. That empty space isn't really empty at all. WTF? Right?!

Click here to see animation!

So the idea is, if it can happen at a small scale, then why not on a scale the size of the universe? The only thing that seems to matter is that the total energy of the universe must always remain at zero, which apparently does.That might seem counter-intuitive too, but it's not once you begin to think about it. Stephen Hawking likened it (loosely) to making a hill out of dirt. In order to do that you must dig a hole of equal mass. So even though the hill might be high, it is balanced out by a hole equally deep. You are not bringing anything into the system or taking anything out of it either, you are just sort of shuffling it around. Yet still you appear to "make" a hill where there once was none. And so it might be with the universe. There was nothing needed, no outside cause to make the Big Bang, as long as the total energy remained at zero.
Now you might be thinking "Well, where does..."dirt" come from? Where does the system that totals zero energy come from?" And that's where it gets a little tricky. Because maybe the answer is that it comes from nowhere. Just like the particles and antiparticles that appear between quarks, so might our universe be. How could that happen you wonder? No one is exactly sure yet, but many think they are close. And it's all based on solid science, and observation (which the book goes into detail on, things like the Cosmic Background Radiation, and gravitational lensing etc...)
Part of it though, depends on which theory you buy. And each involves ever more complex physics . There is M-Theory and multiverses, string theory and so on, all of which can only truly be understood through some pretty hair-raising mathematics (and so becomes quite difficult for a lay-person such as myself to understand). It also depends on how you think the universe will end: with a"Big Crunch" or a "Big Freeze"? Will the universe collapse in on itself and form a giant black hole encompassing everything? Or will all the galaxies keep moving farther and farther apart until space cools, and all the starts die out? Does it even matter? Well, certainly not for us, or our grandchildren, or the rest of the human race, or any other living thing on our planet, or our sun, or our own home-sweet Milky Way galaxy. But for some distant future galaxy and  civilization it might. Krauss says in a mere trillion years (if the universe keeps expanding as it is now) those aliens will look up at the night sky and only see the stars from their own galaxy. If they develop the technology to gaze father out into the universe they will see....absolutely nothing.

Now That's Power!

I was just looking through my notes on particle physics and came a cross a paragraph I'd highlighted, and thought it was interesting enough to re-type here. It is addressing the reason why (remember we are talking about physics here) antimatter is so interesting not only to science, but also to science fiction writers. (If you recall the U.S.S. Enterprise is powered by antimatter;) The last bit is the most interesting. I had no idea how almost totally inefficient all our methods of producing energy are...

"The glamorous nature of antimatter has given rise to the science fiction notion that it may solve the energy crisis. Indeed, a kilogram (2.2 pounds) of antimatter would provide enough energy to keep the United States going for a day. This is because the entire mass of the antiproton (plus the proton it takes with it to total anihilation) is converted to energy via E=mc2. In the burning of coal or oil only one billionth of the mass is converted to energy. In fission reactors this number is 0.1 percent, and the long -awaited fusion energy supply (don't hold your breath!) it is about0.5 percent."

Taken form The God Particle by Leon Lederman.

Here Higgsy-Higgsy

In the issue of Science (December 2011) I read, there was a tiny blurb on the Higgs-boson. Remember the blog I posted last month about  the book The God Particle?
Anyway, I thought it was an interesting little follow up, especially since the writer claimed (and I sensed a little exasperation between the lines) that "Next year, particle physicists will either find the long-sought Higgs boson, or prove it doesn't exist..." He goes on to claim "It's not so much a prediction as a matter of fact." and concludes that "It's all but a mathematical certainty." (And from what I understand  "mathematical certainty" translates to "pretty damn sure" in the vernacular.)
The Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland is on the hunt, and producing so much data, so rapidly, that scientists believe if the Higgs is out there, it will soon have no place left to hide.
Either way I think it's exciting. If they do find it, it will vindicate the Standard Model theory and be one of the (maybe the?) greatest achievements in modern physics. If they don't find it, then they will have to start from scratch and come up with a whole new theory. And that would be really interesting too.

Tough Time with Chaos

I've been slogging (is that even a word?) through my book for book club with little success. The title is Chaos, by James Gleick. I wrote a post about it last week, and was feeling optimistic at the time, but since then my attention span has dwindled to nearly nothing, and I can barely read five pages at a time without thinking that I'd rather be organizing the junk under my kitchen sink, or cleaning out the trunk of my car (two things I normally HATE doing).
Usually I make it though any subject, so it's surprising to me that I'm having such a hard time reading this. I don't even think it's poorly written (it got great reviews and was a best seller). I guess it's just me. Maybe it's because it's my second physics book in a row, and I'm just not as smart (or perceptive) as I'd like to think I am.
BUT while I might be forced to face the truth that I'd be lost beyond all hope if I were to try to make it through the book, it doesn't me that I must accept defeat in my goal to learn a little something about Chaos.
I had to do a little thinking outside the box but I finally found a solution to my delema. I probably won't finish reading the book, but as an alternative, I discovered a lecture series on Chaos at the library, and am on #8 of 24. And it's fantastic! Everything (I think) that Gleick covers in his book is in the lectures, but there are a lot more pictures, and simulations, and I'm finally getting it! I guess you could argue it's cheating, but I disagree. even in the context of a "book club". I think 24 lectures about makes up for not finishing half a book:)
So I just wanted to throw this out there, that if you have any interest in learning about chaos, I'd definitely recommend the series titles Chaos, that is put out by The Teaching Company. It's pretty good stuff, and much more visually oriented.