Light, The Big Bang, AndInflation Theories

By

Rodney W. Peterson’

Math G, Section: 16814. M.W. 5-7 PM Professor Ian Walton

            Contemporarycosmologists are as fixated with the origins of the universe as were theancient Egyptians and Greeks; in point of fact, since prehistoric Homo sapiensfocused their binocular vision on towards the heavens and observed the impenetrableradiant constellations (comprised of some 3,000 visible extraterrestrialbodies), the Cosmos has continued to enrapture and flummox all who ponder its splendorand genesis; and, despite the ingenious contributions of Isaac Newton, James ClerkMaxwell, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein, humankind is only somewhat closer toanswering the fundamental question: From where did the visible universeoriginate from?

            Theaforementioned men, along with their predecessors Copernicus, Galileo, andKepler, shared one common passion—the habitual observance and notation ofcelestial light. Centuries passed between the Greeks and Einstein before theelemental question: What is light?—did acquire a comprehensible answer.

The first individual for consideration, regarding theproperties of light, is Sir Isaac Newton (1643-1727). Newton is accredited withone of the first scientific clues regarding the properties of light,“[when] In 1672, in the first paper that he submitted to the RoyalSociety, Newton described an experiment in which he permitted sunlight to passthrough a small hole and then through a prism. Newton [discovered] thatsunlight, which gives the impression of being white, is actually made up of amixture of all colors of the rainbow” (Voyages, 86). Newton’sexperiment demonstrated that the visible “white” light the Sunemits is in actuality bands of light. In our present day Newton’s light bandsare known as spectral light and are a segment of electromagnetic radiation, andwhose particular wave lengths are approximately between 400 and 750 nm(nanometers), however, the entire electromagnetic spectrum is made up of gammarays, X-rays, Ultra-violate, visible (or white light), infrared, microwavesVHF/UFH, short-wave radio, and long-wave radio.

            Thesecond individual for consideration, regarding the properties of visible light,is James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879). Maxwell is accredited with the discovery oflight’s “electromagnetic” properties, and his discovery isanalogous to Newton’s laws of mechanics (or Newtonian relativity), thepropounded explanation for the moon’s orbit about the earth (as well asall planetary systems). Maxwell’s experiments with electric chargesdemonstrated that magnetism was the result of moving charged particles.According to Maxwell there existed a fundamental connection between electricalcharges and magnetism, that is, moving charged particles produced magnetism.Maxwell adroitly amalgamated, hitherto, separate rules for electricity andmagnetism into one consistent theory. “In the vicinity of an electriccharge, another charge feels a force of attraction or repulsion: Oppositecharges attract; like charges repel. When charges are not in motion, we observeonly this electric attraction or repulsion. If charges are in motion, however… we measure another force, called magnetism” (Voyages, 82).

And, as any contemporary college physics text book willexplain, typical atoms are these above-referenced particles, which possess auniversal blueprint—positively charged proton(s) (comprising the nucleus)and negatively charged orbiting electron(s). Maxwell investigated theoscillation “and found that the resulting pattern of electric andmagnetic fields would spread out and travel rapidly through space … allatoms [which consist of charged particles] oscillate back and forth … Theresulting electromagnetic disturbances are among the most common phenomena inthe universe” (Voyages, 82).

Inventively, “Maxwell was able to calculate the speedat which an electromagnetic disturbance moves through space; he found that itis equal to the speed of light, which had been measured experimentally. On thatbasis, he speculated that light was one form of a family of possible electricand magnetic disturbances called electromagnetic radiation” (Voyages,83). Maxwell’s experiments demonstrated that the phenomena of changingfields could produce electric currents and changing electric currents couldproduce changing magnetic fields and once started, electric and magnetic fieldchanges simultaneously generated the other. “Because of hiscontributions, the set of equations are known as Maxwell’s equations… Essentially, Maxwell’s equations combine the electric and themagnetic fields into a single electromagnetic field … [which are]separate fields … symmetrically related in the sense that either one cancreate the other” (College physics, 649).

In spite of Maxwell’s symmetrical wave-likeelectromagnetic field, visible light possesses a somewhat contradictory secondproperty, which cannot be fully explained by his wave model. In addition topossessing wave-like properties light also possesses particle-like properties. Contemporaryphysicists know these self-contained bundles of energy as packets ofelectromagnetic energy, or photons. The scientific method has repeatedly confirmedthat visible light has a dual nature and can behave wave-like and particle-likeat the same time.

Attempting to contemplate light as possessing dual properties,can be difficult, but what must be kept upper most in mind is that visiblelight is visible light; and each photon (a particle composed of even smallerparticles) possesses a certain, or constant, amount of energy, and this“energy is proportional to the frequency of the wave it represents”(Voyages, 96). And the above-referenced proportionality leads to the nextindividual and his contribution.

The third individual for consideration, regarding theproperties of light, is the German physicist Max Planck (1858-1947). In orabout the year 1900, Planck scrutinized the inability of classicalelectromagnetic theory to explain the characteristics of thermal radiation anddevised a radical explanation which correctly predicted that atoms emittingradiation “have only discrete energy rather than continuous distributionof energies” (College Physics, 842). Planck’s theoretical detectionfacilitated supplanting the inherent discrepancies of classical electromagnetictheory’s continuous quantity energy with quantized energy, occurring indiscrete amounts, and said quantity is mathematically represented as hf, which in English is known asquantum energy.

Quantum energy, according to Planck’s definition, is “theenergy [that] occurs only in integral multiples of hf. The symbol h represents a constant known asPlanck’s constant and has a value of h = 6.63 X 10^-34 J·s” (College Physics, 842). Planck’spioneering work gave astronomers “Planck’s constant” and his hypothesisof quantum energy won Planck the 1918 Nobel Prize. However, outside thescientific community, Planck does not possess the public awareness that AlbertEinstein achieved, but Einstein’s two postulates, which form the basis forhis special theory of relativity, will be for all time linked with Planck’squantum energy hypothesis.

The fourth and final individual for consideration, regardingthe properties of light, is mathematician and physicist Albert Einstein (1879-1955).Inarguably, Einstein was the most gifted mathematician and physicist of the TwentiethCentury, and is accredited for his General Relativity (the very large scale atthe Cosmological level) equation E=mc². In particular, it is the secondpostulate of his special theory of relativity that contributively elaborates uponanother property of light, that is, the consistency of its speed. Einsteinstated: “The speed of light in a vacuum has the same value in allinertial fields.” Einstein built upon Planck’s quantum energyhypothesis and ingeniously “reasoned … that energy quantization isa fundamental property of electromagnetic waves … He suggested …that to conserve energy, the emitted radiation should also be quantized.[Einstein proposed] … The radiant energy from a point source is notdistributed continuously throughout an increasingly larger region, but,instead, this energy consists of a finite number of spatially localized energyquanta which, moving without subdividing, can only be adsorbed and created inwhole units” (College Physics, 842).

Einstein, in 1905, published a paper on his Special Theoryof Relativity regarding light absorption and emission, and in so doing laiddown the most profound mathematical concept for the property of light; that is itsspeed, the c in his General Relativity equation: E=mc² (where E = energy,m = mass, and c = equals the speed of light, that is to say, energy equals masstimes the speed of light squared).

Having now considered the contributions of Newton, Maxwell,Planck, and Einstein, as they pertain to the multiple properties of light, themath behind these theories can, perhaps, be comprehensible for the layperson.From Newton we now know visible light is actually comprised of rainbow-coloredbands; and, from Maxwell we now know visible light is comprised of chargedparticles, photons, that have wave-like electromagnetic properties; and, fromPlanck we now know visible light radiates discrete “quantized”energy; and, from Einstein we now know light possess a universal constant speedof 300,000 km/s. If confusion persists, it is not necessarily the layperson’sfault, because “The confusion that [Maxwell’s electromagneticmodel] this wave-particle duality of light caused in physics was eventuallyresolved by the introduction of a more complicated theory of waves andparticles, now called quantum mechanics” (Voyages, 84). However, quantummechanics (the very small scale at the subatomic level), in scope, is beyondthe purpose of this essay because only the elementary properties of visiblelight, particle, wave, and speed, are considered herein.

Let us begin with the math symbol for the frequency of light(wave-like property), which is ƒ; and, ƒ = c/λ. The math symbol“c” represents the speed of light, and the math symbol“λ” (meaning 1) represents the wavelength of light. Now let usrecall that the hin Planck’s constant represents a constant that equals 6.626 X 10^-34 J·s (the math symbol “J·s” represents Joule second, the metric unit of energy). Themath symbol representing a photon (light’s particle property) isEø. Review of the aforesaid accords a formula to express visible light’sdual properties: Eø = hƒ. And let us not forget the“rest” mass of a photon, which in math notation is represented asmø; and, mø equals c²/Eø. What the above math connotesis visible light is composed of photons (a discrete packet of energy),particles that can, at times, also behave like electromagnetic waves—bothof which travel at the universal speed of light, 300,000 km/s.

Consequently, the frequency andwavelength of visible light are inversely proportional, their product alwaysbeing the speed of light in a vacuum; and the energy conveyed by an individualphoton is directly proportional to the light’s frequency, the constant ofproportionality being Planck’s constant (h) = 6.63 X 10^-34 J·s; and if an equivalent“rest” mass can be spoken of for a photon, then it would be foundby equating the energy of that photon Eø with the famous rest energyequation of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity: Eø ≡Eо = mо c². Hence, mо = c²/Eø.

Acquiring an elementarycomprehension of visible light, its simultaneous dual properties, proved itselfa perplexing conundrum for centuries. Yet visible light, the continuouselectromagnetic spectrum human eyes detect without difficulty, distinguishesonly a small segment of the entire electromagnetic spectrum—a diverse spectrumthat includes Gamma rays, X-rays, Ultra-violate light, Visible, Infrared,Microwaves, VHF/UHF, Short-wave radio, and Long-wave radio radiation, proved tobe Kinderspiel compared to the origins of The Cosmos.

Nineteenth and early TwentiethCentury astronomers, like their ancient counterparts the Egyptians and Greeks, wereno less challenged when contemplating the origins of the universe. Theevolutionary processes of the Cosmos presented humankind with Sphinx-likeconundrums within conundrums until the pantheon of mathematical genius providedhumankind with Albert Einstein, who possessed the mathematical prowess tograpple with the Cosmos and its probable origins. Einstein’s Relativisticmodels, adequately measuring objects traveling at the speed of light, openedthe heavens vanitas (emptiness), instabilitas (instability), and vertibilitas (mutability) to theoreticalconsideration hitherto unimaginable.

Coincidently, subsequent observationsmade by Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) confirmed an expanding endless universe, and “setthe stage for today’s studies of galaxy formation when he discovered thatthe Milky Way was not alone ... The known universe suddenly ballooned insize” (National Geographic, 16). Drawing this conclusion from his October6, 1923, observations he thereby did substantiate Einstein’s theoretical equationsand transformed the current theory of a static “unchanging”universe into a dynamic changing endless entity—rife with the malevolent throwsof birth, life, and death. Consequently, by virtue of Einstein and Hubble, mathematicallycontemplating scientific theories on the origins of the universe are, quitepossibly, unique to the late Twentieth and early Twenty-first centuries.

Presently, there are two concurrenttheories regarding the origin of the universe, and they are known as the BigBang and Inflation Theories. However, when contemplating the origins of theCosmos, what is meant by the term “Big Bang? And, when contemplating theevolution of the universe, what is meant by the term Inflation theory?

In the past several decades theprevailing theory on how the Cosmos began is commonly referred to as the BIGBANG. In essence, this theory suggest that there was nothing and then there wassomething as result a tumultuous effulgent explosion, all of which resulted inwhat Cosmologist call the present “observable universe”—somefifteen billions years later. Observable universe is meant to construe acomprehension that the light (the visible particle wave-like properties ofphotons) emitted by galaxies billions of light years distant from earth arecollected and studied, and some of this light may well be near the beginningsof the Cosmos. However, Cosmologist do not limit their studies by observingonly the properties of visible light, because the primordial electromagneticspectrum is composed of many differing forms of radiant energy, radiantenergies that include Gamma rays, X-rays, Ultraviolet, Visible, Infrared,Microwaves, VHF/UHF, Shortwave radio, and Long wave radio waves, as mentionedearlier.

Before pressing forward with the primalBig Bang theory, however, an analogy of a VCR and a VHS tape would be helpfulin illustrating the aforementioned. Think of rewinding a VHS tape of yourfavorite movie in a VCR from its ending to its beginning—all the whilewatching the images progress backwards in real-time. Now think of the universeas we observe it here and now, and ask the question: How would it look if theevolution of the Cosmos had been recorded and we could watch it run backwardsin spacetime? Simplification applied, this thought model allows you and I, aswell as Cosmologists, to intellectually approach the question from where dideverything, the Cosmos, originate?

Pursuant to Big Bang theorists,“Eventually, we would find that all matter was once concentrated in aninfinitesimally small volume. [Cosmologists] identify this time with thebeginning of the universe … The violent explosion of that concentrateduniverse at the beginning of time is called the Big Bang” (Fraknoi, etal., 600). However, there are inherent flaws with this theory. For example, thetheory does little to “explain why there is [not] more matter thanantimatter in the universe, nor does it account for the origin of the densityfluctuations that ultimately grew into galaxies … It also does notexplain the remarkable uniformity of the universe” (Fraknoi, et al.,617).

To assist answering thesetheoretical questions, we return to Einstein’s eloquent intellectualachievement, his theory of General Relativity: E=mc², which was publishedin 1916. E=mc² fundamentally transmogrified physics; and, in 1925, thescientific method substantiated Einstein’s theory of general relativity.With Einstein’s relativistic theories substantiated, Cosmologists couldnow quantitatively begin investigating the origins of, not just our solarsystem and/or our galaxy—the Milky Way, but, the Cosmos at large because theynow possessed the means to hypothetically explore the what, when, and howquestions of the Big Bang theory; scientifically affirming that “…energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only converted from one form toanother” (Fraknoi, et al., 321). Understood correctly, conversion of energyinto matter is the basis or premise that something “matter’ canevolve from “energy”—something from nothing.

As the Big Bang theory suggests“The expansion of the universe began everywhere at once throughout theuniverse we can see” (Fraknoi, et al., 605). The first mathematician tohypothesize the physical processes of the Big Bang was not Einstein but,rather, Abbé Georges Lemaître (1894-1966). According to Lemaître,the universe originated from what he called “the primeval atom”which cataclysmicly detonated, as the consequence of radioactive disintegration,into pieces of atoms as result the inherent splitting processes of nuclearfission. Although the 1927 theory of cataclysmic eruption held, the fissionprocess did not.

In 1948, physicists George Gamow,Ralph Alpher, and Hans Bethe, published their theory suggesting the beginningof the universe came about as result of the processes of fusion, wherein “…fundamental particles … built up the heavy elements by fusion in the BigBang … The result of their efforts is now considered the standard modelof the Big Bang” (Fraknoi, et al., 612); although Astronomer Fred Hoyleis credited for coining the term Big Bang. Be as that may, does the Big Banganswer the question from what and/or where did everything come from, that is,the stuff that went bang? In short, the answer is yes and no.

Remember, there are flaws; flawsthat do not explain why there is more matter than antimatter, the origin ofdensity fluctuations that evolved into galaxies, and the remarkable uniformityof the universe, as a whole.

As it turns out, coincidentally,Lemaître’s theory was more accurate than inaccurate, and the searchto explain the evolution of the universe leads us to Lemaître’salma mater, MIT, and Alan Guth, Ph.D., a contemporary man who postulates aplausible theory which grapples with the seeming inconsistencies of the BigBang theory; and who, in April 2001, was awarded the Benjamin Franklin Medal inphysics (the precursor to the Nobel Prize) for his effort.

Professor Guth developed ahypothesis he coined the “inflationary” theory. Encapsulated, thetheory posits that the universe began from a marble size of extremely dense hotmatter which exploded, and from this explosion the universe rapidly inflatedand, thereafter with uniformity, expand and cooled, permitting the evolutionaryformation of galaxies, stars, solar systems, and planets (as we have come toknow them). Commensurate with the Big Bang, inflation theory attempts anexplanatory narration of what was before, during, and/or after the cosmicmarble exploded, addressing some of the propounded eccentricities of the BigBang; from zero, the “era of quantum gravity”, to the period comprisinginflation—between 10^37s through 10^34s.

It is in the interval between 10^37sand 10^34s (the period of time comprising the inflationary theory) that,according to Guth, “ … the universe expanded at a rate that keptdoubling before beginning to settle down to the more sedate expansionoriginally described by the Big Bang theory” (B. Lemley, Discover, April2002).

In other words, “The universe… began in the era of quantum gravity [0 to 10^37s], a time when all fourforces of the universe—gravity, electromagnetism, the strong (nuclear)and weak forces—may have been unified. Energy boiling out of thisunstable stew grew during the brief inflationary period at an ever-doublingrate, and then decayed into an electronquark soup [10-34s to 10-6s] as thoseforces began splitting apart. The soup’s fundamental particles [10-6s to3.5 minutes] combined into ever-more-complex forms as the universe cooled andexpanded” (B. Lemley, Discover, April 2002). As theorized, something,matter (particles), developed from nothing, a vacuum.

However, one must bear in mind thatGuth’s inflationary theory is firmly anchored upon the bedrock foundationof quantum mechanics, whereby “… nothing is something. Quantum theory holdsthat probability, not absolutes, rules any physical system. It is impossible… to predict the behavior of any single atom; all physicists can do ispredict the average properties of a large collection of atoms. Quantum theoryalso holds that a vacuum, like atoms, is subject to quantum uncertainties. Thismeans that things can materialize out of the vacuum, although they tend tovanish back into it quickly” (B. Lemley, Discover, April 2002).Physicists refer to this phenomenon as quantum fluctuation, the realm ofparticle physics (matter), and Guth’s “inflationary theory suggeststhat what erupted was a ‘false vacuum’, a peculiar from of matter… ”; and, according to inflation theory—“a false vacuumis characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it canexplode into a universe” (B. Lemley, Discover, April 2002).

Being the aforesaid found true, thenfor the average individual, with an average intellect, trying to conceptualizesomething from nothing is tantamount to “… imagining nothing, apure vacuum. Imagine no space at all and no matter all”, which is all butimpossible to comprehend; but, Guth cautions, “Don’t imagine outerspace without matter in it” (B. Lemley, Discover, April 2002). But thatis exactly what Guth requires anyone contemplating the Big Bang and/orinflationary theories to think—a “false” vacuum with andwithout “things” (particles) popping in and out of materialexistence.

To recapitulate the above-mentionedparagraphs, it is helpful to bear in mind what inflation theory attempts toestablish, namely, an evolutionary time line, between the era of quantumgravity (wherein matter did not exist) 0 and 300,000 years (when negative andpositive subatomic particles organized into stable atoms of hydrogen, helium,and lithium). How matter evolved from energy and became the observable universeis abridged in the subsequent paragraph.

Following the era of quantum gravity(when the marble size universe exploded and was simultaneously profoundly hot,hotter than our Sun’s 15 million°K core, and, only the four forces—gravity, electromagnetism, the strongand weak nuclear forces—existed concordantly) is the period of inflation(10^37s – 10^34s), when the false vacuum acted as a repelling force.Following inflationary expansion is the Quark soup period (10^34s – 10^6s);followed by the period between 10^6s and 3.5 minutes, wherein the radioactivequark soup cooled and emitted photons (tiny packets of electromagnetic energy).And here is when, in the evolutionary process, light became visible.

Accordingly, the quark soup periodis followed by the period between 3.5 minutes to 300,000 years, wherein theorigin of light atomic nuclei coalesce. And from 300,000 years to 1 billionyears atoms evolved (the universe cooled permitting protons, neutrons,electrons, and neutrinos to built up, stabilize, and form deuterium or heavyhydrogen); and from 1 billion years to 12-15 billion years, the first galaxiesevolved, organized, and expanded to their present day position and appearance.Viola! We have not only the evolution time line of the universe (itsinflation-expansion)—but the evolutionary conversion processes of mattermaterialized from energy: The manifestation of something from nothing!

What has simplistically beenpresented here, energy becoming matter, in of its self—is a relativelynew theory. However, the premise that energy can become matter has beenscientifically observed and documented in particle accelerators around theworld. Subsequently, therefore, one can think of the primeval universe, between3 and 4 minutes old, functioning like a star—nuclear fusion of simplerelements into more complex elements.

Guth’s inflationary theoryreiterates what GUTs (Grand Unified Theory: a model that unites three of thefour forces of nature as a single force as result tremendous temperatures) predict,that an “incredible event occurred when the universe was about 10^35s old… The equation of general relativity, combined with the special state ofmatter at that time, predict that gravity could briefly have been a repulsiveforce” not the force that Cosmologist observe in the universe today; and,it’s this repulsive force that Guth conceptualizes in his inflationtheory—“an extraordinary rapid expansion or inflation during whichthe scale of the universe increased by a factor of about ten to the fiftiethpower times more than predicted by standard Big Bang models” (Fraknoi, etal., 619). Accordingly, Guth’s inflationary model marginally differs fromthe Big Bang only in the seconds from the era of quantum gravity to 10^-35s.After 10^-35s, the two theoretical models are identical.

In his own words, Guth states:“The inflationary universe theory is an add-on to the standard Big Bangtheory, and basically what it adds on is a description of what drove theuniverse into expansion in the first place ... Inflation theory takes advantageof results from modern particle physics, which predict that at very highenergies there should exist peculiar kinds of substances which actually turngravity on its head and produce repulsive gravitational forces … The inflationarytheory gives a simple explanation for the uniformity of the observed universe,because in the inflationary model the universe starts out incredibly small… the inflation takes over and magnifies this tiny region to become largeenough to encompass the entire universe, maintaining this uniformity as theexpansion takes place.” But, Guth cautions, “… everything hasto be described in terms of probabilities” (Brockman, www.edge.org,2002).

For the back yard astronomer, adifferent manner in which to simplify inflation theory is to think of saidtheoretical model as several pieces added to a jigsaw puzzle. AlthoughGuth’s propounded theory accords more comprehension applied to the BigBang, it also suggests plausible explanations (but not absolute answers) as towhy there exists more dark matter than matter, how galaxies evolved from theorigins of density fluctuations, as well as, explain (in part) the presentuniformity of the current observable universe. More pieces, however, arerequired before the Cosmological puzzle becomes complete. The challengestanding remains our continued acquisition of the fundamental scientificknowledge to explain observable cosmological phenomena.

Unlike our predecessors, the Egyptians and Greeks, celestialbodies themselves may no longer elicit idolatrous veneration, but theyassuredly continue to capture our acute watchfulness. Undoubtedlyhumankind’s fascination with the origins of the universe will not abate,but continue to compel us to seek answers to its riddles. Apparently what wastrue for Aristotle continues to remain true “The beginning of anything isthe most important part, being indeed half of the whole.” And thereinlies a maxim holds humans, we are obsessed with not knowing the beginnings ofanything, knowing only that nothing precedes a beginning and everythingproceeds from its beginning.

Works Cited

1. “Alan Guth: The Golden Age of Cosmology.” edge.org. 2001. 07/06/2002

<http://www.edge.org/documents/day/day_guth.html>.

2. Cowen, Ron. “Galaxy Hunters: The Search forCosmic Dawn”. National

Geographic. February 2003: 2-29.

3. Fraknoi, Morrison, and Wolff. Voyages Through TheUniverse. 2nd ed.

Harcourt: Philadelphia, 2001.

4. Lemley, Brad. “Guth’s Grand Guess.” Discover. April 2002: 33-38.

5. Newton, Sir Isaac: Mathematicians. Accessed03/11/03; available from

            <http://www-goups.dcs.st-ac.uk/~hisory/Mathematicians/Newton.html>.

6. Wilson, Jerry, D., And Anthony J. Buffa. CollegePhysics. 4^th ed.

NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000.