Limit or just beginning (Part-I : Evolution and Energy)
Title is entirely in reference to the understanding of us or ours or our nature around us. Title is asking us weather if it is a limit for our understanding about the universe or nature in general or it is a beginning of knowledge. We are going to discuss strange stuffs that we are unable to explain till today or till our current level of Intel. Without sounding more philosophical we would jump directly to the main points. One more point to be noted that I would not judge single statement or fact or theory according to my knowledge or understanding but instead I would be glad if you the readers try for the same and get best out of it.
Nature has always been around us and has always amazed us by showing its strangeness and complexity to us or any intelligent being (comparatively intelligent) and we or comparatively intelligent one has many times grasped that strangeness by ability. For example, in older times raining was very complex and strange natural phenomenon. But after the development of thermodynamics and material science, we understood it and likewise we have huge list of processes in nature that we have encountered. For example, matter’s transformation in different forms, mystery of day and night, secretes of planet’s shapes (although we have many intelligent beings having issues about planet’s shape), but it’s not the case for all the time. So we are going to discuss few strange stuffs (no idea what to call) which lead us to have such discussions or similar to the title I put for the article.
How does the life started on planet earth?
Bare with me, it is still a physics problem with few biological terms. Theory of Evolution by Darwin amazes us by encountering many previous beliefs and showing true nature’s process. Main reason behind the validation of TOE is that it shows numerous evidences to put in arguments for its validation. But problem is that it only shows the present phase of life forms and living beings, but it has no ability to explain beginning of life.
So, to understand this let us have small ride in time from today. Let us say some kind of bacteria were first to start the evolution. Bacteria are still complex structure for beginning stage, at the beginning there might be simpler than that organism.
What might be simpler than bacteria? Some kind of strange single cell organ. Cellular structure is still highly complex for starting. So what might be the case? What is simpler than that?
Let us say that there might some small tiny viny chemical or physical or both process which might have given birth to the small chemical which might have some kind of strange property to grasp the nature around it and change in accordance (which is heart of TOE), it’s still just a thought without a single evidence.
Answer to this problem is http://ciciartist.com/portfolio/angels-motherboard-tree/ “No Answer” yet.
Literally we have got no answer for that problem of beginning of life; actually this question is not that simple. We still need huge exploration for that in our universe and especially in our biological knowledge.
We can go further in our exploration by finding more mysterious questions like beginning of life, existence of intelligence, birth of consciousness and a lot more.
But we have our tool of imagination by which we doubt with our scientifically suitable method and solve the case by finding evidences about our predictions or imaginations. In same way some of science people like Neil Tyson Degrasse (American Astrophysicist, Author and Science Communicator) have proposed their belief about the beginning of life on Earth.
Life on earth that we see today might not have been started on earth, some bacteria or other simpler stuff might have been migrated on earth from neighboring planet Mars through huge meteoroid or other small celestial object. Still it is just an idea which has small possibility and which has no evidence to validate it, simply a story which might be true or might not be.
Think of this confusing puzzle, you may solve this in future.
Simplest way to understand the Energy is as below:
go to site “To get something, you need to give something”
Like to turn the light bulb on, you need to give electricity
To lift the weight in gym, you need to eat something
And this list goes on; these are nothing but different forms of energy.
So energy can be traditionally defined as http://atozautoplaza.com/project/stock-of-auto-parts-in-a-z-autopart/ “an ability of one to do something or to do any work”.
Electrical bulb gives us energy in the form of Light and Heat.
And to get these two forms of energies from bulb we need to give energy to bulb in the form of electricity.
One more interesting fact about energy is that “it is always conserved”, meaning it can never be destroyed or it can never be disappeared from the available quantity in universe and same way it can never be created. There is no any factory available in universe that can create new energy, so net amount of energy in universe remains as it is (constant). It is different that it can be converted into different forms like we discussed above.
This is still very basic information nothing shocking and seems like nothing to worry about it.
But problem is
“How that quantity of energy came to existence in universe?”
Who put that amount of energy in our infinitely large bag of universe or where does it came from.
If energy can never be created why is there energy?
If we take The Theory of Big Bang in consideration than at the beginning or approximately 13.7 billion years ago there was nothing but a single proton sized universe with infinite amount of Mass in it. Which is infinitely massive object but with least amount of space occupation (highly unstable state of space-time singularity), whose explosion led to the creation (or formation) of our universe after which space and time (or space-time) came to existence. Enormous amount of energy released and formed our universe. During the condition of singularity the gravitational field of small sized universe is infinite (same as black holes whose gravitational pull is infinite or enormously strong).
Singularity was before the explosion of universe, where –
- Temperature was extremely high
- Density was almost infinite
- Mass was infinite
- Size of the universe was very tiny perhaps equal to the proton or neutron (may be smaller or greater than that)
- Space and time were not existed yet (no idea how to think of something without space coordinates and time coordinate, I mean how does anything make sense without these fundamental concepts of coordinates, where was the centre from where the big bang started, is this question valid ? and how would you locate that centre if no coordinates existed?)
One of many ways to think of singularity is as below:
If you divide any quantity with zero (0); you get the state of singularity.
Density = m / v
m = mass of an object
v = volume of an object
If somehow you make the denominator infinitesimal (dv or close to zero but not zero) theoretically by keeping mass constant you gets the singularity at where density of an object becomes infinite ideally and all other physical laws goes inapplicable or anything makes no sense there.
Any object can be squeezed up until that volume by changing the intermolecular distance in an object or by changing atomic or molecular sizes, but this must have taken huge effort from something (no idea what to call that something) to do that much of squeezing.
If it is not true than it must have some mysterious state of existence in space-time fabric (but wait, it is still not existed what do I have to do here, leaving up to readers)
But question is, “why the universe was in state of singularity, what led it to have properties of state of singularity”.
Just to squeeze the sponge into small size, you need some effort from external side; think of universe squeezed into the size of not atom but a proton.
In response to that we can put argument that energy always existed or it had no creation or law of conservation of energy is just foundation of theoretical work, but these are just responses for self satisfaction and for winning the debate competition. We can’t apply these responses to the actual universe which is out there waiting to be solved with truth not with satisfaction.
Again the answer is that “NO answer”.
And this is the reason why I put these question in the article titled as “LIMIT or just BEGINNING?”
Now after this small discussion, one might come up and say:
“You cannot have such topics like limitations in science, it has been barely few centuries we started scientific methods and scientific understanding about universe”
“We have that huge advancement in technology up until now, very short period of time, how can we raise question about the ability of science”
But honestly my intention is not to question the ability of scientific work that would take place in future to solve the hidden mysteries of universe. Technology is totally different business, which has nothing to do about the way that human brain took for its development which resulted in few disabilities of human to intuit many un common sides of universe, instead technology is has huge dependence on human’s tendency to give less effort.
So that is all for now, I would be continue for next part of this article. I want that readers interact in comment section for questions and answers.