Are We Living in a Giant Void?

As a science fiction fan, I have come across something that annoys me. There seem to be a limited number of things that can happen in a series, and episodes start repeating themselves from series to series. One such occurrence is the idea of a ship being trapped in a void of stars; being literally nowhere near another star, and thus, all in black.

This void, as most episodes are entitled, is similar to the descriptions that filter out of Antarctica. When explorers are traversing miles and miles of white, they begin to lose the ability to determine where they are, and if they are moving.

The idea of an astronomical void is not just science fiction fodder however, and rather, according to Timothy Clifton and colleagues Pedro G. Ferreira and Kate Land at the University of Oxford, a possible explanation for why it looks as if our universe is expanding at an accelerated pace.

So far, the general consensus has been that dark energy – though unfound and unproven – is to blame for this acceleration. And although corroboration has been found from several independent sources, such as the cosmic microwave background and large scale structure, as well as improved measurements of the supernovae, this consensus is filled with uncertainties, considering that the observed value of dark energy is 120 orders of magnitude smaller than what is predicted from quantum physics.

At this point, Timothy Clifton’s paper, entitled ‘Title: Living in a Void: Testing the Copernican Principle with Distant Supernovae’, can be brought in to play as the basis of an alternative theory explaining what we are witnessing outside our proverbial window.

The opening line of their paper, states that “a fundamental presupposition of modern cosmology is the Copernican Principle”.

The Copernican Principle states that the Earth is not in a central, specially favored position, according to Herman Bondi in his 1952 book Cosmology. Clifton and co want to challenge this principle scientific theory, with an explanation that would also help us understand what we are seeing.

Their theory posits that if in fact Earth and our surrounding neighbors are in fact in an unusual or special region of space, ie, a void, then our perspective on the universe would be severely challenged. The local geometry of space-time would be different than expected. The curvature of space around us would affect how light from those distant supernovae that originally saw us explain their dimness as an ever accelerating and expanding universe. In fact, if the proposed void were large enough, it could do away entirely with the scientific need for dark energy to explain what we cannot.

It is no surprise that Clifton’s theories are speculative, but the best science always starts out that way. But one aspect of this paper, that at least one writer – Amanda Gefter, opinion editor at New Scientist – has picked up on, is that by blinding adhering to a scientific principle because to do otherwise is too hard, is tantamount to crime. Without making this a “rattle the cages” message, rules are there to be broken, and in science this is even more the case than elsewhere.

Posted by Josh Hill.

Related Links:

http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0807.1443
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/space/2008/07/are-we-living-in-giant-cosmic-void.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_universe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_principle

Comments

[Ima Denier]

Those are only empty liberal promises echoing painfully in your heart.

[Jim Jones]

You bring up some very valid points. Really makes you wonder.

JT
www.ULtimate-Anonymity.com

[alex]

www.myspace.com/tr7n7ty7

[Aaron]

If we are open minded enough to consider fairly intriguing scientific theories why not consider if they might relate some of the oldest astronomical and historical accounts we have intact on earth...

Genesis 1

1-In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2-The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
3-Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light...

Not trying to prove anything here. The void concept triggered thought of this verse when I read the article. Just an outside observation since there is no evidence beyond our opinions and theories that either perspective can truly be dismissed. We all are on a journey to find Truth.
Respectfully,
Aaron

[Dax]

Actually Alex, the Sumerian accounts of the creation predate any biblical accounts by about 10,000 years and paint a very different picture. Anyway, back to the scientific.
I really don't understand why the theory of an electrical universe is being met with such strong resistance. Plasma has been the only logical explanation for "dark matter" so far. How can people simply say, "oh... Newtonian physics doesn't explain it... so there must be nothing there!" Geez luweez...

[Marc Driftmeyer]

``It is no surprise that Clifton’s theories are speculative, but the best science always starts out that way. But one aspect of this paper, that at least one writer – Amanda Gefter, opinion editor at New Scientist – has picked up on, is that by blinding adhering to a scientific principle because to do otherwise is too hard, is tantamount to crime.''

------------ FIX -----------------

``It is no surprise that Clifton’s theories are speculative, but the best science always starts out that way. But one aspect of this paper, that at least one writer – Amanda Gefter, opinion editor at New Scientist – has picked up on, is that by (]blindly) adhering to a scientific principle because to do otherwise is too hard, is tantamount to crime.''

FWIW: Occult Science has long since discussed and deliberated with this issue and applied it to advance Mathematics.

However, since most credible Occult Scientists are long since dead it's hard to see that ever taking footing with the United States living in a Void thinking it's a democratic republic founded upon Christian Folklore and Mythology.

[Stephen Lazaro]

That Occult Scientists stuff sounds like a great deal of shit to me Marc Driftmeyer. Perhaps you could link me to some material or something? Besides which, what does it matter if the United States is (or thinks it is as you say) a "democratic republic founded upon Christian Folklore and Mythology"? What does this have to do with science, a methodology practiced around the world? What the United States as a whole does or does not believe is ultimately irrelevant.

[Frank]

This "paper" by Clifton et al. is science at its worst. A quick read of the paper from arxiv leaves me with many questions: where is this to be published? Has anyone relevant (read relativity expert) peer reviewed this work? It seems apparent that they have not.

The statement "we could not infer the properties of the Universe at large from what we observe locally" is profoundly stupid, and is the antithesis to science in general. Or, that we can explain what we observe using mathematics and experimentation. If what Clifton et al. claim is true, all astronomy/astrophysics/cosmology/space physics etc may as well close up shop.

If this "paper" were written by anyone not from Oxford, it would be laughed at/mocked and totally ignored by the scientific journalistic press.

[The Joker]

Why so serious ?

[frog to prince]

Actually Dax, the mere age of a copy of an account does not validate it over a newer copy of a different account or invalidate it. This is a logical fallacy rife in today's modern thinking. For all we know the newer copy may have been based on an older copy that has since been destroyed or lost.

All we can really do is test different accounts and theories as far as we know how to with the tools of science and see which one holds up and answers the most questions - Aaron's (not alex) observation was highlighting that.

However, today's modern science is merely the natural philosophy of the 1700s and 1800s codified into today's standard of thinking sanctioned by powerful interest groups. Knowing historical accounts (even ancient ones) are quite pertinent today having much bearing on what you think you know when you return "back the scientific" today.

Consider the ancient account of Pythagoras handing down his mathematical theorems to the Greek schools thanks to his investigations into the knowledge of the very ancients. The Great Pyramid of Giza is in fact a monument to the principle of Pi in addition to other advanced knowledge pertaining to astronomy and geometry (primitive man wasn't supposed to know that we're taught). It's more of a repository of knowledge in stone that we only recognize once we gradually make the discoveries ourselves or recover it elsewhere, as Pythagoras did (reverse engineer). But, since such ideas overturn the sanctioned views we've inherited of man's ancient history (modern man is smarter than primitive less evolved man) it's typically not fed to you in public school. Meanwhile, the ancient knowledge is kept in the mystery schools of today and lo, the movers and shakers in the most powerful interest groups are stacked in said mystery schools; it's no mistake one of their favorite symbols is the Egyptian pyramid (see reverse US Seal).. or maybe it's all just a coincidence and there is no guiding force or 'reason' behind any of it as modern man is taught. Yes, ignore what those silly backward ancients knew and their structures so advanced they still defy our knowledge and ability today, here now, we know they were just apish ancestors who could hardly build a fire. Here, go study how you're just an animal who need look no higher than man's intellect.

[a dogs bum]

poo

[Pseudonym]

If you post about metaphysics, you will invariably get this nonsensical drivel smacked right back in your face. Right from people quoting the Bible to people who have seen one to many documentaries on ancient conspiracy theories.

Nobody cares about what you guys think. If nobody answers your posts, it's not because we have no counter-argument. It's because we've already made them countless times, and we've realised that you don't want to learn anything new.

[karl]

I like pickles

[Johnald Chaffinch]

i thought something simialr today, that perhaps dark energy is where sapce-time gets more of it's natural shape back as all matter we can see is creating a universe wide depression onto it.

[frog to prince]

Hey everybody I want everyone to know I don't care what you think. Are you listening to me? I want you to know I don't care what you think! I'm not going to speak to you. Hey, are you listening to me?

- the modern intellectual

[Edwin R. Floyd]

Let a million minds debate!!
Let a million ideas contend!!!!

Its all a great adventure - perhaps the truth is out there

(Moller - the X File).

[Summer Glau]

This sounds a bit like the 'cell' theory, that the universe is made of dozens of diffrent 'voids'.

[Summer Glau]

By the way 'voids' sounds weirdish. :(

[Bob Mosurinjohn]

Voids - anti-gravity bubbles whose expansion is powering the expansion of the universe, accounting for redshift, accounting for voids, accounting for the sponge texture of the universe .. no big bang .. just a vast twinkling coming slowly into being through quantum fluctuations in nothing - (read pascual jordan)the same fluctuations creating the anti-gravity bubbles.