IV
Anthropic and ananthropic concepts
a)
The physical concept of space
The aristotelician or newtonian
space is an absolute framework where the phenomena occur. Einstein relativized this space by
integrating it into a four-dimensional universe (compound of three coordinates
of space and one of time) where the events happen (On the electrodynamics of
the moving bodies 1905). Time and space,
closely mixed, constitute reference frames from which the physical phenomena
are calibrated: momentum, energy, speed,
etc... The physical laws are invariant
by change of reference frame. Actually,
Special Relativity does not relativize space but space measurements of rigid bodies
located in space, according to their situation of movement or rest. It relativizes, in the same way, not time but
temporal measurements of the clocks at rest or moving. Special Relativity rises from the postulate
of the constancy of the speed of the light in the vacuum.
By prolonging its step, Einstein
geometrises the concepts of force and gravitation in an optimal trajectory
(geodesic) described by a particle of test in a four-dimensional space
(space-time) curved by the presence of matter-energy (Foundations of the
General Theory of Relativity 1916).
If space is curved by the presence
of matter-energy, it is because it appears different from thoseones and as a
framework where the events occur. A
space containing neither matter nor energy is thus conceived as an empty
framework. How can one conceive the
physical curve (and no geometrical) of an empty space? i.e. nothingness. Nothingness, by definition, can be neither
flat nor curve. Actually, in General
Relativity, Einstein describes and calculates the modification, the curve of
the euclidean trajectories of a particle of test in a space containing of
matter-energy. It is not the empty space
which is curved. That is impossible by
definition. They are the trajectories of
the bodies in an empty space which are modified by the presence in this same
empty space of matter-energy. Empty
space or nothingness, the container, cannot be affected of a curve without
contradiction in term. We find the
aristotelician framework of space. The
question which arises then is as follows:
how can matter-energy, without newtonian gravitation, without curve of
empty space, affect and curve the
trajectories of the particles of test?
We have tried to provide an element
of reply to this question in the model of temporalist gravitation which we
propose (see < http://site.voila.fr/nobigbang > Chapter 9: The temporalist gravitation).
In quantum mechanics, the vacuum of
space is not empty. Because of the uncertainty
principle of Heisenberg, space is the place of quantum fluctuations and filled
with virtual particles.
In the theory of the Big Bang, the
galaxies move away from each other, with a speed proportional to their distance
and a redshift whose value is given by the constant of Hubble Ho. This redshift is interpreted like a
cosmological effect, the expansion of the universe. This expansion of the universe is conceived
as a dilation of the space which involves the galaxies (the usual comparison is
that of a balloon or a hyper sphere which dilates involving the objects on its
surface). The origin of the expansion is
allotted to various causes, the Big Bang, the inflation, the cosmological
constant, the dark energy, the quintessence, the instanton, etc… Space, in the theory of the Big Bang, seems
an ambiguous concept. Is this an
abstracted, mathematical or real and physical space? Is this the vacuum? i.e. nothingness? It is rather the curved space-time of General
Relativity. Contradiction is the same
one as for General Relativity. How
can an empty physical space, i.e.
nothingness, be expanding?
The physical concept of space, in
contemporary physics and cosmology is contradictory. The quantum spatial vacuum is not empty since
it is filled with virtual particles. The
spatial vacuum of General Relativity, in the absence of matter-energy, can be
regarded as vacuum. How can the presence
of matter-energy curve an empty framework physically? An empty physical framework is neither flat
nor curve. It does not have of a spatial
size. General Relativity is a
mathematically coherent and physically validated theory. Its predictive value is daily shown, since long. Its rationality is not. It is the same for quantum mechanics. As for the expansion of the universe, the base
of the Big Bang, it suffers from the same rational handicap as General
Relativity.
Regarding its irrationality, the
quantum concept of space or vacuum, contradictory, must be regarded as
anthropic. It is the same for the relativistic
space concept which curves space or the vacuum and not the trajectories in this
space or this vacuum. It is necessary
thus to seek an ananthropic concept of the space, i.e. rational,
not-contradictory, which integrates the considerable and undeniable results
quantum mechanics and Einsteinian relativity.
Such a model is possible. It is
an approach of this model which the author proposed in the temporalist
gravitation of his temporalist model:
(< http://site.voila.fr/nobigbang > Chapter 9: The temporalist gravitation).
a)
The physical concept of time
Just as for space, Special
Relativity relativizes the concept of absolute aristotelician or newtonian
time. But just as for the concept of space,
Special Relativity relativizes not time but measurements of time, i.e. temporal
measurements of the clocks, depending on their movement or at-rest state. This relativistic operation of the clocks of
Special Relativity rises from the same postulate of the constancy of the speed
of the light in the vacuum.
Nevertheless, the coordinate of time preserves its privileged direction,
of past towards the present and the future, contrary to the coordinates of
space. This privileged direction of
time, generates a "cone of light" which delimits the observable
events of the universe. General
Relativity preserves this temporal asymmetry.
The quantum physics, which
integrated the Special Relativity in the quantum electrodynamics, hardly
modified the relativistic concept of time.
It changed it, in a space direction, in the diagrams of Feynman, where
the orientation past > future is not privileged any more compared to the
orientation future > past (particles and antiparticles). The relations of uncertainty of Heisenberg,
by correlating uncertainty on energy and uncertainty over time do not give a specific
definition of time. If Einsteinium
relativity emphasizes well (cone of light) the arrow of past time > future,
it abolishes the concept of time for the photon. A moving clock slows down. A clock, moving at the speed of the light, would slow down infinitely. The photon which moves, in the vacuum, at the
constant speed of c is, according to einsteinian relativity, immutable. For it, time disappears and it is thus
located apart from time.
In the theories of the superstrings,
the universe would be composed of eleven dimensions, including seven space
dimensions, twisted in spaces of Calabi-Yau and 4 dimensions of visible
space-time. In the dimension of time,
the photon does not age "At the speed of the light, time ceases running
out" (Brian Greene 2000).
The macroscopic concept of time
suffers, with the first access, of millennium religious and metaphysics a
priori primarily anti-scientists:
creation (of the universe), first causes, final causes, origin, creative
divinities, innumerable myths, etc…
These a priori led science, in the past, to purely anthropic cosmogonic
theories and their last misadventure, the Big Bang, appeared ex nihilo, and
whose many theories try to mitigate the difficulties of the initial singularity
(inflaton, pre-Big Bang, etc…).
In last analysis, time is conceived,
in contemporary physics, like the fourth space dimension of the universe. Asymmetry past > future is the only
parameter distinguishing space dimensions from temporal dimension. This asymmetry, denied by Stephen W. Hawking
is affirmed by Roger Penrose (1996). If
asymmetry disappears from the concept of time, nothing distinguishes any more
temporal dimension from a spatial dimension.
A recent experiment nevertheless
confirmed the asymmetry of time in the strange elementary particles (PLEAR
1998).
Multiple theories, primarily in
quantum cosmology, speculate on the concept of time. The theory of Instanton, of Hawking-Turok,
extremely speculative, conceives Instanton like a tiny object containing at the
same time its own gravity, the matter and its own space-time and which would
start an inflationary universe. Andrei
Linde is very skeptic with respect to this theory which he considers physical
more media than physical. A question
remains unanswered in this theory: which
is the cause of the origin of the instanton?
The inflationary hypothesis of Alan Guth and the multiple theories of
pre-Big Bang (Gabriele Veneziano 1968 - 1991;
Igor and Grichka Bogdanov 1999 - 2004;
etc…) are primarily speculative
and/or almost unverifiable.
These various theories cannot profit
from the ananthropic statute: 1) they
are highly speculative and violate the critical mind 2) they transgress the
Principle of reality because they are not falsifiable or verifiable.
In Einsteinian relativity as in the
theory of the superstrings, time is abolished for the photon which is thus
located out of time. In the majority of
the cosmological models, space and time disappear before the quantum wall
(located at 10^-43 second) or the Big Bang located at moment zero.
To affirm that space and time emerge
with the Big Bang or before (pre-Big Bang) mean very precisely that
matter-energy is created with space and time starting from pure
nothingness. This assertion, without any
validation, raises more from science fiction than from rigorous science.
The concept of time, such as it
appears in the quantum cosmological models, the Einsteinian relativity or the
theory of the superstrings can be regarded as an anthropic concept. It transgresses at the same time the
criterion of critical mind and the Principle of reality: 1) To
affirm that the photon is located apart from time is pure speculation and an
obvious absence of critical mind 2) We do not have any physical proof of the
exclusion of the time of the photon.
The quantum or relativistic concept
of time can thus be regarded as anthropic.
It is thus necessary to seek an ananthropic concept of the time, i.e.
which does not violate the critical mind, which integrates the considerable and
undeniable results of quantum mechanics and Einsteinian relativity and which is
falsifiable. It is what the author
proposes in his temporalist model based on the assumption of the fundamental
asymmetry of time: (< http://site.voila.fr/nobigbang > Chapter 5: The concept of time).
b)
The physical concept of speed limit
c
The constancy of the speed of the light
in the vacuum c is a postulate of Special Relativity. This postulate of the constancy of c and its
limiting value in the speed transmission of the physical phenomena constitutes
the base of modern physics that it is in Relativity (Special or General) or in
quantum mechanics. A certain number of
researchers nevertheless considered supraliminal or even considerable physical
speeds, even infinite. Or actions being
instantaneously propagated. Up to now
none of these assumptions could be validated.
These concepts which transgress the Principle of reality, i.e. the
scientific validated facts and laws, cannot thus claim with the ananthropic
statute.
The physical concept of speed limit
c can only, at the present time, claim it.
Paradox EPR introduced a strange,
contradictory concept with deterministic traditional physics.
Paradox EPR (Einstein,
Podolsky, Rosen - 1935)
Paradox EPR supported that the
description of the quantum phenomena by quantum mechanics was insufficient (hidden
variables) and led to a contradiction with one of the three following
points: 1) impossibility for a physical
signal of exceeding speed c; 2) the
causality; 3) the locality.
The quantum formalism
(probabilistic) leads to the violation of the inequalities of Bell by the
quantum predictions which show that the quantum correlations cannot be
understood using traditional concepts.
The experiments of Alain Aspect
(1981 - 1982) showed that the predictions of quantum mechanics were valid, that
there were not hidden variables and that Einstein and its colleagues were
wrong. Of the three above mentioned
points, one chooses the third and one shows some the non-locality or the
non-separability of two particles in a single unit.
.
This inseparable overall concept, of
intricate states, of transmisssion of instantaneous information (and not of
physical message what would violate Special Relativity) and of not-locality is
an interpretation of the experiments of Alain Aspect.
Another interpretation, that we
propose, is possible. We substitute for
the determinism called upon the fundamental indeterminism of the quantum
microcosm, corroborated by the probabilistic equation of wave of Schrödinger
and the relations of uncertainty of Heisenberg.
The substitution of a fundamental probabilism to traditional causality
makes the strange concept of non-locality or non-separability useless.
c)
The physical concept of the
Principle of conservation of energy
The first law of thermodynamics
states the Principle of the conservation of energy in a closed system. Can the universe be regarded as a closed
system? The answer, today, is
discussed.
In addition, wether it is in the
macroscopic or microscopic, animated or inanimate world, one has never been able to observe the appearance
ex-nihilo or the disappearance of matter-energy. The living organisms transform themselves
into other living organisms (reproduction) or into inanimate matter. The molecules, the atoms or their components
(particles of matter and bosons of gauge) change into one another but never disappear. The matter is transformed into energy and
vice versa (photons > < electrons) but does not disappear. Under the terms of the Principle of reality,
one can consider that matter-energy can neither appear nor disappear.
The models which consider the
creation of matter-energy and space time ex-nihilo either at moment zero of the
Big Bang or at one time Pre-Big Bang violate the Principle of reality and must
thus be regarded as anthropic. Only the Principle
of conservation of energy (more precisely of matter-energy) profits from the
ananthropic statute.
e) The concept of finality
The concept of finality relates to
primarily biological sciences. Historically, those ones are made, of finalist a
priori. The same terms of organs and
functions imply utilitarian considerations and judgments of value. An organ (heart, stomach, lung, etc…) has a function (circulation, nutrition,
breathing, etc…). In the field of
physics, an electron does not have, in the constitution of an atom, a
utilitarian role. It has certain
properties which allow the bond with other atoms to form molecules. This
dichotomy in the description of the living organisms and the inanimate matter
does not have any theoretical or scientific justification. It may originate in cosmogonies of
metaphysical or religious nature. To
allot nature intentions or an ethical
aspect, is to ignore neutrality and
objectivity concepts.
The Darwinism and its prolongation,
the T.S.E. (the Synthetic Theory of the Evolution), with their fundamental
concepts of "advantages" and "natural selection" allot
nature with utilitarian concepts and finalist intentions, in the biological
evolution, which violate the neutrality of nature and is incompatible with the
ananthropic statute. The natural
selection (of the best ones), the advantages (anthropic concept, nature being
neutral), the adaptations (the organisms which are the best in phase with their
environment) are anthropic concepts, without possible dispute. The Darwinism must thus be regarded as an
anthropic theory. The author proposes a
model of the biological evolution which integrates the Darwinian theory with a
new interpretation which respects the ananthropic character of nature: A probabilistic model of the biological
evolution: < http://site.voila.fr/dinosaurs >
f) The concept of optimization
Wether it is in the physical or biological
sciences, one finds the concept of optimization or maximum effectiveness in
many principles or disciplines.
In the Einsteinian gravitation, the
gravitation, a dynamic concept, is replaced by a cinematic concept, the
geodesic one of space- time (the shortest trajectory traversed by a particle of
test in a four-dimensional space more or less curved by the masses and
energy). Quantum physics uses the
concept of minimal fundamental level of energy (no excited state of the
atom). In quantum mechanics, the quantum
of action of Planck h, minimal action, is the angular stone of all the physical
phenomena. In traditional mechanics, the
Principle of the least action of Maupertuis dominates. The importance of this Principle is found in
the quantum electrodynamics where the equations of the movement, in the
theories of the fields, rise from a Principle of the least quantum action
(Hildebrandt 1998). In these various
fields, the movement, the energy, the action are minimal. Which can be translated into a Principle of
minimization or optimization of the physical phenomena.
This minimization or optimization of
the physical phenomena is found in the biological phenomena. One can note this optimization of the
biological processes at the molecular level, since in last analysis, they are
the properties of the biological molecules which determine those of the
organisms. If oxygen is not essential to
life (anaerobia), "coupled with the respiratory chain, the cycle (of
Krebs) thus has the maximum effectiveness met in biology as for the
recuperation of energy of oxidation in the form of A.T.P." (Schoffeniels 1984). By glycolysis and the fermentative way, the
anaerobic cells manufacture, starting from glucose, 2 molecules of A.T.P.,
whereas the same reaction, continuing with breathing in the aerobic cells,
produces 32 molecules of A.T.P. (oxidative phosphorylation of the cycle of
Krebs) that is to say 16 times more energy (Mason 1992, Robert J.Huskey
1998).
The concept of optimization which
allots to nature a tendency to effectiveness or a finality in the physical or
biological phenomena cannot be regarded as ananthropic. The minimization of these phenomena is
nevertheless a fact. How can one
interpret it in an ananthropic way?
We have seen in a previous chapter (Chapter II) that the theory of
probabilities, and its application by the law of the large numbers, expresses
that the events, of which the probability or the chances are very weak, rarely
or never occur and, vice versa, those of which the probability or the chances
are high occur. If one takes the example
of a coin thrown in the air, the chances of seeing the side pile appear are 1/2. In the case of a dice, the probability of
seeing each face appear is 1/6. The physical or chemical constitution of the
coin or the dice, the height, the speed, the duration of the jet, etc..., are
factors or conditions which play a negligible role in the result of the
jet. The probability thus arises, among
a number of conditions, like a dominating but no single factor. The probability orders and simplifies the
"events": the result of the
throwings, according to their mathematical chances, i.e. the ratio of the
probable cases to the possible cases, in fact 1/2 or 1/6. Ultimately, the probability selects, among
the many parameters which condition the production of an "event" (in
the above mentioned example, the structure, the chemical composition, the
kinetic energy of the object, etc...), only one parameter, the number of faces
of the object (2 or 6), which simplifies the phenomenon and determines the
mathematical chances to which the law of Bernoulli applies.
One notes thus that, in the theory
of probabilities, one finds the process of minimization or optimization, which
we highlighted in the many physical concepts of minimal action of movement,
energy and: geodesic of General
Relativity; minimal fundamental level of
energy of the no excited state of the atom;
minimal quantum of action of Planck h, Principle of the least action of
Maupertuis, Principle of the least quantum action of Hildebrandt. It is the same for the optimization of the
biological processes (cycle of Krebs).
The concepts of minimization or optimization, attached to a human
judgment of value, must be regarded as anthropic. The phenomena of movement, of minimal energy
or action, physical or biological, must be regarded as phenomena which have
mathematical chances to occur and which occur.
They are thus probabilistic phenomena which concern ananthropic
concepts.
The anthropic concepts of
minimization or optimization thus appear, in last analysis,as the anthropic
translation, of the ananthropic concept of dominant or dominating
probability.
g) The Second Principle of
Thermodynamics
The Second Principle of Thermodynamics
states that, in a closed system out of balance, the entropy is not
preserved. It grows and evolves to a
state of balance. The entropy increases
during the evolution towards the state of balance. For Poincaré, the entropy is a probability,
i.e. it obeys the laws of chance. This
chance is directed in time; in a total
system, the entropy is irreversible. For
Schrödinger, the entropy is rather synonymous with disorder, degradation. One can consider that the Second Principle of
the Thermodynamics which minimizes, by the probability, the evolution of the
order in a closed system out of balance is a concept of optimization as those
which we have just quoted in the preceding paragraph, i.e. probabilistic and
ananthropic. We will find in the chapter
V other minimalist principles in physics.
Conclusion
The use of anthropic concepts, in
models or theories, can lead only to anthropic reasonings. Only the reasonings resting on ananthropic
concepts can lead to valid conclusions, ananthropologically..
Next : V A probabilistic ananthropic model of the
universe
Return to Home page
Return to Table of contents