Born to do Math 76 – 180 Million Years
Scott Douglas Jacobsen & Rick Rosner
March 1, 2018
[Beginning of recorded material]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: There has been recent experimental evidence showing the earliest discovered stars formed as early as 180 million years after the Big Bang.
Rick Rosner: There is early light from 300,000 years after the Big Bang. Any earlier and the universe was opaque because there was too much stuff going on. There were various phases in the early universe.
You enough electrons and protons to be with each other for light to get through, enough electrons orbiting protons when you have a hot soup of that not happening - which is an Ionization Era. There is no way for light to get through.
The deal is, the matter in the universe went through certain phase changes as a whole. The modern universe is inhomogeneous in a lot of ways. You have huge expanses of almost nothing, a vacuum, and then you have blips of matter and stars.
But in the universe, as it is conceived as the Big Bang in the early universe, everything was a soup. This soup went through phase changes as a whole. One of them was going from ionized matter, which is separated electrons and protons, to electrons and protons combining into hydrogen atoms.
Until that phase change happened, you can't get light escaping from the soup because it is scattered by free electrons. You get hydrogen atoms forming at a little after 400,000 years the Big Bang. That is the earliest light that we can see.
The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, we detect that in the form of radio waves. There is a lot of it. There might be more of the ancient free photons than from later on, There are still a lot of them. They do not affect us so much because they are so redshifted, so weak, from being so old.
But in terms of absolute numbers, there are a bunch of them. You do not get certain amounts of light until lights start forming and shining. They found using some sophisticated radiometric techniques dips in background radiation that indicates this is the part at which you start getting stars.
This was 180 million years after the Big Bang. I do not know if that is sooner than they expected it to be. But they are talking about it being the earliest that you could possibly expect stars to form after the Big Bang.
According to IC, we do not believe in one big bang. Though the universe looks very Big Bangy, if there have been any big bangs at all, it has been through a series of Big Bang-like events or just the universe rolling along in not necessarily a Big Bang way with the Big Bang appearance being a characteristic of information.
Under IC, the CMB would be noise that hasn't been filtered out because the universe isn't sufficiently defined. It doesn't have an infinity of matter or an infinity of information. So, you will have noise that isn't filtered out.
If information is arranged in a Bang Bangy way, the amount of information in the universe is proportional to the apparent age of the universe and the amount of matter in the universe and the scale of the universe - that is, the scale of a proton diameter to the diameter of the entire universe, then all of those things are consequences of the information the universe contains the apparent age of the universe being proportionate to information; you would expect the information to be arranged in a way that is temporal and causal as an apparent history with some of that history being actual history.
Some of it, though, as you get farther and farther away from the active center of the universe what looks like redshifted and younger galaxies and stuff has more and more to do with incomplete information.
The parts of the 'beginning' of the universe are where there is a lot of incompletely defined information relative to us and also relative to the other parts of what looks like the early universe. You could view the absence of complete information as at least allowing the existence of noise.
In that, if you had a universe with infinite information, it would appear to be infinitely old and any information from the apparent beginning of the universe - any light from the apparent beginning - would be redshifted down to zero information and the noise level would be zero.
We are still confused about things. We think in IC the universe is a lot older than it appears to be with the apparent age being the amount of information it contains, but one of the areas of confusion is "Does this very, very old universe have Big Bang-like events?" The answer is "probably yeah."
"What is the scale of those?" When a part of the universe becomes informationally active when it wasn't before if you're retrieving old frozen information and making it active, does that make a Big Bang looking event?
The answer is “probably yeah, but it would be incorporated into something like the apparent Big Bang, which is the way the universe appears.” One of these little bangs that meld into this apparent Big Bang.
“How big of an event is that?” Does it cover the entire visible universe? The deal is, under IC, we still need a framework that accounts for all of the apparent manifestations of a single Big Bang 14 billion years ago.
If IC is an actual thing, an information-based universe that functions a little bit like thought does, you have to have mechanisms that account for information processing over a super long period of time and also informationally do not contradict the observational evidence of the apparent Big Bang.
Every time that you get an experimental result like somebody found the light from the earliest possible stars 180 million years after the Big Bang. You have to figure out what is happening.
Somebody has to figure it out, how it works informationally. If it is not a Big Bang, then informationally, what is the deal with the first light from the first star – apparent first light from the apparent first star – showing up as some dip in radiometric observations showing up 180 million years after the Big Bang?
Based on how information is in our brains, we know there is a lot of stuff that information processing apps, modules, or modes are pretty much on whenever we are awake like spatial information processing, there is never a time unless you do LSD.
That the parts of your brain that process spatial information into a sense of 3D space around you. There is never a time when that is turned off and space is scrambled. Do not take LSD.
But if you happen to be exposed to LSD, you can really hamper a lot of those modules. When you are awake, there is never a time that those modules are not processing faces, so that a face looks like a face.
That it is readable as a human face with expressions and recognizable features, but if you happen to be on LSD then those modules get screwed up. You see incompletely processed faces, which look like CG effects.
That the faces haven’t been smoothed into rounded faces. You get these lizardy badly processed faces that look like wireframe faces. The kind of faces you may see in early video games. That haven’t to manage human-looking faces.
I supposed with enough LSD that you could turn off your spatial processing modules and have a really hard time navigating and figuring out where walls, routes, and doors are and their relationship to each other because the modules have been turned off.
Also, you dream in 3D and in faces. Even when you aren’t working, those modules are always on. Others are only turned on as needed, whatever modules you need to be a ski racer.
I assume there is a skill set and a set of perceptions that mostly you turn on when you are racing or practicing racing. In an IC universe, you would have some parts always on and processing information.
Then you would have modules that you could turn on. An IC universe needs to have always on stuff and stuff that gets turned on and then turned off as it gets used and is no longer useful.
It falls away to the cold and frozen outskirts that look like close to T=0 and has to fit into a structure that looks Big Bangy. So, that is what we are trying to resolve or would be trying to resolve if I weren’t so lazy.
The end.
Rick Rosner
American Television Writer
RickRosner@Hotmail.Com
Rick Rosner
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing
Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.Com
In-Sight Publishing
Endnotes
[1] Four format points for the session article:- Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner.
- Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott.
- Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview.
- This session article has been edited for clarity and readability.
- American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf.
- Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf.
License and Copyright
License
In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 2012-2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
No comments:
Post a Comment