What do you find most troubling about our current model of the Universe?

Question

The fine structure constant? The lack of a quantum theory of gravity? Wave particle duality? Weakness of gravity? Information Paradox? Something else perhaps?

Im just curious to what you all think. Be free with your terminology I have a 4 year physics degree.

This is more of a pole than a question

Answer 1

I think the inability to mathematically handle that thing we call infinity is the most disturbing. Back before the Schrodinger and other similar equations, scientists struggled with something as simple as a oven.

According to the old so-called blackbody equations, without discrete energy levels, ovens should heat up to infinite amounts of energies. This is, of course, empirically silly...clearly ovens do not heat up to infinity...but the pre-discrete energy level physics said they should. [See source.]

So, discrete energy levels, multiples of whole numbers, were concocted. And out of all that, quantum physics was born and the duality (wave and particle) of nature. And now we have sub atomic particles that can exist anywhere in the universe concurrently. That, it seems to me, is equally as silly as infinitely hot ovens. Yet, that's where quantum mechanics takes us.

Now that brings us to the latest silliness...strings. These were invented to avoid singularities in the macro equations of Einstein et al. Singularities, like dividing by zero, occur because points have no size dimensions; they are zeroes. So, instead of giving points a bit of size, they created (get this) an "infinitely" thin vibrating string of Plank's length (~10^-33 cm). So the string has some size; there will be no singularity.

What did that do? Well, that traded the infinity of a singularity in Einstein's stuff for an infinity of thinness. Argh. You have to be kidding me. I think I'd rather go back to infinite energy in my oven.

Answer 2

you're having difficulty? The questions you're posing presently have not have been given any solutions, and a few say they might in no way be replied. yet to handle your first element, it is not a count of religion to settle for the universe replaced right into a singularity. The universe is increasing and there is not any talked approximately phenomena that halts this enlargement (the universe itself would not have sufficient mass for gravity to overhaul the enlargement). Einstein even tried to fudge a phenomena into his math to maintain the universe as a comfortable state in view that relativity indicated the two an increasing or collapsing universe. in view that not something can halt this enlargement, the opposite implication is that at a finite time interior the previous the universe replaced right into a singularity. We in simple terms could be thoroughly incorrect and there'll come an remark that overturns the extensive-unfold clarification. yet for now, the stressful information (it is there, pass look) shows the universe rising from a quite heat and dense state.

Answer 3

What troubles me most about the “standard model” is the idea of action at a distance without a particle to transmit it. Sure you can describe the effects of gravity and electromagnetism as being properties of the empty space between objects; but that is a cop out to avoid the issue of the true cause.

I believe there has to be an ether, and it's substance must leave no space unfilled. As distances get smaller, the particles that fill them get smaller until the infinitely small space is filled with infinitely small particles. To me that suggests a fractal model. Fractals are infinitely large in size and infinitely small in divisibility.

I am skeptical of those who claim the speed of gravity is either infinite or equal to the speed of light---both of which claim to be the standard model. Likewise I am skeptical of the "standard" belief that the range of gravity is infinite.

Answer 4

The thing I find most troubling about our universe is wave-particle duality because I think that if we were able to carry out detailed experiments on sub-atomic particles then our knowledge of quantum physics would greatly benefit and we would be able to arrive much more quickly at an all-encompassing set of rules that govern everything in the universe in terms of physics.

Answer 5

I admire all scientific personnel, especially Physicists, for starters. I believe that there are an unsurmountable number of problems that have yet even to be proposed, let alone the very numerous present problems in theoretical or practical physics. Pondering the most troubling question about our current model of the Universe is almost like pondering infinity itself.

However, with such philosophical-type thinking aside, the largest problem, and maybe the most day-to-day, down to earth one, which everyone here has *failed* to mention.....is Time itself, in my opinion.

What is time? Why do we measure time? Time is essential to our view of our cosmos, our universe. There's Spacetime, then there is Earthtime. Clocks and calendars are inaccurate, and yet we still measure daily life with these things. Our human brains have the capacity to measure time, like an internal clock, we do it every day. We've sped time up, and yet in the instant of a crisis, time seems to slow down. Time spurts, seems random, there is past, present and future, it is the fourth dimension, it is abstract, it is measured, it is there and it is not. Time is the epitome of most Physics theories: of classical and modern physics itself. The simplest physical equation: Distance = Rate * Time......

We take it for granted. Every second of it. And yet it's so mysterious.

I don't pretend to know everything about Physics, and I definately don't wish to jarble any jargon (the little I do know). I'm a chemist with the heart of a physicist. But to me, Time is essential....and something we need to start understanding better than we already are. Does it exist? Doesn't it exist? Is it a thing of our Cosmos? Or Is it manmade?New theories and discoveries in such a small, inoccuous (yet phenominally important) thing as Time will help us in the understanding of the bigger problems of the Universe....don't you think?

Answer 6

I find the Standard Model of particle physics rather shaky. It will be very interesting to see whether the Higgs Boson shows up any time soon (such as when the LHC starts up). I wonder whether we may not see it, but instead see some new physics which points to something deeper and more interesting. Maybe this could lead to understanding what dark matter, and especially dark energy really are.

Answer 7

From what I've seen in the current model, most of the loose ends are tied-up, gravitation does what it supposed to, the statistics of astrophysics give answers that mostly match observed data. Most of the big areas in our current model seem fine, except for one huge elephant in the room ...

Dark energy and dark matter.

The amount of energy that we should have in the universe is much larger than the amount that we calculate from observations. The amount of matter that we should have in the universe is much larger than the amount that we calculate from observations.

So like medieval alchemists, when we can't explain something, we simply say that a dragon flew by and disturbed our results. Only our dragon is the catch-all of dark energy. Dark energy is so adaptable and presents such a delicious range of fudge factors, that it has been stretched and condensed to make up for a range of problems.

True, there probably really is dark energy (and thus dark matter) but the fact that we really little knowledge of what it is, is troubling. I've seen some tantalizing work that attempts to explain dark matter through Casimir Force and some extra dimensions on the subatomic level. These are areas that are complicated, and although I understand Casimir Effect, I know nothing about "extra dimensions," they smack of "dragon" to me.

Another problem in our model of the universe, although more closely related to the model of our Quantum Universe, is renormalization. I won't go into the details here, but in producing closed-forms of systems, we have some unpleasant infinities (in the form of energies that exist below the ground state and some other areas) that we simply sweep under the rug because they are inconvenient. True, you have to make a living, and you do what works, but Dirac himself warned about this renormalization as being a danger to good physics.

A good introduction on the controversy of renormalization can be found here:

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/renormalization.shtml

Finally, there is another problem, but not with our model per se. This problem is with us physicists. Unlike other areas of science like engineering, chemistry, biology, etc., many of us (even most of us) are too eager to solve the basic problems, to work on the problems that will make us famous, but we're not willing to work on the problems that the world needs us to solve. Energy, water, pollution, transportation, nonproliferation, etc.. If Dark Energy is the elephant in the room, than this is the herd of elephants in the room.

Physicists have the power to solve many of these problems, but we seem more interested in the competition of intelligence. There is no problem with the competition of course, but a bit of attention on real-world problems would go a long way in our profession.

Answer 8

Most troubling?
That big bang cosmology is assumed true when the evidence for it is paltry, contrived / ad hoc solutions to fit facts as they are discovered.

And that physics is now purely mathematical - and as one poster above noted - there is no explanation of the causal connection between things - they just keep making more mathematical 'particles' and give them the properties they need to make things add up.

The solution. The wave structure of matter in space is the most simple foundation for physics. It deduces fundamentals of QT, relativity and cosmology. Explains connection between finite observalbe universe and infinite space.
And it makes sense!

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/science-physics-wsm-wave-diagrams.htm
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Most-Simple-Scientific-Theory-Reality.htm
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Cosmology.htm

Hope this helps.
Geoff Haselhurst

Answer 9

Man has an inherent curiousityabout the Universe. It is a chalenge for scientist to question and understand the mysteries that our Creator has set in the Universe.
The Current model of the Universe is interesting ;however it does make very litle sense and there is doubt about those whos believe it know if they really understand what they are talking about.
In other words its a model based on theory ;however ;
It is not it.
We cannot believe somethings they are explaining in physics
thinking they have the absolute truth. The Fact they do not Understand exactly what is light ,Gravity,magnetism,charges and spins as they explain it to us simple humans in terms of an undefinable concept which in turn is explained in terms of another undefinable one make us believe that they are adressing to idiots.

Answer 10

The simple answer is the fact that despite all we do know, or think we know, there is really no consensus as to whether the universe is finite or infinite.
Without this pretty basic foundation, it seems rather futile to try and build the house starting from the second floor up.Other than that, the current model seems to agree pretty much with our observations and predictions.