Posted on 01/10/2005 3:04:44 AM PST by billorites
We have entered what is being celebrated as the Einstein Year, marking the centenary of the physicist's annus mirabilis in 1905, when he published three landmark papers -- those that proved the existence of the atom, showed the validity of quantum physics and, of course, introduced the world to his theory of special relativity. Not bad for a beginner.
"It's not that I'm so smart," Einstein once said, "It's just that I stay with problems longer." Whatever the reason for his greatness, there is no doubt that this determination allowed him to invent courageous new physics and explore realms that nobody else had dared to investigate.
What he was not, however, was a perfect genius. In fact, when it came to the biggest scientific issue of all -- the origin of the universe -- he was utterly wrong. And while we should certainly laud his achievements over the next 12 months, we may learn a more valuable lesson by investigating Einstein's greatest failure.
The story starts in the late 19th century, when the scientific establishment believed in an eternal and unchanging universe. This was a neat theory of cosmology, because a universe that had always existed did not raise any awkward questions, such as "When was the universe created?" and "What (or Who) created it?"
Einstein grew up in this era, and was similarly convinced that the universe had existed for an eternity. However, when he developed general relativity (his theory of gravity) in 1915, he became aware of a tricky problem. Gravity is an attractive force -- it attracts coins to the ground and it attracts comets toward the sun. So why hadn't gravity caused the matter in the universe to collapse inward on itself?
Gravity seemed to be incompatible with an eternal, unchanging universe, and Einstein certainly had no sympathy for the alternative view of a collapsing universe, stating that: "To admit such a possibility seems senseless."
Isaac Newton had run into the same problem with his own theory of gravity some 250 years earlier. He too believed in an eternal universe, yet he knew that gravity would have to cause its collapse after a finite time. His solution was to propose that God was responsible for keeping apart all the celestial objects, adjusting their positions from time to time as part of his cosmic curatorial responsibilities.
Einstein was reluctant to invoke God, so his solution was to fiddle with his theory of general relativity, adding an anti-gravity force alongside familiar gravity. This repulsive force would counteract gravity over cosmic distances, thereby maintaining the overall stability of the universe. There was no evidence for this anti-gravity force, but Einstein assumed that it had to exist in order to provide a platform for eternity.
Although everything now seemed to make sense, there were some dissenters. A small band of renegade cosmologists suggested in the 1920s that the universe was not eternal but had been created at a finite moment in the past. They claimed it had exploded and expimanded from a small, hot, dense state into what we see today. In particular, they argued that it had once been compacted into a primeval super atom, which had then ruptured and exploded. This model, which has since developed into the Big Bang theory, did not require any stabilizing antigravity because it proposed a dynamic, evolving universe.
The Big Bang model was initially ridiculed by the scientific establishment. For example, one of its pioneers, Georges Lemaitre, was both a cosmologist and an ordained priest, so critics cited his theology as his motivation for advancing such a crackpot theory of creation. They suspected that the model was Lemaitre's way of sneaking a Creator into science. While Einstein was not biased against Lemaitre's religious background, he did call the priest's physics "abominable." It was enough to banish the Big Bang model to the hinterlands of cosmology.
However, in 1929 Einstein was forced to eat humble pie. Edwin Hubble, working at Mount Wilson Observatory in Southern California, showed that all the distant galaxies in the universe were racing away from one another as though they were debris from a cosmic explosion. The Big Bang model seemed to be correct. And, while it would take several decades before the theory was accepted by the scientific establishment, Einstein, to his credit, did not fight on. "This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened," he said, and even called his repulsive force the biggest blunder of his career.
In 1931, Einstein paid a visit to Hubble at Mount Wilson, where he renounced his own static cosmology and endorsed the expanding universe model. His support was enough for The New York Times to embrace the mavericks, running an article with the headline "Lemaitre Suggests One, Single, Great Atom, Embracing All Energy, Started The Universe." Hubble's hometown newspaper in Missouri, The Springfield Daily News, preferred to focus on its local hero: "Youth Who Left Ozark Mountains to Study Stars Causes Einstein to Change His Mind."
It might seem that Einstein emerges from this story as a flawed genius, one who was not perfect. In fact, there is a twist to the tale, one that implies he was perhaps better than perfect.
If gravity pulls everything together, then the expansion of the Big Bang should be slowing, because all the receding galaxies would be attracted to one another. In 1998, however, when astronomers tried to measure this deceleration, they were astonished to find that the universe is in fact accelerating. The galaxies are apparently moving apart faster and faster as time passes.
What is the best explanation scientists can come up with? The existence of an anti-gravity force. Theorists call this repulsive effect "dark energy," but it is exactly the sort of force that Einstein posited to maintain the stability of the universe. Anti-gravity is now back in fashion some seven decades after he abandoned it. It seems that even when Einstein thought he was wrong, he turned out to be right.
And, as we celebrate the Einstein Year, let's also bear in mind the fact that he was prepared to admit that he was wrong. Perhaps humility, more than anything, is the mark of true genius.
Singh, based in London, is the author of Fermat's Enigma and the forthcoming Big Bang: The Origins of the Universe.
"God does not roll dice."
I'm sorry but there are some things that just don't need to have their centenary marked. The guy's dead for goodness' sake. Can't these people leave... Oh, never mind
That was not in response to the big bang theory but to Hisenberg's uncertainty principle.
I note that the author claims Einstein was hesitant to invoke God--yet believed the universe had always existed.
the problem was he could not explain gravity.And the author mentioned Newton -and Hubble--of the three I know Newton and Einstein were committed Christians -both believed in
God the Creator.Einstein said something about the Nazi
invasion of his home country and how the universities
could not explain it ,the politicians couldn't explain it,
only the churches had a viable explanation.As James Wilson
put it Science and Religion are not enemies but come from
the same Divine source.
So "bob" thinks dead people ought not be remembered?
Well will be sure to forget him when he's gone.Too many Americans have NO respect for anything outside their
undercloths."oh just forget it.'(we will)
There was once a man in Ispahan
Ever and ever so long ago,
And he had a head, the phrenologists said,
That fitted him for a show.
For his modesty's bump was so large a lump
(Nature, they said, had taken a freak)
That its summit stood far above the wood
Of his hair, like a mountain peak.
So modest a man in all Ispahan,
Over and over again they swore --
So humble and meek, you would vainly seek;
None ever was found before.
Meantime the hump of that awful bump
Into the heavens contrived to get
To so great a height that they called the wight
The man with the minaret.
There wasn't a man in all Ispahan
Prouder, or louder in praise of his chump:
With a tireless tongue and a brazen lung
He bragged of that beautiful bump
Till the Shah in a rage sent a trusty page
Bearing a sack and a bow-string too,
And that gentle child explained as he smiled:
"A little present for you."
The saddest man in all Ispahan,
Sniffed at the gift, yet accepted the same.
"If I'd lived," said he, "my humility
Had given me deathless fame!"
-- Ambrose Bierce ("Devil's Dictionary")
ping for later
I heard a comedian quip: "One of the smartest men to ever live, Einstein, was divorced. Don't you think they should tell you this before you get married?
God is what is eternal; the physical world is not.
An eternal God created a temporal universe. Outside of time and physicality is the eternal world.
This is where these cosmologists are wrong.
Einstein is the poster boy for the modern cult of "intelligence", whatever that is, and shows the dangers of assigning undue importance to the opinions of those who possess high IQs. The guy was certainly technically astute. But when you examine his life (read the biography "Einstein") you find that he was as gullible as they come for every destructive social and political fad of his age.
No, that's not what I'm saying at all.
My comment related to the marking of the centenary of his "annus mirabilis". Sorry for the lame joke.
The next thing you'll learn is that he was gay and that he intended to vote in the 2008 elections for hillary clinton as a democrat
One hopes they saved a generous helping of humble pie for our author, Mr. Singh....
IIRC, there is renewed interest in the possibility that Einstein's "cosmological constant" (which was a mathematically correct term, BTW) is not equal to zero, as the rate of expansion does not appear to be uniform.
Although Einstein called it his "greatest mistake," there is evidence to suggest that perhaps Al's only mistake was to think he was mistaken.
....A survey on 42 very distant supernovae, which has been carried out thanks to the Hubble Space Telescope, shows that the acceleration of the expansion of the universe is constant.
This result adds a piece to the puzzle that cosmologists are trying to put together; puzzle which is about "dark energy" ("dark" is an adjective which might evoke some sort of mistery, or something magical or metaphisical, but, despite all this, this phenomenon is not magic).
This energy is thought to be a space-time property and what it seems to do is accelerating the expansion of the universe. When Einstein theorized the general relativity, he put a lamba in his equations, as to indicate an inversion of the force of gravity at large distances. For many decades, that paramenter in those equations has been considered as wrong, but today we might have the proof that, after all, Einstein was right....
Except from "Unione Astrofili Italiani" web site from Hubblesite.org at
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2004/12/text/
....A survey on 42 very distant supernovae, which has been carried out thanks to the Hubble Space Telescope, shows that the acceleration of the expansion of the universe is constant.
This result adds a piece to the puzzle that cosmologists are trying to put together; puzzle which is about "dark energy" ("dark" is an adjective which might evoke some sort of mistery, or something magical or metaphisical, but, despite all this, this phenomenon is not magic).
This energy is thought to be a space-time property and what it seems to do is accelerating the expansion of the universe. When Einstein theorized the general relativity, he put a lamba in his equations, as to indicate an inversion of the force of gravity at large distances. For many decades, that paramenter in those equations has been considered as wrong, but today we might have the proof that, after all, Einstein was right....
Except from "Unione Astrofili Italiani" web site from Hubblesite.org at
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2004/12/text/
Sorry about the double post. Sometimes it goes to the thread after a post but has not posted. When I go back it post twice. Not sure how to keep this from happening.
That's ok, Bob. I got it.
Thank you very much for posting that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.