Rotation in the universe. Universe - lex. And at this time

MOSCOW, August 29 - RIA Novosti. At the center of the Milky Way there is a giant “pit” filled with hot gas, which arose approximately 6 million years ago, when the black hole at the center of our Galaxy constantly “chewed up” and “spitted out” huge masses of matter, according to a paper accepted for publication in Astrophysical Journal.

"We played cosmic hide and seek, trying to understand where at least half the mass of visible matter in the Milky Way disappeared. To do this, we turned to archival data collected by the XMM-Newton telescope, and realized that this mass was not hidden anywhere and what it represents "hot gas that permeates almost the entire galaxy. This "fog" absorbs X-rays," says Fabrizio Nicastro from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge (USA).

As scientists explain, today most astronomers believe that in the center of all galaxies live supermassive black holes - objects with a mass of millions and billions of Suns, continuously capturing and absorbing matter, part of which is “chewed” by the black hole and ejected in the form of jets - thin beams of plasma, accelerated to near-light speeds.

In the Milky Way and in a number of other galaxies, this black hole is in “hibernation” and has no jets. Scientists have been trying for quite a long time to understand when it “fell asleep” and how active it was in the past, and how this activity influenced the life of stars in the center of the Galaxy and on its outskirts.

Nicastro and his colleagues unexpectedly found the answer to this question while trying to solve another old cosmic mystery - the question of where the “missing” matter of the Galaxy went. The fact is that astronomers have been trying for several decades to understand why the mass of visible matter - stars, planets, dust, gas clouds and other structures - is approximately 2.5-5 times less than predicted by calculations based on the speed of movement of stars around the center Milky Way.

Relatively recently, observations of other galaxies, carried out using the Chandra X-ray Observatory and the Fermi Gamma-ray Telescope, showed that this “missing mass” may be hiding outside the galaxy in the form of “ears” - giant clouds of hot gas above and below the Milky Way. In ways that are not visible in any other range of radiation except X-rays and gamma rays.

Nicastro's team tested whether this was true using data collected by Europe's XMM-Newton X-ray telescope. Focusing on the oxygen lines in the X-ray spectrum of the interstellar medium, which “give out” the presence of hot gas, the authors of the article calculated its mass and density in different parts of the galaxy.

It turned out that in the center of the Milky Way there is a giant “bubble” of rarefied hot gas, stretching to a distance of about 20 thousand light years from its center. The mass of this gas and other accumulations of hot matter above and below the galaxy, according to astronomers, is just enough to cover the difference between observations and calculations.

Its “parent” was apparently the supermassive black hole Sgr A* at the center of our Galaxy - if it was active in the past, it would have ejected huge masses of hot gas moving at a speed of about a thousand kilometers per second. These emissions “cleared” those parts of the Milky Way through which they flew from any serious accumulations of cold matter that was more noticeable to us.

This bubble, as scientists’ calculations and observations of young stars in the vicinity of the Galactic center show, formed approximately 6 million years ago, when the black hole “ate” all its reserves of matter and went into “hibernation” after 8 million years of “gluttony.” In a similar way, as astrophysicists believe, the work of distant quasars, active supermassive blacks in distant galaxies, may cease.

One of the main questions that does not leave the human consciousness has always been and is the question: “how did the Universe appear?” Of course, there is no definite answer to this question, and it is unlikely to be obtained soon, but science is working in this direction and is forming a certain theoretical model of the origin of our Universe. First of all, we should consider the basic properties of the Universe, which should be described within the framework of the cosmological model:

• The model must take into account the observed distances between objects, as well as the speed and direction of their movement. Such calculations are based on Hubble's law: cz =H 0D, Where z– redshift of the object, D– distance to this object, c– speed of light.
• The age of the Universe in the model must exceed the age of the oldest objects in the world.
• The model must take into account the initial abundance of elements.
• The model must take into account the observable.
• The model must take into account the observed relict background.

Let us briefly consider the generally accepted theory of the origin and early evolution of the Universe, which is supported by most scientists. Today, the Big Bang theory refers to a combination of the hot Universe model with the Big Bang. And although these concepts initially existed independently of each other, as a result of their unification it was possible to explain the original chemical composition of the Universe, as well as the presence of cosmic microwave background radiation.

According to this theory, the Universe arose about 13.77 billion years ago from some dense heated object - difficult to describe within the framework of modern physics. The problem with the cosmological singularity, among other things, is that when describing it, most physical quantities, such as density and temperature, tend to infinity. At the same time, it is known that at infinite density (the measure of chaos) should tend to zero, which is in no way compatible with infinite temperature.

• • The first 10-43 seconds after the Big Bang are called the stage of quantum chaos. The nature of the universe at this stage of existence cannot be described within the framework of physics known to us. The continuous unified space-time disintegrates into quanta.

• The Planck moment is the moment of the end of quantum chaos, which falls at 10 -43 seconds. At this moment, the parameters of the Universe were equal to, like the Planck temperature (about 10 32 K). At the moment of the Planck era, all four fundamental interactions (weak, strong, electromagnetic and gravitational) were combined into a single interaction. It is not possible to consider the Planck moment as some long period, since modern physics does not work with parameters less than the Planck moment.
• Stage. The next stage in the history of the Universe was the inflationary stage. At the first moment of inflation, the gravitational interaction was separated from the single supersymmetric field (previously including the fields of fundamental interactions). During this period, matter has negative pressure, which causes an exponential increase in the kinetic energy of the Universe. Simply put, during this period the Universe began to inflate very quickly, and towards the end, the energy of physical fields turns into the energy of ordinary particles. At the end of this stage, the temperature of the substance and radiation increases significantly. Along with the end of the inflation stage, a strong interaction also emerges. Also at this moment it arises.
• Stage of radiation dominance. The next stage in the development of the Universe, which includes several stages. At this stage, the temperature of the Universe begins to decrease, quarks are formed, then hadrons and leptons. In the era of nucleosynthesis, the formation of initial chemical elements occurs and helium is synthesized. However, radiation still dominates matter.
• The era of substance dominance. After 10,000 years, the energy of the substance gradually exceeds the energy of radiation and their separation occurs. The matter begins to dominate the radiation, and a relict background appears. Also, the separation of matter with radiation significantly enhanced the initial inhomogeneities in the distribution of matter, as a result of which galaxies and supergalaxies began to form. The laws of the Universe have come to the form in which we observe them today.

The above picture is composed of several fundamental theories and gives a general idea of ​​the formation of the Universe in the early stages of its existence.

Where did the Universe come from?

If the Universe arose from a cosmological singularity, then where did the singularity itself come from? It is currently impossible to give an exact answer to this question. Let us consider some cosmological models affecting the “birth of the Universe”.

Cyclic models

These models are based on the assertion that the Universe has always existed and over time its state only changes, moving from expansion to compression - and back.

• Steinhardt-Turok model. This model is based on string theory (M-theory), as it uses an object such as a “brane”. According to this model, the visible Universe is located inside a 3-brane, which periodically, every few trillion years, collides with another 3-brane, which causes something like the Big Bang. Next, our 3-brane begins to move away from the other and expand. At some point, the share of dark energy takes precedence and the rate of expansion of the 3-brane increases. The colossal expansion scatters matter and radiation so much that the world becomes almost homogeneous and empty. Eventually, the 3-branes collide again, causing ours to return to the initial phase of its cycle, again giving birth to our “Universe.”

• The theory of Loris Baum and Paul Frampton also states that the Universe is cyclical. According to their theory, the latter, after the Big Bang, will expand due to dark energy until it approaches the moment of “disintegration” of space-time itself - the Big Rip. As is known, in a “closed system, entropy does not decrease” (the second law of thermodynamics). From this statement it follows that the Universe cannot return to its original state, since during such a process entropy must decrease. However, this problem is solved within the framework of this theory. According to the theory of Baum and Frampton, a moment before the Big Rip, the Universe breaks up into many “shreds”, each of which has a rather small entropy value. Experiencing a series of phase transitions, these “flaps” of the former Universe generate matter and develop similarly to the original Universe. These new worlds do not interact with each other, as they fly apart at speeds greater than the speed of light. Thus, scientists also avoided the cosmological singularity with which the birth of the Universe begins, according to most cosmological theories. That is, at the moment of the end of its cycle, the Universe breaks up into many other non-interacting worlds, which will become new universes.
• Conformal cyclic cosmology – cyclic model of Roger Penrose and Vahagn Gurzadyan. According to this model, the Universe is able to enter a new cycle without violating the second law of thermodynamics. This theory is based on the assumption that black holes destroy absorbed information, which in some way “legally” reduces the entropy of the Universe. Then each such cycle of the existence of the Universe begins with something similar to the Big Bang and ends with a singularity.

Other models of the origin of the Universe

Among other hypotheses explaining the appearance of the visible Universe, the following two are the most popular:

• Chaotic theory of inflation - the theory of Andrei Linde. According to this theory, there is a certain scalar field that is inhomogeneous throughout its entire volume. That is, in different areas of the universe the scalar field has different meanings. Then, in areas where the field is weak, nothing happens, while areas with a strong field begin to expand (inflation) due to its energy, forming new universes. This scenario implies the existence of many worlds that arose non-simultaneously and have their own set of elementary particles, and, consequently, laws of nature.
• Lee Smolin's theory suggests that the Big Bang is not the beginning of the existence of the Universe, but is only a phase transition between its two states. Since before the Big Bang the Universe existed in the form of a cosmological singularity, close in nature to the singularity of a black hole, Smolin suggests that the Universe could have arisen from a black hole.

Results

Despite the fact that cyclic and other models answer a number of questions that cannot be answered by the Big Bang theory, including the problem of cosmological singularity. Yet, when combined with the inflationary theory, the Big Bang more fully explains the origin of the Universe, and also agrees with many observations.

Today, researchers continue to intensively study possible scenarios for the origin of the Universe, however, it is impossible to give an irrefutable answer to the question “How did the Universe appear?” — is unlikely to succeed in the near future. There are two reasons for this: direct proof of cosmological theories is practically impossible, only indirect; Even theoretically, it is not possible to obtain accurate information about the world before the Big Bang. For these two reasons, scientists can only put forward hypotheses and build cosmological models that will most accurately describe the nature of the Universe we observe.

Introduction
Why do telescopes lie?;
Where is this SINGULARITY?;
Gravity and antigravity;

THE UNIVERSE AND ROTATION

It is enough to look at one of the many photographs of the Universe () and its parts to understand that it is, in fact, a volume expanding in all directions to the limits of visibility of our telescopes and satellites for studying the Universe. This fact must never be forgotten, not at any moment, otherwise it can very easily happen to us that we begin to perceive volumetric space as a surface (), a plane, or compare it () with objects and phenomena on Earth.

There are no straight or curved lines, or any other geometric objects in the volume; there is only an open volume, expanding into the distance up to 13.8 billion light years (). This figure refers to the object (galaxy) detected from Earth using our instruments. This is only possible because objects whose mass is greater than 10% of the mass of our Sun (and some smaller objects () for which the necessary conditions have been met) constantly emit radiation, which instruments register as light.
Let's assume that in such a space there are only two objects, stars. Despite the magnitude of the distance between them, over time, radiation and gravity will reach from one to the other. That radiation and gravity reached from one object to another over, say, 13 billion years, traveling at ~300,000 km/sec, tells us nothing about the history of those objects. The only conclusion we can draw is that radiation takes that long to travel such a distance. You need to understand that galaxies consist of stars, whose radiation can only be recorded. Stars must live at least as long as it takes for radiation to travel the distance to our instruments that record it.
Why do I emphasize this? Observations of stellar explosions (novae and supernovae) clearly show that the period from the beginning of the explosion to its extinction is very short (), and then there is no radiation. There is no star, and the instruments have nothing to measure. The nebula that remains behind the explosion does not have a source of radiation, and therefore does not shine, only reflects light.

Let's also discuss the statement that 400,000 years (lately this figure is 300,000) from the beginning of the expansion or formation of the Universe (), the compact mass began to clear up and that then radiation (light) appeared. For this mass it is claimed - of course, without evidence or other basis - that it was very hot, larger than all the stars together. It sounds logical to fill such a small space with the entire Universe. If this were accurate, some evidence would already exist by now. The surest and simplest proof would be to photograph that object using our instruments. The problem is that there is no such object; with such mass, heat and amount of radiation (light), it should obscure most of the Universe or its scenes. There is no need for the saying here: If something cannot be detected, it does not mean that it does not exist or did not exist. Instruments are things that record existing objects and the radiation they emit. They can't make things up. It would be impossible not to register an object of this size, even with the help of outdated tools.

The claim that galaxies formed first is completely illogical. Galaxies without stars emitting radiation would only be dark mass, which our instruments could not detect at such a distance. The Universe is an extremely cold and dark place and, if there are no objects (stars) emitting radiation, then nothing can be seen or recorded until they are actually found there, directly in the place itself. It is well known that the most distant galaxies recorded by us are only the sum of a huge number of stars that shine inside the galaxy, because they can only be registered in this way.

If we now argued that in this case the stars are older than 13.8 billion years, we would be right. We would make a big mistake if we said that those stars were formed from the remnants of the decomposition of other stars or something else older than them, because such a statement is in contrast to the constant expansion of our Universe and just forming galaxies (protogalaxies). This implies that the previous size of the Universe was greater or at least the same as today's, and this would immediately exclude the expansion and further development of the Universe on those foundations.

I am not trying to defend the view that the Universe is expanding, but on the contrary, I want to point out the inconsistency of such a worn-out idea, built on fictitious premises, without evidence or with an unclear interpretation of the meaning of some evidence. As for the old age of objects emitting radiation, from this distance one can only correctly say that they have been there for many billions of years and that, in fact, these are stars that form the galaxy. We record the total radiation of a group because the light of an individual object disappears already at a distance of several million (not billions) of light years.

Let's return to the example of two stars separated by 13 billion light years. Over the time it takes for contact between stars to occur (in this case: 13 billion years), forces from those stars begin to act and a relationship is formed. If the objects are approximately the same mass, it is a binary system. All observed stars, without exception, rotate around their axis (), and this is the basic rule for any statement or conclusion (millions of stars have been studied so far). What we are discussing here is that the rotation of one object causes another object to rotate and is affected by it, despite the distance, if it has enough time to cross the distance between them.

Gravity (gravity) and the rotation of objects are the main prerequisites for the formation of double and more complex systems: spherical and other groups of stars, galaxies and groups of galaxies. If only gravity existed (or was dominant), there would be no Universe, because objects would fall vertically onto each other. Only rotation is the main creator of all systems, which places falling objects into orbit. Rotation cannot be discussed only in terms of a rotating object, but as an object and space that gravity fills.

Only the object does not rotate; with him revolve and his forces in space. As distance increases, the power (intensity) of radiation and gravity decreases. The closer the objects are to the star, the stronger the force on them. The results confirm exactly this: in our system, Mercury moves the fastest, and Pluto moves the slowest (). Of course, objects in the Kuiper belt move even slower. Distance is not an obstacle to the action of one object on another. The only obstacle to this would be insufficient time to carry out that action, that is, if the existence of the object was shorter than the distance between the objects. In reality, the distances are shorter than that; the longest can be measured in millions of light years, distances approximate to the distances between neighboring galaxies. It is estimated that there are approximately 100 billion galaxies in our Universe. I have never seen a given or statement, how many are in the present and how many are in the past, and where the past begins and the present ends.

An object that rotates around its axis also has a direction of movement. Our Sun moves at a speed of approximately 200 km/sec. (), inside our galaxy, which has a similar speed of movement within the local group of galaxies. New research suggests a speed of 552 ± 6 km/sec, relative to background radiation (some thinking suggests a speed of 630 km/sec). There are galaxies that move slower than ours; their speed is approximately 100 km/sec. As the distance from us increases, towards the end of the Universe, the speed of movement of galaxies also increases. The highest speeds, close to the speed of radiation, 270,000 km/sec, are found in the most distant galaxies.

The big problem for accepting the rotation of the Universe was that the rotation of the Universe has always been associated with the appearance and design of galaxies, i.e., with the existence of a clearly defined center, which in galaxies, in comparison with the remains of galaxies, is very impressive. All observations of the Universe did not give any possibility of the existence of anything similar; The universe looked the same in all directions. In addition, galaxies are also like groups of stars: those that are closer to the center rotate faster than those that are further from the center. In the Universe, it is the other way around: the most distant objects move approximately at the speed of light, while in the middle of the Universe there are galaxies with very slow speeds.

There are other systems in the Universe that could be discussed, but galaxies are so popular that their fame has not faded in the last 80 years. Globular groups of stars have not been discussed outside the scope of their beauty, and it can be said that groups of galaxies, as such, were discovered several years ago. The structure of such groups does not have a clear center; it is only assumed that it exists. Everyone agrees that they are rotating and that their rotation speed is greater than zero (0), otherwise they would collapse. Due to the excessive shine that interferes with the instruments, it is not easy to obtain the data. Groups of galaxies are still too far away, probably no one has claimed this yet. Only with the help of mathematics can one determine that outer stars or galaxies move faster than inner ones, otherwise, if this were not so, there would be no spherical groups of stars.

Causing widespread surprise, relatively new research has discovered that the observed groups of galaxies are moving in the same direction, and not in the direction expected for an expanding Universe, towards outer space. The authors of those data waited three years, not wanting to announce them, because the results they obtained were impossible to fit into almost any accepted theory of the Big Bang or the expansion of the Universe, as well as into any less well-known theory. Finally, they announced that some dark stream was pulling groups of galaxies in some unknown direction ().

It is important to remember that the observed groups of galaxies are located with us, in the first half of the Universe. Therefore, we cannot talk about the inflation of the Universe or the space between galaxies, because if this were so, then groups of galaxies would move in an outward direction, and this is not the case here. The announced results show that they move horizontally, to where, according to the survey, the Universe bulges out, just like most objects in the equatorial belt.

Radical supporters of the expansion of the Universe do not allow it to be said that this is a photograph of the Universe, but of the Universe that was like this 400,000 years from its beginning. If this is the case, then it is very difficult, even impossible, to answer where our and neighboring galaxies, as well as nearby groups of galaxies, came from in such a Universe. Either this is the Universe of that time and there are no today’s objects in it, or this is the Universe as it really is.

The case of the Andromeda Galaxy, which is just over two million light-years away, is known to collide with our galaxy within a few billion years. This event, according to the expansionists, will take place from the past to the present, because they claim that it is two million years away in the past. It would be a collision of past and present, but this cannot happen. The past, without exception, remains in the past and is not confused with the present or future tense.

This is also similar to the arrival of background radiation, for which it is necessary to look for and name another source, because no one returned from the past and nothing arrived from there. The authors of “Dark Stream” still managed to avoid this trap; they simply showed the results on a photograph of the Universe, where they were obtained, and did not enter into disputes with the past, but showed them as a distance - that’s the only way it should be.

Collisions of galaxies happen quite often, they are a very common phenomenon in the Universe, as well as approach and bypass (). If the Universe or space is inflated or expanded, how can collisions and other relationships of neighboring galaxies exist? After all, they must constantly move apart and move away from each other. The observations show something different: the results are, in fact, capturing large numbers of galaxies in close proximity or collision, despite their distance from us. Of course, this can be lowered by the value of rotating groups of galaxies, but they are also an inexplicable anomaly of inflating space and expansion. If there is a rule of behavior (expansion), then one can expect the behavior of objects in accordance with that rule, and one or more exceptions are possible, but the simultaneous existence of completely opposite rules is by no means possible, such as: collisions of galaxies and smaller objects, rotation of galaxies, groups of galaxies , systems of stars and their groups. In addition, in addition to rotation, they all have a coordinated direction of movement.
Let's discuss, from the point of view of expansion, the decrease in the speed of galaxies moving in the direction from the surface to the center. Our galaxy in today's time is moving at an approximate speed of 200 km/sec. The most distant galaxies, often called pragalaxies, are 13.8 billion light-years away and moving at 270,000 km/sec. Let's now look at the Hubble constant, which indicates that the Universe is expanding faster and faster. Let us now try to reconcile this constant with the fact that the oldest objects moved at approximately the speed of radiation and that today its speed is only 200 km/sec. Either the expansion of the Universe has practically stopped, or there is something seriously wrong with the expansion. If, in their opinion, we are moving further into the past, why is the speed increasing? Or why does Mr. Hubble claim that the Universe is expanding at almost the speed of light?

The rotation of the Universe does not cause any confusion or inaccuracy of that type. The outer objects move faster, and those in the center move slower. Objects that are at least 13.8 billion light-years away must be at least a little older for radiation to continually replenish the space between us and them. While the radiation is coming, we know that there are physically objects emitting it.

For several years now, galaxy studies have been increasingly increasing the list of those galaxies that have a blue shift in their spectrum. Today that figure is about 7,000, and part of the scientific world does not agree with this and recognizes about 100 galaxies with a blue shift (). At least 100 galaxies have a negative velocity relative to our galaxy. This means that the distance between us decreases: either they approach us, or we approach them.

Today I read on one Internet portal that there is not a single absolute blue shift, because if there were, we would have to change our thinking about the structure of the Universe. I asked myself: is it really worth thinking about? What does the word “absolute” mean to the author of that statement? Andromeda will collide with our galaxy sometime in the future - and what is relative about that? Or they will collide; this means that the distance between galaxies is decreasing - or they will not collide; this means that the evidence is false and that many people do not know anything. The existence of a blue shift is irrefutable proof that the structure of the Universe is not built according to the rules of expansion theory, but according to the rules of rotation.

Expansion implies the rectilinear movement of objects towards the outer belt, and all studies show that all systems in the Universe rotate (stars, groups of stars, galaxies and groups of galaxies) and that all objects have curved trajectories rather than straight ones. They clearly indicate that objects move in elliptical orbits within the Universe. The Universe must be only the sum of the movements of the objects in it and that is exactly what it is, because there is no Universe without the objects composing it. It is just another group (a group of galaxies and groups of galaxies). For a group to exist, it must have a rotation speed greater than zero (0), and evidence suggests that the most distant objects are moving at 270,000 km/sec. The action of gravity (gravity) between objects is impossible in the Universe, whose objects move in an outward direction at approximately the speed of light. The intensity of gravity is not sufficient to withstand those higher, as well as much smaller, speeds. In 1684, Edmund Halley proved that the force of gravity between the Sun and the planets decreases in proportion to the square of the distance. The same is true for other objects. Although the reach of gravity is relatively infinite, its intensity quickly weakens. This can be seen in the speeds of the planets of our system: Mercury 47.362 km/sec; Pluto 4.7 km/sec.

In fact, the lowest speed of objects in the Universe is from 100 km/sec. sufficient for gravity to predominate, i.e., for gravity to not have the effects of forming the interaction of two or more objects. The reason gravity effects occur is possible because neighboring objects have the same direction (i.e., curved path line) of motion. Small differences in the distance of objects from the central part (volume) of the Universe, taking into account the surroundings of our system, gives the object that is further away a speed that is slightly greater. It helps to bypass objects (galaxies) if the distance is sufficient for the gravity of both objects to prevail. In the same trajectory, one can expect that even a very weak intensity of gravity over a long period of time can produce the attachment of objects or, to put it more popularly, a collision, although it is more correct to use the expression attachment (approach). Objects on the same trajectory also have similar speeds.

Among the 100 billion galaxies, there are other events, due to the specific structure of the Universe. For example, two groups of galaxies, due to their different rotation rates, will indeed experience a classical collision of two or more galaxies. The same is true in the cases of galaxies alone. In many objects, many different events can be expected, due to the complexity of the system itself.

The same direction of movement of objects explains that there are galaxies in the outer belt, where their speed of movement is 270,000 km/sec, just like the speed of all other objects in that belt. Accordingly, the effect of gravity is similar to that at low speeds.

Let us now check whether the Hubble constant (the expansion constant of the Universe) is equal under the conditions of rotation of the Universe (). Mr. Hubble, using the Doppler effect, concluded that the distances of galaxies and their speeds are proportional, i.e., that those galaxies that are relatively further away from us are moving away faster. Relative to our galaxy, the speeds of other galaxies are mainly greater and the farther they are, the speeds increase proportionally, with the exception of those galaxies that have a blue shift and negative speed. There are 100 - 7000 of them, with a note that their number is constantly growing. If we include in Hubble’s Law groups of galaxies that, by their rotation, cause different velocities of the galaxies in their composition, then we can see that such a law cannot be considered the best solution, taking into account the main error: that all objects move in an outward direction.
An object (the Universe) that rotates also has a direction of movement. This means, according to all the evidence in the Universe, that direction cannot be outside of some system and that only one whole does not exist. This expanse (Multiverse) has one main characteristic: the temperature of the expanse is lower than the temperature of the Universe. With the fact that the background radiation comes from that expanse and is 2.4 – 2.7° Kelvin. This is the upper value, which will decrease at the edges of that expanse, and the rotation speed of that next group in the outer belt will be greater than the speed of the Universe (270,000 km/sec.). The end of the structure of ever larger groups would appear at a temperature of 0° Kelvin, i.e., at absolute zero.

The expanse of absolute zero would have a large number of groups, and we are within one of them. The temperature between star systems and galaxies is ~ 4° Kelvin; this means that it decreases by 1.5° Kelvin between large systems. This helps us conclude that there are still 3-4 layers outside our Universe. The temperature value depends on the source (stars), and the larger the space, the less their influence. The last layer is a group similar to a spherical group of stars, and outside it is only pure energy.

It is necessary to realistically evaluate the behavior of matter at temperatures below the melting point of helium (-272.20° Celsius); this could help more accurately describe the look of the top layer.

Many villages in the universe

Universum are universal

In our Milky Way galaxy alone, according to scientists, there are about 300,000,000,000 stars.

There are about 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies counted in the Universe.

This turns out to be 600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars.

The Universe develops dynamically for 13,500,000,000 years.

But many scientists believe that intelligent life throughout the Universe, in the form of homo sapiens, accidentally arose on this planet 30,000 years ago and through random crossings they became scientists.....

“So, the formulation of Gödel’s first, or weak, incompleteness theorem: “Any formal system of axioms contains unresolved assumptions.” But Gödel did not stop there, formulating and proving Gödel’s second, or strong, incompleteness theorem: “The logical completeness (or incompleteness) of any a system of axioms cannot be proven within the framework of this system. To prove or disprove it, additional axioms are required (strengthening the system)."

It would be safer to think that Gödel’s theorems are abstract in nature and do not concern us, but only areas of sublime mathematical logic, but in fact it turned out that they are directly related to the structure of the human brain. English mathematician and physicist Roger Penrose (b. 1931) showed that Gödel's theorems can be used to prove the existence of fundamental differences between the human brain and a computer. The meaning of his reasoning is simple. The computer acts strictly logically and is not able to determine whether statement A is true or false if it goes beyond the axiomatics, and such statements, according to Gödel’s theorem, inevitably exist. A person, faced with such a logically unprovable and irrefutable statement A, is always able to determine its truth or falsity - based on experience. At least in this respect the human brain is superior to a computer constrained by pure logical circuits. The human brain is capable of understanding the full depth of truth contained in Gödel's theorems, but a computer brain never can. Therefore, the human brain is anything but a computer."

Gödel's discovery

In 1949, the great mathematician and logician Kurt Gödel discovered an even more complex solution to Einstein's equations. He suggested that the entire Universe rotates. Like the case of Van Stockum's spinning cylinder, everything is carried away by space-time, viscous like molasses. In Gödel's universe, a person can, in principle, travel between any two points in space or time. You can become a participant in any event that occurred in any period of time, regardless of how far it is from the present.

standing. Due to gravity, Gödel's universe tends to collapse. Therefore, the centrifugal force of rotation must balance the gravitational force. In other words, the Universe must rotate at a certain speed. The larger the Universe, the

the greater its tendency to collapse and the faster it must rotate to prevent it.

For example, a Universe of our size, according to Gödel, would have to complete one revolution every 70 billion years, and the minimum radius for time travel would be 16 billion light years. However, when traveling back in time, you must

move at a speed just below the speed of light.

It was known, that the solutions of Einstein's equations largely depend on the choice of coordinate system. When analyzing them, spherical coordinates are usually used. In this case, these solutions satisfy the requirements of spherical symmetry, which is quite reasonable - after all, both the Universe and its constituent “particles”, that is, stars, planets, atoms, have the shape of a ball. Such arguments cannot be denied their beauty.
Gödel's universe appeared unexpectedly different - thin, lanky, like the mathematician himself, reminiscent of a medieval mystic and ascetic. It took the shape of a cylinder, and therefore Gödel resorted to cylindrical coordinates when describing the universe.
His Universe at all bore little resemblance to previous ideas about it. Thus, Gödel suggested that not only all the objects in it rotate - these stars, planets, atoms - but also the Universe itself.
What happens? The behavior of all elements of the universe in Einstein’s theory - in our space-time - is described by four-dimensional lines, a kind of “longitude-latitude” of any physical bodies that are simultaneously in space and time. According to Gödel, due to the rotation of the Universe, these four-dimensional lines - "world lines" - are bent so much that they twist into a loop. If we assume that we try to travel along such a closed line, then, in the end, we will meet... ourselves, returning to our past. This is not science fiction, this is an exact mathematical calculation. Travel into the distance of past times is possible along “curves closed in time,” as Gödel called such lines.
These curves are like bridges laid over the stormy waters of time. Would it be easy to cross the stormy waters of the river if not for the bridge built over it? So there is only one way out of the waters of time, one opportunity to pass them - this line, this “bridge”, curled into the past. Having stepped on this “Mirabeau bridge” - “darkness descends midnight beats the days go by and life goes on” (G. Apollinaire) - you can find yourself where... “night time has struck again, my past is with me again.”
Thousands of roads lead us from our today to tomorrow, thousands of possibilities ready to be realized - and only one road back. How to find her? Gödel, like God, proclaims the real: “If we, setting off on a spaceship, fly in a circle, describing a curve of a sufficiently large radius, then we can return to any corner of the past.”

And yet she spins?

In 1999, Time Magazine, joining the general fuss about humanity's entry into the new millennium, surveyed experts and compiled a list of the 100 greatest people of the outgoing century. The most outstanding physicist on this list is, of course, Albert Einstein. And the greatest mathematician of the 20th century was recognized as the Austrian logician Kurt Gödel (1906-1978), whose famous incompleteness theorem transformed the foundations of modern science, perhaps even more radically than Einstein’s general theory of relativity.

It is noteworthy that both of these outstanding scientists, forced to leave Europe at different times due to Nazism and war, found work and shelter in the same place - the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study, where their offices were located not far from each other. Moreover, despite the almost thirty-year age difference, physics and mathematics developed close friendships. From Gödel's letters to his mother we know how highly he valued this friendship. And to make the degree of Einstein’s respect for his young colleague clear, it is enough to recall his famous words that he (being in very old age) went to the institute every day mainly in order to communicate with Gödel on the way back home. These kinds of walking walks and conversations between the two scientists were regular and continued until Einstein’s death in 1955.

No one except the scientist friends themselves knows for sure what topics they discussed during these walks. But at least one of the immediate consequences of their close association is very well known. Although Gödel's main scientific interests lay very far from the problems of physics, in the late 1940s the mathematician turned his attention to the equations of Einstein's general theory of relativity and managed to find an exact solution for them. This solution, called the “Gödel metric,” has a very simple, beautiful and, one might say, elegant appearance (which is especially valued in science). But, ironically, it was precisely these circumstances that extremely puzzled the scientific world, because a simple and beautiful solution - this is how everything works in nature - with a high probability should also be the most correct. However, Gödel's elegant metric describes a universe with rather strange properties. In the opinion of modern science, at least.

Nowadays it is usually customary to say that the solution found by the mathematician is, alas, unrealistic and unphysical. Unrealistic because the Gödel metric describes a stationary (i.e., maintaining a constant volume) universe rotating at a constant non-zero speed. While astronomical observations, on the one hand, convincingly indicate the constant expansion of the universe, on the other hand, they do not provide indisputable evidence in favor of the rotation of the universe. This solution is called unphysical for the reason that Gödel’s universe allows the existence of trajectories closed in loops along the time coordinate. In other words, as the discoverer himself strictly showed, here you can return to the past, albeit a very distant one. And this violates the cause-and-effect relationships of phenomena and thus contradicts the fundamental ideas of physical science about the structure of the surrounding world.

Any aspect of criticism of Gödel's solution deserves careful consideration. So, let’s say, “non-physical” giant time loops imply an endless sequence of cycles of the existence of the universe, where it itself is its own cause. And this, in essence, is an idea expressed by thinkers since ancient times and often graphically illustrated with images of the cosmos in the form of an ouroboros - a huge serpent grasping its own tail. Or, if you look at it a little differently, spewing himself out of his own mouth... However, at the moment, the greatest interest is in the question of the rotation of the universe. If only because there is nothing unphysical in the fact of rotation. Rather, on the contrary, everywhere - from the microscopic world of elementary particles to planets, stars, galaxies and galactic clusters - natural objects are in constant rotation. However, the universe itself, according to the current dominant view in science, does not rotate.

It cannot, however, be said that this fact is strictly substantiated in theory and convincingly proven by experiments. It’s just that in a world without rotation, scientists, one might say, live more comfortably. First, everyone has already agreed that according to the theory of relativity, the universe should look the same everywhere, regardless of where the observer is located. And from the idea of ​​rotation of the universe it follows that the direction along the axis of such rotation turns out to be in some sense “special” and different from the rest. If, secondly, we talk about experiments and astronomical observations, then here, as is commonly believed, there is no convincing evidence of the rotation of the universe. But, this, however, depends on how you look.

In 1982, the young English astrophysicist Paul Birch from the University of Manchester discovered a highly asymmetric distribution for the rotation angles of the polarization of radiation from approximately one and a half hundred extragalactic radio sources. Having analyzed independently obtained data sets from different researchers, Birch showed that they all demonstrate the same pattern - in the northern hemisphere of the celestial sphere, the polarization vector of radio emission is directed mainly in one direction, and in the southern hemisphere in the opposite direction.

In the same work, Birch also made a corresponding conclusion - that the most natural explanation for the observed phenomenon would be the rotation of the universe... Over the years since then, no one has been able to convincingly refute this inconvenient result, which contradicts generally accepted views in cosmology. However, the researcher, who began his journey into big science with such a provocative discovery, unfortunately, failed to make a further career in the world of scientists.

A decade and a half after Birch’s publication, in the spring of 1997, a very consonant work by Borge Nodland and John Ralston, two researchers from the American universities of Rochester and Kansas, appeared. Nodland and Ralston studied data on the rotation of the plane of polarization of waves of so-called synchrotron radiation from 160 galaxies and also discovered a remarkable dependence for polarization angles. It turned out that the angle of rotation changes depending on the direction in which the observation is made - as if the universe had some special axis.

Namely, it turned out that the magnitude of the rotation of the polarization of waves from the observed galaxy directly depends on the cosine of the angle between the direction to this galaxy and the axis passing through the equatorial constellation Eagle, planet Earth and the equatorial constellation Sextant. It turned out that the discovered anomaly again seriously undermined important physical concepts about the isotropy of the universe (should be the same for observations in all directions) and the homogeneity of the universe (should be the same in all places). For obvious reasons, the “anisotropy axis” of the universe, discovered by Nodland and Ralston, took a place in science next to Birch’s result - among the amusing, but not worthy of special attention, incidents.

However, as more and more accurate observational data are collected in cosmology, the inconvenient axes of anisotropy appear more and more clearly in them. Moreover, these axes, as a rule, in some puzzling way strive to pass through the Earth, as if it were a special reference system. Thus, among the many mysteries brought by the data of the WMAP satellite, which records the anisotropy of the background microwave radiation of the universe, the problem with the non-random orientation of low-frequency vibrational modes occupies a prominent place.

According to the theory, the lower modes, like all others, should be randomly oriented in space. But instead, the WMAP map shows that their location clearly gravitates toward the equinoxes and the direction of motion of the solar system. Moreover, the spatial axes of these oscillations lie near the ecliptic plane, and two of them are in the plane of the Supergalaxy, which unites our Galaxy, neighboring star systems and their clusters. It is calculated that the probability of a random coincidence of these directions is less than 1/10000.

In other words, all this looks extremely strange and difficult to explain. Because if we continue to consider the universe motionless, then our solar system and planet Earth seem to be in the center of all outer space. However, if you turn to Kurt Gödel's concept, where the entire universe spins like a giant roulette wheel, the strangeness disappears on its own. For in a universe of this kind, every observer, wherever he may be, sees things as if he were at the center of rotation, and the whole universe seemed to revolve around him. It is easier to visualize this effect if the open cylinder universe of the original Gödel model is transformed into a torus. Then, as the German theorists Istvan Osvath and Engelbert Schücking showed in the early 1960s, in the closed space of the universe-torus there is no designated axis, and all elements rotate around each other in the general rotation of the vortex ring.

Bootes' Void

Named for its proximity to the constellation Bootes, this void is also known as the Great Void. It was discovered in 1981 by Robert Kirschner and his colleagues, who were shocked to discover what appeared to be a ball of nothingness in space. After close analysis, Kirchner and his team were only able to detect 60 galaxies in this region, spanning a whopping 250-300 million light years.

By all laws, there should be at least 10,000 galaxies in this place. By comparison, the Milky Way has 24 neighbors within 3 million years.

Technically, this void should not exist, since current theories only allow for the existence of much smaller "empty" spaces.

Z->Z^2+C

When studying the topic of fractals, it is necessary to take into account several aspects that Mandelbrot did not voice:

1) Fractals constructed using mathematics and computer modeling are artificial fractals. They have no meaning or content.

2) Fractals are a form. That is, fractals arise at the boundary of media. The medium itself is not a fractal.

3) Fractals are the place where ideas come into contact with matter. When constructing fractals of living beings, such qualities of life as instincts, feelings, will, etc. are not taken into account. That is why ideal fractals do not exist in living nature; every living being has certain deviations from ideal forms, asymmetry.