Snow Day

December 4, 2009

This morning at Johnson Space Center the snow started falling. Many JSC employees (not this one) were sent home early. This is the earliest Snow Day in Houston on record. Snow Day comes in the midst of controversy about Earth's climate. This issue involves climate data from NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies. The climate is a complex issue, involving everything from human activity to solar luminosity and the speed of light. As readers have seen before, "c change" us coming in science.

Journey to the Sun

As the Northern hemisphere's climate warms in annual event called Summer, thoughts return again to the Sun. Tuesday NASA announced the Solar Probe Plus. The spacecraft will pass within 7 million km, or 9 solar radii. The conical shield will protect the spacecraft from extreme temperatures. Solar variablility affects Earth's climate in the most direct way. Though humans have wondered about our star for thousands of years, they are just beginning to understand the Sun

As late as the 1920's most physicists would lecture that the Sun is made of iron, and burns in the sky like a red-hot poker. Quantum mechanics was new, and physics of the Sun's interior had yet to be figured out. A young woman named Cecilia Payne first suggested that the spectral lines could be interpreted as hydrogen. As a woman, Payne was ignored but eventually she was proved right. Sincer we have no direct samples, the Sun's composition is still a matter of conjecture.

The "Faint Young Sun" has long been a paradox. According to models of astrophysics, life should not have evolved here because at Earth's formation the Sun was only about 75% as bright. Earth would have been frozen solid, making evolution of life impossible. Geology and the fossil record contradict the model, telling us that Earth had both liquid water and life billions of years ago. Because the Sun turns fuel into energy according to E=mc^2, change in c precisely accounts for this paradox. If c had not changed in precisely the amounts predicted, life would not have evolved to read this post.

Today there is plenty of evidence that the Sun fuses hydrogen into helium, but few understand how this reaction is maintained. Sustained nuclear fusion in a reactor is a dream that has eluded humans for decades. Scientists have yet to understand how the reaction is triggered in billions of stars. While stars are known to condense from gas clouds, those clouds should dissipate before fusion is triggered. Something else is needed to trigger a cloud's collapse into a star.

Photos of infant stars show twin jets reminiscent of those produced by Black Holes. If the Sun and other stars formed around them, Black Holes' gravity would draw gas inward until fusion began. Their presence in stars would maintain those immense pressures indefinitely. A Black Hole could easily exist in the second last place humans would expect, in front of our faces each morning.

Temperature of the Sun's surface is measured in thousands of degrees yet in the corona it is million of degrees. Scientists can not agree why the corona is so hot, though the answer is related to transfer of energy by magnetic field lines. The magnetic field lines originate in the Sun's mysterious core. The 11-year sunspot cycle is still a mystery. If launched in 2015, Solar Probe Plus will arrive at the end of Solar Cycle 24 and finish near the maximum of Cycle 25. It will pass directly through the hot corona. We can wish this mission the best of luck.

TOMORROW: NASA is scheduled to announce a decision on the Constellation Spacesuit system. The suit system will be used for decades, supporting flights to the Moon. Wednesday the US House of Representatives will vote on a NASA authorization bill that will order one additional Shuttle flight to take the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer into Space. This is a very exciting time in Washington!

Exhibit 1: Hot Young Sun

(Solar luminosity vs. solar system age. L/Lo is luminosity as a fraction of present value. Lower line is standard solar model. Upper line indicates luminosity when c change is a factor. If speed of light c is precisely related to Universe age t by GM = tc^3, luminosity remains within a comfortable range for life to evolve.)

Over at Quantum Diaries, Tommaso has introduced discussion of whether fundamental values like the speed of light are really constant. This has led to a question by Carl Brannen about the Sun. It is impossible to "prove" experimentally that c is constant, because a more accurate measurement could always prove that foolish. It is possible to measure c change over billions of years, if a scientist knows what to look for. One of these measurements involves the Sun and life on Earth.

The “Faint Young Sun” has been a paradox of astrophysics. Over decades physicists have developed a standard model for the Sun’s evolution. This model predicts that at about 4 Ga ago Earth was too cold to support life. The sedimentologic and fossil records contradict this prediction. The very appearance of life on Earth conflicts with the model. An answer may be deduced from Relativity and Space/Time.

The standard solar model predicts that about 4 Ga ago the Sun shone with scarcely 70 percent of its present power. Because power P is related to temperature T by the Stefan-Boltzmann law, P = $\delta$ T^4, Earth’s temperature would have been only 91 percent of present value. Today’s average temperature is about 283K, so in the past it would have been only 258K, 15K below freezing. An Earth frozen solid would reflect most sunlight into Space, maintaining even colder temperatures. The appearance of life and its evolution would have been very unlikely.

Geology shows evidence of extensive sedimentation 4 Ga ago, indicating the presence of rivers and seas. Other geologic markers corroborate presence of liquid water on Earth during this period. The earliest organisms are at least 3.4 Ga and possibly over 4 Ga old. Clearly liquid water and life both existed when the model predicts Earth was frozen solid. The fact that life exists today is in conflict with the standard solar model. This conflict with observations is the Faint Young Sun paradox.

A much higher concentration of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere has been suggested to maintain a proper temperature. This is an inferrence supported by no geological evidence whatsoever. Studies of iron carbonates by Rye et al. conclusively show that Earth had at most 20 percent the required amount of CO2. We have evidence that Mars also had temperatures suitable for liquid in its distant past. It is unlikely that CO2 would custom-heat both planets.

Fortunately, Relativity and new physics may help save the standard solar model. The Sun converts its fuel to energy according to E = mc^2. One theory of Space/Time predicts that c is related to t by:

GM = tc^3

Where t is age of the Universe, GM combines its mass and gravitational constant . Solving, we have c(t) ~ t^{-1/3}. Billions of years ago, solar output and temperature were therefore higher than originally predicted.

Earth is estimated to be 4.6 Ga and the Universe 13.7 Ga, 1.5 times its age at the time of Earth’s formation. Energy mc^2 is adjusted by 1.5^{2/3} = 1.31 times the initial estimate. Multiplying by an estimate of 70 percent, the Sun’s actual output was 0.917 of the present value. Temperature was then 98 percent of the value we enjoy today. If we start with an estimate of 76 percent, solar luminosity was exactly the present value. The “paradox” leads to an extraordinary test of Theory. If c had not changed in precisely the amounts predicted, life would not have evolved on Earth.

A PLANE HAS STRUCK THE TOWERS

STARDUST and Niels Bohr

STARDUST is based on a graphic novel by Neil Gaiman. A star (Claire Danes) falls to Earth in human form and can't return to the sky. Along the way she encounters lovestruck Tristan Thorne (Charlie Cox) and pirate Captain Shakespeare (Robert DeNiro), who captures lightning in his airship. She is pursued by Prince Septemus (Mark Strong) and a wicked witch (Michelle Pfeiffer). The villains wish to cut out the star's glowing heart to gain her secret of eternal life.

The eternal life of stars has been a mystery that life on Earth's surface depends on. According to standard models, life should not have evolved here at all because when the Solar System was forming the Sun was only 75% as bright. Earth's average temperature would have been 15 degrees below zero Celsius, frozen solid. This can't be true, for geology and the fossil record say that Earth had liquid water and life when models say it was frozen solid. This conflict with observations is the Faint Young Sun paradox.

Niels Bohr is best known for describing the heart of an atom, but he also turned his attention toward stars. Bohr's atomic model is based upon a miniature Solar System. In the early part of the 20th century many old ideas of science were questioned. Bohr would say that "Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true." In work that was never published, Bohr hypothesised that a star's heart is made of an unknown material radiating at a constant temperature To.

The region surrounding this core would be composed of a hot plasma. At the boundary, particles of the plasma would have energies given by:

E = (3/2)nkT

If To of the core were greater than T of the plasma boundary, an equilibrium would be reached. The star would maintain a constant luminosity.

Bohr's hypothesis required a material radiating at a constant temperature, something unknown in the 1930's. Though Black Holes are predicted by Relativity, even Einstein himself didn't believe they exist. In 1974 Stephen Hawking reached the amazing conclusion that they radiate at a temperature depending upon their mass. For many Black Holes this temperature would be nearly constant. Connecting Bohr with Hawking, a Black Hole at a star's heart would be just the thing to maintain a constant luminosity.

Recently astronomers have discovered that the outer Solar System contains many objects with temperatures suitable for liquid water. These distant bodies are now considered possible abodes of life. They are far too distant for the Sun to warm them, and must depend on an internal source of heat. Presence of Black Holes may create conditions for life on these dark worlds too.

The history of science is full of great unpublished work. Account of Bohr's theory came from friend George Gamow. In 240 BC most people thought that the Sun circled Earth and stars were fixed to an immense sphere. Aristarchus, librarian of Alexandria, wrote "On the Distances to Stars and Planets," with estimates that were remarkably accurate for the time. Those distances were estimated from the Earth, fitting an Earth-centred cosmology. The enormous distances may have started Aristarchus thinking about alternatives. He wrote another book that is now lost and only known through citations of contemporaries like Archimedes.

The second book introduced a cosmology where the stars were immeasurably distant and that Earth circled the Sun as a planet! The book caused great argument, with another contemporary writing that Aristarchus should have been put on trial! (Did he write nasty comments in blogs?) If Aristarchus' model had been widely disseminated, the world might have been saved 1500 years of Ptolemy. Alternative cosmologies need to be considered, or science will again be wound up in epicycles.

In fantasies from Harry Potter to STARDUST, heroes overcome many trials. New theories are almost inevitably hounded by the jealous lords and wicked witches of science. Bohr also said that "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." Heroes are often aided by some lost knowledge or ancient wisdom. It is very pleasing that truth always wins in the end.

Hawking Closer to the Sun

Our Sun imaged by STEREO, the Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory. The twin STEREO spacecraft allow 3-D images of the Sun and surroundings. Best wishes to Stephen Hawking, for today was the day of his long-awaited zero-G flight. Desire to slip the surly bonds of Earth is far older than humanity, as symbolised by Icarus' flight. Hawking's biggest discovery may have a lot to do with the Sun.

There are many unsolved mysteries about the Sun. The temperature of its surface is thousands of degrees, yet the corona is millions of degrees. The corona is laced with magnetic fields which contribute to its high temperature. The sunspots which Galileo saw mark the locations of magnetic field lines. Solar flares related to sunspots affect communications on Earth and could be a great hazard for interplanetary flights. Solar variations are part of the debate on Earth's climate. Though life on Earth depends on the Sun, we are far from understanding it.

According to the standard solar model, when Earth was formed the Sun shone with only 70% of its present luminosity. Earth’s surface would have been frozen solid, making evolution of life very unlikely. Geology and the fossil record contradict this prediction. The very appearance of life on Earth conflicts with the model. This conflict with observations was the Faint Young Sun paradox. Because the Sun turns fuel into energy according to E=mc^2, change in c precisely accounts for this paradox. If c had not changed in precisely the amounts predicted, life would not have evolved to read this post.

Hawking's biggest discovery was that Black Holes are not completely black--they tend to radiate as blackbodies. Hawking first presented his results in a talk entitled "Black Hole Explosions?" When he had finished, the moderator said, "Sorry Stephen, but this is absolute rubbush." At least Hawking was allowed to finish. Within a few years people realised that Stephen was right, and scientific fame followed.

One big mystery about the Sun is how it formed in the first place. We know that stars form from collapsing disks of gas, but how the fusion reaction begins has been a complete mystery. If the gas cloud were heated, it would dissipate before a sustained fusion raction could begin. The disk's angular momentum would also be carried off into Space. Something else is needed to trigger a cloud's collapse into a star.

If tiny Black Holes collided with a gas cloud, they would not suck everything up. The tiny amount that they did eat would produce an immense amount of Hawking radiation. Heat and the gravitational pull of a singularity would ignite a star and keep it steadily burning for billions of years. A Black Hole could exist in the second last place humans would look for one, in front of our face each morning.

Eye in London Pt. 3 of 3

(Here are the last of the picture slides. Perhaps they were annoyed by "A Second Plane Has Hit the Towers," or the diagrammes of the London Eye going Big Bang. They may have considered the author a revolutionary, a moniker I would happily accept. Worrying about what others think about you is useless.)

Colleagues in Australia caused a bit of stir when they claimed to detect alpha changing. Since the evidence is still non-conclusive, we can stipulate that product hc is indeed constant, as are the photon energy and Chandrasekhar limit. This means that redshifts of distant objects are indeed caused by expansion. It also verifies Dr. Lieu and Dr. Hillman’s very important finding (ApJ 585, L77, 2003), that “Planck time” is an illusion.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The most surprising prediction may already have been seen. Dr. Krauss says that supernova data “naively implied that the Universe was accelerating.” Redshifts are the only direct evidence of cosmic acceleration. (What was overlooked a child could ask.) What if v/c increases not because v is accelerating, but because c slows down?

When light of redshift Zed was emitted, c was faster by sqrt(1 + Z). Apparent redshift is therefore decreased. This factor is negligible for low redshifts, where zed increases linearly. An object of redshift 1.0 recedes at 60% of our present speed of light. That is only 42% of c at the time its light was emitted. The apparent redshift is just .57. Supernovae produce that light according to E=mc^2. Energy output is here doubled, for a magnitude shift of -.75. Connect the dots, and the upward curve of Type Ia redshifts is precisely predicted.

As you know, it was possible to believe that the Universe is accelerating due to some inferred repulsive energy. Now there is corroborating evidence from a nearby star. According to astrophysics, life should not have evolved here at all because at Earth’s formation the Sun was only about 70% as bright. Our average temperature would have been 10° below zero centigrade, frozen solid. Prof. Allen at Imperial says this can’t be true, for geology tells us Earth’s temperature was suitable for liquid water. This is called the “Faint Young Sun” paradox.

Here’s a hot young solution. The Sun also turns fuel to energy according to E=mc^2. Adjusting for change in c at various epochs, solar luminosity becomes a nearly level line. Some things are nearly constant, and the “solar constant” has allowed life to evolve over thousands of millions of years. This distinguishes Theory from “accelerating universe” ideas and models where c was higher only during an inflationary period. If c had not changed in precisely the amounts predicted, we would not have evolved to argue about it. A 2ND PLANE HAS HIT THE TOWERS. There are now two lines of evidence from truly independent sources indicating that c has slowed according to GM=tc^3.

More supportive data comes from the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. The PLANCK spacecraft will determine whether baryons are indeed 4.5%. Another indication would be discovery of supermassive Black Holes at high redshift. Dr. Blandford also alluded to discovery of ultra-high energy cosmic rays. All these experiments contribute to an exciting “c change” in physics.

Scientists Question Understanding of Universe

From SpaceRef.com: "Cosmologists from around the world will meet at Imperial College London next week to challenge the theories behind the 'standard model' used to understand the universe."

"Lawrence Krauss of Case Western Reserve University and Subir Sarkar from Oxford query whether we need to postulate the existence of dark energy in the universe to explain the key observations. Tom Shanks of Durham will pose a puzzling question concerning why the instruments that measured the cosmic microwave background failed to detect shadows on this 'afterglow' radiation cast by nearby clusters of galaxies. This calls into question a key part of the standard model, which clearly predicted that such shadows should be formed, and be readily observable.

"Another vital prediction not observationally verified concerns the evolution of clusters of galaxies. While theory predicts that these systems should be rapidly evolving, the X-ray data presented by Alain Blanchard from Toulouse shows a complete absence of evolution. Additionally, Jelle Kaastra from Utrecht and Niayesh Afshordi from Harvard will demonstrate how the amount of atoms and molecules of daily life falls short of that predicted by the standard model by at least 30-40 percent."

Wednesday NASA released images from the Japanese Hinode spacecraft showing that the Sun's magnetic field is more dynamic than previously suspected. Changes in the structure of the magnetic field spread outward through the corona and into Space. Though the Sun's surface has a temperature of thousands of degrees, the corona has a temperature in the millions of degrees! No one knows the cause of this, but the answer is somewhere in the Sun's powerful magnetic field. Extremely hot plasma issues from the Sun, following magnetic field lines to heat the corona. The Sun's bipolar magnetic field is similiar to that produced by a Black Hole.

The Sun has a lot to do with cosmology. According to astrophysics, life should not have evolved on Earth because at Earth’s formation the Sun was only about 70% as bright. Earth's average temperature would have been 10 degrees below zero centigrade, frozen solid. On the graph, the standard model has solar luminosity L/Lo as an increasing curve. This can’t be true, for geology and the fossil record tell us that Earth had conditions welcoming to life. This is called the “Faint Young Sun” paradox.

Here’s the Hot Young Solution: The Sun turns its fuel to energy according to E=mc^2. Adjusting for the changing speed of light, solar luminosity becomes a nearly level line. Some things really are constant, and the solar constant has allowed life to evolve over billions of years. If c had not changed in precisely the amounts predicted, life would not have evolved to argue about it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Combined with supernovae, there are two lines of data from truly independent sources indicating a “c change” in physics.

UPDATE: This little blog has reached record viewership of 742 hits per day. Thank you!

Sunshine

Danny Boyle is the ultra-hip director of TRAINSPOTTING, SHALLOW GRAVE and 28 DAYS LATER. Now he has the budget to visit Space for SUNSHINE. In a future when the Sun is dying, a spaceship is on a desperate mission to save humanity. The movie looks like gritty, suspenseful fun.

It would be foolish to think that humans understand everything about the Sun. As Carl Brannen has noted, NASA's Ulysses spacecraft has discovered that the Sun's North Pole is slightly cooler than the South Pole. Like Saturn and its little Moon Enceladus, an unknown process makes the South Pole warmer. This could be yet another sign of an internal singularity.

Theories of the Sun have advanced over time. As late as the 1920’s most astronomers would lecture that our Sun was made of iron, and glowed in the sky like a hot poker. Only a young astronomer named Cecilia Payne suggested that the Sun’s spectral lines could be interpreted as hydrogen. Because Payne was a woman, her idea was roundly dismissed. The equations of nuclear fusion were still being worked out, and most scientists doubted that Black Holes existed. Eventually the young woman was vindicated. As our knowledge of physics advances, so must theories of the Sun.

A Black Hole could conceivably exist in the second last place we would think to find one, inside the Sun! A tiny singularity would feel right at home in the temperature and pressure of a stellar interior. The Black Hole’s rotation would cause the star’s inner layers to rotate faster, contributing to a magnetic field. Indeed astronomers now know that our Sun’s core rotates faster than the outer layers due to some mysterious influence. A Black Hole could be literally in front of our face each morning.

Only occasionally would Black Holes within stars reveal themselves. In their twilight years, the largest stars would consume all their fuel until fusion abruptly ended. The equilibrium between outward pressure and the Black Hole's gravity would abruptly end. Robbed of fusion’s energy, a star would collapse catastrophically. A star’s mass suddenly falling into a Black Hole would produce an immense explosion, like a supernova.

As we have seen before, the paradox of a "Faint Young Sun" is precisely explained by a changing speed of light. Though the Sun's luminosity goes through small fluctuations, it is constant enough for life to have evolved on Earth for billions of years. Previously it was assumed that carbon dioxide somehow custom-heated Earth's atmosphere for us. This led to the present debate about global warming. Measurements of iron carbonates show that early Earth can not posibly have contained that much CO2.

No matter what one's opinion is about global warming, it is clear that humans spew too much junk into the atmosphere. Many fascinating technologies have been developed to cut emissions. This is one way that scientists can make a positive contribution to the world. I'll be away from the computer for a few days, test-driving one of those new techologies.