Life versus Entropy
Wolfgang Hebel *
Abstract
The concept of entropy or the 2nd principle of thermodynamics constitutes a fundamental principle of classical physics, which among other things establishes that a system of particles having a higher state of order than its environment, will degrade to the less orderly state of its surroundings as a function of time. This is an irreversible process, which applies as well to ordinary matter as to living matter (organisms). The present paper discusses why living cells (organisms) being characterized by a unique state of well-ordered molecules, have yet persisted on Earth for billions of years despite their varying, less orderly environments.
Unsolved Question
The question as to how life appeared on Earth is very old but the correct answer is still under discussion. The traditional view reads that living cells originated autonomously on Earth through normal physical and chemical processes using the available molecular constituents of their surroundings. However, doubts about this view are increasing, as for example, that one has never observed a living cell coming into existence, i.e. arising de novo, without its mother cell (model cell) disposing of the required knowledge on the functioning of life being coded into the molecular structure of the inherited DNA complex. This fact can be regarded as a direct consequence of the fundamental principle of entropy, which excludes that a uniquely ordered molecular state like the system of a living cell can build up autonomously i.e. generate itself out of surrounding disorder. Such exceptional event demands that energy (or information) from outside is transferred to the system in a well-directed way.
Nevertheless, traditional science argues that under the particular environment conditions of the early Earth liquid containing, membrane enclosed vesicles or cells formed through ‘necessity and chance’ or by exceptional events (singularities), which developed step by step orderly molecular states inside exhibiting functional abilities [2]. Some of these primeval cells succeeded eventually in replicating themselves. By this, they had created the prerequisite to potentiate information. The constantly reproduced younger vesicles stored increasingly useful information in their molecular structures to produce finally the first primeval cell on Earth. However, in contrast to these assumptions, until today, also advanced bio-molecular research has not succeeded in synthesizing principal cellular components (e.g. proteins, RNA’s, DNA’s, etc.) from their elementary constituents in a way to make a living cell function autonomously and to reproduce itself.
* EU Scientific Coordinator retd. Brussels, 2 November 2008
Email: wolfgang.hebel@telenet.be
In his recent book on “The Mystery of Life – Does Science hold the Key?” [1], the author discusses a different view concluding that primeval living cells on Earth must have originated from mother cells (models), which arrived on our planet from outside. Those cells had the intrinsic ability to duplicate at the appropriate moment and escaped so from dying out. They constantly generated younger, untouched descendants who preserved their intrinsic ability i.e. their inherited knowledge on the functioning of life. In this way, they not only overcame the dismantling entropy effect on Earth, but they even used this effect to get biological evolution go on our planet.
Beneficial Entropy
Of course, also the imported capacity of constantly producing fresh living cells on the primeval Earth had to cope with the omnipresent entropy effect. Due to this effect, the reproduced descendents never had exactly the same molecular architecture of their DNA complex as their parents nor were this complex completely identical among related cells. During the time-demanding replication process, entropy was permanently present so that faults were customary and happened regularly in the reproduction machinery of the cells. However, only those descendents were able to reproduce successfully, whose replication errors did not pass a critical maximum percentage characteristic of the species concerned. All others were damned to vanish as they were excluded from future reproduction. Most of the surviving descendents, however, were slightly different in their inherited DNA structures and so were able to survive under environmental conditions possibly different from those of their parental cells. It is this typical nature of reproduced living cells, which makes them survive under changing environmental conditions. Besides, this typical nature had been discovered sometime ago already by Charles DARWIN who explained us, ‘the fittest will survive’. Thanks to this fundamental principle of life, innumerable different species have emerged and vanished again on Earth during billions of years.
From the aforementioned, one may conclude that the essentially dismantling effect of entropy, which on the one hand prevented that life could emerge autonomously on Earth, has favored on the hand that primeval microbes (Archaea, Bacteria) arriving from outside could propagate [1]. Due to its ingenious concept, life not only overcame the fatal entropy effect on Earth, but in addition, life used this effect and made it partner of the most amazing evolution of living organisms on our planet.
References:
[1] Wolfgang Hebel: The Mystery of Life – Does Science hold the Key?
German University Press, Baden-Baden, 2007
[2] Christian de Duve: Aus Staub geboren – Leben als kosmische Zwangsläufigkeit
Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg, 1995
[3] Wolfgang Hebel: Functional Physics of Life
www.google.com.wolfgang-hebel.blogspot, Sept. 2008
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Functional Physics of Life
Functional Physics of
Biomolecular Self-organization
Wolfgang Hebel *
Abstract
Although it has been possible to discover the complicated structures of many bio-molecules in recent decades, especially of the famous DNA and of many proteins with an amazing precision down to the level of their atomic detail, nevertheless, a fundamental understanding of the functional molecular physics in a living cell eludes us. All molecular processes that occur inside a living organism serve one principal purpose, namely to sustain life by replacing the actual molecular system at the appropriate moment with an essentially identical, but younger one. However, our classical physics knows of no basic principle that distinguishes such purposeful molecular processes in living organisms from ordinary molecular reactions in inanimate matter. This study discusses a fundamental premise that underlies apparently the functioning of biomolecular self-organization.
Introduction
The astounding property of a living cell resides in its ability to build up autonomously its own molecular structures and to self-organise its functioning according to a basic plan programmed into the molecular structure of its DNA. The functioning of a living cell takes place in close contact with its molecular environment, as the cell imports and exports molecules following the fundamental instructions communicated by its DNA complex. Scientifically, the innumerable molecular reactions of such cellular self-organization prove bewilderingly complex and are still barely understood, because our traditional principles of classical physics are not completely adequate to make us understand how the well-coordinated teamwork of thousands of millions of individual molecules in a living cell can purposefully function. Classical physics does not include, for example, any Principle of Information & Communication between the partners of a system to make them function for a given aim. However, of all molecular reactions theoretically possible in the complex environment of a living cell, priority goes to those that serve the purpose coded into the DNA complex. This basic knowledge on the functioning of life has to be communicated and acknowledged by all molecular players in a living cell in order to meet the programmed goal. What are the physical foundations of this self-organized molecular interplay in a living cell? Can some advanced physics make us understand the amazing functionality of living matter? [4]
For more than twenty years, the author has been participating at plenty of high-level scientific meetings related to bio-molecular topics [1] including the traditional Nobel Laureate meetings at Lindau, Germany, end of June every year [3]. At those meetings, he regularly encountered such fundamental questions as aforementioned, inspiring him to write down his view on the functional physics of biomolecular self-organization.
* EU Scientific Coordinator retd., Brussels, 1st September 2008
Email: wolfgang.hebel@telenet.be
Molecular Recognition
The greatest challenge confronting molecular biology today is to lift bit by bit the veil of mystery around the biophysical chemistry that governs the functioning of living cells [1]. In recent years, a term was coined to describe as best as we can the concept of the observed phenomena: Molecular Self-assembly, while admitting that we know very little about the underlying rules. Fundamental bio-molecular research has only just begun to explain the physics of molecular self-organization [2]. Why does this astounding property of living cells exist at all? In other words, what is the origin of life? This will no doubt remain an open question for some time to come.
Advances in experimental methods and techniques, which are today increasingly available to fundamental bio-molecular research, are fortunately bringing a constant progress in our scientific knowledge. One notable example of this is the discovery by Dagmar RINGE (Waltham, MA, USA), which she presented at the Workshop on molecular Biotechnology held in Jena, Germany, in November 1994. Under the title The role of the solvent in molecular recognition, she explained her experimental findings, which worked from a principle often neglected in model studies, namely that the ubiquitous water molecules present in a cell are not only there to act as a solvent, but also they compete as binding partner. A layer of water molecules covers all molecular structures in the cytoplasm including the proteins, the main functional players of the cell. This protects them from binding with unauthorized reaction partners, of which there are many in the cell, quite capable in principle of binding to any protein if the chance occurred. The omnipresent covering layer of water molecules, however, prevents this. The protective water only moves aside to permit binding when the right partner for the functional process presents itself. This typically occurs when the favored partner molecule can correctly dock with the atomic structure of a given protein. Mutual molecular recognition ensures that only those molecules can bind which belong together from the functional point of view.
Dagmar RINGE’s discovery is therefore of fundamental significance making it easier to understand how molecular self-assembly in living cells can come about. She obtained her study results using highly developed NMR spectroscopy, which enabled her to ‘see’ virtually individual water molecules. She demonstrated experimentally that a protein and its authorized partner molecule fit together in atomic detail like a safety key in its lock. The protective layer of water molecules on the surface of the functional partner only allow passage when the ‘chemistry between the partners is right’, to use a common expression, in other words, when the nanoscopic attraction vectors between the protein and its authorized partner molecule are stronger than toward the ubiquitous water molecules. When this happens, the water molecules are forced away and the protein exposes its binding site.
Despite innumerable advances on the level of detail such as the findings mentioned above, we still have little or no understanding of the functional orchestration of myriads of individual molecules in a living cell. The highly complex interactions, which they undergo to achieve the predetermined purpose, continue to puzzle science in the absence of an overarching functional mechanism that would clarify our understanding.
Cellular Communication
The aforementioned experimental findings together with related knowledge gained over years by attending scientific conferences, led me to examine more intensely the mysterious functioning mechanisms in living organisms and to propose the following hypothesis by way of explanation.
When a protein binds with a preferred partner molecule, it changes its geometrical form by folding and adopting a specific conformation. Usually, it is enabled to do so by means of a protein kinase, a small molecular compound, which provides the protein the necessary energy. The cell’s universal energy provider is the well-known, phosphorus-containing compound called ATP (Adenosine TriPhosphate) and the process therefore is called (reversible) protein phosphorylation. This process - discovered by Edmond FISCHER, Nobel Prize 1992 [3] - plays a crucial role in all functional molecular reactions that take place in a cell. When the protein adopts its specific conformation, it is not only its own shape that changes, but its submicroscopic environment in the cytoplasm as well. Many other electrically charged (ionic) particles are present there, including electrons, hydrogen ions (protons), and a large number of different ionized molecules. All these are mobile to various degrees in the aqueous cytoplasm, and the change in the shape of the protein has the effect of slightly altering their position at that moment. The associated electrons change track, they are redirected into different pathways since the cytoplasm is an electrically conducting medium. Unlike an ordinary electrolyte, however, it is in addition intelligently structured.
Normally, all ionized molecular structures are located in well-defined, three-dimensional networks of nanoscopic vectors, which maintain them in their actual position or, if changes occur, displace them in a specific way. It is mainly the easily mobile electrons, which are involved in such cases, moving along other pathways, on electron highways as it were, to new well-defined destinations in the cytoplasm. Their arrival signals that something in the ionic network of the cytoplasm has changed and sets in train a cascade of resulting electronic reactions. However, the electronic signal from a single protein that changes conformation is too weak to have any consequence amid the electronic background noise of the cytoplasm. It is when a whole number of protein molecules folds simultaneously that it becomes a concerted action producing a functional effect. Many electrons in the region around these proteins are mobilized and a grand landslide of electronic pathways takes place, so signaling that a given protein population has bound its partner molecules. The conformational change of the proteins therefore is announced with electronic rapidity, in the shortest possible time at all interlinked locations in the cytoplasm and the scheduled follow-on reactions are set in motion. This requires of course a communication and information centre in the cell, to which all significant events are reported: it is the all-knowing DNA complex in the nucleus of the cell. The arriving electronic signals cause the relevant genes to be switched on or off via complicated molecular pathways, so that the active protein population of the cytoplasm can be adjusted as quickly as possible to suit the signaled changes in accordance with the programmed plan of the cell.
One important aspect of this speculative functional dynamics in the cytoplasm is that every change in the nanoscopic network of ionic bonds between the molecular partners is passed on instantly. This is actually the case as the signal is transmitted electronically. In this way, genetically programmed follow-on reactions can be brought about quasi simultaneously at various locations in the cell, so that they are all linked in a logic manner. The simultaneously launched electronic feedback signals serve not only to report-back that a pre-programmed protein action has been performed, but at the same time, they act as feed-ahead-signals to initiate new, predetermined processes. In this way, the myriad molecular reactions in the complex functional system of the cell are efficiently linked, as both kinds of signal, the feedback and feed-ahead signal arrive practically at the same moment at their respective receptors. Many thousands of simultaneous molecular processes in the cell can so be coordinated effectively to concerted actions, because the electronic signal transmission in a carefully structured ionic network allows the huge amount of information coded in the DNA to be activated instantly in order to master any, whatsoever complex situation. In other words, the active protein population of the cytoplasm can be instructed immediately to suit the signals that have been received by the DNA complex as well from inside the cell as from its molecular environment.
Of course, the constant production and transport of appropriate proteins as well as the dismantling of faulty or surplus proteins (protein waste) take relatively much longer time (microseconds) than the original electronic signals (femtoseconds), as those tasks involve considerable atomic masses being thousands of times heavier than the tiny, elementary electrons. Electronic signaling, therefore, has to precede and accompany all molecular reactions in the cellular plasma in view of making such bewilderingly complex molecular system operate efficiently according to the instructions stored in the DNA complex.
Conclusion
As mentioned at the outset, the functional mechanism outlined here is speculative and for the lack of detail experimental evidence, it is described only in broad terms. Finally, the situation will be found more complicated than this, but my intention was simply to set out an idea on the functional physics of bio-molecular self-organization and to initiate scientific discussion. Nevertheless, the concept of electronic signal transmission via predetermined routes in living cells is more than a mere imagination. It can call, for example, upon experimental findings of recent detail studies on photoelectrons released in light harvesting proteins of bacteria and plant cells (chlorophyll) by incident sunlight [1]. These photoelectrons bring about the well-known photosynthesis or biosynthesis of molecules vital to life on Earth.
References:
[1] Wolfgang Hebel: The Mystery of Life, Does science hold the key?
German University Press, Baden-Baden, 2007
[2] Christof Biebricher, Gregoire Nicolis, Peter Schuster:
Self-organisation in the physico-chemical and Life Sciences
European Commission, Luxembourg, 1995, Report EUR 16546
[3] Wolfgang Hebel: Nobel Laureates meet Students, Lindau 1996-2005,
On the edge of knowledge, German University Press, Baden-Baden, 2008
[4] Ilya Prigogine: The End of Certainty – Time, Chaos, and the new Laws of Nature
The Free Press, New York, 1997
[5] Manfred Eigen: Stufen zum Leben
R. Piper, München, 1987
Biomolecular Self-organization
Wolfgang Hebel *
Abstract
Although it has been possible to discover the complicated structures of many bio-molecules in recent decades, especially of the famous DNA and of many proteins with an amazing precision down to the level of their atomic detail, nevertheless, a fundamental understanding of the functional molecular physics in a living cell eludes us. All molecular processes that occur inside a living organism serve one principal purpose, namely to sustain life by replacing the actual molecular system at the appropriate moment with an essentially identical, but younger one. However, our classical physics knows of no basic principle that distinguishes such purposeful molecular processes in living organisms from ordinary molecular reactions in inanimate matter. This study discusses a fundamental premise that underlies apparently the functioning of biomolecular self-organization.
Introduction
The astounding property of a living cell resides in its ability to build up autonomously its own molecular structures and to self-organise its functioning according to a basic plan programmed into the molecular structure of its DNA. The functioning of a living cell takes place in close contact with its molecular environment, as the cell imports and exports molecules following the fundamental instructions communicated by its DNA complex. Scientifically, the innumerable molecular reactions of such cellular self-organization prove bewilderingly complex and are still barely understood, because our traditional principles of classical physics are not completely adequate to make us understand how the well-coordinated teamwork of thousands of millions of individual molecules in a living cell can purposefully function. Classical physics does not include, for example, any Principle of Information & Communication between the partners of a system to make them function for a given aim. However, of all molecular reactions theoretically possible in the complex environment of a living cell, priority goes to those that serve the purpose coded into the DNA complex. This basic knowledge on the functioning of life has to be communicated and acknowledged by all molecular players in a living cell in order to meet the programmed goal. What are the physical foundations of this self-organized molecular interplay in a living cell? Can some advanced physics make us understand the amazing functionality of living matter? [4]
For more than twenty years, the author has been participating at plenty of high-level scientific meetings related to bio-molecular topics [1] including the traditional Nobel Laureate meetings at Lindau, Germany, end of June every year [3]. At those meetings, he regularly encountered such fundamental questions as aforementioned, inspiring him to write down his view on the functional physics of biomolecular self-organization.
* EU Scientific Coordinator retd., Brussels, 1st September 2008
Email: wolfgang.hebel@telenet.be
Molecular Recognition
The greatest challenge confronting molecular biology today is to lift bit by bit the veil of mystery around the biophysical chemistry that governs the functioning of living cells [1]. In recent years, a term was coined to describe as best as we can the concept of the observed phenomena: Molecular Self-assembly, while admitting that we know very little about the underlying rules. Fundamental bio-molecular research has only just begun to explain the physics of molecular self-organization [2]. Why does this astounding property of living cells exist at all? In other words, what is the origin of life? This will no doubt remain an open question for some time to come.
Advances in experimental methods and techniques, which are today increasingly available to fundamental bio-molecular research, are fortunately bringing a constant progress in our scientific knowledge. One notable example of this is the discovery by Dagmar RINGE (Waltham, MA, USA), which she presented at the Workshop on molecular Biotechnology held in Jena, Germany, in November 1994. Under the title The role of the solvent in molecular recognition, she explained her experimental findings, which worked from a principle often neglected in model studies, namely that the ubiquitous water molecules present in a cell are not only there to act as a solvent, but also they compete as binding partner. A layer of water molecules covers all molecular structures in the cytoplasm including the proteins, the main functional players of the cell. This protects them from binding with unauthorized reaction partners, of which there are many in the cell, quite capable in principle of binding to any protein if the chance occurred. The omnipresent covering layer of water molecules, however, prevents this. The protective water only moves aside to permit binding when the right partner for the functional process presents itself. This typically occurs when the favored partner molecule can correctly dock with the atomic structure of a given protein. Mutual molecular recognition ensures that only those molecules can bind which belong together from the functional point of view.
Dagmar RINGE’s discovery is therefore of fundamental significance making it easier to understand how molecular self-assembly in living cells can come about. She obtained her study results using highly developed NMR spectroscopy, which enabled her to ‘see’ virtually individual water molecules. She demonstrated experimentally that a protein and its authorized partner molecule fit together in atomic detail like a safety key in its lock. The protective layer of water molecules on the surface of the functional partner only allow passage when the ‘chemistry between the partners is right’, to use a common expression, in other words, when the nanoscopic attraction vectors between the protein and its authorized partner molecule are stronger than toward the ubiquitous water molecules. When this happens, the water molecules are forced away and the protein exposes its binding site.
Despite innumerable advances on the level of detail such as the findings mentioned above, we still have little or no understanding of the functional orchestration of myriads of individual molecules in a living cell. The highly complex interactions, which they undergo to achieve the predetermined purpose, continue to puzzle science in the absence of an overarching functional mechanism that would clarify our understanding.
Cellular Communication
The aforementioned experimental findings together with related knowledge gained over years by attending scientific conferences, led me to examine more intensely the mysterious functioning mechanisms in living organisms and to propose the following hypothesis by way of explanation.
When a protein binds with a preferred partner molecule, it changes its geometrical form by folding and adopting a specific conformation. Usually, it is enabled to do so by means of a protein kinase, a small molecular compound, which provides the protein the necessary energy. The cell’s universal energy provider is the well-known, phosphorus-containing compound called ATP (Adenosine TriPhosphate) and the process therefore is called (reversible) protein phosphorylation. This process - discovered by Edmond FISCHER, Nobel Prize 1992 [3] - plays a crucial role in all functional molecular reactions that take place in a cell. When the protein adopts its specific conformation, it is not only its own shape that changes, but its submicroscopic environment in the cytoplasm as well. Many other electrically charged (ionic) particles are present there, including electrons, hydrogen ions (protons), and a large number of different ionized molecules. All these are mobile to various degrees in the aqueous cytoplasm, and the change in the shape of the protein has the effect of slightly altering their position at that moment. The associated electrons change track, they are redirected into different pathways since the cytoplasm is an electrically conducting medium. Unlike an ordinary electrolyte, however, it is in addition intelligently structured.
Normally, all ionized molecular structures are located in well-defined, three-dimensional networks of nanoscopic vectors, which maintain them in their actual position or, if changes occur, displace them in a specific way. It is mainly the easily mobile electrons, which are involved in such cases, moving along other pathways, on electron highways as it were, to new well-defined destinations in the cytoplasm. Their arrival signals that something in the ionic network of the cytoplasm has changed and sets in train a cascade of resulting electronic reactions. However, the electronic signal from a single protein that changes conformation is too weak to have any consequence amid the electronic background noise of the cytoplasm. It is when a whole number of protein molecules folds simultaneously that it becomes a concerted action producing a functional effect. Many electrons in the region around these proteins are mobilized and a grand landslide of electronic pathways takes place, so signaling that a given protein population has bound its partner molecules. The conformational change of the proteins therefore is announced with electronic rapidity, in the shortest possible time at all interlinked locations in the cytoplasm and the scheduled follow-on reactions are set in motion. This requires of course a communication and information centre in the cell, to which all significant events are reported: it is the all-knowing DNA complex in the nucleus of the cell. The arriving electronic signals cause the relevant genes to be switched on or off via complicated molecular pathways, so that the active protein population of the cytoplasm can be adjusted as quickly as possible to suit the signaled changes in accordance with the programmed plan of the cell.
One important aspect of this speculative functional dynamics in the cytoplasm is that every change in the nanoscopic network of ionic bonds between the molecular partners is passed on instantly. This is actually the case as the signal is transmitted electronically. In this way, genetically programmed follow-on reactions can be brought about quasi simultaneously at various locations in the cell, so that they are all linked in a logic manner. The simultaneously launched electronic feedback signals serve not only to report-back that a pre-programmed protein action has been performed, but at the same time, they act as feed-ahead-signals to initiate new, predetermined processes. In this way, the myriad molecular reactions in the complex functional system of the cell are efficiently linked, as both kinds of signal, the feedback and feed-ahead signal arrive practically at the same moment at their respective receptors. Many thousands of simultaneous molecular processes in the cell can so be coordinated effectively to concerted actions, because the electronic signal transmission in a carefully structured ionic network allows the huge amount of information coded in the DNA to be activated instantly in order to master any, whatsoever complex situation. In other words, the active protein population of the cytoplasm can be instructed immediately to suit the signals that have been received by the DNA complex as well from inside the cell as from its molecular environment.
Of course, the constant production and transport of appropriate proteins as well as the dismantling of faulty or surplus proteins (protein waste) take relatively much longer time (microseconds) than the original electronic signals (femtoseconds), as those tasks involve considerable atomic masses being thousands of times heavier than the tiny, elementary electrons. Electronic signaling, therefore, has to precede and accompany all molecular reactions in the cellular plasma in view of making such bewilderingly complex molecular system operate efficiently according to the instructions stored in the DNA complex.
Conclusion
As mentioned at the outset, the functional mechanism outlined here is speculative and for the lack of detail experimental evidence, it is described only in broad terms. Finally, the situation will be found more complicated than this, but my intention was simply to set out an idea on the functional physics of bio-molecular self-organization and to initiate scientific discussion. Nevertheless, the concept of electronic signal transmission via predetermined routes in living cells is more than a mere imagination. It can call, for example, upon experimental findings of recent detail studies on photoelectrons released in light harvesting proteins of bacteria and plant cells (chlorophyll) by incident sunlight [1]. These photoelectrons bring about the well-known photosynthesis or biosynthesis of molecules vital to life on Earth.
References:
[1] Wolfgang Hebel: The Mystery of Life, Does science hold the key?
German University Press, Baden-Baden, 2007
[2] Christof Biebricher, Gregoire Nicolis, Peter Schuster:
Self-organisation in the physico-chemical and Life Sciences
European Commission, Luxembourg, 1995, Report EUR 16546
[3] Wolfgang Hebel: Nobel Laureates meet Students, Lindau 1996-2005,
On the edge of knowledge, German University Press, Baden-Baden, 2008
[4] Ilya Prigogine: The End of Certainty – Time, Chaos, and the new Laws of Nature
The Free Press, New York, 1997
[5] Manfred Eigen: Stufen zum Leben
R. Piper, München, 1987
Friday, August 1, 2008
a different view on cosmic redshift
A different view on Cosmic Redshift
Wolfgang HEBEL *
Light or photons propagate in straight line as rays from the source to the receptor in accordance with the theory of quantum electrodynamics established by Richard Feynman. The present study expounds that celestial bodies interact with cosmic rays by causing redshift, which resembles the traditional Doppler shift. However, such different redshift process does not request the Universe to expand.
Traditional theory of cosmic redshift
In 1929, Edwin HUBBLE discovered that light from cosmic stars exhibits longer wavelengths or reduced frequencies than that from similar radiation sources on Earth. All specific frequency lines in the electromagnetic spectrum of distant cosmic radiation sources appeared shifted towards the red end of the visible spectrum. His discovery therefore was called astronomic redshift defined by the redshift ratio
z = Dl / lo (1)
Of which Δl represent the elongation of a specific wavelength and lo the original wavelength of emission at the source. Frequency (n) and wavelength (λ) of the radiation are correlated by the velocity of light (c) c = n x l (2).
Right from the beginning, the astronomic redshift was attributed to the well-known Doppler Effect of wave propagation, manifest when source and receiver of waves mo[1]ve relative to each other. HUBBLE’s discovery, therefore, proved as it were that our Universe was expanding and all stars and galaxies moved apart and away from Earth. Their apparent recession velocity in radial direction away from Earth was determined according to the Doppler Effect at n / no = (1-v/c) (3)
n representing one specific frequency of the arriving light, no the corresponding frequency of emission at the source, v the recession velocity of the source and c the velocity of light in vacuum. Simultaneously, HUBBLE discovered that the apparent recession velocity of cosmic sources increases proportionally to their distance (r) from Earth,
v = H x r (4)
H representing the famous HUBBLE constant, which currently is estimated at about 70 km/s per megaparsec or per 3.26 million light-years. HUBBLE’s discoveries soon led to our current view of the Universe, assuming that it originated from a gigantic explosion, the Big Bang, which happened spontaneously out of a tiny egg of unimaginable high temperature followed up by adiabatic expansion and the condensation of matter while cooling down. Apparently, this expansion process is still going on today. According to HUBBLE’s law, the escape velocity of an extremely distant galaxy can ultimately gain light-velocity, meaning its redshift ratio equals one. Physically of course, this is impossible. However, redshift ratios of z=5 and z=7 have been observed in recent years showing supernova explosions apparently further away from Earth than the postulated age of the Universe (~14 billion light-years). In addition, as well known, various other inconsistencies jeopardize the Big Bang view and many a scientist therefore questions it.
Alternative redshift thesis
Richard FEYNMAN received the Nobel Prize of physics in 1965, for his pioneering studies on quantum electro-dynamics, explaining the interactions of light (photons) with matter. In his book published in 1985 [2], he also describes the mechanism of linear propagation of light. He shows that photons emitted by a radiation source have then the best chance of arriving at a given receptor when they move straight and in close company from the source to the receptor, i.e. when they travel this distance within the shortest possible time. All other photons taking different and longer paths need more time and are of no consequence.
A ray of photons leaving a cosmic radiation source will strike innumerable celestial bodies while propagating in straight line through the Universe before arriving on Earth. Such bodies like stars, planets, comets, meteorites, grains, etc. are swirling around in the Universe at typical velocities of some hundred kilometers per second. When they cross a given ray of photons, this ray will shortly be cut off and all photons hitting the body will be completely removed from the stream independent of their individual energy or frequency. The photons following thereafter move further and after countless interruptions, only the remaining photons will arrive with the observer on Earth. He will remark that all typical spectral lines of this ray of photons exhibit lower frequencies than ordinary, because the knocked-out photons did not show up in time. Such ray has lost a good deal of its original photons, showing a redshift ratio, which is proportional to its traveling distance through the Universe. In other words, the described redshift mechanism fully acknowledges the great significance of HUBBLE’s discovery, namely that the redshift ratio indicates how far a cosmic radiation source is from Earth.
In addition, HUBBLE’s law still discloses another context. When replacing in equation (4) the recession velocity v by the product zxc, i.e. by a fraction of the ultimate velocity of light, an interesting correlation becomes apparent: z = H/c x r (5)
The constant factor H/c can be interpreted as a modified HUBBLE constant, H*, which amounts to 0,00023 per megaparsec or 0.00007 per million light-years. This modified constant represents the loss of photons suffered by a cosmic ray that has traveled one megaparsec through the Universe. It is a very small loss of photons over such big distance, demonstrating our experience that the Universe is largely empty of solid matter. The reciprocal of the modified HUBBLE constant i.e. 1/0.00007 gives 14 billion light-years, in accordance with the postulated age of our Universe following the traditional theory. However, in this case the meaning is different showing namely that ordinary cosmic light cannot penetrate further through the Universe than 14 billion light-years. All photons directed from an ordinary cosmic radiation source toward the Earth got lost due to absorption by celestial solid matter. We usually cannot look deeper into the Universe than this distance, corresponding theoretically to the redshift ratio of unity. However, what about those bigger redshift ratios of z=5 or even z=7, which have been observed in recent time?
We know from nuclear physics that energetic radiation penetrating through a shielding medium will be absorbed according to the general correlation E = Eo x e-m r (6)
E representing the radiation energy behind the shielding medium, Eo the energy of emission at the source, m the absorption coefficient of the medium and r the traveling distance through the medium. In the present case, it makes sense to regard the modified HUBBLE constant H* as a cosmic photon absorption coefficient and r as traveling distance of a light ray through the Universe. The energy of photons emitted by a heat source corresponds to the well-known equation
E = k x T (7)
of which T represents the surface temperature of the source and k the BOLTZMANN constant. On the other hand, the energy of photons corresponds to PLANCK’s equation
E = h x n (8)
of which h is the PLANCK constant and n the frequency of the photons. From equations (6), (7), and (8) follow the correlations n/no=T/To and E / Eo = e-H* r (9)
Referring to the previous equations (1) and (2), one finds that the cosmic redshift ratio correlates to z = e H* r – 1 (10)
The distance of a cosmic radiation source can thus be estimated from its redshift ratio according to r = 1/H* x ln (z + 1) (11)
in which H*= 0.00007 per million light-year. For a redshift ratio of z=1, for instance, one finds 9.9 billion light-years and for z=5, the distance is 25.6 billion light-years.
Conclusion
In contrast to the traditional redshift theory, the present different view on cosmic redshift indicates no theoretical upper limit of z and the Universe shows no restricted age.
Referring to the aforementioned equations, the redshift ratio also correlates to z = To/T – 1 (12)
i.e. to the ratio between the surface temperature of a cosmic radiation source, To, and its apparent temperature, T, observed on Earth. The light from a remote galaxy cluster at an ordinary surface temperature of about 5800°K as our sun would show the apparent temperature of 970°K on Earth, when arriving from a cosmic distance of z=5 or r=25.6 billion light-years. Such radiation source, of which most of the photons got lost on the way to Earth, would be invisible to ordinary optical telescopes. However, cosmic radiation sources of much higher surface temperatures or bigger emission energy like supernova explosions would still be visible over such extraordinary distances, which largely exceed the postulated age of our Universe according to the Big-Bang hypothesis.
In contrast to the traditional theory of cosmic redshift, the present different view does not present any difficulty on principle to explain such observations. In addition, this view still offers another interesting perspective, namely, that the well-known cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) may be interpreted as the thermodynamic radiation background of a Universe without frontiers. Because this ubiquitous radiation noise suggests, that many more radiation sources still exist in the remote Universe far beyond the practical limits of detecting individual sources.
R e f e r e n c e s :
[1] Paul Davies: The New Physics
Cambridge University Press, New York, 1989
[2] Richard P. Feynman: “QED – The Strange Theory of Light and Matter”
Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1985
[3] Craig J. Hogan: Revolution in Cosmology
Scientific American, p. 27-49, January 1999
[4] Ann Finkbeiner (ed): Seeing the Universe’s red dawn
SCIENCE, p. 392, 16 Oct. 1998
[5] Floyd E. Bloom: Breakthroughs 1998
SCIENCE, p. 2193, 18 Dec. 1998
[6] Wolfgang Hebel: The Mystery of Life – Does Science hold the Key?
German University Press (GUP), Baden-Baden, 2007
* Email: wolfgang.hebel@telenet.be Brussels, July 2008
Wolfgang HEBEL *
Light or photons propagate in straight line as rays from the source to the receptor in accordance with the theory of quantum electrodynamics established by Richard Feynman. The present study expounds that celestial bodies interact with cosmic rays by causing redshift, which resembles the traditional Doppler shift. However, such different redshift process does not request the Universe to expand.
Traditional theory of cosmic redshift
In 1929, Edwin HUBBLE discovered that light from cosmic stars exhibits longer wavelengths or reduced frequencies than that from similar radiation sources on Earth. All specific frequency lines in the electromagnetic spectrum of distant cosmic radiation sources appeared shifted towards the red end of the visible spectrum. His discovery therefore was called astronomic redshift defined by the redshift ratio
z = Dl / lo (1)
Of which Δl represent the elongation of a specific wavelength and lo the original wavelength of emission at the source. Frequency (n) and wavelength (λ) of the radiation are correlated by the velocity of light (c) c = n x l (2).
Right from the beginning, the astronomic redshift was attributed to the well-known Doppler Effect of wave propagation, manifest when source and receiver of waves mo[1]ve relative to each other. HUBBLE’s discovery, therefore, proved as it were that our Universe was expanding and all stars and galaxies moved apart and away from Earth. Their apparent recession velocity in radial direction away from Earth was determined according to the Doppler Effect at n / no = (1-v/c) (3)
n representing one specific frequency of the arriving light, no the corresponding frequency of emission at the source, v the recession velocity of the source and c the velocity of light in vacuum. Simultaneously, HUBBLE discovered that the apparent recession velocity of cosmic sources increases proportionally to their distance (r) from Earth,
v = H x r (4)
H representing the famous HUBBLE constant, which currently is estimated at about 70 km/s per megaparsec or per 3.26 million light-years. HUBBLE’s discoveries soon led to our current view of the Universe, assuming that it originated from a gigantic explosion, the Big Bang, which happened spontaneously out of a tiny egg of unimaginable high temperature followed up by adiabatic expansion and the condensation of matter while cooling down. Apparently, this expansion process is still going on today. According to HUBBLE’s law, the escape velocity of an extremely distant galaxy can ultimately gain light-velocity, meaning its redshift ratio equals one. Physically of course, this is impossible. However, redshift ratios of z=5 and z=7 have been observed in recent years showing supernova explosions apparently further away from Earth than the postulated age of the Universe (~14 billion light-years). In addition, as well known, various other inconsistencies jeopardize the Big Bang view and many a scientist therefore questions it.
Alternative redshift thesis
Richard FEYNMAN received the Nobel Prize of physics in 1965, for his pioneering studies on quantum electro-dynamics, explaining the interactions of light (photons) with matter. In his book published in 1985 [2], he also describes the mechanism of linear propagation of light. He shows that photons emitted by a radiation source have then the best chance of arriving at a given receptor when they move straight and in close company from the source to the receptor, i.e. when they travel this distance within the shortest possible time. All other photons taking different and longer paths need more time and are of no consequence.
A ray of photons leaving a cosmic radiation source will strike innumerable celestial bodies while propagating in straight line through the Universe before arriving on Earth. Such bodies like stars, planets, comets, meteorites, grains, etc. are swirling around in the Universe at typical velocities of some hundred kilometers per second. When they cross a given ray of photons, this ray will shortly be cut off and all photons hitting the body will be completely removed from the stream independent of their individual energy or frequency. The photons following thereafter move further and after countless interruptions, only the remaining photons will arrive with the observer on Earth. He will remark that all typical spectral lines of this ray of photons exhibit lower frequencies than ordinary, because the knocked-out photons did not show up in time. Such ray has lost a good deal of its original photons, showing a redshift ratio, which is proportional to its traveling distance through the Universe. In other words, the described redshift mechanism fully acknowledges the great significance of HUBBLE’s discovery, namely that the redshift ratio indicates how far a cosmic radiation source is from Earth.
In addition, HUBBLE’s law still discloses another context. When replacing in equation (4) the recession velocity v by the product zxc, i.e. by a fraction of the ultimate velocity of light, an interesting correlation becomes apparent: z = H/c x r (5)
The constant factor H/c can be interpreted as a modified HUBBLE constant, H*, which amounts to 0,00023 per megaparsec or 0.00007 per million light-years. This modified constant represents the loss of photons suffered by a cosmic ray that has traveled one megaparsec through the Universe. It is a very small loss of photons over such big distance, demonstrating our experience that the Universe is largely empty of solid matter. The reciprocal of the modified HUBBLE constant i.e. 1/0.00007 gives 14 billion light-years, in accordance with the postulated age of our Universe following the traditional theory. However, in this case the meaning is different showing namely that ordinary cosmic light cannot penetrate further through the Universe than 14 billion light-years. All photons directed from an ordinary cosmic radiation source toward the Earth got lost due to absorption by celestial solid matter. We usually cannot look deeper into the Universe than this distance, corresponding theoretically to the redshift ratio of unity. However, what about those bigger redshift ratios of z=5 or even z=7, which have been observed in recent time?
We know from nuclear physics that energetic radiation penetrating through a shielding medium will be absorbed according to the general correlation E = Eo x e-m r (6)
E representing the radiation energy behind the shielding medium, Eo the energy of emission at the source, m the absorption coefficient of the medium and r the traveling distance through the medium. In the present case, it makes sense to regard the modified HUBBLE constant H* as a cosmic photon absorption coefficient and r as traveling distance of a light ray through the Universe. The energy of photons emitted by a heat source corresponds to the well-known equation
E = k x T (7)
of which T represents the surface temperature of the source and k the BOLTZMANN constant. On the other hand, the energy of photons corresponds to PLANCK’s equation
E = h x n (8)
of which h is the PLANCK constant and n the frequency of the photons. From equations (6), (7), and (8) follow the correlations n/no=T/To and E / Eo = e-H* r (9)
Referring to the previous equations (1) and (2), one finds that the cosmic redshift ratio correlates to z = e H* r – 1 (10)
The distance of a cosmic radiation source can thus be estimated from its redshift ratio according to r = 1/H* x ln (z + 1) (11)
in which H*= 0.00007 per million light-year. For a redshift ratio of z=1, for instance, one finds 9.9 billion light-years and for z=5, the distance is 25.6 billion light-years.
Conclusion
In contrast to the traditional redshift theory, the present different view on cosmic redshift indicates no theoretical upper limit of z and the Universe shows no restricted age.
Referring to the aforementioned equations, the redshift ratio also correlates to z = To/T – 1 (12)
i.e. to the ratio between the surface temperature of a cosmic radiation source, To, and its apparent temperature, T, observed on Earth. The light from a remote galaxy cluster at an ordinary surface temperature of about 5800°K as our sun would show the apparent temperature of 970°K on Earth, when arriving from a cosmic distance of z=5 or r=25.6 billion light-years. Such radiation source, of which most of the photons got lost on the way to Earth, would be invisible to ordinary optical telescopes. However, cosmic radiation sources of much higher surface temperatures or bigger emission energy like supernova explosions would still be visible over such extraordinary distances, which largely exceed the postulated age of our Universe according to the Big-Bang hypothesis.
In contrast to the traditional theory of cosmic redshift, the present different view does not present any difficulty on principle to explain such observations. In addition, this view still offers another interesting perspective, namely, that the well-known cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) may be interpreted as the thermodynamic radiation background of a Universe without frontiers. Because this ubiquitous radiation noise suggests, that many more radiation sources still exist in the remote Universe far beyond the practical limits of detecting individual sources.
R e f e r e n c e s :
[1] Paul Davies: The New Physics
Cambridge University Press, New York, 1989
[2] Richard P. Feynman: “QED – The Strange Theory of Light and Matter”
Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1985
[3] Craig J. Hogan: Revolution in Cosmology
Scientific American, p. 27-49, January 1999
[4] Ann Finkbeiner (ed): Seeing the Universe’s red dawn
SCIENCE, p. 392, 16 Oct. 1998
[5] Floyd E. Bloom: Breakthroughs 1998
SCIENCE, p. 2193, 18 Dec. 1998
[6] Wolfgang Hebel: The Mystery of Life – Does Science hold the Key?
German University Press (GUP), Baden-Baden, 2007
* Email: wolfgang.hebel@telenet.be Brussels, July 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
on the edge of knowledge
Wolfgang Hebel worked with the research directorate of the European Commission at Brussels (1981-1996). He has published more than 30 scientific reports and studies, previously on nuclear research and later on specific trends in fundamental research, in particular, regarding molecular biology and the molecular processes of life. For many years, he has been participating at high-level scientific meetings as an experienced observer, interested in grasping the messages communicated by the lecturers (including Nobel Laureates at their yearly meetings in Lindau, Germany). Although he has been studying in the first place the functionality of molecular processes in living organisms, he also studied the cosmic redshift phenomenon and the idea of an expanding Universe.
His recent studies have been published by Deutscher Wissenschafts-Verlag (DWV), Baden-Baden, Germany (www.dwv-net.de).
His recent studies have been published by Deutscher Wissenschafts-Verlag (DWV), Baden-Baden, Germany (www.dwv-net.de).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)