Product Description

The Astronomer Royal shows how the behaviour and origins of the universe can be explained by just six numbers

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #5513 in Books
• Published on: 2000-10-05
• Binding: Paperback
• 176 pages

Amazon.co.uk Review
Just six numbers govern the shape, size and texture of our universe. If their values were only fractionally different, we would not exist; nor, in many cases, would matter have had a chance to form. If the numbers that govern our universe were elegant--1, say, or Pi, or the Golden Mean--we would simply shrug and say that the universe was an elegant mathematical puzzle. But the numbers Martin Rees discusses are far from tidy. Was the universe "tweaked" or is it one of many universes, all run by slightly different but equally messy, rules?

This is familiar ground, though rarely so comprehensively explored. What makes Rees's book exceptional is his conviction that cosmology is as materialistic and as conceptually simple as any of the earth sciences. Indeed, "cosmology is simpler in one important respect: once the starting point is specified, the outcome is in broad terms predictable. All large patches of the universe that start off the same way end up statistically similar. In contrast, if the Earth's history were re-run, it could end up with a quite different biosphere."

Rees demonstrates how the cosmos is full of "fossils" from which we can deduce how our universe developed, as surely as we infer the Earth's past from the relics found in sedimentary rocks. Rees's theme is nothing less than the colossal richness of the universe. It is an ambitious book, if anything, it deserves to be longer. --Simon Ings

Synopsis
How did a single 'genesis event' create billions of galaxies, black holes, stars and planets? How did atoms assemble -- here on Earth, and perhaps on other worlds -- into living beings intricate enough to ponder their origins? This book describes the recent avalanche of discoveries about the universe's fundamental laws, and the deep connections that exist between stars and atoms -- the cosmos and the microscopic world. Just six numbers, imprinted in the 'big bang', determine the essence of our world, and this book devotes one chapter to explaining each.

Customer Reviews

Thought provoking
The central hypotheisis in this book is that if any of just six numbers, were different, our universe would be entirely different. Some critical consequence such as planets not been able to form, stars not emitting enough energy or evolution not having enough time for our species to develop would be the result of any of these numbers being different.

When I first heard of this book, I was naievly thinking the numbers would include PI, the speed of light or some of the well other known constants from the scientific world. The numbers and their associated concepts are far more abstract.

The six numbers are:

1. N
This is the ratio of electrical force to gravitational force between atoms. This is 10 pow 37.
If this number were slightly lower, molecules would behave similarly but less atoms would be needed to make a star and it wouldn't last as long. The star would die sooner, meaning planets such as our own wouldn't get the length of time needed for evolution to bring species such as our's into existence.

2. E
This is the percentage of mass that is converted into energy, when hyrogen atoms fuse to form helium.
Strong nuclear force, is the force which the particles that make up an atomic nucleus (protons and nuetrons) together. This force acts is the dominant force in the microworld where it overcomes the electrical repulsion which would cause the protons to fly apart. The amount of energy released when atoms undergo nuclear fusion depends on the strength of strong nuclear force as this force that is overcome.

If E was lower (say 0.006) it would mean, that the strong nuclear force or nuclear glue was weaker and protons and nuetrons would never overcome the electrical repulsion and attach. Elements such as helium would never form.

If E was larger (say 0.008) no hyrdogen (which has one proton, no nuetron) would have survived from the big bang. Two protons would have been able to bind as they would have easily overcome the electrical repulsion to each other. This would have happened in the early universe so that all hydrogen would quickly be gone. No hydrogen, amongst other things means no water.

3. Omega.
The universe is quite empty. Omega is the ratio of actual density to critical density. If the universe were closer to critical density, gravitational force would over come explosive energy and the universe could collapse. If the actual density was too small, no stars or galaxies would have formed because gravitational energy would not be strong enough.

4. Lambda. This controls the expansion of the universe. It relates to the anti gravitational force (a new force and recent discovery) which determines the speed of expansions of the universe. I gathered that not a lot is known about this other than it is a small number. Had it not have been galaxies etc would not have formed.

5. Q: 10 pow -5. This ratio of ratio of energy required to break up stars and galaxies to their rest mass energy (i.e. E = mC pow2). This is 10 pow -5. If Q were less the universe would be structureless. If Q were too large no stars or solar systems would survive.

6. D: Number of spatial dimensions which is 3. If D was 2 or 4 life could not exist.

Although this book is well written some of the concepts in it are difficult to grasp. There is a lot more in this book than just simple numbers. There are some very sophisticated concepts in this book. If you are doing a PhD in Theoritical Physics its probably quite easy, but I found myself having to re-read several passages to grasp the ideas. Other Universe-esque books such Stephen Hawkings' 'Brief History of Time' or Simon Singh's 'The Big Bang', I found a lot easier to understand and arguably better.

That said, the overall hypotheisis that just 6 numbers play a critical role in shaping our universe is fascinating, mind boggling and well presented.

One universe or many?


What an excellent book!

Martin Rees looks at six facets of the universe, and considers how changing any one of these parameters would lead to a very different type of universe to the we can see (and infer) all around us.

He explains complex ideas beautifully and elegantly. He helps the reader wonder if this universe was designed for our purposes (sorry chaps, we're not that important), or whether we evolved to take advantage of the conditions that were available.

And the logical extensions to his thinking and writing are really quite breathtaking. Has our universe expanded and crashed many times? Or is our view of just one universe simply limited and parochial? And if there are many universes, how would they form and what would they look like?

Rees using mathematics, physics and some creative and highly enjoyable thinking to talk us through these ideas.

And the idea that there is no chance of us being here?

Well ...you're almost right. But there's at least one universe full of difference between no chance and almost no chance ...

Makes you think, doesn't it?

A problem of Prejudice
You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. It appears that you can also lead a Scientist to the evidence that there is a reason for the Cosmos, but you cannot make him think, particularly if the evidence points to an intelligent Creator.

The evidence that Martin Rees presents provides substantial support for my Thesis, "The Process of the Cosmos", also published in 1999. This Thesis is freely available on my Website. The New Jersey City University Library refers to my Website:"Big Questions of Philosophy and the Answers" - in the following terms:-
"Dr. Anthony Kelly's thesis is to examine nothing less than the relationship between God, humanity and the history of the universe, exploring unresolved philosophical questions about the cosmos and human nature which go back to Aristotle."

Martin Rees is prepared to go to absurd lengths to avoid the conclusion his evidence leads to, that there is a God. He proposes the existence of multiple universes as an alternative to an intelligent Creator, our universe only becoming fine tuned "by accident". He admits not only that there is no evidence for such multiple universes, saying "it is only a hunch" (page 174). He then admits that if there were such universes we could never know anything about them. He finds this approach more comforting than accepting the existence of a God. Perhaps Ree's real problem is the fanciful religious notion that God intervenes in the world, rather than the perception that God is necessarily "hands-off" the Cosmos, the world being humanity's "Do-it-yourself kit".