Subject: CCC/SDEC with perfectly smooth "dark energy"
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:24:32 +0300
From: Dimi Chakalov <dimi@chakalov.net>
To: Jim Isenberg <jim@newton.uoregon.edu>
CC: alan.rendall@aei.mpg.de, piotr@gargan.math.univ-tours.fr,
     bernard.schutz@aei.mpg.de, psj@tifr.res.in, goswami@tifr.res.in,
     sorkin@physics.syr.edu, takashi@tap.scphys.kyoto-u.ac.jp,
     frampton@physics.unc.edu

Dear Jim,

Thank you for your kind reply from Wed, 6 Apr 2005 18:02:27 -0700.

I'll certainly look at the slides of your talk "Cosmic Censorship" at

http://www.pv.infn.it/~spacetimeinaction/structure.html

Given your skills in manipulating the initial data (gr-qc/0403066) by "gluing" constructions (gr-qc/0501083 and gr-qc/0409047), I am highly interested in your opinion on the Cosmic Censorship Conjecture (CCC) in the presence of "dark energy". Roger Penrose knew nothing about "dark energy" in 1969, when he conjectured that a continual gravitational collapse should necessarily end up in a "black hole" state only.

Alan Rendall hinted that there could be surprises,

http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/Rendall.html#1

and I requested the paper by Bernard Schutz, "The inevitability of gravitational waves", which he has presented on the same conference, hoping to learn how these mythical gravitational waves could be immune to the dark energy crisis in GR.

Going back to your talk "Cosmic Censorship", may I ask you and your colleagues to help me understand how we can manipulate the physical substrate (your choice) of the dark energy to ensure that its distribution will indeed be *perfectly smooth*,

http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/Turok.html#3

This is the crucial issue which I cannot understand: What kind of initial data engineering and their "gluing" constructions are needed to make the dark energy *perfectly smooth*? Have you elaborated on some Smooth Dark Energy Conjecture (SDEC)?

We start with an "energy condition which requires the positivity of energy density at the classical level as seen by a local observer" [Ref. 1], but it is not at all clear to me how Mother Nature has made 73 per cent of Her body perfectly smooth and directly unobservable from the outset.

Besides, Her ubiquitous "dark energy body" has been evolving (the
coincidence problem), which means that we need to pinpoint some
preferred reference frame for SDEC.

Perhaps you can get some insights about SDEC from [Ref. 2]. I guess the fate of the universe is undecidable *in principle*, that is, irrespective of *any* initial data from our past light-cone [Ref. 3], which I believe fits to the conceptual solution proposed by Hitoshi Kitada [Ref. 4], as well as to my speculations at

http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/Turok.html#dissolve

You can read this email also at

http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/Isenberg.html

Please be assured that I will keep all professional feedback from you and your colleagues strictly private.

Best regards,

Dimi

> On Apr 1, 2005, at 1:37 PM, Dimi Chakalov wrote:
>
> Dear Dr. Isenberg,
>
> If possible, may I ask you for a copy from your "Cosmic
> Censorship", Spacetime In Action, University of Pavia , March 29
> - April 2, 2005.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dimi Chakalov
> --
> http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net
> http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/download.html
 

References

[Ref. 1] Pankaj S. Joshi and Rituparno Goswami. A resolution of
spacetime singularity and black hole paradoxes through avoidance of
trapped surface formation in Einstein gravity, gr-qc/0504019 v1,
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0504019

"For the class of solutions to the Einstein field equations that we construct here, at the initial epoch we take the matter to be a regular *isentropic* perfect fluid with a linear equation of state p = k[ro]. Then the energy conditions imply that at the initial surface, the fluid has a positive pressure. As the collapse evolves, we no longer impose the condition on the perfect fluid to remain necessarily to be isentropic, but allow the evolution of equation of state as determined by the collapse itself and the Einstein equations, as we shall discuss. The pressure decreases monotonically as the collapse proceeds, and eventually and closer to the singularity it necessarily becomes negative in this class of solutions. It is seen that there is avoidance of any trapped surfaces formation in the space-time. The *weak energy condition* is, however, preserved through out the collapse.
...

"In fact, such a form of dark energy may violate some of the energy conditions as well, as opposed to the weak energy condition holding in our case. However, within the framework of gravitational collapse, while dealing with finite massive matter clouds such as collapsing stars, an energy condition may be supposed to hold, at least at the classical level till a fairly advanced stage of collapse is reached. On the other hand, there is no problem having negative pressures, even when the weak energy condition is satisfied, as we have seen above. As the collapse progresses the quantum corrections may become important, and such quantum effects may possibly give rise effectively to negative pressures, at least in a certain approximation."
 

[Ref. 2] Takeshi Chiba, Ryuichi Takahashi, Naoshi Sugiyama, Classifying the Future of Universes with Dark Energy, astro-ph/0501661 v2,
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0501661

"The Universe is replete with dark energy whose nature is almost completely unknown, excepting that its "equation of state", w = p/[ro], is negative. (...) In this paper, including w < -1 dark energy, we classify the future of the universe and the conformal diagrams for
cosmological models with dark matter and dark energy with general
equation of state."

[See sec. 5.2, Spherical collapse, Figure 8: 'Monotonously Expands',
'Collapses', and 'Expands-Contracts-ReExpands'.]
 

[Ref. 3] Paul H. Frampton, Tomo Takahashi, The Fate of Dark Energy, astro-ph/0211544 v4,
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0211544

"Our dreadful conclusion is that no amount of data from our past
light-cone can select between these future scenarios."
 

[Ref. 4] Hitoshi Kitada, A possible solution for the non-existence of time, gr-qc/9910081 v3,
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9910081
 
 

Note: To explain the paradigm of virtual reality in Einstein's GR, which is the cornerstone of the Smooth Dark Energy Conjecture (SDEC), let me comment on a recent conjecture due to A. Ashtekar and M. Bojowald [Ref. 5]. They wrote: "It may well be that there is a well-defined, new notion of quantum causality and using it one may be able to reanalyze this issue."

This new notion of quantum causality is outlined here. It does preserve 'pure states', since they emerge from the virtual reality of quantum gravity. The unitary dynamics in 'relational reality' is an approximation which ultimately fails in quantum cosmology. Instead of talking about "black holes", see the non-tensorial mess in GR here.

We need to unravel a new aspect of gravity [Ref. 6], since the very "action" of the 'grin of the cat' on its physical substrate in the bi-directional "talk" of gravity is completely dark as well. All we can observe is some self-acting behavior of matter in the right-hand side of Einstein's equation, which we interpret as spacetime "curvature".

Again, the so-called dark energy is an effect of the Holon, hence it does not have any intrinsic physical substrate. We cannot pinpoint some physical stuff in the right-hand side of Einstein's equation and claim that this stuff, call it {X}, is the physical substrate of "dark energy". It is a virtual reality, an effect of the Holon in the global mode of spacetime, and is huge [Refs. 6 and 7].

Interested? Time is running out!

D. Chakalov
April 8, 2005
Last update: April 13, 2005
 
 

[Ref. 5] Abhay Ashtekar and Martin Bojowald, Black hole evaporation: A paradigm, gr-qc/0504029 v1

p. 4: "Second, the event horizon is a highly global and teleological construct. (For a recent discussion of limitations of this notion, see [11]). Since the structure of the quantum space-time could be very different from that of figure 1 near (and ‘beyond’) the singularity, the causal relations implied by the presence of the event horizon of figure 1 is likely to be quite misleading.

"Indeed, Hajicek [12] has provided explicit examples to demonstrate that the Vaidya solutions which are often used to model the evaporating black hole of figure 1 can be altered just in a Planck scale neighborhood of the singularity to change the structure of the event horizon dramatically and even make it disappear.
--
[12] Hajicek P 1987 Origin of Hawking radiation Phys. Rev D36 1065-1079
 

p. 10: "ii) Event horizon: Since the shaded region does not have a classical metric, it is not meaningful to ask questions about causal relations between this region and the rest.
...
Thus, because the geometry in the deep Planck regime is genuinely quantum mechanical, the global notion of an event horizon ceases to be useful. It may well be that there is a well-defined, new notion of quantum causality and using it one may be able to reanalyze this issue. However, the standard classical notion of the event horizon is ‘transcended’ because of absence of a useful classical metric in the deep Planck region.
...

pp. 14-15: "Quantum geometry is defined on a larger manifold and when the analysis pays due respect to this extension, pure states can evolve to pure states, without any information loss."
 

[Ref. 6] Michael S. Turner, Beyond Einstein: The Origin and Destiny of the Universe, talk at "Geometry and Physics after 100 Years of Einstein's Relativity" (April 5 - 8, 2005, Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics, Albert Einstein Institute, Potsdam-Golm, Germany), Tuesday, April 5, 2005.
 
 


Slide 67
 
 
 

Slide 45

Note added on April 12, 2005: If you click on Mike Turner's slide 45 above, you will read my efforts from June 5th last year to explain the notion of Pure Void, the source of the so-called dark energy. Pure Void is not 'the absence of X' or 'zero value of Y' ("zero bananas", in my example from June 5, 2004). Pure Void is what we call 'empty set'. It is the essence of the non-unitary evolution of the Universe: creatio ex nihilo. Its physical manifestation is provided by two virtual worlds of positive and negative mass, separated by an atemporal luxonic world. More about the creation of the Universe from the "polarization" of the Pure Void here; general philosophical remarks here and here.

D. Chakalov
Tuesday, April 12, 2005, 14:05:47 GMT
 
 
 

Slide 11








[Ref. 7] R. Aldrovandi, J. P. Beltran Almeida, J. G. Pereira, Time-Varying Cosmological Term: Emergence and Fate of a FRW Universe, gr-qc/0312017 v3,
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0312017
[Version to be published in Gravitation & Cosmology]

p. 5: "Since a new degree of freedom, connected with the time-evolving cosmological term, is introduced, there remains in the theory a free parameter -- the cosmological term -- whose time evolution has eventually to be determined by further fundamental physics [24].

"Of course, to explain why e' and e'' are approximately of the same order today, and eventually why the acceleration was negative in the past and positive today, as strongly suggested by recent observations, a quite specific time evolution for [lambda] is necessary. This question, however, remains as one of the mysteries involving the nature of dark energy, an open problem to be investigated.
...

" ... conservation of energy requires that matter and/or radiation be transformed into dark energy by a time increasing [lambda] term.
...

"Of course, whether quantum effects will or not preclude such "collapse" is an open question."
 

======

Subject: The cosmic equator and gr-qc/0507028 v2
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 12:18:23 +0300
From: Dimi Chakalov <dimi@chakalov.net>
To: Thomas Buchert <buchert@theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de>
CC: Viatcheslav Mukhanov <mukhanov@theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de>,
     Stephane Colombi <colombi@iap.fr>,
     Sabino Matarrese <matarrese@pd.infn.it>,
     Edward W Kolb <rocky@rigoletto.fnal.gov>

Dear Professor Buchert,

I wonder if you or some of your colleagues could explain the cosmic equator

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101Flucts.html

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ContentMedia/map_model_2.gif

with some global kinematical backreaction term, as in your gr-qc/0507028 v2.

My speculative ideas are very different from yours, since I suggest a Holon state of the whole universe, which casts its global "spin" on 3-D space. Hence I believe it can be possible to avoid any preferred direction in 3-D space. Also, the "compensating cosmological constant" would reside in the Holon state (global mode of spacetime). More at

http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/Szabados.html#note

http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/Price.html#note

It goes without saying that I could be all wrong, which is why I'm highly interested in your alternative explanation of the cosmic equator. It's driving force could be just the so-called dark energy of the Holon.

BTW I noticed your "big mistake" at

http://www.theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~buchert/
buchert_mistake.html

If I'm on the right track, I think there could be a lot of money in

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/possible.html#vac

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/ideachev.html#neg

Kindest regards,

Dimi Chakalov
--
http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net
http://www.God-does-not-play-dice.net/download.html
 

Note: BTW the accelerated expansion of the universe due to the so-called dark energy may be a cosmological case of "negative mass" propulsion, as suggested on November 3, 2002. If we can model the universe as a huge brain, perhaps we can make a warp drive as well.

First, we need to understand the physics of all that "dark" stuff, which shows up as dark matter and dark energy. Perhaps the Holon can exert a gravitational force "from within" each and every spacetime point, such that there will be two "opposite" 3-D components cast in the local mode of spacetime: dark matter (implosion) and dark energy (expansion/explosion).

To be specific, we postulate two virtual worlds in the Holon (global mode of spacetime), material and tachyonic, which "run against each other" in the Holon. Also, at every spacetime "point" from the local mode of spacetime, the space turns itself "inside out", much like the way a mathematician would catch a lion in Sahara. (First, he will make sure that there is at least one lion available, then he will build a cage, go inside it, and will invert the space w.r.t. the cage surface, such that all points from inside will be teleported outside, and the other way around. Then the mathematician will wind up outside the cage, and the poor lion will be trapped inside!) Another mathematician, Martin Bojovald, has suggested his insights as follows: "This can be visualized with an ideally spherical balloon which looses air. It remains an empty balloon such that all its parts clash together -- as in a singularity. Now one has to imagine that instead of clashing the parts can freely move through each other and simply move forward. The balloon then again expands with the former inside pointing outward, and vice versa." Time will change its direction, and your left glove will be converted into a right glove as well. Topologically, you can achieve a smooth transition only in the Holon (global mode of spacetime).

Thus, we would have a local mode of spacetime endowed with spherical rotation and CPT-invariant physics -- all blueprints from the two virtual worlds in the Holon. Hopefully, we would discover two more blueprints, one time-symmetrical and one time-asymmetrical. The former would be the "dark" effect of the Holon producing dark matter and dark energy, and the latter would be producing the cosmic equator.

Well, you can't find this in present-day GR. Wait until November 2015.
 

D. Chakalov
September 14, 2005