The universe has caused tons of different opinions and studies to its origin and existence. From scientists to the public, everyone is confused by the mystery lying in the universe. Its origin, existence form and time it has been existing is just but a quagmire in the minds of the concerned souls. The book “Dancing Universe: From Creation Myths to Big Bang” talks of the different standpoints and theories that have been evolving since time immemorial. The ninth and tenth chapter brings out vividly the chronology of scientific approach towards the explanation of the dimension and form of the universe. This is something known as the Physics Revolution. It is an interesting experience to have a taste of how the different scientists that are celebrated today did tiring research which later seemed to confuse people (including themselves) even more.
As a Physics student, it is always a norm to meet names like Newton and Einstein. We view these great people like the contributors of mechanics only, but we never know how much they contribute to cosmology. Explaining the shape and occurrence of the universe employs the equations and theories the scientists contributed. Previously, it was the religion which explained the origin of the universe. It was as simple as only one Creator being responsible for the creation of the vast universe (Marcelo, 2012). Cosmology was regarded as a lie to the public by the religious faction. It was after the Renaissance that cosmology was known as a true science. Science had won a little bit.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The victory over the tight religious groups was not enough. What was lying ahead seemed like a darkness loaded with bottomless pits of mysteries. It was time to prove that science is responsible for the occurrence of the universe. Albert Einstein was at the forefront in explaining the physics of Universe. He studied the Newtonian principle of gravity and revealed the setbacks of Newtonian mechanics. He revealed a new way of studying gravitational fields on the object moving at not only constant relative velocities but also at accelerations. Thus the long opposition of Newton towards the law of constant gravitational pull that Newton had discovered. The law of relativity was hence born (Marcelo, 2012). It proposed that there is no difference between a downward gravitational pull and an upward acceleration. In the book, it is analogized by a lift moving down and the person not feeling their weight.
Science, according to Einstein, can determine the configuration of the whole universe if the relationship between matter and gravitational field can be mapped (Marcelo, 2012). What ensued after the discovery of possibility to model is the entire universe and would be termed as the beginning of a new era in cosmology. Other scientists joined the bandwagon of modeling the universe with mathematical equations and shapes. They used the waves of light and sound about gravitational pull to claim the universe is static, oscillating, expanding, open, closed or flat. The book describes these types “desktop universes.” Moreover, this is further confusing, and at some point, Einstein apologized for misleading the people by saying the universe is static after Friedman’s discovery (Marcelo, 2012). It is so difficult to know the shape and form in which the universe exists from these models. But science is not based on beliefs as for the religions.
Similar to the shape of the universe, another gray area is in the origin of matter and the universe as a whole. It is not clear on how the tiny bits that make every one of us up, together with everything around us, came to exist. People still question how the movement in the galaxies are related to the time that the universe has been there. An important question is whether the galaxies were clustered together in the beginning. Science brings more questions than answers and if there are answers, they are not certain. But in contrary to religion, observations can be done. Religion only states what we should believe in and no questions to be asked.
Estimating the age of the universe brought more problems between cosmologists and geologists. According to the two groups, there is a fluctuation in age from ten to twenty billion years. The age of the universe is a source of hot debate in the field of astronomy. It is imperative to note that the state in which the matter of the universe exist created more fuss as it is known that matter is made up of small atoms which can be further split into a nucleus, composed of neutrons and protons and the electrons orbiting the nucleus (Marcelo, 2012). This was not regarded either until the first detonation of the first atomic bomb. This finding gave light to the research from a bigger occurrence to small ones. It makes the discoveries a top down sort of phenomenon.
In conclusion, there is a mystery involved in the verge to explain the origin and state of the universe and everything in it. The branch of cosmology and mythmakers in the religion faction are in the great twine of the question as each side tries to uncover the “truth.” But it seems that the cosmologists depend on the previous studies to strengthen the theories of the universe. They try to answer the uncovered questions from the previous studies as they expose their shortcomings. Quantum mechanics at large was developed not by a single scientist. From the myths about creation to the Big Bang, the book illustrates the chronology, the labyrinth, and dilemmas suffered by marveled people on their quests to uncover the mysterious beginning of the universe.
Reference
Gleiser, Marcelo, (2012). Understanding Science and Technology: Dancing Universe: From Creation Myths to the Big Bang. Lebanon, US: Dartmouth. ProQuest library.
