Paradoxes of the Universe
Valery Petrov
Introduction
In cosmology, the question of the finitude or infinity of the Universe is of great importance:
if the Universe is finite, then, as Friedman showed, it cannot be in a stationary state and must either expand or contract;
if the Universe is infinite, then any assumptions about its compression or expansion lose any meaning.
It is known that the so-called cosmological paradoxes were put forward as objections to the possibility of the existence of an infinite Universe, infinite in the sense that neither its size, nor the time of existence, nor the mass of the matter contained in it can be expressed by any, no matter how large, numbers. Let's see how justified these objections turn out to be.
Cosmological paradoxesessence and research
It is known that the main objections to the possibility of the existence of a Universe infinite in time and space are as follows.
1. In 1744 Swiss astronomer J.F. Chezot was the first to doubt the correctness of the idea of an infinite Universe: if the number of stars in the Universe is infinite, then why doesn’t the whole sky sparkle like the surface of a single star? Why is the sky dark? Why are stars separated by dark spaces? . It is believed that the same objection to the model of an infinite Universe was put forward by the German philosopher G. Olbers in 1823. Olbers's counter-argument was that light coming to us from distant stars should be attenuated by absorption in matter in its path. But in this case, this substance itself should heat up and glow brightly, like stars. . However, this is how it really is! According to modern ideas, vacuum is not nothing, but is something that has very real physical properties. Then why not assume that light interacts with this something in such a way that each photon of light, when moving in this something, loses energy in proportion to the distance it travels, as a result of which the photon’s radiation shifts to the red part of the spectrum. Naturally, the absorption of photon energy by vacuum is accompanied by an increase in the temperature of the vacuum, as a result of which the vacuum becomes a source of secondary radiation, which can be called background radiation. When the distance from the Earth to the emitting object of a star or galaxy reaches a certain limiting value, the radiation from this object receives such a large red shift that it merges with the background radiation of the vacuum. Therefore, although the number of stars in the infinite Universe is infinite, the number of stars observed from the Earth, and in general from any point in the Universe, of course, at any point in space the observer sees himself as if in the center of the Universe, from which a certain limited number of stars (galaxies) are observed. At the same time, at the frequency of background radiation, the entire sky sparkles like the surface of a single star, which is actually observed.
2. In 1850 German physicist R. Clausius... came to the conclusion that in nature heat passes from a warm body to a cold one... the state of the Universe should increasingly change in a certain direction... These ideas were developed by the English physicist William Thomson, according to which all physical processes in the Universe are accompanied by the conversion of light energy into heat. Consequently, the Universe faces thermal death, so the endless existence of the Universe in time is impossible. In reality, this is not the case. According to modern concepts, matter is converted into light energy and heat as a result of thermonuclear processes occurring in stars. Heat death will occur as soon as all the matter in the Universe burns up in thermonuclear reactions. Obviously, in an infinite Universe, the reserves of matter are also infinite, therefore, all the matter in the Universe will burn out in an infinitely long time. Heat death threatens rather the finite Universe, since its reserves of matter are limited. However, even in the case of a finite Universe, its thermal death is not obligatory. Newton also said something like this: Nature loves transformations. Why shouldn’t there be some in a series of different transformations in which matter turns into light, and light into matter? Currently, such transformations are well known: on the one hand, matter turns into light as a result of thermonuclear reactions, on the other, photons, i.e. light, under certain conditions, turns into two completely material particles, the electron and the positron. Thus, in nature there is a circulation of matter and energy, which excludes the thermal death of the Universe.
Given the incompleteness of human knowledge about the world, we need to be prepared for the fact that from time to time we are faced with very real situations for which we cannot find any logical explanation.
In such situations, humanity is faced with theoretical contradictions (when the cause-and-effect relationship stops working), as well as contradictions between theory and experience (when logical conclusions do not correspond to what a person observes during an experiment).
Such scientific paradoxes lead to dead ends, cast doubt on many generally accepted scientific theories, and sometimes lead to the birth of a new scientific paradigm. Some of the paradoxes can still be resolved through the use of new scientific methods, more accurate measurement tools, and also through the search for logical errors in the very formulation of the paradox. Others remain an unsolved mystery for us, which, nevertheless, stimulates scientists to a deeper understanding of existing theories. 
This section will consider physical paradoxes in general, as well as cosmological paradoxes in particular. Of particular interest are the cosmological paradoxes that arise when humanity attempts to extend the generally accepted laws of physics to the Universe as a whole.
What is the difficulty of studying the Universe using natural scientific methods? The Universe is an object that is infinite and includes the entire surrounding world. Traditional physics is not used to working with objects of this scale. Nevertheless, many physicists of the “old Newtonian school” still tried to adapt the physical laws that work in terrestrial conditions to the Universe on its largest scales. And, of course, they were the first to encounter numerous paradoxes that called into question the truth of Newton's theory.
Many paradoxes were painlessly resolved thanks to the emergence of modern cosmology and the development of Einstein's general theory of relativity. This is how relativistic physics appeared, which made it possible to perceive the Universe as a whole as an object of scientific study. For example, Einstein's new theory made it possible to describe the laws of mechanics and space-time relationships in situations where we are dealing with motion speeds close to the speed of light.
However, there are still many blind spots in modern physics and, accordingly, many currently unresolved scientific paradoxes. Most likely, this is due to the idea of the infinity of the Universe, which is impossible to fully comprehend and, even more so, to use experiments as a method of studying it. At the moment, in many questions (especially questions regarding the origin and evolution of the Universe), scientists have only theories, which often contradict each other and give rise to new insoluble paradoxes.
While this all sounds like the plot of an episode of The Twilight Zone, it's entirely possible that we're stuck in some kind of celestial cage. Extraterrestrial civilizations could have stumbled upon our blue ball a long time ago, but for some reason they are watching us from afar. Maybe we are just entertainment for them (like monkeys in a zoo) or they need us for scientific purposes. Be that as it may, they do not touch us and try not to make contact.
The idea was first proposed by John Ball in 1973, who argued that extraterrestrial intelligent life may be ubiquitous, but that "failed attempts to communicate with us can be understood in the context of their abandonment of us, like a nature reserve or a zoo." We can be part of a huge reserve, the limits of which are almost unlimited, or these limits are sufficient for the undisturbed development of intelligent life. This idea directly corresponds to the "First Directive" from Star Trek - civilizations are left to their own devices until they reach a certain level of technological development. UFOlogists adhere to the same idea, claiming that aliens are everywhere, but are watching us from afar.
Voluntary quarantine
This is sort of the opposite of the zoo hypothesis. Aliens may well be dangerous. Extremely dangerous. So, instead of riding around the galaxy in spaceships and hoping that everyone they meet will be super friendly, extraterrestrial civilizations have collectively and independently decided to sit quietly and not attract attention.
Why not? It would be quite reasonable to conclude, especially in light of the Fermi Paradox, that space is teeming with danger - be it an imperialist civilization on the march or a war of berserker probes sterilizing everything in its path. To ensure that no one disturbs them, advanced extraterrestrial civilizations may build a perimeter of Sandburg probes (self-replicating police probes) to ensure that no one gets through. 
Front sight hypothesis
Imagine, some kind of “First Directive” is in effect, but extraterrestrial civilizations are hanging over us with giant hammers, ready to slam us down as soon as something doesn’t go the way they want. Such aliens will be something like Gort from The Day the Earth Stood Still, trying to preserve the peace of the galaxy at any cost. “There are no limits to what Gort can do,” Klaatu said. “He could destroy the Earth.” What's next for Gort or other advanced extraterrestrial civilizations? Perhaps a technological singularity. could lead to the emergence of (ASI), which could become a threat to the entire galaxy. Thus, to prevent such bad intelligences from developing - and to give good intelligences a chance to develop - the galactic hammer is raised and awaits the signal.
We are made of meat
Just read a small part of Terry Beeson's award-nominated short story.
- They are meat.
- Meat?
- Yes. They are made from meat.
- From meat?!
- Error excluded. We picked up several specimens from different parts of the planet, brought them aboard our reconnaissance ship and tested them thoroughly. They are made entirely of meat.
– But this is incredible! What about radio signals? What about messages to the stars?
– They use radio waves to communicate, but they do not send the signals themselves. Signals come from cars.
– But who builds these machines? This is who you need contact with!
- They are building. That's what I'm telling you about. Meat makes cars.
- What nonsense! How can meat make a machine? Do you want me to believe in meat with memories and feelings?
- I don’t want anything. I'm just telling you what it is. These are the only intelligent creatures in the entire sector, and at the same time they are made of meat.
– Maybe they look like Orpholeys? You know, that carbon intelligence that goes through a meat phase as it develops?
- Not really. They are born meat and die meat. We studied them during several life cycles - which, by the way, are very short. Do you have any idea how long meat lives?
- Oh, spare me... Okay. Maybe they are not completely meat after all? Well, remember how these... veddileys. Meat head with an electron-plasma brain inside.
- No! At first we thought so too. Since they have a head made of meat. But then, as I said, everyone was tested. From top to bottom. It's all meat everywhere. What's outside, what's inside.
– What about the brain?
- Oh, I have a brain, everything is fine. But also made from meat.
– Where do thoughts come from?!
– You don’t understand, right? Thoughts are produced by the brain. Meat.
– Does the meat have thoughts? Do you want me to believe in intelligent meat?
- Hell yes! Smart meat. Meat with feelings. With conscience. Meat that dreams. Everything is pure meat. Do you understand?
- Oh my God... Are you serious?
- Absolutely. They are seriously made of meat, and for the last hundred years they have been trying to get in touch.
-What do they want?
– For starters, talk... Then, apparently, rummage around the Universe, contact scientists from other worlds and steal ideas with data from them. Everything as usual.
- So we have to talk to the meat?
- In fact of the matter. That’s what they say in their messages: “Hello! Is there anyone alive? Is anybody home?" - and other rubbish.
- So they really talk? Through words, ideas and concepts?
- And how. Especially with the surrounding meat...
– But you said they use radio!
- Yes, but... What do you think they are doing to block the airwaves? Meat sounds. You know that splashing sound when you slap meat on meat? This is how they spank each other. And they even sing, passing streams of compressed air through the meat.
- Wow. Singing meat! This is too much... What do you recommend?
– Officially or between us?
- And this way and that.
“Officially, we are supposed to make contact, welcome them and open access to the Complete Register of sentient beings and multi-entity minds in this sector - without prejudice, fear or favor on our part. But if between us, I would erase all their data to hell and forget about them forever.
“I was hoping you would say that.”
– The measure, of course, is forced. But there is a limit to everything! Do we really want to get to know meat?
– I agree one hundred percent! Well, we tell them: “Hello, meat! How are you?" What next? And how many planets have they already populated?
- Only one. They can travel in special metal containers, but are not able to live constantly on the road. In addition, being meat, they can only move in space C. This does not allow them to reach the speed of light - which means that their likelihood of making contact is simply negligible. More precisely, infinitely small.
– So, it’s better for us to pretend that there is no one in the Universe?
- That's it.
– Cruel... On the other hand, you’re right: who wants to date meat? And those who were taken on board for testing - are you sure that they don’t remember anything?
– If anyone remembers, they will still take him for a crazy person. We got inside their heads and smoothed out the meat so that they perceived us as dreams.
- Meat dreams... Just think - meat dreams of us!
– And then this entire sector on the map can be marked as uninhabited.
- Great! I completely agree. Both officially and between us. Case is closed. No others? What else is funny on the other side of the Galaxy?
Simulation hypothesis
Nobody visited us because - and this model does not contain any extraterrestrial companions for us.
If this is true, then several important things follow from it. Firstly, these bandits - or gods, depending on how you look at it - arranged everything so that we are the only civilization in the entire galaxy (or even the Universe). Or the real Universe simply isn’t there; from here it seems to us that the world is huge, but it’s a simulated bubble. If a tree falls in the forest but no one hears the sound of it falling, does it make a sound?
Another strange possibility is that this simulation is run by a post-human civilization in search of an answer to the Fermi Paradox, or some other strange question. Perhaps, when trying to test different hypotheses (even preemptively considering the possibility of a certain action), they run a billion different simulators, trying to determine the options they need.
Silence on the air
This theory is similar to the quarantine hypothesis, but is not as paranoid. Not that much, but paranoid. It is quite possible that everyone is listening to us, but no one is trying to communicate. And for very good reasons.
David Brin suggests that the practice of Active SETI is similar to screaming in the jungle (Active SETI is the deliberate transmission of high-power radio signals towards possible star systems with life). Michael Michaud feels the same way: “Let's be honest, Active SETI is not a scientific study. This is a conscious attempt to provoke a reaction from an alien civilization, whose capabilities, intentions and distance from us are unknown to us. This is a political problem." The main concern is that we may attract premature attention. Perhaps one day we will stop all attempts to communicate with aliens. But what if every civilization in space went through exactly the same ladder? This means there will be silence on the air.”
Perhaps even listening to the broadcast can be dangerous: where is the guarantee that SETI will not download a malicious virus from deep space?
All aliens are homebodies
This option is not so much strange as it is possible. Advanced extraterrestrial beings, upon reaching type II civilization on the Kardashev scale, may lose all galactic ambitions. As soon as a Dyson sphere or something like that is built, aliens unknown to us will start having fun unknown to us. Massive supercomputers will be able to simulate universes within universes, life cycles within life cycles. The rest of the universe will seem boring and empty. Space will turn into a rearview mirror.
We can't read the signs
It is quite possible that signals and signs from extraterrestrial civilizations are around us, but we simply do not see them. Either we are too stupid to notice them, or we need additional technology. According to the current SETI approach, we need to listen for radio signatures. But civilizations that are much more advanced than us may use completely different technology. They can signal with lasers, for example. Lasers are great because they are tightly focused beams with excellent information transfer capabilities. They can also penetrate the dusty interstellar medium.
Or, extraterrestrial civilizations could use "calling cards" using direct detection methods (that is, building massive ideal geometric structures like a triangle or square in orbit around their star).
Stephen Webb pointed out that electromagnetic signals, gravitational signals, signals of elementary particles, tachyons, and something else that we have not yet discovered have a certain potential. There may well be a radio, but we don’t know what frequency to tune in to (the electromagnetic spectrum is extremely wide). We may end up finding messages where we least expected them - even in our DNA code. 
They're all at the edge of the galaxy
This interesting solution to the Fermi Paradox was proposed by Milan Cirkovic and Robert Bradbury.
"We believe that the outer regions of the galactic disk are the most likely locations for advanced SETI searches," they wrote. The point is that complex intelligent communities will tend to migrate outward across the galaxy as their information processing capabilities increase. Why? Because machine-based civilizations, with their powerful supercomputers, will have serious problems with heat removal. They will have to camp somewhere where it will be cool. And the outer rim of the galaxy would be fine.
Additionally, post-singularity extraterrestrial civilizations may well live in places other than those where meat-based life lives. Hence, advanced civilizations will have no interest in exploring habitable zones inhabited by biological beings. Perhaps we are looking in the wrong place. Stephen Wolfram once said that one day it would be possible to calculate without generating heat, so this explanation of the Fermi Paradox would not work for him.
Targeted panspermia
Perhaps we cannot contact extraterrestrial civilizations because we ourselves are them. Or our ancestors were them. According to this theory, first proposed by Francis Crick, aliens sow sparks of life on other planets (by sending spores to potentially fertile planets, for example) and then move on. Forever. Or they may return someday.
This idea is quite popular in science fiction circles.
Bonus. Phase transition hypothesis
This hypothesis is similar to the "rare Earth" hypothesis, but assumes that the Universe is still evolving and changing. The conditions for maintaining developed intelligence have only recently appeared. Cosmologist James Annis calls this the phase transition model of the Universe - a kind of astrophysical explanation for the paradox of the great cosmic silence.
According to Annis, a possible regulatory mechanism that could explain all this is the frequency of gamma-ray bursts - super-catastrophic events that literally sterilize large areas of the galaxy.
“Assuming they are lethal to terrestrial life throughout the galaxy, it would only take one mechanism to prevent intelligence from increasing at a certain point, from time to time.” In other words, gamma-ray bursts happen too often, and intelligent life dies before it has the opportunity to move between galaxies. But as the frequency of gamma-ray bursts drops over time, that could change.
“The galaxy is currently undergoing a phase transition from an equilibrium state in which there is no intelligence to another state full of intelligent life,” Annis said.
And then everything will be fine.
Based on materials from Gizmodo
In cosmology, the question of the finitude or infinity of the Universe is of great importance:
if the Universe is finite, then, as Friedman showed, it cannot be in a stationary state and must either expand or contract;
if the Universe is infinite, then any assumptions about its compression or expansion lose any meaning.
It is known that the so-called cosmological paradoxes were put forward as objections to the possibility of the existence of an infinite Universe, infinite in the sense that neither its size, nor the time of existence, nor the mass of the matter contained in it can be expressed by any, no matter how large, numbers. Let's see how justified these objections turn out to be.
Cosmological paradoxes of TAU are the essence and research
It is known that the main objections to the possibility of the existence of a Universe infinite in time and space are as follows.
1. VlV 1744 Swiss astronomer J.F. Chezot was the first to doubt the correctness of the idea of an infinite Universe: if the number of stars in the Universe is infinite, then why doesn’t the whole sky sparkle like the surface of a single star? Why is the sky dark? Why are stars separated by dark spaces? It is believed that the same objection to the model of an infinite Universe was put forward by the German philosopher G. Olbers in 1823. Albers's counter-argument was that light coming to us from distant stars should be attenuated due to absorption in matter in its path. But in this case, this substance itself should heat up and glow brightly, like stars." . However, this is how it really is! According to modern ideas, a vacuum is not “an “extra-thing,” but is an “extra-thing,” which has very real physical properties. Then why not assume that light interacts with this “thing” in such a way that each photon of light, when moving in this “thing,” loses energy in proportion to the distance it travels, as a result of which the photon’s radiation shifts to the red part of the spectrum. Naturally, the absorption of photon energy by vacuum is accompanied by an increase in the temperature of the vacuum, as a result of which the vacuum becomes a source of secondary radiation, which can be called background radiation. When the distance from the Earth to the emitting object tAU star, galaxy tAU reaches a certain limiting value, the radiation from this object receives such a large red shift that it merges with the background radiation of the vacuum. Therefore, although the number of stars in the infinite Universe is infinite, the number of stars observed from the Earth, and in general from any point in the Universe, of course, at any point in space the observer sees himself as if in the center of the Universe, from which a certain limited number of stars (galaxies) are observed. At the same time, at the frequency of background radiation, the entire sky sparkles like the surface of a single star, which is actually observed.
2. In 1850 German physicist R. Clausius Vl.. came to the conclusion that in nature heat passes from a warm body to a cold one.. the state of the Universe must increasingly change in a certain direction.. These ideas were developed by the English physicist William Thomson, according to which all physical processes in the Universe accompanied by the conversion of light energy into heat." Consequently, the Universe faces “thermal death”, so the endless existence of the Universe in time is impossible. In reality, this is not the case. According to modern concepts, matter is converted into “light energy” and “heat” as a result of thermonuclear processes occurring in stars. “Thermal death” will occur as soon as all the matter of the Universe “burns up” in thermonuclear reactions. Obviously, in an infinite Universe, the reserves of matter are also infinite, therefore, all the matter of the Universe “burns” over an infinitely long time. "Thermal death" threatens rather the finite Universe, since the reserves of matter in it are limited. However, even in the case of a finite Universe, its “thermal death” is not obligatory. Newton also said something like this: “Nature loves transformations.” Why shouldn’t there be some in a series of different transformations in which matter turns into light, and light into matter?” Currently, such transformations are well known: on the one hand, matter turns into light as a result of thermonuclear reactions, on the other hand, photons, i.e. light, under certain conditions, turns into two completely material particles - electron and positron. Thus, in nature there is a circulation of matter and energy, which excludes “thermal death” in the Universe.
3. In 1895 German astronomer H. Seliger Vl.. came to the conclusion that the idea of an infinite space filled with matter at a finite density is incompatible with Newton’s law of gravity.. If in an infinite space the density of matter is not infinitesimal, but every two particles, according to Newton’s law, are mutually attract, then the gravitational force acting on any body would be infinitely large, and under its influence the bodies would receive an infinitely large acceleration.
As explained, for example, by I.D. Novikov in, the essence of the gravitational paradox is as follows. Let us assume that the Universe is, on average, uniformly filled with celestial bodies, so that the average density of matter in very large volumes of space is the same. Let's try to calculate, in accordance with Newton's law, what gravitational force caused by all the infinite matter of the Universe acts on a body (for example, a galaxy) placed at an arbitrary point in space. Let's first assume that the Universe is empty. Let us place a test body A at an arbitrary point in space. We surround this body with a substance of density that fills a ball of radius R so that body A is at the center of the ball. It is clear without any calculations that, due to symmetry, the gravitation of all particles of matter of the ball in its center balances each other, and the resulting force is zero, i.e. no force acts on body A. We will now add more and more spherical layers of matter of the same density to the ball.. spherical layers of matter do not create gravitational forces in the internal cavity and adding these layers does not change anything, i.e. as before, the resultant gravitational force for A is zero. Continuing the process of adding layers, we ultimately arrive at an infinite Universe, uniformly filled with matter, in which the resulting gravitational force acting on A is zero.
However, the reasoning can be carried out differently. Let us again take a homogeneous ball of radius R in an empty Universe. Let's place our body not in the center of this ball with the same density of matter as before, but on its edge. Now the gravitational force acting on body A will be equal according to Newton's law
where M is the mass of the ball; m is the mass of test body A.
We will now add spherical layers of matter to the ball. Once a spherical shell is added to this ball, it will not add any gravitational forces within itself. Consequently, the gravitational force acting on body A will not change and is still equal to F.
Let's continue the process of adding spherical shells of matter of the same density. The F force remains unchanged. In the limit, we again get a Universe filled with homogeneous matter with the same density. However, now body A is acted upon by force F. Obviously, depending on the choice of the initial ball, it is possible to obtain force F after the transition to a Universe uniformly filled with matter. This ambiguity is called the gravitational paradox... Newton’s theory does not make it possible to unambiguously calculate gravitational forces in an infinite Universe without additional assumptions. Only Einstein’s theory allows us to calculate these forces without any contradictions.”
The contradictions, however, immediately disappear if we remember that the infinite Universe TAU is not the same as a very large one:
in an infinite Universe, no matter how many layers of matter we add to the ball, an infinitely large amount of matter remains outside it;
in the infinite Universe, a ball of any, no matter how large, radius with a test body on its surface can always be surrounded by a sphere of an even larger radius in such a way that both the ball and the test body on its surface will be inside this new sphere filled with matter of the same density, as inside the ball; in this case, the magnitude of the gravitational forces acting on the test body from the side of the ball will be equal to zero.
Thus, no matter how much we increase the radius of the ball and no matter how many layers of matter we add, in an infinite Universe uniformly filled with matter, the magnitude of the gravitational forces acting on the test body will always be equal to zero. In other words, the magnitude of the gravitational forces created by all matter in the Universe is zero at any point. However, if there is no substance outside the sphere on the surface of which the test body lies, i.e. if all the matter of the Universe is concentrated inside this ball, then a gravitational force proportional to the mass of the matter contained in the ball acts on a test body lying on the surface of this body. Under the influence of this force, the test body, and in general all the outer layers of the ball’s substance, will be attracted to its center - a ball of finite dimensions, uniformly filled with matter, will inevitably be compressed under the influence of gravitational forces. This conclusion follows both from Newton’s law of universal gravitation and from Einstein’s general theory of relativity: A Universe of finite dimensions cannot exist, since under the influence of gravitational forces its matter must continuously contract towards the center of the Universe.
VlNewton understood that, according to his theory of gravity, stars should be attracted to each other and therefore, it would seem.. should fall on each other, approaching at some point.. Newton said that this is so (hereinafter it is emphasized by me tAU V.P .) would indeed have to be the case if we only had a finite number of stars in a finite region of space. But.. if the number of stars is infinite and they are more or less evenly distributed over infinite space, then this will never happen, since there is no central point where they would need to fall. This reasoning is an example of how easy it is to get into trouble when talking about infinity. In an infinite Universe, any point can be considered the center, since on both sides of it the number of stars is infinite. (Then you can tAU V.P.) .. take a finite system in which all the stars fall on each other, tending to the center, and see what changes will happen if you add more and more stars, distributed approximately evenly outside the region under consideration. No matter how many stars we add, they will always tend to the center." Thus, in order not to get into trouble, we must select a certain finite region from the infinite Universe, make sure that in such a finite region the stars will fall towards the center of this region, and then extend this conclusion to the infinite Universe and declare that the existence of such a Universe is impossible. Here is an example of how Vl.. is transferred to the universe as a whole..B" as something absolute, such a state.. to which.. only a part of matterB can be subject" (F. Engels. Anti-Dühring), for example, a single star or a cluster of stars. In fact, since in the infinite Universe any point can be considered a center, the number of such points is infinite. In the direction of which of this infinite number of points will the stars move? And one more thing: even if such a point is suddenly discovered, then an infinite number of stars will move in the direction of this point for an infinite time and the compression of the entire infinite Universe at this point will also occur in an infinite time, i.e. never. It's a different matter if the Universe is finite. In such a Universe, there is a single point, which is the center of the Universe - this is the point from which the expansion of the Universe began and in which all the matter of the Universe will again concentrate when its expansion is replaced by compression. Thus, it is the finite Universe, i.e. The Universe, the dimensions of which at each moment of time and the amount of matter concentrated in it can be expressed by some finite numbers, is doomed to contraction. Being in a state of compression, the Universe will never be able to exit this state without some kind of external influence. Since, however, there is no matter, no space, no time outside the Universe, the only reason for the expansion of the Universe can be the action expressed in the words VlDa there will be light!B.” As F. Engels once wrote, “We can twist and turn as we please, but... we return again every time... to the finger of God” (F. Engels. Anti-Dühring). However, the finger of God cannot be the subject of scientific study.
Conclusion
Analysis of the so-called cosmological paradoxes allows us to conclude the following.
1. World space is not empty, but is filled with some medium, whether we call this medium ether or physical vacuum. When moving in this medium, photons lose energy in proportion to the distance they travel and the distance they travel, as a result of which the photon emission shifts to the red part of the spectrum. As a result of interaction with photons, the temperature of the vacuum or ether rises several degrees above absolute zero, as a result of which the vacuum becomes a source of secondary radiation corresponding to its absolute temperature, which is actually observed. At the frequency of this radiation, which is really the background radiation of the vacuum, the entire sky turns out to be equally bright, as J.F. Chaizeau assumed.
2. Contrary to the assumption of R. Clausius, “thermal death” does not threaten the infinite Universe, which includes an infinite amount of matter that can turn into heat in an infinitely long time, i.e. never. “Thermal death” threatens a finite universe, containing a finite amount of matter that can be converted into heat in a finite time. That is why the existence of a finite Universe turns out to be impossible.
3. In an infinite Universe, the dimensions of which cannot be expressed by any, no matter how large a number, uniformly filled with matter at a non-zero density, the magnitude of the gravitational forces acting at any point in the Universe is equal to zero - this is the true gravitational paradox of the infinite Universe. The equality of gravitational forces to zero at any point in an infinite Universe, uniformly filled with matter, means that the space in such a Universe is Euclidean everywhere.
In the finite Universe, i.e. in the Universe, the dimensions of which can be expressed by some, albeit very large numbers, a test body located at the edge of the Universe is subject to an attractive force proportional to the mass of the substance contained in it, as a result of which this body will tend to the center of the Universe - finite The Universe, whose matter is uniformly distributed throughout its limited volume, is doomed to compression, which will never give way to expansion without some kind of external influence.
Thus, all objections or paradoxes that are believed to be directed against the possibility of the existence of a Universe infinite in time and space are actually directed against the possibility of the existence of a finite Universe. In reality, the Universe is infinite in both space and time; infinite in the sense that neither the size of the Universe, nor the amount of matter contained in it, nor its lifetime can be expressed by any, no matter how large, numbers - infinity, it is infinity. The Infinite Universe never arose either as a result of a sudden and inexplicable expansion and further development of some “Material” object, nor as a result of Divine creation.
It must be assumed, however, that the above arguments will seem completely unconvincing to supporters of the Big Bang theory. According to the famous scientist H. Alven Vl, the less scientific evidence there is, the more fanatical the belief in this myth becomes. It seems that in the present intellectual climate the great advantage of Big Bang cosmology is that it is an insult to common sense: credo, quia absurdum (quoted in ). Unfortunately, for some time now fanatic belief in one theory or another has been a tradition: the more evidence of the scientific inconsistency of such theories appears, the more fanatical the belief in their absolute infallibility becomes.
At one time, polemicizing with the famous church reformer Luther, Erasmus of Rotterdam wrote: “Here, I know, some, holding their ears, will certainly shout: “Erasmus dared to fight with Luther!” That is, a fly with an elephant. If anyone wants to attribute this to my feeble-mindedness or ignorance, then I will not argue with him, only even if the feeble-minded, even for the sake of learning, are allowed to argue with those whom God has gifted richer... Maybe my opinion deceives me; therefore I want to be an interlocutor, not a judge, an explorer, not a founder; I am ready to learn from everyone who offers something more correct and reliable.. If the reader sees that the equipment of my essay is equal to that of the opposite side, then he himself will weigh and judge what is more important: the judgment of all enlightened people..., all universities..., or the private opinion of this or that person... I know that in life it often happens that the larger part defeats the best. I know that when investigating the truth, it is never a bad idea to add your diligence to what has been done before.”
With these words we will conclude our brief study.
Klimishin I.A. Relativistic astronomy. M.: Nauka, 1983.
Hawking S. From the big bang to black holes. M.: Mir, 1990.
Novikov I.D. Evolution of the Universe. M.: Nauka, 1983.
Ginzburg V.L. About physics and astrophysics. Articles and speeches. M.: Nauka, 1985.
They look at it together.
“The abyss full of stars has opened;
The stars have no number, the bottom of the abyss.”
M. V. Lomonosov, “Evening reflection on God’s Majesty...”
This stanza from the ode of the brilliant Lomonosov has become the most famous of the entire creative heritage of the great scientist, poet and philosopher. The writing of this philosophical work dates back to 1747. Let us only note that since then, scientific thought has not decided on the interpretation of the infinity of the universe, leaving Lomonosov’s hypothesis about the infinity of the universe unproven.
Since that time, a whole branch of fundamental science, cosmology, has emerged. But she is not yet able to answer this eternal question; moreover, the more information we have, the more insoluble paradoxes arise before us. The scientific concept of the infinity of the universe is expressed in the sense that its dimensions, lifetime, mass of matter contained in universal volumes cannot be expressed in finite numerical values of any size. The logic of such an understanding of the infinity of space puts forward the following two incompatible logical conclusions:
According to Friedman's theory, the finite universe cannot be stationary and must either expand or contract;
The concept of expansion or contraction of the universe in the case of its infinity does not make sense, since the expanding infinity is equal to the contracting one, and the emergence of the universe at the moment of the Big Bang from a volume of one neutron with a finite, albeit arbitrarily large mass is refuted by its infinity in terms of mass, size and time of existence.
It is known that the process of expansion of the universe has been proven experimentally based on experiments in measuring distances to the nearest star systems using the radar method. It is also proven that there was a moment when space came into existence as a result of the Big Bang. It is definitely known that time is a vector concept and has no reverse direction. Consequently, until this moment, time did not exist, and as follows from Einstein’s theory, space and time cannot exist without each other. This means that there was a moment when there was no space. For most scientists - cosmologists, this paradox is the basis for asserting the absence of God or other supreme power that was the impetus for the emergence of the universe. And yet, let us leave ourselves with hope of resolving this paradox, since our understanding of cause-and-effect relationships, and therefore all philosophy, suffers from bias. The genius of Lomonosov lies in the fact that in his ode he connected science, philosophy and the divine principle, creating a precedent for foreseeing not even the future itself, but a scientific idea of the universe in this future.