Stephen Hawking and I created his final theory of the cosmos – here’s what it reveals about the origins of time and life

The late physicist Stephen Hawking first asked me to work with him to develop “a new quantum theory of the Big Bang” in 1998. What started out as a doctoral project evolved over some 20 years into an intense collaboration that ended only with his passing on March 14 2018.

The enigma at the centre of our research throughout this period was how the Big Bang could have created conditions so perfectly hospitable to life. Our answer is being published in a new book, On the Origin of Time: Stephen Hawking’s Final Theory.

Questions about the ultimate origin of the cosmos, or universe, take physics out of its comfort zone. Yet this was exactly where Hawking liked to venture. The prospect — or hope — to crack the riddle of cosmic design drove much of Hawking’s research in cosmology. “To boldly go where Star Trek fears to tread” was his motto – and also his screen saver.

Our shared scientific quest meant that we inevitably grew close. Being around him, one could not fail to be influenced by his determination and optimism that we could tackle mystifying questions. He made me feel as if we were writing our own creation story, which, in a sense, we did.

In the old days, it was thought that the apparent design of the cosmos meant there had to be a designer – a God. Today, scientists instead point to the laws of physics. These laws have a number of striking life-engendering properties. Take the amount of matter and energy in the universe, the delicate ratios of the forces, or the number of spatial dimensions.

Physicists have discovered that if you tweak these properties ever so slightly, it renders the universe lifeless. It almost feels as if the universe is a fix – even a big one.

But where do the laws of physics come from? From Albert Einstein to Hawking in his earlier work, most 20th-century physicists regarded the mathematical relationships that underlie the physical laws as eternal truths. In this view, the apparent design of the cosmos is a matter of mathematical necessity. The universe is the way it is because nature had no choice.

Around the turn of the 21st century, a different explanation emerged. Perhaps we live in a multiverse, an enormous space that spawns a patchwork of universes, each with its own kind of Big Bang and physics. It would make sense, statistically, for a few of these universes to be life-friendly.

However, soon such multiverse musings got caught in a spiral of paradoxes and no verifiable predictions.

Turning cosmology inside out

Can we do better? Yes, Hawking and I found out, but only by relinquishing the idea, inherent in multiverse cosmology, that our physical theories can take a God’s-eye view, as if standing outside the entire cosmos.

It is an obvious and seemingly tautological point: cosmological theory must account for the fact that we exist within the universe. “We are not angels who view the universe from the outside,” Hawking told me. “Our theories are never decoupled from us.”

We set out to rethink cosmology from an observer’s perspective. This required adopting the strange rules of quantum mechanics, which governs the microworld of particles and atoms.

According to quantum mechanics, particles can be in several possible locations at the same time – a property called superposition. It is only when a particle is observed that it (randomly) picks a definite position. Quantum mechanics also involves random jumps and fluctuations, such as particles popping out of empty space and disappearing again.

In a quantum universe, therefore, a tangible past and future emerge out of a haze of possibilities by means of a continual process of observing. Such quantum observations don’t need to be carried out by humans. The environment or even a single particle can “observe”.

Countless such quantum acts of observation constantly transform what might be into what does happen, thereby drawing the universe more firmly into existence. And once something has been observed, all other possibilities become irrelevant.

Image of the Carina nebula.

Star-forming region in our galaxy. NASA, ESA, CSA, and STScI

We discovered that when looking back at the earliest stages of the universe through a quantum lens, there’s a deeper level of evolution in which even the laws of physics change and evolve, in sync with the universe that is taking shape. What’s more, this meta-evolution has a Darwinian flavor.

Variation enters because random quantum jumps cause frequent excursions from what’s most probable. Selection enters because some of these excursions can be amplified and frozen, thanks to quantum observation. The interplay between these two competing forces – variation and selection – in the primeval universe produced a branching tree of physical laws.

The upshot is a profound revision of the fundamentals of cosmology. Cosmologists usually start by assuming laws and initial conditions that existed at the moment of the Big Bang, then consider how today’s universe evolved from them. But we suggest that these laws are themselves the result of evolution.

Dimensions, forces, and particle species transmute and diversify in the furnace of the hot Big Bang – somewhat analogous to how biological species emerge billions of years later – and acquire their effective form over time.

Moreover, the randomness involved means that the outcome of this evolution – the specific set of physical laws that makes our universe what it is – can only be understood in retrospect.

In some sense, the early universe was a superposition of an enormous number of possible worlds. But we are looking at the universe today at a time when humans, galaxies and planets exist. That means we see the history that led to our evolution.

We observe parameters with “lucky values”. But we are wrong to assume they were somehow designed or always like that.

The trouble with time

The crux of our hypothesis is that, reasoning backward in time, evolution towards more simplicity and less structure continues all the way. Ultimately, even time and, with it, the physical laws fade away.

This view is especially borne out of the holographic form of our theory. The “holographic principle” in physics predicts that just as a hologram appears to have three dimensions when it is in fact encoded in only two dimensions, the evolution of the entire universe is similarly encoded on an abstract, timeless surface.

Hawking and I view time and causality as “emergent qualities”, having no prior existence but arising from the interactions between countless quantum particles. It’s a bit like how temperature emerges from many atoms moving collectively, even though no single atom has temperature.

One ventures back in time by zooming out and taking a fuzzier look at the hologram. Eventually, however, one loses all information encoded in the hologram. This would be the origin of time – the Big Bang.

For almost a century, we have studied the origin of the universe against the stable background of immutable laws of nature. But our theory reads the universe’s history from within and as one that includes, in its earliest stages, the genealogy of the physical laws. It isn’t the laws as such but their capacity to transmute that has the final word.

Future cosmological observations may find evidence of this. For instance, precision observations of gravitational waves – ripples in the fabric of spacetime – may reveal signatures of some of the early branches of the universe. If spotted, Hawking’s cosmological finale may well prove to be his greatest scientific legacy.The Conversation

Thomas Hertog, Professor of physics, KU Leuven

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Related articles

Staffing Cuts at NWS and the Tragic Flooding in Texas

Q: Is it true that if President Donald Trump...

‘No means no!’ Andrew Cuomo buried in mockery for refusing to accept loss



Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) was routed in a shock upset last month when Democrats rejected him in the primary for mayor of New York City, in favor of the young democratic socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani, who is running on a platform of freezing rent, expanding free bus service, and creating public grocery stores in food deserts.

After weeks of relative silence from Cuomo, however, he announced Monday that he is remaining in the race and will run on a separate party line in the general election, alongside scandal-plagued incumbent mayor Eric Adams and the pro-Trump Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa.

"Unless you've been living under a rock, you probably knew that the Democratic primary did not go the way I had hoped," said Cuomo in his announcement video posted to X. "To the 440,000 New Yorkers who voted for me, a sincere thank you. Thank you for believing in me, in my agenda, and in my experience. And I am truly sorry that I let you down. But as my grandfather used to say, when you get knocked down, learn the lesson and pick yourself back up and get in that game, and that is what I'm going to do."

Even before Cuomo's video dropped, reports that he would stay in the race had already drawn criticism.

"Andrew Cuomo an un-evolved desperate man searching for meaning in all the wrong places," wrote former New York state Sen. Alessandra Biaggi.

"True to form, Andrew Cuomo once again refuses to accept that no means no," wrote state assemblymember Phara Souffrant Forrest, referencing allegations of sexual misconduct against the former governor.

As soon as the video dropped, it was overshadowed in likes and shares by Mamdani, who replied to the post with a link to his campaign donation page.

"NO MEANS NO. Go away, you gargoyle faced bully," wrote state Sen. Gustavo Rivera.

"Translation: Cuomo is so desperate to prevent a rent freeze that he actually set foot on the streets of New York. Get this jabroni out of New York politics for good!" wrote the account for the activist network Adbusters.

"Took three weeks to edit out passersby shouting 'Go f--- yourself'" wrote satirical political cartoonist Eli Valley.

"Honestly, what do Democrats say about the purpose and utility of the primary process now?" wrote Bernie Sanders' political adviser and More Perfect Union founder Faiz Shakir. "In New York, we're yielding the entire 'process' over to billionaires' whims. Fight Oligarchy."

Watch Cuomo's announcement video below or at the link here.

Get To Know Bills Wide Receiver Laviska Shenault Jr.! #shorts

Subscribe to the Buffalo Bills YT Channel: https://bufbills.co/2Yhjq9j For...

The 9 best books of the year so far

A truism about stories (courtesy, more or less, of...