Geometries of the Universe: The Math of Knowledge Advancement

What can math be used for? Here's a wise answer: two basic forms of geometry are used in almost every engineering project and every physics discovery that has ever been made.

This post, by Tom Hartsfield, was originally published in RealClear Science's Newton blog. You can read the original here


Back in 8th grade, I hated math. Everyone hated math. Maybe the kid who kept their calculator (or slide rule, for you vintage readers) in a case didn't hate math. That kid probably became an engineer. Or a physicist. (Confession: I was later the kid with the fancy calculator.) Our rallying cry as math-haters was, "When are we ever going to use this?!" Here's a wise answer: two basic forms of geometry, learned before high school, are used in almost every engineering project and every physics discovery that has ever been made.

Euclidean Geometry

Greek mathematicians, notably Euclid and Pythagoras (of middle school algebra infamy), laid out the first geometry of the world. They thought of things in terms of shapes made of lines and curves. Their most important discovery was a way to tell how far apart things are:

Take any two places (A and B) and draw a line through each place such that the lines meet (C) at a 90 degree angle. The distance from A to B, squared, is always equal to the distance B-C squared plus the distance from C back to A, squared. (This is the infamous Pythagorean theorem.) This language is perfectly accurate for flat, still surfaces. Notice however, that it only deals in distances between things, not their absolute position. Euclid says "B is five miles north of A" not "B is at 2 Water Lane, Woolsthorpe".

Cartesian Geometry

Descartes wanted a way to make the points A, B and C refer to absolute things so that anyone anywhere can perform the same measurements. Latin, Chinese, Hebrew and English are all languages of words to catalog or refer to concepts. They are phone books that assign words to ideas. Similarly, the math of Descartes is a phone book, but to assign numbers to places in space. This is called Cartesian geometry. In this language, the Pythagorean Theorem is written like this:

Pythagoras Descartes.png

Where A, B and C are all coordinate numbers, like (0,0) or (-3,5) that you stick into the formula. Euclid would have made you draw lines and geometric shapes and connect them all with theorems!

Descartes's world is an enormous ream of numbered graph paper. You start with zero somewhere, and then you follow perpendicular lines in all directions. Euclid's relative distances are replaced by numbers that tell you where you start and where you end and where you are everywhere in between, relative to the entire world. This mathematical machinery is valid for most experiences in day to day life.

Lorentzian Geometry:

Centuries later, Einstein came along and changed everything. His conclusion that the speed of light is constant, and his fitting of experiments to theory demanded a new geometry. In this geometry, objects always move at the speed of light through four-dimensional space-time. The math was invented by Hendrik Lorentz, a brilliant mathematician and physicist of the late 19th century. Lorentzian geometry is much harder to explain, but you can think of the graph paper of Descartes as actually distorted, or squished, like a cardboard carton being smashed:

Lorentz Transformed Coords.gif

Cartesian geometry is the black perpendicular lines; Lorentz geometry is the green and red lines. (Source: IEP)

Second, distance rules change a bit, so you have to modify the Pythagorean theorem:

Pythagoras Lorentz.png

Where x,y,z,t are the distances you've moved in space (x,y,z) and time (t) and c is the speed of light.

Curved spacetime geometry:

After Einstein revolutionized the geometry by which we measure the universe in 1905, he did it again in 1916, when he completed the theory of general relativity. General relativity is so difficult and so complex, that we only know of a few correct answers to its equations. Luckily, however, Einstein realized that the curved universe looks flat if you look at a small enough area of it. This is just like how the earth appears flat to us, standing upon it. Physicists thus work in Lorentz geometry most of the time, and then use the difficult curved geometry to translate between one almost flat "Lorentzian" place and another.

Four increasingly sophisticated geometrical descriptions of the universe, as created by three millennia of human minds. How much deeper will the rabbit hole go?

~

Note: phone book analogy borrowed from "The Phone Book": Misner Thorne & Wheeler's Gravitation, a book on general relativity with the authority and heft of a phone book but far greater beauty.

Related Articles

Major study: Drug overdoses over a 38-year period reveal hidden trends

It's just the current cycle that involves opiates, but methamphetamine, cocaine, and others have caused the trajectory of overdoses to head the same direction

From the study: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6408/eaau1184
Surprising Science
  • It appears that overdoses are increasing exponentially, no matter the drug itself
  • If the study bears out, it means that even reducing opiates will not slow the trajectory.
  • The causes of these trends remain obscure, but near the end of the write-up about the study, a hint might be apparent
Keep reading Show less

Why "nuclear pasta" is the strongest material in the universe

Through computationally intensive computer simulations, researchers have discovered that "nuclear pasta," found in the crusts of neutron stars, is the strongest material in the universe.

Accretion disk surrounding a neutron star. Credit: NASA
Surprising Science
  • The strongest material in the universe may be the whimsically named "nuclear pasta."
  • You can find this substance in the crust of neutron stars.
  • This amazing material is super-dense, and is 10 billion times harder to break than steel.

Superman is known as the "Man of Steel" for his strength and indestructibility. But the discovery of a new material that's 10 billion times harder to break than steel begs the question—is it time for a new superhero known as "Nuclear Pasta"? That's the name of the substance that a team of researchers thinks is the strongest known material in the universe.

Unlike humans, when stars reach a certain age, they do not just wither and die, but they explode, collapsing into a mass of neurons. The resulting space entity, known as a neutron star, is incredibly dense. So much so that previous research showed that the surface of a such a star would feature amazingly strong material. The new research, which involved the largest-ever computer simulations of a neutron star's crust, proposes that "nuclear pasta," the material just under the surface, is actually stronger.

The competition between forces from protons and neutrons inside a neutron star create super-dense shapes that look like long cylinders or flat planes, referred to as "spaghetti" and "lasagna," respectively. That's also where we get the overall name of nuclear pasta.

Caplan & Horowitz/arXiv

Diagrams illustrating the different types of so-called nuclear pasta.

The researchers' computer simulations needed 2 million hours of processor time before completion, which would be, according to a press release from McGill University, "the equivalent of 250 years on a laptop with a single good GPU." Fortunately, the researchers had access to a supercomputer, although it still took a couple of years. The scientists' simulations consisted of stretching and deforming the nuclear pasta to see how it behaved and what it would take to break it.

While they were able to discover just how strong nuclear pasta seems to be, no one is holding their breath that we'll be sending out missions to mine this substance any time soon. Instead, the discovery has other significant applications.

One of the study's co-authors, Matthew Caplan, a postdoctoral research fellow at McGill University, said the neutron stars would be "a hundred trillion times denser than anything on earth." Understanding what's inside them would be valuable for astronomers because now only the outer layer of such starts can be observed.

"A lot of interesting physics is going on here under extreme conditions and so understanding the physical properties of a neutron star is a way for scientists to test their theories and models," Caplan added. "With this result, many problems need to be revisited. How large a mountain can you build on a neutron star before the crust breaks and it collapses? What will it look like? And most importantly, how can astronomers observe it?"

Another possibility worth studying is that, due to its instability, nuclear pasta might generate gravitational waves. It may be possible to observe them at some point here on Earth by utilizing very sensitive equipment.

The team of scientists also included A. S. Schneider from California Institute of Technology and C. J. Horowitz from Indiana University.

Check out the study "The elasticity of nuclear pasta," published in Physical Review Letters.


How a huge, underwater wall could save melting Antarctic glaciers

Scientists think constructing a miles-long wall along an ice shelf in Antarctica could help protect the world's largest glacier from melting.

Image: NASA
Surprising Science
  • Rising ocean levels are a serious threat to coastal regions around the globe.
  • Scientists have proposed large-scale geoengineering projects that would prevent ice shelves from melting.
  • The most successful solution proposed would be a miles-long, incredibly tall underwater wall at the edge of the ice shelves.

The world's oceans will rise significantly over the next century if the massive ice shelves connected to Antarctica begin to fail as a result of global warming.

To prevent or hold off such a catastrophe, a team of scientists recently proposed a radical plan: build underwater walls that would either support the ice or protect it from warm waters.

In a paper published in The Cryosphere, Michael Wolovick and John Moore from Princeton and the Beijing Normal University, respectively, outlined several "targeted geoengineering" solutions that could help prevent the melting of western Antarctica's Florida-sized Thwaites Glacier, whose melting waters are projected to be the largest source of sea-level rise in the foreseeable future.

An "unthinkable" engineering project

"If [glacial geoengineering] works there then we would expect it to work on less challenging glaciers as well," the authors wrote in the study.

One approach involves using sand or gravel to build artificial mounds on the seafloor that would help support the glacier and hopefully allow it to regrow. In another strategy, an underwater wall would be built to prevent warm waters from eating away at the glacier's base.

The most effective design, according to the team's computer simulations, would be a miles-long and very tall wall, or "artificial sill," that serves as a "continuous barrier" across the length of the glacier, providing it both physical support and protection from warm waters. Although the study authors suggested this option is currently beyond any engineering feat humans have attempted, it was shown to be the most effective solution in preventing the glacier from collapsing.

Source: Wolovick et al.

An example of the proposed geoengineering project. By blocking off the warm water that would otherwise eat away at the glacier's base, further sea level rise might be preventable.

But other, more feasible options could also be effective. For example, building a smaller wall that blocks about 50% of warm water from reaching the glacier would have about a 70% chance of preventing a runaway collapse, while constructing a series of isolated, 1,000-foot-tall columns on the seafloor as supports had about a 30% chance of success.

Still, the authors note that the frigid waters of the Antarctica present unprecedently challenging conditions for such an ambitious geoengineering project. They were also sure to caution that their encouraging results shouldn't be seen as reasons to neglect other measures that would cut global emissions or otherwise combat climate change.

"There are dishonest elements of society that will try to use our research to argue against the necessity of emissions' reductions. Our research does not in any way support that interpretation," they wrote.

"The more carbon we emit, the less likely it becomes that the ice sheets will survive in the long term at anything close to their present volume."

A 2015 report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine illustrates the potentially devastating effects of ice-shelf melting in western Antarctica.

"As the oceans and atmosphere warm, melting of ice shelves in key areas around the edges of the Antarctic ice sheet could trigger a runaway collapse process known as Marine Ice Sheet Instability. If this were to occur, the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) could potentially contribute 2 to 4 meters (6.5 to 13 feet) of global sea level rise within just a few centuries."