Theoretical physicist says universe has radius=10cm

In summary, the conversation discusses a certain theoretical physicist who made a claim about the radius of the universe based on general mathematical grounds. However, it was not until years later that anyone actually worked out the numbers and found the answer to be 10 centimeters. The author of "Concepts of Modern Mathematics" does not provide the name of this physicist or any papers involved, leading to curiosity and speculation among the participants in the conversation. They also discuss the possibility of the 10 centimeters being a measurement of the universe at the time of the big bang. Overall, it is suggested to take the claims made in the book with caution due to its publication in 1975.
  • #1
Tweak88
3
0
Hello everyone.
I was just reading Ian Stewart's "Concepts of Modern Mathematics". In the end of the first chapter he writes


A certain theoretical physicist secured himself a mighty reputation on the basis of his deduction, on very general mathematical grounds, of a formula for the radius of the universe [...] It was several years before anybody had enough curiosity to substitute the numbers in it and work out the answer. Ten centimeters."


This seems quite the fluke. Is this actually true? Can you tell me who this "certain theoretical physicist" is/was?



Cheers
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
He should have asked for help from Physics Forums before going to press. It would have saved him a lot of embarrassment.
 
  • #3
For very large definitions of "centimeter"
 
  • #4
Or very small definitions of universe :P
 
  • #5
The author couldn't be bothered to actually give the name of this certain someone and the papers involved?
 
  • #6
Paradox. ?
 
  • #7
via mathematical approach* quite possible!
 
  • #8
Born2bwire said:
The author couldn't be bothered to actually give the name of this certain someone and the papers involved?

No, they author didn't bother. That's why I posted this, I am curious about it.
 
  • #9
Thats why physics is awesome. There is obviously still stuff to work out!
 
  • #10
  • #11
champu123 said:
I think by 10cm, he means that the size of universe at the time of big bang i.e. if everything in the universe was tightly packed and compressed into one ball, it'd be a 10cm ball... Balls!

See this link: http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1125

Note that they are talking about the size of the observable universe right after inflation, not at the big bang.
 
  • #12
Tweak88 said:
No, the author didn't bother. That's why I posted this, I am curious about it.
As the book from which the 10cm quote came was published in 1975, I wouldn't take very seriously any envelope-pushing claims it makes.
 

1. What is a theoretical physicist?

A theoretical physicist is a scientist who uses mathematical models and theories to understand and explain the fundamental laws of nature.

2. How did the theoretical physicist determine that the universe has a radius of 10cm?

The theoretical physicist likely used mathematical calculations and theoretical models to come to this conclusion. It is important to note that this is a theoretical concept and cannot be directly measured or observed.

3. Is this theory widely accepted in the scientific community?

At this time, this theory does not have widespread acceptance in the scientific community. Theoretical physicists often propose and explore various theories, but they require further testing and evidence before they can be accepted as valid explanations.

4. How does this theory fit with our current understanding of the universe?

This theory challenges our current understanding of the universe, which is based on the Big Bang theory and the concept of an ever-expanding universe. However, it is important to continue researching and exploring different theories in order to gain a better understanding of the universe.

5. Can this theory be proven?

Since this theory is based on mathematical calculations and theoretical models, it cannot be directly proven. However, it can be supported or rejected through further research, experiments, and evidence. Scientific theories are constantly evolving and can be revised or replaced as new information becomes available.

Similar threads

Studying What to do in a gap year to prepare for a Physics + Math degree
    • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
15
Views
2K
Schools HS Senior seeking advice for university studies :)
    • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
1K
Physics What are the steps to becoming a physicist?
    • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
1
Views
3K
A syllabus of books/literature from calculus to group theory to QFTs
    • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
26
Views
17K
Guiding principles from the great physicists to take us beyond the standard model
    • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
3K
Model of the Universe: Exploring Andrew Cheong's Ideas
    • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
3K
Does Physics Need Mysticism?
    • General Discussion
2
Replies
56
Views
6K
Pure Math Preparation (the ultimate high school / pre-university book thread)
    • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
15
Views
38K
Should we be skeptical of inductive logic in the sciences?
    • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
3K
Definition of Separable & Rules for Physical Systems: 65 Characters
    • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top