Linear size of everything doublles overnight

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter albsac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linear
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario where the linear size of everything in the universe has doubled overnight. Participants explore the implications of this change on measurements of time and space, and whether any experiments could detect such a phenomenon.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that if the distance between any two points in the universe doubles, then the definition of a second, based on the radiation from a Cesium-133 atom, would also change, leading to clocks running at half speed.
  • Another participant suggests that if all universal lengths change without affecting dimensionless constants, the change would be unmeasurable, while a change in dimensionless constants would be detectable.
  • A different viewpoint is raised regarding the speed of light, arguing that if everything doubles, the speed of light might also double, complicating the ability to determine if the doubling occurred.
  • One participant notes that the question's validity hinges on what exactly is changing and what remains constant, indicating that without clear definitions, various interpretations can arise.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the doubling scenario, particularly regarding the effects on measurements and constants. There is no consensus on how to detect the doubling or what aspects would remain unchanged.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights assumptions about the constancy of physical laws and definitions, as well as the potential for varying interpretations of the scenario presented.

albsac
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Suppose you are told that the linear size of everything in the universe has been doubled overnight. Can we perform any experiment to test this?

Here is my take on this. Please review and tell me how correct I am.

By doubling of linear size overnight, I am assuming that the distance between any two points in the universe has doubled overnight. Now 1s is defined as a certain number of time periods of a certain radiation from Cesium-133 atom. The wavelength of this radiation must have also doubled. But since the speed of this radiation = c is a constant, the frequency must have halved. So, the new 1s would be twice as long as the old 1s. In other words our clocks are running at half the speed.

Now, 1m is defined as the distance traveled by light in a certain time (let us call it t). Now our new clock would report t time has elapsed when in reality 2t time would have elapsed. In other words, our measurement will report a length of 2m to be 1m. So, this experiment fails to detect the doubling in linear size.

Have I made a mistake somewhere? Is there any other way to detect it then?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi albsac, welcome to PF!

It turns out that the key is to distinguish between dimensionful and dimensionless constants. If all of the universal lengths changed in such a way that none of the dimensionless constants were changed, then the change would not be measurable. On the other hand, if the dimensionless constants were to change, then the difference would be measurable.

See:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2011753&postcount=55
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2015734&postcount=68
 
albsac said:
... But since the speed of this radiation = c is a constant, the frequency must have halved. So, the new 1s would be twice as long as the old 1s. In other words our clocks are running at half the speed.

I would have thought that if everything, including you, the size of atoms and the distance between the stars, was linearly doubling overnight then the speed of light would also be doubling so you would have difficulty determining whether it was true or not.

You could probably tell by measuring the energy density of the vacuum. Presumably this would be getting progressively and rapidly more rarefied. This is the reason that I find expansion theories of gravity hard to rationalise.
 
More generally, the whole question depends on what is changing and what is staying the same. Unless that's specified, you can get pretty much any answer you like.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 95 ·
4
Replies
95
Views
8K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K