Scaling the Universe: How Would it Affect Physics?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kfx
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scaling Universe
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the hypothetical scenario of scaling the entire universe by a constant factor while maintaining proportional distances. Participants debate the implications of such scaling on fundamental physics, particularly regarding gravitational forces and constants. A key point raised is that while volume increases with the cube of the radius, gravitational pull decreases with the square of distance, suggesting that a scaled-up universe would experience stronger gravitational forces. The conversation emphasizes the need for precise definitions of what remains constant, such as the speed of light and units of measurement, to adequately address the question.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical Newtonian physics
  • Familiarity with gravitational constants, specifically G
  • Knowledge of dimensional analysis in physics
  • Basic concepts of scaling laws in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of scaling laws on gravitational forces
  • Examine the relationship between volume and radius in physics
  • Study the effects of constant factors on physical constants like G
  • Explore the concept of dimensional analysis in scientific measurements
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of physics, and anyone interested in theoretical discussions about the fundamental laws of the universe and their implications under hypothetical scenarios.

kfx
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
This is a hypothetical question. What would happen if everything in the Universe was scaled up (or down) in size by a constant factor? Starting from the nuclei in atoms, ending with galaxies; assume that all proportions would be kept intact, i.e. all distances are scaled up by the same factor. Can we be sure this is not actually happening at the moment?

I had a pop-sci book once that claimed we would not be able to detect the change in classical Newtonian physics (i.e. without taking into account the fact that the speed of light is constant and would not change). I found this claim doubtful. My reasoning is: because the volume of an object is proportional to the cube of its radius, while the gravitational pull towards an object is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Therefore in a "scaled up" universe the gravitational pull would be stronger.

Would the gravitational constant change as well? And inertia?
 
Space news on Phys.org
<sigh> Here we go again.

This gets asked a lot here, and what ends up happening is that people answer with more and more complicated answers until it goes right over your head and then keeps going. You can do a search and find lots of these threads.

The short answer is that this is an ill-defined question. For it to be well-defined you need to describe exactly what you are changing and exactly what you are keeping constant. For example, does the speed of light change? Does the definition of a second change? And so on.
 
Perhaps I could not figure out the right search terms, at least did not see any threads that address the same question as mine, rather than "Can the size of an atom change" etc.

It should be quite obvious that I mean no change in time or mass units. In the centimetre–gram–second system, grams and seconds stays constant.

As to regarding constants, IMHO their dimensions hint at the way they should be changed. For example, Wikipedia says that the gravitational constant G is expressed as: [itex]G\approx 6.674 \times 10^{-8} {\rm \ cm}^3 {\rm g}^{-1} {\rm s}^{-2}[/itex]

Scaling up by k means [itex]G' = k^3 G[/itex]

However, this is counterintuitive, because [itex]k>1[/itex] means [itex]G' >> G[/itex], i.e. the new constant actually needs to be larger in order to keep gravity the same?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K