AOH :: QUANTI.TXT The Copernican Quantification
```
THE COPERNICAN QUANTIFICATION

This is the fourth of four essays, available from the forum library,
which began with "Copernicus or Ptolemy: Cosmology Visualized"
and proceeded through "A Pin for the Balloon" and "Comments on
'Copernicus'."  The latter essay concluded with a verbal description of
a mildly novel derivation of a cosmological line element, to which
will now be given formal presentation in order to attempt a quantified
resolution of the "mysteries" of both the "cosmological constant" and
the "missing matter" of our unsettled theoretical cosmos:

ds^2 = - dt^2 + dr^2/((1 - r^2/R^2(t)) + (A/r)) + r^2 d(theta)^2 +
r^2sin^2(theta) d(phi)^2

where r is a variable "absolute" radius, and the cosmological radius R
is a function of the momentary time t.  A is the constant of integration
introduced and rationalized in the previous essay, "Comments on
'Copernicus'."

The cosmological constant (lambda) is a function of vacuum energy
density and may be expressed as the inverse of the square of the
cosmological radius.  For purposes of approximating the desired
result, the constant A will be taken to be the Planck length, which
permits a cosmological radius/constant of eight hundred kilometers to
produce a "proper" radial interval of approximately ten billion light
years.  This interval is the desired marginal "closure" radius/density,
which accords with the observed "flatness" of the universe and which
permits maximum spherical radius to the "Copernican" cosmos.

The "missing matter" difficulty is more than accounted for by taking
the geometry of the universe as a product of vacuum energy density
alone.  Given the Planck length as our constant, we have had to over-
/underestimate the absolute cosmological radius/constant by three/six
orders of magnitude [see Abbott] so as to avoid too small a calculated
proper radius.  We have, in compensation however, achieved a CC
discrepancy reduction of some forty of forty-six orders of magnitude,
and some hope of relief from tortuously contrived theories attempting
to dispense with the otherwise troublesome vacuum energy altogether.
The surviving discrepancy does not, at this early date, discourage
continuing efforts at discovering "cancellations" in the particle field
contributions to the vacuum energy, or even at some convenient
fudging in order to bring the involved numbers into mutual
compliance.

An obvious question and objection regarding the foregoing is to the
combination of a seemingly absurd "absolute" radius of geographic-
scale kilometers with a "proper" interval reckoned in terms of billions
of light years.  The two may be reconciled by imagining a "rod" of a
few hundred kilometers length being "ejected" from the highly
vacuum energetic sphere of our universe into the presumed
surrounding void and "decompressing" (amidst its evanescence) to
the equivalent of the cosmological radius.  Alternative estimations of
the universal curvature radically reduced to the equivalent of the
Planck length may be taken to be the particular victims of the isotropy
confusion discussed in "A Pin for the Balloon," the second of the
essays in this series.

[The acute student will have realized that the foregoing equation is
unorthodox only to the extent of recovering the expression "(A/r)."
Otherwise, it retains the premise of progressive reduction to "flat"
space toward the origin and a hyperbolic density distribution
consistent therewith.  A formula consistent with a progressive
reduction to singularity at the origin and "Copernican" energy density
is suggested by the following:  ds^2 = - dt^2 + (R/A)(dr^2/(r^2/R^2(t))
+ R^2 d(theta)^2 + R^2sin^2(theta) d(phi)^2)]

MICHAEL LAURENCE
JANUARY 17, 1995

```

The entire AOH site is optimized to look best in Firefox® 3 on a widescreen monitor (1440x900 or better).