Professor Gustav Tammann was director of the Astronomical Institute of the University of Basel, Switzerland, Member of the European Space Agency, Chairman of the Committee of Galaxies of the International Astronomical Union. His research on supernovae and extragalactic distance scales astronomy has given way to determine the distance at which objects are located in deep space and thereby determine the universe's expansion.
Precisely humanist and a practical conception of the universe around him, Gustav Andreas Tammann is a man who understands your needs and place in the universe. This combination of elements are present in what he considered the beginning of his vocation as an astronomer, "the decision to be an astronomer to take it to the four years due to a traumatic experience. In those years told me that God is in heaven, but when you look to heaven, God is not. Then I thought - Ahh, He must be further away, so I can not see - I decided to be an astronomer to see farther "
In simple terms, how is the universe for you?
say that the universe is amazing. When you look you the impression that is built with simple principles. But if you come see these same principles infinitely detailed. Cosmologists say that at the beginning, the universe was linear, ie, had a single temperature, density and this one is simple. But then began to evolve. The universe ceased to be linear and became infinitely complex, until a point in space is completely unlike any other. The most admirable thing is that these simple principles, the cosmos would become so complex as to make proteins.
Why does the universe become so complex?
do not know. I think one of the biggest mysteries of the universe is a violation of the physical principle of entropy. According to this principle, any information in the universe would vanish, the entropy increases continuously. That's a good perfume, invest so much money to get a wonderful scent in a small bottle. Entropy want to destroy the bottle so that one day the bottle is dropped, is broken and the smell evaporates, it is entropy. And so why in a universe that expands, matter is concentrated and the information it contains more and larger? The universe is becoming more "smelly" instead of losing their aroma.
physicists's excuse is that the violation of the principle of entropy is not serious since it is only local. It's like the picture of the mountain and the mouse. The mouse is highly structured but very small and the mountain is huge, but without any structure. So I structured seems unimportant compared to the large size of the mountain. Physicists explain this issue by saying that entropy is a severe violation, but does not explain why it happens. We understand that physicists say that the mouse is not important and we can forget it but why the universe creates a mouse?. As Martin Rees says, "Why does the universe exist effort? Would have been much more simple does not exist.
Can cosmologists are creating a mathematically perfect universe instead of explaining what happens beyond outside.?
Yes, the theories of mathematicians can invent all kinds of universes. Fred Hoyle once said I could invent a new cosmology for tea time. We assume that the space provided has a simple topology and for mathematicians it is not absolutely clear. A mathematician is equally happy if the universe is a donut or a sphere, if you are mathematician can always change the topology of the universe.
So you're in the Solar System, our galaxy is in this universe, and a quasar is there and the light waves move in that space, but we can not distinguish whether the universe is shaped like a donut or a sphere. You can make as many theoretical models as you want and each one more complex. Mathematicians have begun to speak of universes incredible, infinitely large. and when you ask physicists what they think of these models, they say they never could decide on any. Universes raised by mathematicians are possible, but intuitively very unpleasant. Horrible encounter the idea of \u200b\u200ban infinite universe, because it implies that an infinite universe was infinite and the Big Bang, so now is infinitely great and continues to expand at a greater infinity. That is terribly ugly, but mathematically it's nice.
A universe open or a closed universe "which side the coin will fall?
My problem is that if the density in the universe - the value that speaks to the total amount of matter, also called Omega Total - has a value of one, then the universe is infinitely large and infinitely large has always been since the Big Bang. But the funny thing is that if this value is only a little higher, then the cosmos changed to be closed and finite.
The problem is that we do not see how experimentally whether the universe is infinite or finite. The difference between these two worlds can be so terribly small that observers can not decide. That is what mathematicians or theoretical and Freadman wonder and try to solve. I think the idea that we are living in an infinite universe is open and very painful.
Astronomy is largely a matter of numbers, many numbers. One of the most interesting How big is the universe?
The answer is not known and will never be known because we can not distinguish between a finite universe and an infinite universe. In a sense the question is not permissible, because you can only ask about the size of the observable universe. Clearly we can see as far as light has had time to reach us. So if the universe is 15 billion years, you can only catch a glimpse of up to 15 billion light years. That's as far as you can see because there was no light. Then define the size of age.
What is for you a universe of 13 billion years?
an error. As a first approximation is necessary to think that we calculate the age of the universe using the rate at which it expands, ie the Hubble constant. And the amount of matter or density that we have. Over the past six years, scientists say that there is also an acceleration called Lamda, this crazy concept raises the idea that in addition to expanding the universe increases the speed of its expansion. The current belief that speech if the density of the observable universe is equal to 1, this will expand even faster, reaching the final infinite speed.
fashion value Ho (Hubble constant) is 72, people who accept this value and accept the concept of Lamda, estimated age of the universe at 13.7 billion years. I prefer a value of 63 for the Hubble constant, which leads to our universe to 15.6 billion years is an age with which I agree more.
Something that is consistent with this, is the work of Dr. Jordi Cepa, a researcher at the IAC. The told me that he has dated clusters globular in 15 billion years, this contrasts with the age of the universe calculated from a Ho equal to 72, because there can be objects much older than the universe itself. Therefore the value of the constant must be smaller, and 63 is small enough. For my 15.6 billion years is a pretty reasonable age for our universe. I think 72 is an erroneous value for the Hubble constant and therefore it is equally wrong for a universe 13.7 billion years old.
Each response found, the universe rewards us with more questions, where do you currently cosmological research?
I think the big questions of the moment will not be resolved by astronomers. Things like the nature of dark energy are more in the field of particle physics in astronomy. The explanation for dark energy is and its role in shaping the universe is one of the biggest problems, to which astronomy can not contribute much. There are certain observations that could distinguish between Lamnda and called quintessence. But what they really mean each of these phenomena is a problem of physics of astronomy.
The other big question in cosmology is the dark matter. I find it very important that we know as a part of this matter: neutrinos. We know they have some mass, we know that interact weakly. However they are a very small part of missing matter, only 1%. The large piece of dark matter have not seen it yet. Here too it is very probable that physicists find the answer and do here on earth.
So what do you think will be the contribution of astronomers to cosmology?
The formation of structures. When the first stars formed and how was the diversity of chemical elements. The chemical history of the universe is not understood yet.
You've been interviewed countless times, however, is there any question that you would like to respond but you have not been asked?
I can tell you what question I am glad that I have done, usually when interviewing an astronomer raises the question of how was the universe before the Big Bang or that caused this phenomenon. It is another thing of which I am convinced that the human race will never understand. I find it interesting that many researchers now admit that there are questions that may never be answered. We can never know whether the universe is finite or infinite and we can never know what happened exactly during the Big Bang. We propose 20 possible, and have a range of possibilities, but the scientific method does not allow us to accurately distinguish between them.
I think scientists have become more modest, now admit that we are in a box which we can aspire to know answers, but outside there are questions, important and fundamental questions that will not be solved by science.
As cosmologist did you?
cosmologist I never called my work is to determine the distance between galaxies and that leads to the determination of the Hubble Constant. The funny part is that the constant is a theme close. The expansion of the universe is determined in a range of 13.000 km / s around us, so to work on the Hubble constant is not required to be a cosmologist. Alan Sandage
asked me to determine the Cepheid in a galaxy, and I asked me because I had been trained as photometers. If you want to get the distance of a Cepheid must know very well the magnitude and my training was just that obtain magnitudes, so if we go to my roots in reality I am a photometer.
If I could ask God one question what would it be?
Of course, what is the meaning of life. What is our goal here. For the Protestants are told - must be useful in your life and you must fulfill your obligations, how terrible it is that we do not know what these obligations.
Interview by Dr. Siegfried and published in the journal news IAC of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias
