We want to know some things in science are absolute yet we accept that a lot is relative.    The speed of light is absolute and so the same with respect to any observer in empty space but sound is relative, like when a train whistle goes from high to low as it passes the observer.  A longstanding quest in physics has been to determine whether chaos, in which tiny events lead to very large changes in the time evolution of a system, such as the universe, is absolute or relative in systems governed by general relativity, where the time itself is relative. 

Like right after the Big Bang.
A study published in the journal Communications in Mathematical Physics claims that not only is chaos an absolute but that they have mathematical tools that can be used to detect it. When applied to the most accepted model for the evolution of the universe, the Big Bang, these tools demonstrate that the early universe was chaotic. 

An absolute aspect of the chaos conundrum concerns our ability to determine unambiguously whether the universe as a whole has ever behaved chaotically. If chaos is relative, as suggested by some previous studies, this question simply cannot be answered because different observers, moving with respect to each other, could reach opposite conclusions based on the ticks of their own clocks. 

"A competing interpretation has been that chaos could be a property of the observer rather than a property of the system being observed," said Adilson E. Motter, co-author of the paper and an assistant professor of physics and astronomy at Northwestern's Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. "Our study shows that different physical observers will necessarily agree on the chaotic nature of the system." 

They say the work has direct implications for cosmology and shows in particular that the erratic changes between red- and blue-shift directions in the early universe were in fact chaotic. 

Motter worked with Katrin Gelfert, a mathematician from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, who says that the mathematical aspects of the problem are inspiring and likely to lead to other mathematical developments.  An important open question in cosmology is to explain why distant parts of the visible universe -- including those that are too distant to have ever interacted with each other -- are so similar. 

"One might suggest 'Because the large-scale universe was created uniform,'" Motter said, "but this is not the type of answer physicists would take for granted."

Fifty years ago, physicists believed that the true answer could be in what happened a fraction of a second after the big bang. Though the initial studies failed to show that an arbitrary initial state of the universe would eventually converge to its current form, researchers found something potentially even more interesting: the possibility that the universe as a whole was born inherently chaotic.

The present-day universe is expanding and does so in all directions, Motter explained, leading to red shift of distant light sources in all three dimensions -- the optical analog of the low pitch in a moving siren. The early universe, on the other hand, expanded in only two dimensions and contracted in the third dimension.

This led to red shift in two directions and blue shift in one. The contracting direction, however, was not always the same in this system. Instead, it alternated erratically between x, y and z.

"According to the classical theory of general relativity, the early universe experienced infinitely many oscillations between contracting and expanding directions," Motter said.  "This could mean that the early evolution of the universe, though not necessarily its current state, depended very sensitively on the initial conditions set by the big bang."

They say this problem gained a new dimension 22 years ago when tworesearchers, Gerson Francisco and George Matsas, found that different descriptions of the same events were leading to different conclusions about the chaotic nature of the early universe. Because different descriptions can represent the perspectives of different observers, this challenged the hypothesis that there would be an agreement among different observers. Within the theory of general relativity, such an agreement goes by the name of a "relativistic invariant." 

"Technically, we have established the conditions under which the indicators of chaos are relativistic invariants," Motter said. "Our mathematical characterization also explains existing controversial results. They were generated by singularities induced by the choice of the time coordinate, which are not present for physically admissible observables."

Citation: Katrin Gelfert, Adilson E. Motter, '(Non)Invariance of Dynamical Quantities for Orbit Equivalent Flows', Communications in Mathematical Physics DOI: 10.1007/s00220-010-1120-x