Here's what I've got:
At some point during the very first moments after the Big Bang, the Higgs field turned on, permeating the universe and giving mass to the elementary particles, incuding quarks.
Protons and neutrons came into existence around one ten-thousandth of a second after the Big Bang.
So it would appear that gravity was established so soon after the Big Bang that I wouldn't loose any sleep over it!
It's the fact that it emerged after the BB commenced that interests me. So mass emerged first (since the Higg's field imparts mass) and then gravity? Or did gravity first emerge which then led to the Higgs field?
Prior to the BB can we postulate that if the pre-BB universe was in fact an earlier universe that contracted under its own gravity, the Higg's field must have been destroyed at some point as the universe would then have consisted only of photons?
Serious questions BTW - is there a discussion of this anywhere?
We can postulate all we want as everything prior to the Big Bang is pure speculation! 😉
I was wondering about your notion of an early universe consisting of "only photons".
At very early times, the universe was so hot that it contained mostly radiation. However the photons that filled the universe could collide and produce material particles. This was possible because the conditions just after the Big Bang permitted energy to turn into matter (and matter into energy).
"Think of the universe at this time as a seething cauldron, with photons colliding and interchanging energy, and sometimes being destroyed to create a pair of particles. The particles also collided with one another. Frequently, a matter particle and an antimatter particle met and turned each other into a burst of gamma-ray radiation." https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshe...Big_Bang/29.03:_The_Beginning_of_the_Universe
Not that I am aware of, but you could check out the Big Bounce which is a replacement for the classical idea of a Big Bang as the beginning of our Universe.
Your old friend Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) is a mathematical description which establishes the existence of the Big Bounce and acts as a mathematical time machine to deduce properties of the earlier universe from which our own may have sprung.
LQG's equations produce valid mathematical results past the point of the classical Big Bang, giving scientists a window into the time before the Big Bounce.
Alternatively, I can explain the pre-BB universe another way - I simply haven't got a clue! 😀
Indeed, I stumbled on this frustrating issue. Could this be à NP complete problem ?
I think I could make a program to reach high n, but not easy and I am not sure I could certify its validity.
Brute force programming would be easy but could not reach very high n, however it could be used to test a more sophisticated program to go one step beyong.
Galu, the early universe as far as I have read consisted of only photons since the temperature was >> higher than the binding energy levels required for any particles to form. I’m trying to remember but IIRC the temp was 15^9K. Maybe that’s why there was a BB - there was no gravity, no mass, no time.
Separately, isn’t the Big Bounce something that’s also been postulated by the ‘electric universe’ people?
Separately, isn’t the Big Bounce something that’s also been postulated by the ‘electric universe’ people?
Is this fifteen raised to the power of nine or there is a mistake? Usually, standard form uses powers of ten.
Sky & Telescope published the early period of the creation of the universe over several months. What struck me is that the whole thing was needed to explain the microwave background via some what extrapolated physics such as temperature I suspect we have no hope of ever achieving.
One obvious thing to ask is due to red shift just how far away is the microwave background. As I thought the question has been asked ~40billion light years away in all directions. 😉 I found an answer.
https://www.astronomy.com/science/ask-astro-how-far-away-is-the-cosmic-microwave-background/
That links also mentions the solution to the initial dismay concerning the results of the survey. It needed to be statistically averaged. There are plots around that show error bounds.
LOL None of this is saying the idea is wrong. Just a but.
Recursion. Me try to understand the maths. No chance but the paper appears to about an algebra where n dimensional spaces are recursive. This rather strange article may explain the interest
https://www.quantamagazine.org/does-nothingness-exist-20230726/
eeek it mentions a probability exceeding 1.
One obvious thing to ask is due to red shift just how far away is the microwave background. As I thought the question has been asked ~40billion light years away in all directions. 😉 I found an answer.
https://www.astronomy.com/science/ask-astro-how-far-away-is-the-cosmic-microwave-background/
That links also mentions the solution to the initial dismay concerning the results of the survey. It needed to be statistically averaged. There are plots around that show error bounds.
LOL None of this is saying the idea is wrong. Just a but.
Recursion. Me try to understand the maths. No chance but the paper appears to about an algebra where n dimensional spaces are recursive. This rather strange article may explain the interest
https://www.quantamagazine.org/does-nothingness-exist-20230726/
eeek it mentions a probability exceeding 1.
Apologies - should read 1.5 x 10^9 ie 15 billion K.
I might have the temp wrong - I’m recalling it from what I read a few yrs ago.
I wouldn't know as I have read nothing that has originated from the 'electric universe' people.
At the Big Bang, the universe is thought to have been infinitely hot. Gosh, there's that pesky infinity again!
My earlier link included the following diagram of temperature versus time, which may be helpful to the discussion.
Ahh - 10^31. What’s 16 orders of magnitude between friends eh? Especially when the QM and GR guys disagree by 120 orders of magnitude!
I've found out some more about the emergence of the Higgs field.
(*) As the universe expanded and cooled, it crossed transition temperatures at which forces separated from each other. These cosmological phase transitions can be visualised as similar to condensation and freezing.
I've trawled multiple sources for the above information. 🤓
- Particles interacted with the Higgs field just 10^-12 seconds after the Big Bang.
- Before this phase transition, all particles were mass-less. They travelled at the speed of light.
- After the universe expanded and cooled, particles interacted with the Higgs field. This interaction gave them mass.
(*) As the universe expanded and cooled, it crossed transition temperatures at which forces separated from each other. These cosmological phase transitions can be visualised as similar to condensation and freezing.
I've trawled multiple sources for the above information. 🤓
Attachments
My above post indicates that gravity emerged first (just after 10^-43 s) and that the Higgs field emerged later (at around 10^12 s).
Even before particles acquired mass through the Higgs mechanism, there was a dense flux of energy and momentum in the universe.
This density and flux of energy is described in general relativity by the stress-energy tensor, which is the source of the gravitational field.
In simple terms, the stress energy-tensor may be regarded as a sort of generalised mass.
I suppose what I am saying is that you don't need to have mass to have gravity.
Here's more trawling:
In general relativity, the source of gravity is the combination of momentum and energy.
Light has momentum and energy, so it is a source of gravity.
Photons make a contribution to the stress-energy tensor, and therefore to the curvature of space.
Here's more trawling:
In general relativity, the source of gravity is the combination of momentum and energy.
Light has momentum and energy, so it is a source of gravity.
Photons make a contribution to the stress-energy tensor, and therefore to the curvature of space.
Correction to my post before the one above - that should be 10^-12 s - before edbarx picks me up on it! 😉
Planck time is 5 10^ -44.
According to recent posts:
This is roughly at the time gravity separed from other forces.
At smaller times elapsed from the Big Bang the universe is unknown, I presume that is an horizon we cannot see beyond.
According to recent posts:
This is roughly at the time gravity separed from other forces.
At smaller times elapsed from the Big Bang the universe is unknown, I presume that is an horizon we cannot see beyond.
Hands up all those who suspect Galu is really an AI trained on Wikipedia... 😀