How well has Cosmic Inflation been verified?

[paddoboy]

But you must, your are one of the few people I trust.

Trust No One!

Actually I believe the following supports my thoughts re the CC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmo... abandoned the concept in,to be equal to zero.
Einstein originally introduced the concept in 1917[2] to counterbalance the effects of gravity and achieve a static universe, a notion which was the accepted view at the time. Einstein abandoned the concept in 1931 after Hubble's discovery of the expanding universe.[3] From the 1930s until the late 1990s, most physicists assumed the cosmological constant to be equal to zero.[4] That changed with the surprising discovery in 1998 that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, implying the possibility of a positive nonzero value for the cosmological constant.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Reading that, it is probably where I got the fact that the CC was always a part of GR.....Einstein introduced it to counteract gravity, giving it a certain value...When the expansion was validated by Hubble, [red highlight] it was valued at zero...Blue highlighted text was after the acceleration in that expansion rate was validated, so a positive CC was needed.

 

[Q-reeus]

Reproduced from http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-big-bang-theory-of-universal-evolution.163092/#post-3647445
https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.04935
And a newer followup:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.11286

That our observable universe originated as an infinitesimal speck in an eternal super-dense infinitely large universe - which is what concordant LCDM flat universe implies, is imo preposterous. I expect the new findings of a very likely closed universe, with evidently zero CC, will become more and more robust.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

When the expansion was validated by Hubble

I just now thought of something which is rather odd so to keep your brain cells firing what do you say to this...

All the problems that inflation sort to overcome would not exist in a steady state universe I think...a steady state would be flat, the same etc.
From what I can see (leaving aside CBR) the Steady State Universe only? problem was making new matter..which it felt it needed to make to fit an expanding universe...which is rather curious if you think about it given the Big Bang expanding universe does not need to make more matter...why did a steady state need to create more matter?

And thinking about red shift..light from Sun set goes red simply because the light has further to travel and greater incidence of running into stuff that sends it red...Do you get red shift because something is far away and red shifted because it must pass thru more space or is the redshift due only to expansion? Don't worry I think I have a book mark on the desk top about that..I just can't remember how it works at all...sad when you realise your memory is terrible.
Differential Calculus??? Any ideas?
Alex

 

[Michael 345]

And thinking about red shift..light from Sun set goes red simply because the light has further to travel and greater incidence of running into stuff that sends it red...Do you get red shift because something is far away and red shifted because it must pass thru more space or is the redshift due only to expansion?

Red shift for light from billions of kilometres away is due to the actual distance and it's speed

The longer it has to travel due to the distance the more it will be streached (Doppler effect)

Red light has a longer wavelength

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

and it's speed

Does the speed change over great distances.

The longer it has to travel due to the distance the more it will be streached

Like a line of humans walking thru the desert? Growing longer because those at the back are less enthusiastic than those at the front...maybe they not only get the heat of the Sun but pick up the body heat of those in front making their experience more demanding than those at the front who do not pick up such body heat and so experience greater physical stress and a fall off in efficiency.

Alex

 

[Q-reeus]

I just now thought of something which is rather odd so to keep your brain cells firing what do you say to this...

All the problems that inflation sort to overcome would not exist in a steady state universe I think...a steady state would be flat, the same etc.
From what I can see (leaving aside CBR) the Steady State Universe only? problem was making new matter..which it felt it needed to make to fit an expanding universe...which is rather curious if you think about it given the Big Bang expanding universe does not need to make more matter...why did a steady state need to create more matter?

And thinking about red shift..light from Sun set goes red simply because the light has further to travel and greater incidence of running into stuff that sends it red...Do you get red shift because something is far away and red shifted because it must pass thru more space or is the redshift due only to expansion? Don't worry I think I have a book mark on the desk top about that..I just can't remember how it works at all...sad when you realise your memory is terrible.
Differential Calculus??? Any ideas?
Alex

Dear Alex. Stop rambling here. You are a star-gazer not cosmologist. The difference is profound. Is it not obvious your Fred Hoyle style steady-state notion which posits an ever expanding but already infinitely large cosmos, 'neatly accounts' for redshift via ordinary Doppler effect? Why then try and add a tired light effect on top of that, which is a function of distance only not recession velocity?

Passing by all the many 'tired light theories are plain wrong' hits, I found one with a list of NTL (new tired light) articles, all by the one author, that will likely give you cheer:
https://independent.academia.edu/LyndonAshmore
You do understand that gent is no doubt considered a crank? His theory requires a universe permeating 'coherent electron crystal lattice'.

 

[Michael 345]

Does the speed change over great distances.

No, light speed is inverant

Think about a point fixed on a light beam (perhaps on a peak on a light wave). It travels at a constant speed. However the space it travels in expands resulting in each moment it is moving towards us Minions, space is pulling it back

The speed of light, as I understand the process, ensures the light does reach us

Another way to imagine the system, a single wave (peak to peak) enclosed in square of space (sides size of wave, peak to peak). As it travels the box expands and by the moment it gets to us the square box looks like a shoe box

 

[paddoboy]

Reproduced from http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-big-bang-theory-of-universal-evolution.163092/#post-3647445
https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.04935
And a newer followup:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.11286

That our observable universe originated as an infinitesimal speck in an eternal super-dense infinitely large universe - which is what concordant LCDM flat universe implies, is imo preposterous. I expect the new findings of a very likely closed universe, with evidently zero CC, will become more and more robust.

Preposterous? Bit strong but anyway, as I said in the other thread, the current cosmological model will not be easily replaced, and nor should it be...it has too much going for it.
Whether our current picture of cosmology is modified, invalidated, or remains as is, is open to question and further never-ending research.
I'm sure as technology allows, and data is received, it will all be treated as such and diligently researched via the scientific method, and reaching the correct and most likely answer.

 

[paddoboy]

I just now thought of something which is rather odd so to keep your brain cells firing what do you say to this...

All the problems that inflation sort to overcome would not exist in a steady state universe I think...a steady state would be flat, the same etc.

Not sure Alex, but I believe one of the major problems with steady state is why we never see distant galaxies blue shifted...or heading back for the bounce so to speak.

From what I can see (leaving aside CBR) the Steady State Universe only? problem was making new matter..which it felt it needed to make to fit an expanding universe...which is rather curious if you think about it given the Big Bang expanding universe does not need to make more matter...why did a steady state need to create more matter?

Another point that Freddy failed to answer...while we have a reasonable speculated methodology for the BB, [quantum foam fluctuations] no reason could be dug up to explain any continued recollapse/bounce ad infinitum

And thinking about red shift..light from Sun set goes red simply because the light has further to travel and greater incidence of running into stuff that sends it red...Do you get red shift because something is far away and red shifted because it must pass thru more space or is the redshift due only to expansion? Don't worry I think I have a book mark on the desk top about that..I just can't remember how it works at all...sad when you realise your memory is terrible.
Differential Calculus??? Any ideas?
Alex

My only knowledge is that there are three categories of red shift, Doppler, Gravitational and Cosmological...cosmological being due to expanding space, which then needs to be sorted from Doppler and local galactic angular momentum etc.
Gravitational red shift as you probably know is observed when climbing out of a gravity well.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Dear Alex. Stop rambling here. You are a star-gazer not cosmologist

Most of my efforts have been to draw you out given you seem to know what you are talking about.

Why then try and add a tired light effect on top of that, which is a function of distance only not recession velocity?

Well I think I can answer all your questions with one simple answer. I feel although river tries hard to do his best to fill the most necessary role of site rat bag I thought I could do a better job by at least raising issues that would permit input from others who can make a reasonable job of presenting the real story and deal with nonsense one notices raised by some folk railing against GR mostly.

Thank you for joining in and thank you for the link but I am shattered as it seems someone may have stolen my work coherent electron crystal lattice...

I hope you are doing well.

Alex

 

[paddoboy]

Does the speed change over great distances.

Not as far as we are aware, and we have no reason to believe that would happen. When cosmological red shift takes place, the space is stretched and light with it...and since a photon of light's energy is inversely proportional to the distance, the redshift increases and energy diminishes, not "c"
That's a pretty rough description Alex.

Like a line of humans walking thru the desert? Growing longer because those at the back are less enthusiastic than those at the front...maybe they not only get the heat of the Sun but pick up the body heat of those in front making their experience more demanding than those at the front who do not pick up such body heat and so experience greater physical stress and a fall off in efficiency.

Alex

The only good analogy [not keen on Mick's shoe box analogy, sorry Mick ] I can think of is reverting back to the Doppler effect with sound...As an ambulance for example approaches you, the pitch of its siren gets higher...as it proceeds away, the pitch gets lower...same principal.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Think about a point fixed on a light beam (perhaps on a peak on a light wave). It travels at a constant speed.

I got hung up here...all I can now imagine is like long pieces of spaghetti wiggling their way through space delivered at my door in a shoe box still wiggling..I could have nightmares particularly if the spaghetti turns into snakes that I try to cut up but they just keep doubling up and coming after me as I run down the street..and as you know you look down and no pants..then up start falling..falling falling.

I thought a wave was a way to deal with describing light for math purpose..do we have anyone who can comment on the maths...but that in reality or a better approximation of light was it was best thought of as little packets of photos..the wave reference being no more than to describe them...
My anology now is..the photons are like the line of humans in the desert but the reason the line becomes longer is because it is the desert that expands whilst they walk.

Alex

 

[paddoboy]

Here is another pretty good link more focused on the possible end of the universe, but the topological types also gets some air play...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe#Big_Bounce

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Not sure Alex, but I believe one of the major problems with steady state is why we never see distant galaxies blue shifted

It's the iron oxide in space..turns everything red.

Another point that Freddy failed to answer

Go easy on him he is reeling from the shock that USA has military bases outside USA.

My only knowledge is that there are three categories of red shift, Doppler, Gravitational and Cosmological...cosmological being due to expanding space, which then needs to be sorted from Doppler and local galactic angular momentum etc.
Gravitational red shift as you probably know is observed when climbing out of a gravity well.

It's the iron oxide..not only does it make things red but also much heavier.

The only good analogy [not keen on Mick's shoe box analogy, sorry Mick ] I can think of is reverting back to the Doppler effect with sound...As an ambulance for example approaches you, the pitch of its siren gets higher...as it proceeds away, the pitch gets lower...same principal.

OK an update on mine..the desert is made up of iron oxide so the longer they walk the redder they get.
I can't stop thinking about snakes now..it's getting warmer during the day..just what they like..I had a giant huntsman walk over my chest whilst watching YouTube last night and I sure would hate to have a snake do similar.

Alex

 

[paddoboy]

It's the iron oxide in space..turns everything red.

Go easy on him he is reeling from the shock that USA has military bases outside USA.

It's the iron oxide..not only does it make things red but also much heavier.

OK an update on mine..the desert is made up of iron oxide so the longer they walk the redder they get.
I can't stop thinking about snakes now..it's getting warmer during the day..just what they like..I had a giant huntsman walk over my chest whilst watching YouTube last night and I sure would hate to have a snake do similar.

Alex

I'm like a bloody big sheila with stuff like that..creepy crawlies, cock roaches spiders of course etc.
When we first moved into our current house, [20 odd years ago] we were having a Fijian ceremony called a sevusevu..anyhow we had the local Tui giving a speech before the kava, sitting cross legged on Fijian mats, all listening intently, when this dirty big cockroach ran across the middle. The Mrs shouted to me, "get it! get it!...I shouted back, "get it your f%$#@&^self!!!"
Took her a long time to forgive me.

 

[paddoboy]

Or as a hairy arse teenager, coming home about 0300hrs after a night out on the piss, and I walked into a bloody spider's web!!!
Woke the whole bloody neighbourhood up!!!

 

[Michael 345]

My anology now is..the photons are like the line of humans in the desert but the reason the line becomes longer is because it is the desert that expands whilst they walk.

That works

But here is another puzzle (as if another one is needed) there is talk about space expanding at a rate faster than speed of light

It is claimed since space is nothing it is permissible for it to exceed light speed

Fine ✓

However that would mean, as l take the situation

• space way out there is expanding faster than
• space closer to us
• ie why has space different rates of expansion?

If all space expanded in excess of light speed we would not see ANYTHING

And brain fart thought - do gravity waves, which travel at light speed, undergo Doppler transformation?

Apart from loosing visible light along with the rest of the spectrum we would lose external gravity

Hopefully the closeness of our feet to Earth would keep us grounded

 

[Q-reeus]

It's been clarified numerous times in earlier threads, but to repeat; the popular and stupid claim 'space expands faster than light' during inflation is nonsense. Inflation is characterized by an expansion rate that is a time-rate-of-change ratio, not a velocity. Within GR, one can imagine that given a fixed expansion rate, matter/radiation at some nominal distance from an observer is in some sense moving away faster than light, but it has no direct significance and is an inferred quantity.

 

[paddoboy]

It is claimed since space is nothing it is permissible for it to exceed light speed

https://www.space.com/33306-how-does-the-universe-expand-faster-than-light.html
Also other then the info in the link, the universal speed limit applies to mass/energy. I don't believe space or spacetime is restricted by that.

• space way out there is expanding faster than
• space closer to us
• ie why has space different rates of expansion?

From the link..............
" It's true that in special relativity, nothing can move faster than light. But special relativity is a local law of physics. Or in other words, it's a law of local physics. That means that you will never, ever watch a rocket ship blast by your face faster than the speed of light. Local motion, local laws.


But a galaxy on the far side of the universe? That's the domain of general relativity, and general relativity says: who cares! That galaxy can have any speed it wants, as long as it stays way far away, and not up next to your face.


It goes deeper than this. Concepts like a well-defined "velocity" make sense only in local regions of space. You can only measure something's velocity and actually call it a "velocity" when it's nearby and when the rules of special relativity apply. Stuff super-duper far away, like the galaxies we're talking about it? If it's not close, it doesn't count as a “velocity” in the way that special relativity cares about.
Special relativity doesn't care about the speed — superluminal or otherwise — of a distant galaxy. And neither should you. "
end:
Also the expansion only applies to the universe over larger scales...over smaller scales such as our Local group, our cluster and even the great wall, are gravitationally bound and decoupled from the overall expansion rate.

And brain fart thought - do gravity waves, which travel at light speed, undergo Doppler transformation?

Gravitational waves are stretched by the expansion of the universe/spacetime, since they are one and the same thing.

Apart from loosing visible light along with the rest of the spectrum we would lose external gravity

Hopefully the closeness of our feet to Earth would keep us grounded

The gravitational waves we have measured on Earth have been minute after travelling the vast distances that they need to. But if one was to pass through you, you would be elongated and alternatively stretched in line with the peaks and troughs of the wave.

 

[paddoboy]

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317341105_A_Review_on_Cosmic_Inflation
Abstract:
The Standard Big Bang Cosmology gives the most accepted concept about the beginning and evolution of the Universe. However, it has problems: the flatness problem, the horizon problem and the monopole problem. The predictions of the Standard Big Bang Cosmology do not match the observations of modern cosmologists. Nonetheless, the admirers of the Standard Big Bang Cosmology continued to find out ways for solving those problems and such attempts lead to our knowledge of Inflationary Cosmology. The theory of inflation, which was first proposed by Alan Guth in 1981, soon became a “need” of modern cosmology and various modified models of inflationary Universe were proposed. In this paper, the author gives a brief insight of the Standard Big Bang Cosmology, introduces inflationary cosmology with its brief background, reviews some concepts associated with cosmic inflation, explains how inflation can be classified into various types, describes few of the popular types in brief and explains how the cosmological problems are solved by cosmic inflation. Moreover, few insightful examples have been given to easily explain the fundamental concepts so that even a junior researcher can get thorough idea about the field by escaping the equations and simply going through the text selectively.
extract:
Creation of the Universe from nothing

Even though all the matter in the Universe including
rocks, planets, stars, galaxies, quasars, black holes and
clusters is huge and positive, the energy stored within
gravity may be negative which means the sum could add
nearly to zero. This means that creation of such Universe
from nothing doesn‟t violate the Conservation of Energy.
The very idea of creating Universe from nothing was
introduced by Edward Tryon who believed that the
Universe “happens from time to time” as a result of
quantum fluctuations in vacuum (MichioKaku, 2004).
The Universe-from-nothing theory is significant to
answer practical questions about why the Universe
doesn‟t spin and why the total spin of all the galaxies in
the Universe cancels out.

Conclusive words with hypothesis:

Chaotic inflation is a much better model of inflation as it
doesn‟t require fine tuning unlike the new and old
inflationary theories. The idea of eternal inflation seems
reasonable and the fact that dark matter and dark energy
can be used as some sort of indications of existence of
parallel Universes-can be useful to support eternal
inflation theory. Even though this hypothesis isn‟t
verifiable, dark matter could be the effect of a parallel
Universe which co-exists with ours. It could be the result
of some higher dimensional Universe from where our
Universe is visible but to whom we cannot see, just like
an imaginary 2D TV character having height and width
as the dimensions cannot see us in the dimension of
depth. If that is the case, dark matter and dark energy
could just be some higher dimensional features which
have been unleashed to our Universe by the co-existing
higher-dimension Universe. That being the case, the
inflation field (which can actually resemble the
Cosmological Constant or Dark Energy in some ways
can be the result of the influence of higher dimension. A
string-theory approach to test this hypothesis will be
much appreciable in the future of Cosmology. However,
a better approach is to deliver a mechanism that can be
theoretically possible and experimentally verifiable.

If the early Universe had a rapid spin, the so-produced
centrifugal force could rip apart many parts and throw
them away. The space could have expanded in similar
manner and inflation could indeed be not required. A
sudden centrifugal force could have led to some sort of
exponential expansion which was stopped very soon by
the release of massive amount of energy in the process. If
that is the case, Cosmic Inflation is more of a Cosmic
Rotation and the inflation field is more of a Rotation
Virtual Field. Even though this idea may seem unlikely,
the extreme temperature in the early ages of the Universe
could have triggered such mechanism. This is definitely
testable and verifiable at least within couple of decades.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Interesting to say the least.