Inflation and big bang theory

This is why the math matters. The actual, accurate description of these different physical systems simply does not match.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Any analogy has limitations: If one can grasp that fact at the beginning, and focus on what aspect the analogy is trying to convey.
The raisin loaf analogy is another: The bowling ball and marble in the middle of a trampoline is another.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I dislike that one most.
Even though its 3d it conveys a 2d impression.
I like the raisen and bread one however but only because I like raisen bread toast.
Mmm raisen bread toast.
Alex

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I overlooked a question which I now ask.
What was "it" that inflated in this "inflationary period".
And for what period of time did this inflation continue? Or when did inflation stop and the expansion we now observe start.

Alex

 

Spacetime:
t+ 10-35 seconds, to t+ 10-32 seconds.
After that period, a gradual slowing down of the expansion rate was occurring, due to the relatively high mass/energy density of the universe......Then as that density lessened, while whatever was causing spacetime to expand, [probably the CC of Einstein fame] remained costant, an acceleration phase was/is now observed.....

 

Thank you Paddoboy.
Can you suggest any reading to help me understand "spacetime"
Alex

 

Actually a great description of spacetime was given by rpenner a while back when trying to convince the god re the "reality" of spacetime.....I'll see if I can find it.
The following is OK also....
https://www.quora.com/Is-spacetime-a-real-thing-or-just-a-mere-concept
"Would you consider the electromagnetic field to be a real "thing"? If yes, you should consider spacetime to be a real "thing" as well.

Spacetime is not just a passive arena for light and matter. It has its own dynamics; it interacts with (i.e influences and is influenced by - there are no one-way interactions) energy/momentum (and also with itself), so it should be thought of as an independent physical entity".
My description is that spacetime is a unified multi-dimensional framework within which it is possible to locate events and deduce the relationships between them in terms of spatial coordinates and time.
The concept of spacetime follows from the observation that the speed of light is constant and that it does not vary with the motion of the emitter or the observer.
Intervals of space and time are variable and are not the same for all observers.
In GR, gravitation is described in terms of curvature of spacetime.

 

Thank you for taking the time Paddoboy.
Are you saying it was just space time and nothing else like electrons or similar?
Out of space time matter appeared?
Alex

 

Essentially, yes.
The explanation that I have been enthralled with, is that promoted in a couple of books I have read...The First Three Minutes: Stephen Weinberg and Superforce: Paul Davis.
Basically it goes something like this......The BB was the evolution of spacetime as we know it, from a hot, dense state. Nothing of that story is evidenced in any way between t=0 and t+ 10-43 seconds.
In that first short instant, the four forces were united as one, and which we call the "Superforce". As expansion of spacetime took hold, temperatures and pressures started to fall, and as a result, the Superforce started to decouple into the four forces we are familiar with today.
This created phase transitions and false vacuums and the excesses of energy went into creating our first fundamentals, probably free quarks and electrons.
As expansion continued, and temperatures and pressures dropped further, protons and neutrons were formed and at around three minutes, the first atomic nucleii.
It took another 400,000 years before temperatures were such that electrons were finally able to join with atomic nucleii and our first atoms of hydrogen, and some helium were formed. From that point, onwards to today, the creation of stars, planets, galaxies is fairly well known.
The closer back to the BB, the more speculative is the scenario described, and the further we proceed, the more evidence is available supporting the picture just described.
Still even to be able to reasonably construct such a scenario of the universe we now see around us, tells us the powerful predictive aspect that is the Inflationary/BB theory and why it is so well accepted among most astronomers/cosmologists and scientists in general.

 

Thank you very much Paddoboy.
It is very much clearer for me now.
Alex

 

A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking

The Universe in a Nutshell by Stephen Hawking

Pale Blue Dot: by Carl Sagan

Black Holes and Time Warps: by Kip Thorne

The First Three Minutes: Stephen Weinberg

Superforce: Paul Davis

 

Thanks for that list.
Did you notice my comments about the only book I now own is a bible. Where it came from I dont know probably the city house.
If not I will mention it again... I lost everything in a bush fire all my books so I find it ironic I often tell theisists to get another book if they want to learn about cosmology.

And I take this opportunity to thank the moderator who has moved this thread from a fringe section to the legitimate science section.

Further at the risk of preaching, which I would not do if the God was not on holiday, perhaps others can note that one can ask questions, have doubts etc without simply charging in claiming that all our accumulated knowledge is nonsence and that reasonable folk respond politely and reasonably when one is not simply trying to be disruptive.

Thank you both.

Alex

 

Yep, totally agree with the mod who moved it.....And of course the valid point you made re asking questions and questioning standard accepted cosmology or any other science, is certainly OK, and of course as long as the questioner is genuine in the nature of the question asked.

 

Well I was not entirely genuine in my questioning of inflation in so far as I had misgivings, as expressed re the possible big-bang theory being more about philosophy than cosmology and even if there is a hint of mischief I will be driven to confess how I may be guilty.
However Dave and your good self gave me a better understanding in particular pointing out that comptemplating the evolution of the universe is indeed beyond human experience and I have taken that on board.
However I do know what you mean when you speak about the genuine nature of the question or the person asking the question and many times I notice a question which seems inoccent except for a little something that tells you it probably will be a down hill run from there.
You seem to have picked a few in the short time I have been visiting, which was well before I joined, and there were times I did initially think you jumped hard on who seemed inoccent folk but as time went by I could see that you just caught on quickly to the similar style many of the argumentative folk adopt.
Alex

 

Alex, interesting that your thread was upgraded to Cosmology; I was posting to it in AltTheory, and have some additional links about Inflation Theory that I would like to ask for opinions about in your thread. Getting the detail together, and wonder if you think your thread is a fair place to continue the Inflation discussion?

 

Well first of all I dont know that it is worthwhile seeking my opinion in these matters I have no education that suggests that I can be of any use whatsoever.

I am not exactly sure what is inappropriate or not in this section but I would not post mere ideas and call them theories for a start in fact any dicussion would be best confined to the mainstream view and perhaps reasonable new work, if any, on the matter.

If you wish to go outside the current model and speculate sure I can do that but maybe it would be best in say your current thread.

If you post a question here I think others will answer if it relates to the current model and not something that could be seen as contentious.

Alex

 

Thanks, it is the community that frequents this forum, that I would be directing my questions to, and am savy about the rules related to bringing up my alternative ideas here. Your topic is inclusive of theories about inflation that are often discussed in Cosmology forums, and so if I limit it to questions about links to Cosmological topics, wouldn't I be on safe ground?

 

I expect so.
You can always adopt the approach that it is easier to seek forgiveness than ask for permission.
I am sure you respect the forum enough to ask genuine questions andbe mindful of "not leading the witness".
Ask away we can only learn if that is our motive.
Alex

 

I believe Alex has hit the proverbial nail, fair square on the head....particularly your observed known respect for the forum, its members and its rules.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Others though sadly are not of the same ilk.

 

Join the club.....which is why I mostly let newbies and such no that I am only an amateur at this game, and that my answers generally align with accepted mainstream cosmology.
And of course, I do learn, have learnt in the past on forums such as this, and will continue to learn.
That's why I was disappointed in seeing schneibster and brucep disappear....both had good knowledge, to support the gaps in my own limited knowledge, and both were pretty well versed on cosmological Inflation.