Big Bang Theory Science

Big Bang Theory Science

What was there before the Big Bang … How to speculate if we don’t even know what exactly the Big Bang was … But is it really so? Because it seems instead that there is a way to throw a thread of light beyond the beginning of the Universe: some scientists have developed a method to try to give shape to that period in which the Universe, newborn from some fraction of a billionth second, it would have suffered inflation (the most widely accepted theory today), that is the rapid exponential expansion that occurred immediately after the big bang theory science. If the study were to lead to an alternative scenario to inflation, perhaps important clues could be obtained about what was there before. The work, published in Physical Review Letters, is also the subject of a short article on Physics.

What are we talking about

first, adverb of time; time, … “if you ask me to explain it, I don’t know what to say” (Sant’Agostino, VII century); “words are lacking to talk about it” (Heidegger, 20th century). And so? Let us link time and space in space-time (Einstein, special relativity, 20th century). Can we imagine a ” before space exists “?

That of primordial inflation is an idea shared by a large part of the scientific community. Because it allows explaining some characteristics and properties of the current Universe. However, it is not the only model: others seem to explain what happened at the beginning of time and space.

The Big Bounce

In at least one alternative model to cosmic inflation, the Universe that preceded the Big Bang was contracting (ours is expanding instead). If so, the big bang theory science becomes a moment in the evolution of what cosmologists call the Big Bounce: it is the hypothesis put forward by physicist Martin Bojowald in 2007, which supports the idea that the current Universe is the result of an expansion that occurred after the contraction of the previous universe.

The question is not “who is right,” but which model allows us to interpret the Universe more correctly, and this is the key to understanding both the ongoing scientific debate and decidedly complex studies, such as the one initiated by Xingang researchers Chen, Abraham Loeb and Zhong-Zhi Xianyu (Harvard University).

Inflation or Big Bounce

before, therefore, the three scientists looking for clues that allow tipping the scales in favor of one or the other hypothesis, inflation or Big Bounce, with a method that should allow verifying if there really was cosmic inflation.

The work starts with an analysis of the evolution of the physical dimensions of the early Universe. «The inflation hypothesis,» explains Zhong-Zhi Xianyu, «has it that the volume of the Universe has grown exponentially and extremely rapidly: for some alternative models. However, the size of the Universe decreased. Among the many difficulties for those who find themselves studying this phase of the Universe. The main one is perhaps that of estimating the dimensions of the early Universe: our work consists of trying to understand what are the elements that can give us an idea of ​​this physical property. ”

The early universe was not uniform: there were small-scale density irregularities which then, over time, where they were more marked. Became those spaces from which the great structures of the Cosmos, such as galaxies, took shape. Those irregularities constitute the main information on which cosmologists who want to investigate what was before the Big Bang rely.

The researchers hypothesized the existence of an “oscillatory model of the distribution of matter in the cosmos,” which could steer science between inflation and alternative scenarios if detected. In theory, verifying how the density of matter varies on increasingly larger scales determines if the signal of density variations existed. It should manifest itself as density variations throughout the Universe, i.e., in the number of galaxies and the quantity of matter and energy.

Big bang theory science explosion?

At the beginning of the last century, it was common opinion that the universe was immutable and static, that it had no beginning, and no end was foreseeable. Starting from 1916, with the …

At the beginning of the last century, it was common opinion that the universe was immutable and static, that it had no beginning, and no end was foreseeable. However, starting from 1916, with Einstein’s calculations of relativity, the Big Bang theory (the great explosion that would give birth to the cosmos) was already present, which has had various developments and interpretations over the years.

READ  Ryan Sutter Mystery Illness Details Out as He Speaks About Symptoms

According to the main one, time, space, energy, and matter were contained in a single point of enormous density. At the moment of the explosion, an expansion would have begun, and in the time it took to blink, the spot would have become 100 billion light-years large. However, an explosion occurs at a precise point … it was not so for the Big Bang, which created the space itself. According to another theory, the matter of the universe would instead be constantly created at various points. I turn that that produces (through as many Big Bangs) other universes that branch on top of each other.

What if the Big Bang never existed?

Oh yes, we have to start this scientific column by giving you the bad news: you know the ” Big Bang ” (great explosion) from which the famous television series takes its name? It is probably wrong! The good counter-news is that the alternative is even more fascinating: the ” Big Bounce ” theory.

Here’s an example: in 1687, Isaac Newton presented the world with a fantastic theory of gravitation that explains a vast amount of phenomena. Such as apples falling from trees and the earth revolving around the sun. However, it fails to account for other observations such as, for example, the deviation of light due to the gravitational attraction of the planets. So is Newton’s theory wrong? No, it is incomplete!

He thought Einsin’sEinsin’sEinstein’sEinstein’s general relativity to complete it is virtually identical to the Newtonian theory when we want to know why objects fall to the ground, the planets orbit around the sun and describe otandomena that remained unexpla. General relativity is today’s theory of gravitation, with spectacular implications such as the existence of black holes. We use it every day, too, every time we activate the GPS of our smartphone.

Big bang theory science

Like Newton’s theory, the big bang theory science is also incomplete. And its incompleteness is a direct consequence of the incompleteness of the theory of general relativity. Wait, you think, didn’t you tell us that general relativity completes Newtonian theory? Yes, and so far, there is no observed phenomenon that is not in agreement with Einstein’s theory. However, it has internal inconsistencies. In fact, it predicts the existence of “space-time singularities,” i.e., points of space-time in which the theory itself is no longer valid. One of these singularities is at the origin of the Big Bang. As?

In 1929 Edwin Hubble made a puzzling discovery: the universe is expanding. “What it expands into” will be the subject of a future article, so don’t think about it for now. This expansion is perfectly explained by the mathematical equations of general relativity, which also tell us that. If we rewind the film of the universe’s life, we would see it contract for about 14 billion years. And here the problem arises: at the Big Bang, the equations are no longer valid, and we cannot use them to know which is the prequel of our film.

Explanation: Big Bang Theory Science

To explain how the Universe was born, we need a new theory that completes general relativity, incorporating gravity with quantum mechanics. Some of the claimants, including the ” loop quantum gravity,” “predict the emergence of some new repulsive force. That stops the universe from contracting, bouncing it back to a new age of expansion. It is. as when we crush a sponge ball with our hand. The ball contracts until the fibers’ fibers’ fibers’ elastic forces are such that we cannot crush them further. Quantum gravity produces an effect equivalent to these elastic forces.

Quantum gravity then directs the prequel to our film. So let’s imagine watching the film starting from 15 billion years ago, a billion years before the Big Bounce. What we would see is the Universe contracting for a billion years, bouncing when it’s as small as a proton. At some point, it may stop expanding, begin to contract. Until it bounces again and begins again, in an eternal cycle of expansions, contractions, and rebounds. We have to hope to have experimental data as soon as possible that confirm this fascinating hypothesis or not.

Wasn’t the Big Bang perfect either?

An asymmetrical Big Bang? It is the first thing that comes to mind in front of the speed measurements with which the universe expands made by independent groups in 2019. In different space regions, “younger” and closer to us, galaxies seem to move away at different speeds. At odds with the generally accepted value of the Hubble Constant. And this is a beautiful problem that undermines consolidated notions. The more recent nearby universe turns out to be faster than expected. Doubts arise on the model of the Big Bang, the formation of the first stars. The evolution of galaxies and the nucleosynthesis of the elements. That is almost everything.

Also Read: What Is A Money Order

READ  Co-Stars Call Out Lea Michele who Faces Backlash for Being Unapologetic

Handyman Particles: Big Bang Theory Science

Of course, before throwing away our current conception of the cosmos, scientists try to reconcile observations with theory. And here, various possible loopholes immediately emerged, which we will not examine here. But it is interesting to point out the latest patch that physicists have devised to mend the tear or at least hide it. That would make the expansion rate differs depending on where – which means “When” – you look.

Also Read: What Is Alkaline Water

Constant, but not overtime

The study that raised the problem appeared in the Royal Astronomical Society journal journal journal last October and states. That “the Hubble constant is constant throughout the universe at a given moment, but varies with time. “. So looking at different distances – and consequently, at different times – we find the constant discordant values. In itself, it would not be a shocking fact. But it is necessary to understand why and eventually remedy the destabilizing consequences for current cosmology.

Also Read: What Is Hard Water

The turning point in 1998

Astrophysicists call the expansion rate of the universe the “Hubble constant,” which is questionable. Because Hubble never used this expression, and indeed believed expansion to a certain extent. After all, the first to conceive it was Lemaitre, so much so that now we speak of the “Hubble-Lemaitre constant. Which nevertheless has never been constant. Meanwhile, it has changed a lot as the measurements were refined, a fact more than obvious. Because it is linked to the technology and accuracy of the measurement methods. We went from 600 kilometers per second per megaparsec to 67.15 km / s, with a residual uncertainty of 2 percent. But, truly revolutionary, the Hubble constant changed “intrinsically.”

Also Read: How Much Money Do YouTubers Make

The 2019 measurements

Since it was a question of measuring the speed of moving away from very remote galaxies, Perlmutter, Schmidt, and Reiss used a “meter” the brightness of special supernovae, those of type Ia. Which we know to explode by emitting a well-determined quantity of light and always the same. The explosion occurs when a precise critical mass is reached by a star that sucks material from another. But now, working on more recent areas of the universe, in 2019, other astrophysicists have found a different rate of expansion. And the problem arose of justifying the anomaly.

Also Read:The dangerous world of cyber threats.

Interacting neutrinos: Big Bang Theory Science

In just a few months, cosmologists and particle physicists have presented various hypotheses-loopholes. Cristina Kreisch and her group from Princeton University propose this solution. The idea is basically that the primordial neutrinos, scattered as an omnipresent radiation similar. The microwave background left by the big bang theory science (in the image above, on the right the Planck satellite. That measured it with great precision) interact between them, resulting in the observed discrepancy. The interacting primordial neutrinos are a hypothesis, but with the advantage of explaining well also quantitatively the data. That has undermined the Hubble Constant and embarrassed the winners of the 2011 Nobel.

Also Read: Where Is My Stimulus Money

The era of anomalies

It will now be a question of critically comparing the various hypotheses put forward to solve the anomaly. On the sidelines of the question, it is worth noting that physics has been living with anomalies for years. Always with the hope that through the cracks in the models accepted today, a mythical “new physics” can be glimpsed. For now, this is not the case: anomalies accumulate without allowing themselves to be included in any new physics. So much so that it is now said that we live in the “age of anomalies.” That they are small but tough, and the smaller they are, the more they require large and expensive experiments.

Also Read: What Is Conversion Therapy

Three parts in a billion!

A 16-meter-wide circular magnet weighing 15 tons. A few days ago traveled with great difficulty from New York to Illinois for an experiment. That will have to measure the muon’s muon’s muon’s magnetic moment with extreme precision (similar to the electron but 200 times heavier). But it isn’t enjoyable. It resists all attempts to delete it. Other anomalies would require a relative particle of the Higgs boson or a fourth neutrino, called “sterile.”

A sensationally dismantled famous anomaly (trivial measurement error) was neutrinos’ speed, which seemed to be higher than that of light. Other anomalies could be statistical fluctuations. “We have not the faintest idea” is the title of a book by physicist Daniel Whiteson, University of California, recently published in Italy by Longanesi. One thing is certain: anomalies are a powerful stimulus for scientists’ creativity. But sometimes, they lead astray. We will return to this discourse on the border between physics and philosophy.

Also Read: Best Way To Invest Money

Share this:

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*