[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 98 KB, 768x710, bang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4880319 No.4880319 [Reply] [Original]

I'm trying to better understand the big bang theory

Does it mean the sudden expansion of all matter from a singularly? Or matter AND space?

>> No.4880322

There's a show about it that's pretty popular. You should check it out.

>> No.4880325

Concerning the cosmological singularity, energy was "always there", and space/matter was formed with the introduction of the Higgs field

>> No.4880328

i dont think the laws of physics pertain to the void that is space... but i believe the space was already there, or simply is a "lack of" matter in which matter is assumeed to fill. much like a flow from low concentration to high concentration when the big bang took place i'll personally guess that this had something to do with it.
black hole to white hole as some other theories go.

>> No.4880332

>>4880328

Dafuq did I just read?

>> No.4880334

>>4880325
...no

>> No.4880337

>>4880334
Yeah um why no, bud?

>> No.4880341

>>4880325

If you're going to recite popsci junk at least get it correct.
OP, the big bang is the expansion of both matter and space (or rather, energy and space; which depending on the model can be viewed as as just the expansion of space).

>> No.4880344

>>4880337
energy was "always there", and space/matter was formed with the introduction of the Higgs field

I can't answer your question more accurately to say that it's just incorrect gibberish.

>> No.4880345

>>4880344
than to say*

>> No.4880346

>>4880341

So essentially before the Big Bang the "fabric" of spacetime didn't exist, but once the explosion happened it expanded both energy and spacetime itself?

>> No.4880348

>>4880344
>>4880341
>popsci junk
>gibberish
Right, because the Higgs field isn't responsible for the breaking of symmetry and subsequent arisal of matter and space.

>> No.4880354

>>4880348
>arisal
>english

>> No.4880360

>>4880348

The higgs field was never introduced, phase transitions in the universe gave rise to the "symmetry breaking" you garbled from some Scientific American article that produced base-zero gauges for other forces. You could not have phase transitions in the universe without space,

I'm not sure what you mean by "matter" because it's a poorly defined term but if you mean rest mass-bearing objects then you're wrong and if you mean any quantum of a field that's capable of inertial mass then you're wrong. Hence why I said your post was too full of gibberish to really respond.

>> No.4880376

>>4880360
I actually got all that shit from this board, which, probably was indeed garbled from a popsci article

Thanks for the response.

>> No.4880390

>>4880376

Oh, if you're actually genuine- sorry for the curt response.

So the reason why the higgs field is special n our universe is that it seems to have a non-zero rest energy.

So think about say, the electromagnetic field. In general in empty space, that force is zero, the vacuum itself isn't electromagnetic. The higgs field isn't like that, every point in space in the universe is permeated with it at some non-zero energy level.

When you hear talk that's concerning the higgs field and the energy of the universe, it's talking about that. Before the universe entered the phase it is in now the energy was undifferentiated, i.e. there was no "electromagnetic field" and "weak field" etc, there was just the energy of the universe. As the universe cooled a process called symmetry breaking (which I only know well enough to express mathematically, sorry :( ) the forces differentiated. The higgs field is the only force that "settled" at a non-zero level.

>> No.4880393

So the void that is space has always been there, right?

>> No.4880396

>>4880393

The three dimensional space our universe seems to exist in is traditionally modeled as having expanded with the big bang.

This is a very, very tricky point though because the question itself isn't that well defined. It's hard to say what space is without having reference points via matter, what does and does not constitute a proper unique geometry for the universe, etc. The usual answer is "space did not exist before the big bang, the big bang was the expansion of space." That's where the old balloon image comes from.

>> No.4880398

So the void that is space has always been there, right?
Its the gasses, dust and other crap that the big bang refers to?

>> No.4880400

>>4880396
Just to clarify there might be a new consensus or general, modern answer to that but if there is I don't know it and it's not touched on in my graduate program.

>> No.4880424

>>4880328
NO. The big bang specifically involves space expanding, the big bang was not an expansion of matter in space but an expansion of space. The former dosen't fit the evidence.