Big-Bang Theory Modification Real or Not

  • Thread starter Wings of Pegasus
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Theory
In summary, the current understanding is that galaxies and planets did not come preformed with the universe, but rather formed gradually through gravitational and electromagnetic interactions. The theory of black holes forming and creating a whirlwind effect with gas and dust is still uncertain and the possibility of primordial black holes has been ruled out by measurements. The rapid formation of structures after the big bang remains a puzzling question in modern cosmology.
  • #1
Wings of Pegasus
9
0
Big-Bang Theory- New Idea on it

I have been pondering something for a while now, and it is how the "stuff" in the universe came out. Mostly, just whether or not galaxies came out preformed or, like planets, coalesced into their current selves. If researchers believe that galaxies came out preformed (which i suspect they dont), then this might make sense.

Nothing ever seems to come out preformed in nature, including planets, animals (evolution), stars, etc.
What I'm going for is that, black holes and all the stellar dust and gas was thrown out indiscrimately into space, and the black holes began to "suck up" the gas and dust, creating a whirlwind effect with the gas, much like a drain in a sink does when filled with water.

Am I way off the mark?:frown:
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
Wings of Pegasus said:
I have been pondering something for a while now, and it is how the "stuff" in the universe came out. Mostly, just whether or not galaxies came out preformed or, like planets, coalesced into their current selves. If researchers believe that galaxies came out preformed (which i suspect they dont), then this might make sense.

Actually, the formation of galaxies and planets are two of the most active areas of study in astronomy right now. We're pretty sure they didn't just "come out" with the universe... we think they gradually formed by a combination of gravitational and electromagnetic interactions.


What I'm going for is that, black holes and all the stellar dust and gas was thrown out indiscrimately into space, and the black holes began to "suck up" the gas and dust, creating a whirlwind effect with the gas, much like a drain in a sink does when filled with water.

There are some theories that say there should have been black holes formed very early in the history of the universe, but these theories are quite uncertain at this point. The accretion of gas and dust onto a black hole does, we believe, occur in a disk structure, sort of like the whirlpool you describe. However, black holes don't "suck" you towards them anymore than the Earth does. They attract by the same mechanism -- gravity. That means one can just as easily be in orbit around a black hole as they can be around our sun.
 
  • #3
In fact the 'primordial black hole' conjecture by Stephen Hawking has been pretty much ruled out by measurements of the cosmic gamma ray background. One of the most puzzling questions in modern cosmology is how structures like galaxies formed so rapidly after the big bang. It is extraordinarily difficult to explain this without a boatload of dark matter in the early universe - which also helps explain why cosmologists are so fond of the LCDM model.
 
  • #4
Chronos said:
In fact the 'primordial black hole' conjecture by Stephen Hawking has been pretty much ruled out by measurements of the cosmic gamma ray background.

Those particular measurements only rule out an abundant population of very low-mass black holes (the strongest Hawking radiators).
 
  • #5
Correction noted and agreed. Albeit, I don't recall Hawking having modeled super massive black hole formation in the early universe. No big deal. The lack of mini PBH's mostly creates headaches for accretion models.
 
  • #6
Chronos said:
Correction noted and agreed. Albeit, I don't recall Hawking having modeled super massive black hole formation in the early universe.

I'm not familiar with Hawking's work specifically, but primordial black hole formation can occur over a wide range of masses. The gamma-ray background only rules out those around 1015 grams.
 
  • #7
Ahh, I see. Thanks for the timely response and good explanation.
 

1. Is the Big-Bang Theory really being modified?

Yes, there are several ongoing modifications to the Big-Bang Theory as new evidence and data is discovered.

2. What are some of the proposed modifications to the Big-Bang Theory?

Some proposed modifications include the theory of inflation, the multiverse theory, and the cyclic model.

3. What evidence supports the modifications to the Big-Bang Theory?

Some evidence includes the observation of cosmic microwave background radiation, the abundance of light elements, and the expansion of the universe.

4. How do these modifications affect our understanding of the origin of the universe?

These modifications help to fill in the gaps and explain some of the unanswered questions in the original Big-Bang Theory, such as the initial singularity and the cause of the universe's expansion.

5. Are there any challenges or criticisms to these modifications?

Yes, there are still debates and challenges to these modifications, such as the lack of direct evidence for the multiverse theory and the difficulty in testing some of these theories.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
807
  • Cosmology
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
  • Cosmology
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top