'Frame' symmetry breaking - when did it happen?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of 'frame' symmetry breaking in the universe, particularly in relation to the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and the inflationary period. It suggests that a preferred frame can be defined based on the CMB, but prior to inflation, no such frames exist due to the uniformity of the vacuum. Participants debate whether this symmetry breaking occurred before or at the onset of inflation, with some asserting it happened at the Planck era. The preferred frame is linked to the field driving inflation, which takes on a constant value across locations. Ultimately, the complexities of inflation and the lack of understanding about the early universe leave many questions about the nature of this symmetry breaking unresolved.
Dmitry67
Messages
2,564
Reaction score
1
In any place of our universe we can define a 'preferred' or 'rest' frame based on the observation of the Cosmic Microwave Background. Of course, in different places of our universe these frames are different, but the idea is the same.

If instead of the CMB we define this frame based on the an isotropy of any forms of matter in that frame we can go backwards in time to the time before CMB.

If we take the 'void' universe, before the inflation, then there no 'preferred' frames can be defined because vacuum is the same nomatter how you move thru it. SO it was some kind of a symmetry breaking - before all frames we equal, then they are still mathematically equivalent (based on the SR/GR) but in some of them evenrything is isotropic while in the others it is not.

So my question - it is correct that this 'symmetry breaking' happened right after the era of inflation?
Why it is not usually called 'symmetry breaking'? May be it is something well known and I just don't know right words to search in arxiv?
Now the most difficult question: why in different places of our universe that symmetry breaking was consistent? (Ihope it is clear what I mean by that). Note that it happened after the inflation so the usual explanations based on the effects of the inflation can not be used.

Thank you
 
Space news on Phys.org
The symmetry breaking would have been at the onset of inflation, not after.
 
why? during the era of inflation space is void as far as I know. Hence there are no preferred frames.
 
Dmitry67 said:
why? during the era of inflation space is void as far as I know. Hence there are no preferred frames.
The preferred frame stems from the field that drives inflation: it's the frame where the field takes on a constant value at all locations.
 
Thank you, it explains what puzzled me for so long!
So it happened BEFORE the inflation, hence, at the Planks era, hence, we don't know a lot about it :)
 
Dmitry67 said:
Thank you, it explains what puzzled me for so long!
So it happened BEFORE the inflation, hence, at the Planks era, hence, we don't know a lot about it :)
Well, maybe before, or maybe right at the onset of inflation. But either way, we don't even know that much about inflation yet, let alone what started it off. So right, we don't know much about the symmetry breaking that led to a preferred rest frame of the universe.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...

Similar threads

Back
Top