Big Bang, Life & Quark Stars: How Long Before We're Cool?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TeeTeeKnow
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the timeline for the universe to cool enough to support life, with estimates suggesting that life could potentially emerge between 800 to 1200 million years after the Big Bang, contingent on the formation of stars and heavier elements. It clarifies that Earth did not exist since the Big Bang, as it formed later from matter produced in stars. The concept of a red sky at night from the afterglow of the Big Bang is addressed, indicating that a bright sky would have been visible until about 400,000 years post-Big Bang. Questions about quark stars and their properties, including minimum mass and light escape, remain unanswered. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the complexities of cosmic timelines and the conditions necessary for life.
TeeTeeKnow
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Life?

With the present understanding of the age of the universe (acceleration and temperature), how long before the universe is cool enough to support our type of life?

And

If the Earth existed since the BB, how long would we see a red sky at night from the after glow of the big bang? I guess size and time would be important here.


Quark star?

If there is a quark star,
What would the minimum mass of such a star be?
Could light escape its surface?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Thread moved from Cosmology to Homework Help.

With the present understanding of the age of the universe (acceleration and temperature), how long before the universe is cool enough to support our type of life?

I'd say it's supporting it right about now, no?
 
berkeman said:
Thread moved from Cosmology to Homework Help.



I'd say it's supporting it right about now, no?

as an ex moto-x'er myself maybe I was not clear.

How long after the BB I mean.
I read some numbers a while ago and can not remember where.

This is actually not homework.
An “I do not know” or “please clarify” is an acceptable answer.
 
Guess I'll move it back to Cosmology then. There's not much on the BB at Hyperphysics, but there's a reasonable intro at wikipedia.org (always be careful about the accuracy of articles at wikipedia, though), including some timeline info. It doesn't exactly address your first question, though.

And on your 2nd question, you might want to re-word it, since the Earth wasn't around since the BB, just the matter that ended up in the Earth.
 
TeeTeeKnow said:
With the present understanding of the age of the universe (acceleration and temperature), how long before the universe is cool enough to support our type of life?

That isn't too easy to answer exactly but I think you can get a reasonable idea this way. It's pretty convincing to expect that stars and planets must have formed in order for life anything like the life here on Earth to have evolved. So...

The first stars seemed to have formed sometime in the first billion years. However for planets to form you need some heavier elements to be cooked up in stars. This could take anywhere from a few million years (for really large stars) to a few billion years (for smaller stars). But it does seem likely that sufficient heavier elements might be available in perhaps 100 million years. So a resonable estimate for the earliest possible appearance of life might be from say 800 to 1200 million years after the BB.

TeeTeeKnow said:
If the Earth existed since the BB, how long would we see a red sky at night from the after glow of the big bang? I guess size and time would be important here.

The Earth couldn't have existed from the BB but hypothetically you'd have seen a bright sky right up until the time of last scattering some 400000 years.

Sorry, I don't have even a guess for your last question.
 
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...
Back
Top