Did Matter Really Exceed the Speed of Light During the Big Bang?

  • Thread starter Thread starter studentxlol
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of general relativity in the context of the Big Bang, particularly whether matter exceeded the speed of light during the universe's rapid expansion. It is noted that while nothing can travel faster than light, general relativity may not apply in the same way during the Big Bang due to the extreme conditions. The key clarification is that it is not matter that was accelerating beyond light speed, but rather space itself that was expanding, effectively carrying matter with it. This distinction is crucial in understanding the behavior of the universe during its early moments. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of applying general relativity to the conditions present at the Big Bang.
studentxlol
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
It's generally accepted that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light (expect hypothetical particles that have yet to be discovered). This is in accordance with general relativity.

However general relativity seems to break down momentarily after the big bang because matter must have been accelerated at speeds greater than the speed of light during the rapid expansion phase.

So surely general relativity is wrong because this matter must have exceeded the speed of light?

Can anyone clarify this please?

Thanks.
 
Space news on Phys.org
studentxlol said:
However general relativity seems to break down momentarily after the big bang because matter must have been accelerated at speeds greater than the speed of light during the rapid expansion phase.

To illustrate this effect imagine you are measuring the distance between two objects with a measuring rod for several times and get an increasing distance. In classical mechanics this means that the objects are moving. But in GR there is another possibility: Your rod is shrinking. That's what happens with our universe. The metric of space is changing with time and there is no limit for this kind of expansion.
 
studentxlol said:
It's generally accepted that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light (expect hypothetical particles that have yet to be discovered). This is in accordance with general relativity.

However general relativity seems to break down momentarily after the big bang because matter must have been accelerated at speeds greater than the speed of light during the rapid expansion phase.

So surely general relativity is wrong because this matter must have exceeded the speed of light?

Can anyone clarify this please?

Thanks.

Matter wasn't accelerating. Space itself was expanding and carrying matter with it.
 

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

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##.
View full post »

Thread 'Rutgers finds a transparent Einstein Cross - apparently a dark matter "halo".'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Big Bang and Infinite Universe'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Questions about the Location of the Big Bang and the Age of the Universe
Replies
8
Views
3K
B Did the Big Bang expand faster than light?
Replies
26
Views
4K
B Big Bang and Infinite Universe
Replies
20
Views
1K
B Basic confusion about the Big Bang and light cones
Replies
11
Views
2K
B How Did the Big Bang Happen If the Speed of Light Is a Limit?
Replies
13
Views
3K
I Shouldn't the Big bang be physically impossible?
Replies
25
Views
3K
I Big Bang singularity: can we say anything about its size?
Replies
2
Views
2K
B Did the Big Bang create space and time?
Replies
9
Views
3K
I Is this explanation of "space itself expanding" correct?
Replies
27
Views
4K
I What is the Freeze-Out Temperature of WIMP Particles?
Replies
4
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top