Big Bang Singularity: Was It As "Infinitely Dense" As We Think?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ratman101
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang Singularity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the big bang singularity, particularly questioning whether it is accurately described as "infinitely dense." Participants explore the implications of singularities in cosmology, the relationship between density and size, and the limitations of current theories, including General Relativity and quantum gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the concept of an "infinitely dense" singularity may be a misinterpretation based on our current understanding of the universe's vastness.
  • Others argue that density does not necessarily imply smallness, suggesting that the universe may have been both dense and infinite at the same time.
  • A participant mentions that the singularity is a construct of General Relativity, which may not be applicable in a complete theory of quantum gravity.
  • Some contributions emphasize that the term "singularity" represents a breakdown in our mathematical models rather than a physical reality.
  • There are discussions about the implications of singularities in cosmological models, with references to Misner's work suggesting that singularities can provide valuable insights into cosmology.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the meaning of "pre-universe" and whether singularities exist within our universe or represent phenomena outside it.
  • Some participants caution against speculative interpretations based on popular literature, advocating for a more rigorous understanding of cosmological theories.
  • There is a suggestion that a future theory of quantum gravity may resolve the issue of singularities, although some express skepticism about this possibility.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a range of views on the nature of singularities, with no consensus reached on whether they should be considered artifacts of mathematical models or significant features of cosmological theories. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of singularities and their role in the understanding of the universe's origins.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include the dependence on current theoretical frameworks, the unresolved nature of quantum gravity, and the ambiguity surrounding the definitions of terms like "singularity" and "pre-universe."

  • #31
Is there such a thing as pure, formless, energy ? If there is, could that have been what existed before the Big Bang ?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
Shane Kennedy said:
Is there such a thing as pure, formless, energy ?
No. Energy is a property, not something concrete that can exist by itself.
If there is, could that have been what existed before the Big Bang ?
No, because again, such a thing doesn't exist.
 
  • #33
phinds said:
No. Energy is a property, not something concrete that can exist by itself. No, because again, such a thing doesn't exist.
According to current theory.

I suggest that mass is a property too.
 
  • #34
Shane Kennedy said:
According to current theory.

As well as all current evidence.

Shane Kennedy said:
I suggest that mass is a property too.

For some definitions of the term "mass", yes, this is correct.

What does any of this have to do with the topic of this thread?
 
  • #35
PeterDonis said:
As well as all current evidence.
For some definitions of the term "mass", yes, this is correct.

What does any of this have to do with the topic of this thread?
What could have "seeded" the Big Bang
 
  • #36
Shane Kennedy said:
What could have "seeded" the Big Bang

Our best current model is that the Big Bang happened at the end of a previous inflation era. But this is still an open topic of research.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K