I Big Bang Theory: Spacetime or Matter First?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter omie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matter Spacetime
omie
Messages
4
Reaction score
2
My question comes from the following confusing aspect of the big bang theory. Since at different stages during development of the current universe, we know that fundamental particles, atoms and large masses started to form. And if all large masses are embedded in spacetime when during the development of the universe did the spacetime form? . But it seems to me, that all aspects of matter, would require a spacetime. It is not only large masses that depend on the spacetime but even small particles. Meaning if you require to create a universe the foundation of it must consist of something super strong. Or that space time was always there, and all the mass was just compacted into a point. Am i being silly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
omie said:
at different stages during development of the current universe, we know that fundamental particles, atoms and large masses started to form.

Careful. The quantum fields of the Standard Model, which is what "fundamental particles, atoms, and large masses" are all built on, were always there. But before the end of inflation, those fields had no energy in them; they were all in their vacuum state. At the end of inflation, the energy stored in the inflaton field was transferred to the Standard Model fields (this process is called "reheating", which is somewhat of a misnomer since there had been no previous "heating" or "unheating"). But that didn't create those fields; it just transferred energy to them.

omie said:
it seems to me, that all aspects of matter, would require a spacetime

More precisely, quantum fields such as those in the Standard Model require a background spacetime to exist. At least, that's how quantum field theory is currently formulated. One reason why physicists are searching for a theory of quantum gravity is to try to find a theory in which spacetime and quantum fields are both aspects of something more fundamental. We probably won't be able to answer questions like "how did the universe ultimately originate?" until we have such a theory.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Back
Top