ζ → 0
- 1
- 0
Particles, life, etc.
The discussion revolves around the question of whether things, such as particles and life, can exist or develop without the presence of gravity. Participants explore theoretical implications, the role of fundamental forces, and the conditions necessary for the emergence of life and matter.
Participants generally do not reach a consensus, as multiple competing views remain regarding the necessity of gravity for the existence of particles and life. Some assert gravity's essential role, while others challenge this notion, leading to an unresolved discussion.
Participants express various assumptions about the nature of forces and conditions in the universe, and there are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of "soup" and the specific conditions under which particles or life might arise.
so does everything has mass?
Chronos said:... No gravity, no soup.
So I guess I'm saying that its unlikely to be able to have particles without some equivalent of gravity
Naty1 said:not likely so... because the very early universe was a charged particle soup, a plasma early on...so as things cooled, electromagnetic attraction and,say the strong force, would pull ions together to form particles...but after that not much would happen...hydrogen and helium might form,just a few simple particles, but gravity is needed to pull such inert gases together and provide the potential energy to get nucler reactions (fission/fusion) started... a few basic particles drifting far apart would seem to be rather inhospitable to the beginnings of life...
Thank you -- a very interesting point.malawi_glenn said:No gravitational attraction is not needed for Big Bang Nucleosynthesis. However, gravity is needed to stellar formation.
And God said -- Let there be General Relativity.Chronos said:Gravity is a given, life is not.
Rymer said:And God said -- Let there be General Relativity.
(sorry couldn't resist upon reading -- after the Douglas Adams quote.)