Correct Understanding of Big Bang Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lord Draco
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies that prior to the Big Bang, the universe is believed to have been condensed into a singularity, characterized by infinite density according to general relativity (GR). However, as one approaches the Big Bang under time reversal, quantum effects are expected to emerge, which current theories cannot fully explain due to the absence of a quantum gravity theory. The conversation also touches on the nature of singularities in black holes, where relativity suggests a point-like condensation, but quantum theory complicates this understanding. It is noted that in some models, a singularity may not be a well-defined point, as density approaches infinity while distances between points shrink. Overall, the complexities surrounding singularities in both the Big Bang and black holes highlight significant gaps in current scientific understanding.
Lord Draco
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Is this correct?

Before the big bang or at the moment of the big bang(since we don't know what happened before the big bang), from my understanding it is believed that everything in the universe was all condensed into a singularity, a single point of all the energy of the universe. is this correct?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
This is correct according to pure GR, at the moment of the BB the universe was condensed into a singularity of infinite density. However at some point, as one approaches the BB under time reversal, GR is expected to yield to quantum effects; what these effects might do can only be predicted by a quantum gravity theory, unfortunately we do not have such a theory - yet.

Garth
 
Garth's description is also relevant to the question of what goes on inside a black hole. Relativity predicts a condensation to a point singularity, but quantum theory gets in the way and we really don't know what goes on.
 
Even in ordinary general relativity, it's not necessarily true that a singularity is a "single point". In a model where the universe is spatially infinite, you can say that the density goes to infinity at the singularity, and you can say that the distance between any two points which are some finite distance apart at a later time goes to zero at the singularity, but I don't think it necessarily makes sense to call the singularity a "point", its size wouldn't be well-defined (it's sort of like the question, 'what's zero times infinity'?)
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top