Expansion Rate at the Big Bang: Uncovering the Role of Dark Matter

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expansion rate of the universe at the moment of the Big Bang, particularly focusing on the role of dark matter and dark energy in this context. Participants explore the implications of different models of cosmic expansion, including historical perspectives and current understandings.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the Big Bang could have occurred if the expansion rate was slow or approaching zero, suggesting a need for clarification on the initial conditions of the universe.
  • Another participant notes that while the current expansion is accelerating, it was dominated by matter in the past, leading to a slowing of acceleration, and asserts that expansion was quicker in the early universe.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that the early expansion was driven by a high energy unstable scalar field, potentially likening it to a Higgs-type field, which could have resulted in expansion rates exceeding the speed of light.
  • There is a correction regarding the terminology used, where one participant clarifies that dark energy, rather than dark matter, is responsible for the acceleration of the universe's expansion.
  • Participants reference various graphs and calculators that illustrate the evolution of the universe's size over time, indicating a slowing expansion followed by an acceleration after approximately 7 billion years.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the expansion rate at the Big Bang and the roles of dark matter and dark energy, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without consensus.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific models of cosmic expansion that may not be universally accepted, and there are unresolved questions regarding the initial conditions of the universe and the definitions of dark matter versus dark energy.

Perchie
Messages
20
Reaction score
1
If dark matter is accelerating the expansion of the universe, then how fast did the universe start expanding at the point of the Big Bang ?

The pre-Standard Candle model of the Big Bang held that the expansion rate had always been declining and by backward interpolation, must have been very much faster at the BB.

But if the reverse is true, how did the BB even happen - if the expansion rate was slow to zero ?

I've never heard anyone ask this question, as yet.
 
Space news on Phys.org
Currently, expansion is accelerating - but some billion years ago, matter dominated and acceleration was slowing down. Expansion was quicker in the early universe.

We have a calculator here, and some nice graph showing the evolution of the size of the universe which I do not find at the moment.

But if the reverse is true, how did the BB even happen - if the expansion rate was slow to zero ?
Note that "slower in the past" (if that would be true) does not mean "goes to zero". f(x)=x+x^2 has an increasing derivative (for increasing x) as well, but its derivative is not zero at x=0.
 
mfb said:
Currently, expansion is accelerating - but some billion years ago, matter dominated and acceleration was slowing down. Expansion was quicker in the early universe.

We have a calculator here, and some nice graph showing the evolution of the size of the universe which I do not find at the moment.
Thanks.
:)
 
then how fast did the universe start expanding at the point of the Big Bang ?

faster than light...there was a huge negative pressure... a high energy unstable scalar [Higgs type] field...which powered early expansion.
 
If dark matter is accelerating the expansion of the universe,

you mean dark energy...the cosmological constant...
 
mfb said:
We have a calculator here, and some nice graph showing the evolution of the size of the universe which I do not find at the moment.

...

Jorrie has some nice color-coded curves showing evolution of various things. If that's what you had in mind just say. I think they might be in one of the sticky threads and I'll hunt for them.

There is a much plainer graph of the scalefactor over time that is here
http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March03/Lineweaver/Figures/figure14.jpg

It shows slowing down until around year 7 billion and then speeding up after that.

I didn't have room in my signature for it, but I already had a different figure from the same article in my signature
http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March03/Lineweaver/Figures/figure1.jpg

so I get it by clicking on that (which is "Figure 1") and then changing the 1 to a 14.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
7K