Forces unified at the time of the big bang

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nuby
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang Forces Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether the fundamental forces were unified at the time of the big bang, with a focus on mathematical relationships involving Planck units. Participants explore the implications of these relationships and their significance in the context of physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents mathematical relationships involving Planck mass, length, time, and forces, suggesting these may indicate a unification of forces at the big bang.
  • Another participant criticizes the approach as numerological, claiming it merely rearranges constants without providing new insights.
  • A different participant defends the initial claims, arguing that while algebraic rearrangements are present, the relationships could still hold theoretical significance.
  • Further responses emphasize that scientific discourse should be based on established facts rather than opinions, suggesting that speculative ideas may not be appropriate for the forum's focus.
  • One participant asserts that the questions about the unification of forces and the significance of the mathematical identities have been addressed, implying a resolution to the inquiry.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity and significance of the mathematical relationships presented. While some defend their relevance, others dismiss them as mere algebraic manipulations. The discussion remains unresolved with competing views on the nature of the claims.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the discussion touches on speculative ideas, which may not align with the forum's guidelines for established physics discourse. There is mention of the lack of predictive value in the proposed mathematical identities, indicating limitations in their scientific applicability.

nuby
Messages
336
Reaction score
0
I noticed the following relationships, and I'm curious if these are why physicists believed all forces might have been equal (or unified) during the big bang.

Pm = Plank Mass
Pl = Planck Length
Pt = Planck Time
Pf = Planck frequency (non-angular) = 2.952104e42 Hz
Eo = Electric Constant
Uo = Magnetic Constant

Force of gravity between two Planck masses one Planck length away:
F = G * (Pm * Pm) / (Pl * Pl) = 1.210259e44 N (Planck force)

Electrostatic force between two Planck charges one Planck length away:
F = (1/(4*pi*Eo)) * (Qp^2/Pl^2) = 1.21025e44 N (Planck force)

Magnetic force between two Planck scale magnetic poles:
F = (Uo/(4*pi)) * ( [(2*pi*Pf*Qp)*Pl)]^2 / (Pl^2)) = 1.21025e44 N (Planck force)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think it is just numerological ... And I was looking for someone else's opinion. Please PM me if you have anything else to say.
 
This isn't about "opinions". Science is about facts. You don't get to have an opinion that this isn't just algebraic rearrangements. That's exactly what's happening here, just like the last two times you did this.

Oh, and if you think I shouldn't be posting on this thread, feel free to report this message to the mods.
 
V50,
In other words.. You are wrong! Science is about facts, but guess what usually comes before the facts? Opinions and theory! This can still be science!

You think the above is "JUST" algebraic rearrangements... It does involve algebraic rearrangements, true ... But it doesn't matter! The units are right, the formulas are right, and it might even make sense from a theoretical point of view! ... So you can't say it is JUST algebraic rearrangements... That is fine if you don't agree, and I got your vote how many times now? 15+? This could probably considered thread hijacking.
 
nuby said:
V50,
In other words.. You are wrong! Science is about facts, but guess what usually comes before the facts? Opinions and theory! This can still be science! ...

Actually, the type of opinion you are pushing is not allowed on PhysicsForums - at least, not in this area. If you want to push some new ideas, you may consider Independent Research - although there are guidelines there as well.

What this area is reserved for is learning more about physics - both established and emerging trends. Speculative ideas can be posted on your private blog instead of forums.

I think you basic questions were: a) were the fundamental forces unified at one time? b) is there any significance to your mathematical identities?

a) Yes.
b) No. There is no predictive value here, which makes this an "ad hoc" theory (i.e. simply matches already known facts).

By the way, you may be interested in the numerology of the fine structure constant (1/137) - which is a lot more interesting. Seriously.
 
I believe your questions have been answered.
 

Similar threads

Graduate Historical clarification of the Planck formula of blackbody radiation
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate The uncertainty principle in quantum gravity
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does the Balloon Analogy Explain the Expansion of the Universe?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate "Big Bang" according to the 19th century poet ("Science-v-Poetry")
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Some notes on stochastic physics
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Design of bolts - Influence of higher free length
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Graduate Unifying Forces in the Early Universe: How and Why?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Graduate Planck distance and less dimensional gravity
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Graduate Form of energy at time of big bang
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Undergrad Should Einstein's Field Equations be modified for cosmology?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K