How does gravity affect the formation of structures after the big bang?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Pengwuino
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of gravity on the formation of structures in the universe following the Big Bang. Participants explore various theories, including inflationary theory, and address the implications of entropy and homogeneity in the early universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how structures could form from a uniform density of energy at t=0, suggesting that gravitational forces would cancel out and prevent formation.
  • Others argue that random fluctuations in energy densities disrupt homogeneity, leading to the formation of structures over time.
  • One participant mentions that distant objects were not influenced by local electromagnetic radiation or gravity until a certain time after the Big Bang.
  • Inflationary theory is proposed as a solution to the homogeneity problem, positing that vacuum fluctuations during inflation led to the formation of structures like galaxies.
  • Another participant challenges the effectiveness of inflationary theory, citing Penrose's argument that thermal equilibrium does not equate to homogeneity when gravity is considered, suggesting that low entropy states cannot arise from a time-reversible mechanism like inflation.
  • Some contributions explore the relationship between time, scale, and the Big Bang, questioning how time-dependent evolution can coexist with the initial singularity.
  • Participants note that physics as currently understood ceases to apply around t = 10E-43 seconds, indicating limitations in discussing the very early universe.
  • One participant raises a question about the entropy of black holes and their evaporation, pondering how this relates to the concept of homogeneity as a low entropy state in the context of gravity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the mechanisms of structure formation after the Big Bang. Multiple competing views exist regarding the roles of inflation, entropy, and gravity, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the implications of entropy and homogeneity in gravitational contexts, and the discussion highlights limitations in understanding the early universe due to the Planck wall.

Pengwuino
Gold Member
Messages
5,112
Reaction score
20
I need some clarification on exactly (or not) how the big bang worked. If there was a uniform density of energy at t=0 (or whatever you want to call it) that began expanding at a uniform rate, how were things formed? It seems like if this were the case, everythings gravitational force would cancel out resulting in a failure for anything to form or they would form in some sort of fairly obvious pattern. Soooo... can someone explain what I'm missing here?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Only the fact that nothing in nature happens evenly. There are always random fluctuations in anything, and they interact in random ways. Eventually they (in this case energy densities) multiply to the point that any hope of regaining a homogenous distribution is lost.
 
From what I understand distant objects were not effected by local EM radiation, or gravity until some time after the big bang. A time when those effects had enough time to propigate there.
 
If you want early timescales, you will need inflationary theory. The Big Bang does not answer the homogeneity question, but Inflation does an excellent job of doing so. It posits the cause of structure in the universe as the product of inflated vacuum fluctuations. These tiny fluctuations became gigantic as space itself expanded. The path of these fluctuations cut out an area that galaxies formed in.

I also would highly recommend not going to Kent Hovinds' website, unless you want to see what terrible science looks like.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lucretius said:
If you want early timescales, you will need inflationary theory. The Big Bang does not answer the homogeneity question, but Inflation does an excellent job of doing so.
Well, Penrose's not so enthousiastic about inflation solving this problem and I have to say that I find his argument convincing. The reason is that thermal equilibrium (high entropy) is NOT equivalent to homogeneity when gravity is taken into account. Homogeneity is a state of LOW entropy (far from thermal equilibrium) when gravity is taken into account, and as such, using a time-reversible mechanism such as inflation to explain a LOW-entropy situation does only report you to a _still more stringent_ condition before it. You cannot have "matter thermalize to give you a uniform distribution" on a small scale (unless you *switch off gravity*). If it were to "thermalize" (with gravity) it would generate lots of singularities, and that wouldn't give rise to a smooth uniform homogeneous structure after inflation. The only way inflation can give rise to a (low entropy) state of homogeneity is that there was a potentially even lower entropy state before it acted.
Now, I'm not an expert on this stuff at all, but I found this argument extremely convincing - although I can understand that it must be somehow controversial.
 
Pengwuino said:
I need some clarification on exactly (or not) how the big bang worked. If there was a uniform density of energy at t=0 (or whatever you want to call it) that began expanding at a uniform rate, how were things formed? It seems like if this were the case, everythings gravitational force would cancel out resulting in a failure for anything to form or they would form in some sort of fairly obvious pattern. Soooo... can someone explain what I'm missing here?

Taking what vanesch stated to be quite logical, one can ask the question what determines the scale of size in relation to Time?..Penrose has stipulated that as one reduces a system (the universe in reverse, has to arrive at a location smaller than a time dependent scale?), the reduced system undergoes a transformation from Macro to Quantum, Macro has Time and is thus Time-dependent (GR), but you have to lose the Time componant in all reductionized systems, ie (QM-QCD).

Basically you cannot arrive at the big-bang, if it has evolution in TIME?..time-zero is really a SIZE of scale at a specific location.
 
Spin_Network said:
Taking what vanesch stated to be quite logical, one can ask the question what determines the scale of size in relation to Time?..Penrose has stipulated that as one reduces a system (the universe in reverse, has to arrive at a location smaller than a time dependent scale?), the reduced system undergoes a transformation from Macro to Quantum, Macro has Time and is thus Time-dependent (GR), but you have to lose the Time componant in all reductionized systems, ie (QM-QCD).
Basically you cannot arrive at the big-bang, if it has evolution in TIME?..time-zero is really a SIZE of scale at a specific location.

This may be of interest? :
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0512070

and this:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0512034
 
The answers are all [at least most of them] hidden behind the Planck wall. Physics, as we know it, ceases to exist around t = 10E-43 seconds.
 
vanesch said:
Well, Penrose's not so enthousiastic about inflation solving this problem and I have to say that I find his argument convincing. The reason is that thermal equilibrium (high entropy) is NOT equivalent to homogeneity when gravity is taken into account. Homogeneity is a state of LOW entropy (far from thermal equilibrium) when gravity is taken into account, and as such, using a time-reversible mechanism such as inflation to explain a LOW-entropy situation does only report you to a _still more stringent_ condition before it. You cannot have "matter thermalize to give you a uniform distribution" on a small scale (unless you *switch off gravity*). If it were to "thermalize" (with gravity) it would generate lots of singularities, and that wouldn't give rise to a smooth uniform homogeneous structure after inflation. The only way inflation can give rise to a (low entropy) state of homogeneity is that there was a potentially even lower entropy state before it acted.
Now, I'm not an expert on this stuff at all, but I found this argument extremely convincing - although I can understand that it must be somehow controversial.
This seams to be something profound but I cannot follow it... Black holes have a great entropy, but it seams to me that they are not the states of greatest (total) entropy because they do evaporate. When a black hole evaporates, it converts the Schwarzschild spacetime into another spacetime. What is the resulting spacetime? My first guess would be that it is a (expanding) space with a homogeneous distribution of radiation. In such a case, how can we say that homogeneity is a state of low entropy when gravitation is taken into account?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K