Inflationary Theory out of thin air?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chaos' lil bro Order
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Air Theory
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on inflationary theory, which was proposed to address the Horizon Problem in cosmology, explaining the uniformity of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). Participants question the empirical support for inflation, noting that while there are predictions consistent with observations, such as the Gaussian distribution of matter and the spectral slope confirmed by WMAP, these could also align with alternative models like the cyclic universe. The concept of B-mode polarization in the CMB is highlighted as a potential "smoking gun" for inflation, as its detection would support inflationary models over cyclic ones. The conversation also touches on the implications of recessional velocities exceeding the speed of light due to the expansion of space, emphasizing that this does not violate relativity. Overall, the thread explores the complexities and ongoing debates surrounding the evidence and interpretations of inflationary theory.
  • #31
FunkyDwarf said:
Its a good point, like i said I am simply reiterating what I've read. As i see it though they weren't really one force as such, rather they were grouped together because under the conditions of the time they all acted the same. As these conditions changed so the forces that decoupled exibited different behaviours and effects, thus affecting the world around them in a way that affected the overall entropy.
As I understand it, the other forces diverged from the one force through some mechanism of symmetry breaking. And I've suggested that h-bar was larger during inflation when the forces were one. So I have to further wonder if the required symmetry breaking process could be accomplished by a reduction of h-bar. Since h-bar has the units of an action, a larger h-bar argues for more invariance in the action integral. If the minimum possible action is larger, then changes in the action integral with respect to variables within it will still be within that minimal amount of h-bar and thus not noticed. So if the minimal possibe action becomes smaller, then invariances will have a more noticeable change in the action integral, and previous symmetries may dissappear. Any thought on this anyone? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
The problem I see mike2 is a scaling h parameter is irrelevant prior to the emergence of spacetime - assuming spacetime is emergent. Albeit might be a factor in a background dependent model. BTW, I have a link you might find interesting:

Probability Theories with Dynamic Causal Structure: A New Framework for Quantum Gravity
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0509120
 
  • #33
Chronos said:
The problem I see mike2 is a scaling h parameter is irrelevant prior to the emergence of spacetime - assuming spacetime is emergent. Albeit might be a factor in a background dependent model. BTW, I have a link you might find interesting:

Probability Theories with Dynamic Causal Structure: A New Framework for Quantum Gravity
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0509120
What do you suppose spacetime emerges from?

From what I can gather, h-bar shows that space and time are related in a spinfoam type QFT to matter and energy. The delta-energy*delta-time>h-bar indicates time (a spacetime property) in relation to energy (a particle property), whereas the delta-momentum*delta-position>h-bar indicates space (a spacetime property) in relation to mometum (a particle property). So it seems spacetime is inexerably connected to vacuum energy (virtual particles).

If h-bar were zero it seems spacetime would be exactly correlated with energy-momentum. But if h-bar were larger, then expansion (of spacetime) would not be well correlated with vacuum energy (virtual particle properties).
 
Last edited:
  • #34
A universe from nothing would be my guess.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K