Is Time Measured Differently During the Big Bang?

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of time measurement during the Big Bang and the development of physical laws in the early universe. Participants explore how time can be defined and measured in the context of rapid expansion and the absence of established physical laws at that time.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how a millionth of a second can be accurately defined during the Big Bang, given the rapid expansion of the universe and the potential absence of physical laws.
  • There is a discussion on the relativity of time, with some arguing that the definition of a "second" depends on the clock used for measurement.
  • One participant raises the philosophical implications of whether all physical laws existed at the moment of the Big Bang or if they developed concurrently with the universe's expansion.
  • Another participant mentions that there are no laws governing the speed of space expansion, suggesting that parts of the universe could be expanding faster than the speed of light.
  • Some participants discuss the fluctuation of fields like the Higgs field in the early universe and how their stabilization could affect the properties of matter and the fundamental constants of the universe.
  • A question is posed regarding the initial outward force of the Big Bang and whether it can be measured by the Hubble rate, along with whether this rate changes due to gravitational effects.
  • One participant references Planck time and the unification of fundamental forces at that early stage, indicating that the laws of physics were indeed different then.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the measurement of time during the Big Bang and the nature of physical laws at that time. There is no consensus on these topics, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of definitions and assumptions regarding time measurement and the development of physical laws, indicating that these concepts are still under exploration and debate.

alkammy
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
according to the BB theory, in the first millionth of a second the universe expanded at a rate many times greater than the speed of light, apparently it was able to do this because of the lack of phsical laws, if this is true how do we know that a millionth of a second was in fact a millionth of a second?
 
Space news on Phys.org
alkammy said:
according to the BB theory, in the first millionth of a second the universe expanded at a rate many times greater than the speed of light, apparently it was able to do this because of the lack of phsical laws

The absence of physical laws before the Big Bang is a philisophical issue, and I have doubts on whether it can be addressed scientifically.

alkammy said:
if this is true how do we know that a millionth of a second was in fact a millionth of a second?

How do I know that 2 seconds is 2 seconds? They're equivalent by definition. However, according to Relativity, time is not invariable (neither is the "second"). So the "second" depends on which "clock" we are measuring. To agree on time, we must define what the standard clock will be.
 
How do I know that 2 seconds is 2 seconds? They're equivalent by definition. However, according to Relativity, time is not invariable (neither is the "second"). So the "second" depends on which "clock" we are measuring. To agree on time, we must define what the standard clock will be.

i think what alkammy is trying to say is how do we know that it was a millionth of a second? it could be more...right?
 
Oh great just the topic I wanted to start :). What my question was (it is closely related to this) is this - How do we explain the laws of the universe. What I mean is, if the universe first started with the big bang ... were all the laws of the universe already made in the big bang or were they developing at the same time as the universe was expanding? For example how hydrogen condensed into helium. Was that physical law already in place or did it become a law while the actual event took place. If so when did they stop to come into being? And so for the present: Is there a finite predetermined number of physical laws in the universe already and we just didn't discover them all yet or is the universe still changing and new laws come into being? Any theories on this?
 
alkammy said:
...according to the BB theory, in the first millionth of a second the universe expanded at a rate many times greater than the speed of light, apparently it was able to do this because of the lack of phsical laws...

Can you supply a link on this?
 
There are no laws governing how fast space itself can expand. It is not limited by relativity. The only thing relativity limits is how fast things can move through space. There could be parts of our universe today expanding faster than c. (Of course, they are forever cut off from us becasue the light from them will never reach us).
 
LaPalida said:
How do we explain the laws of the universe. What I mean is, if the universe first started with the big bang ... were all the laws of the universe already made in the big bang or were they developing at the same time as the universe was expanding?
In the first fractions of seconds, there were fields (such as the Higgs field) that were fluctuating wildly (think of it as Heisenberg Uncertainly - writ large). Once the universe had expanded past a certain point, the field "froze" at a specific level. It could have frozen at any level. The thing is, it did not freeze at zero, as it would have if the expansion had been slower.

Once this value was fixed, it determined how all or most of the properties of universe would manifest later on.

For example, if the value had frozen at any other level, matter might have no mass (it is speculated that the very property of mass itself is merely "drag" through this Higgs field), protons might not get glued to neutrons, electrons might not orbit nuclei, gravity might not work.

This why one of the arguments of the Anthropic Principle (I don't remember if it's the 'weak' one or the 'strong' one): our universe is exquisitely tuned. Any other values for some of the fundamental constants and our universe wouldn't even have atoms - let alone life.
 
Hmm interesting. Thanks Dave :)
 
Do we have a measure for the initial outward force of the blast? Is it the Hubble rate?

Basically, when space itself was expanding outward after the Big Bang, at what rate was it going?

Is that rate changing as a result of gravity?
 
  • #10
planck time ATB

in the 10E-35 seconds ATB , the strong, the weak and the electromagnetic forces were all one big united force so, that confirm that the physics laws were different.

anyway if we see this definition of time :

The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom.

we must tought about having a "real time clock" on our speed of light traveling.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K