Standing in nothingness before the Big Bang

  • Thread starter Thread starter Swimfit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the hypothetical experience of standing in nothingness before the Big Bang and the sequence of events that might occur as the universe begins to expand. Participants highlight that true "nothingness" cannot be conceptualized within the framework of physics, as it implies the absence of space and time. The conversation shifts to the effects of a supernova, where gravitational waves and neutrinos can be detected before visible light, illustrating the complexities of cosmic events. Additionally, there is speculation about whether the universe could be cyclical, expanding and contracting over time. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the limitations of current understanding in cosmology and the need for further theoretical exploration.
  • #61
timmdeeg said:
I am sceptical regarding this conclusion, as the matter density today is about 25% of the total energy density. The universe will approach an exponential expansion ...

I'm not sure what conclusion you find dubious, Tim. I'm saying that right now we have almost exponential distance growth at around 1/144% per My
And eventually in future we will have exponential growth at 1/173% per My (according to standard cosmic model).

Maybe the the word "almost" is too vague for you. It is vague! I think you would like to see a TIMETABLE for the decline in percentage growth rate from 1/144 to 1/173 and that is easy to supply. Just google "lightcone cosmological calculator" and look at the column labeled "R" for Hubble radius.
As that increases from 14.4 to 17.3 the percentage rate declines accordingly.

You can compare that with the "T" column which gives the time since start of expansion, i.e. age.

To get better time resolution, first click "set sample chart range" and then "calculate"

that will give a longer table with more gradual increase from today's 14.4 to eventual 17.3.

It also gives a substantial chunk of the past. You can see for instance that the distance growth rate was approximately 1% per My back in the year 67 million. that is what the first row of the table says (if you have pressed "set sample chart range")

If googling does not work, here is the link:
http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relativity-4engineers.com/LightCone7/LightCone.html

I also keep the link in my signature, it's handy for a LOT of purposes. You get to set the parameters of the table.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #62
marcus said:
I'm not sure what conclusion you find dubious, Tim. I'm saying that right now we have almost exponential distance growth at around 1/144% per My
And eventually in future we will have exponential growth at 1/173% per My (according to standard cosmic model).

Maybe the the word "almost" is too vague for you. It is vague! I think you would like to see a TIMETABLE for the decline in percentage growth rate from 1/144 to 1/173 and that is easy to supply. Just google "lightcone cosmological calculator" and look at the column labeled "R" for Hubble radius.
As that increases from 14.4 to 17.3 the percentage rate declines accordingly.
Thanks marcus and congratulation to you and Mordred, this table is very helpful. I haven't realized it till now and for sure will be busy with it from now on. And I agree regarding the development of 1/R , we are now already relatively close to exponential expansion, though it will take another 78 Gy to reach R = 17.2999, corresponding to an almost exponential expansion. Hereby I use 'almost' only in the sense to not hide that the approach is asymptotic.
 
  • #63
Chalnoth said:
Once the matter density goes to zero, the expansion will be exponential, no asymptotic about it.

What is asymptotic is the approach of the matter density to zero.
It seems curious. "Gegen Null gehen" translated into English means "approaching zero", so, seems different from "goes to zero", as I used it wrongly by translating directly. I appreciate your comment.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
782
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K