What was the role of Hawking Radiation in the early universe?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the role of Hawking Radiation in the early universe, particularly in relation to the Big Bang cosmology model and the energy dynamics during inflation. Participants explore concepts of energy, temperature, and mass at Planck time, as well as the implications of these ideas for understanding the universe's early state.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether the total energy of the universe at Planck time can be defined, citing the Planck energy value and its implications for mass and temperature.
  • Others argue that the temperature of the universe at Planck time was extremely high (10^32 K) and that this temperature relates to the mass of the universe being limited to the Planck mass.
  • A participant suggests that Hawking Radiation contributed significantly to the universe's energy during inflation, rather than at the moment of creation.
  • Counterarguments are presented, stating that energy is locally conserved and that the concept of an "instant of creation" is problematic within General Relativity.
  • Some participants clarify that the process at the end of inflation involved energy transfer from the inflaton field to other fields, not the creation of energy through Hawking Radiation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the role of Hawking Radiation in the early universe and the nature of energy conservation. There is no consensus on the definitions and implications of energy and temperature at Planck time.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity surrounding the definition of total energy in the universe and the complexities of energy transfer processes during inflation, which some participants argue are mischaracterized as Hawking Radiation.

big_bounce
Messages
102
Reaction score
3
Amount of Planck energy is 1.956 * 10^9 J.
Was this total energy of universe at plank time at big bang cosmology model?
It's clear this amount of energy is not enough for making our solar system, even it's not enough for making mass of me ( 60 kg ).
Should we postulate energy increase in the universe after Planck time?

If yes, how could? by means quantum tunneling? inflation?
 
Space news on Phys.org
big_bounce said:
Amount of Planck energy is 1.956 * 10^9 J.
Is this total energy of universe at plank time at big bang cosmology model?

No, it's just the unit of energy you get when you set the constants G, ћ and c to 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_energy
 
big_bounce said:
If mass of universe was more than Planck mass, the temperature of universe couldn't be 10^32 K.

Why not?
 
Drakkith said:
Why not?
Because c and k are constant in this formula.
28h1vv8.png
 
How does that compare to the Planck temperature? A leading question, I admit.
 
big_bounce said:
Because c and k are constant in this formula.
28h1vv8.png

And how does that tell us that the mass of the universe at Planck time couldn't be more than the Planck mass?
 
Drakkith said:
And how does that tell us that the mass of the universe at Planck time couldn't be more than the Planck mass?

If i put my mass (60 kg) at this formula we don't get 1032K.

proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fi63.tinypic.com%2F28h1vv8.png
 
  • #10
big_bounce said:
If i put my mass (60 kg) at this formula we don't get 1032K.

proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fi63.tinypic.com%2F28h1vv8.png
Of course you don't. That's not how you use the equation. Unfortunately you'll have to look into how temperature is defined in order to see why the equation is set up the way it is (or wait for someone with more knowledge than myself to explain it).
 
  • #11
big_bounce said:
If i put my mass (60 kg) at this formula we don't get 1032 K.

Temperature is not the total energy; it's the average energy per particle. If you have 60 kg worth of particles each one of which has the Planck energy, then the temperature of the whole system is the Planck temperature.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
My understanding of the early universe is that most of the energy of the universe was created by Hawking Radiation during inflation, not the instant of creation.
 
  • #14
newjerseyrunner said:
My understanding of the early universe is that most of the energy of the universe was created by Hawking Radiation during inflation, not the instant of creation.

This sounds wrong to me for a variety of reasons. Energy is locally (but not globally) conserved, so we don't have processes that create energy. There is no "instant of creation," since GR doesn't describe a singularity as a point on the spacetime manifold.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: newjerseyrunner
  • #15
newjerseyrunner said:
My understanding of the early universe is that most of the energy of the universe was created by Hawking Radiation during inflation

No, this is not correct, for at least two reasons. First, what happened at the end of inflation was not "creation of energy"; it was just a transfer of energy from the inflaton field to the fields described by the Standard Model of particle physics (quarks, electrons, neutrinos, etc.), caused by the inflaton field changing state from the "false vacuum" state it had during inflation, to the "true vacuum" state it has had ever since. Second, this energy transfer process (which is called "reheating" in cosmology, something of a misnomer since there was no previous "heating" of anything) was not Hawking radiation and bears no resemblance to it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith and bcrowell

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K