Previous in Forum: Magma Power   Next in Forum: New Bright & Brilliant BILLBOARDS Day or Night
Close
Close
Close
19 comments
Rate Comments: Nested
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106

State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/17/2007 9:00 PM

Comments uniquely my own will appear in [square brackets].

Part 2

The inflationary version came about when Alan Guth was looking for the solution to the magnetic monopole problem. In 1931 Paul Dirac showed that magnetic monopoles are consistent with quantum theory and that it gives a specific prediction of the strength of the magnetic charge. In 1974 Gerard 't Hooft and Alexander Polyakov independently discovered that some modern particle theories imply the existence of magnetic monopoles. A modern Grand Unified Theory (GUT) contains monopoles with masses as heavy as 1017 times as heavy as a proton. In 1979 Guth made what he called a crude estimate of the monopole density: There should be about 10,000 times more monopoles and antimonopoles that have not yet annihilated as protons or neutrons. Later that year John Preskill concluded that they would be about the same number. Even with that lower number, he argued that the universe could be no more than 1200 years old due to the gravitational attraction from the greater mass if monopoles were numbered that high.

Guth, working with Henry Tye, theorized that inflation is accompanied by supercooling of a delayed phase transition. The supercooling would ward off the glut of monopole production. Supercooling is explained in the sense of Higgs Fields (theoretical fields, the nature of which that can not be deduced from known physics). The energy density for Higgs fields is shown as a 3-dimensional graph that looks like a Mexican hat with the sides higher than the middle. The base of the hat when sitting on a table has the points of contact with the table defined as the vacuum circle. The coordinates on the table top are represented by Higgs field A and Higgs field B. For the case with a large amount of supercooling, the center of the hat is dented down somewhat. A point in that center corresponds to the state called the false vacuum, in which both Higgs fields have a zero value. This state has a high energy density, but is classically stable. The false vacuum leads to a state of gravitational repulsion, which causes the universe to expand exponentially. Cosmological theories invoke 100 or more doublings – until the false vacuum decays by quantum tunneling.

In 1981 inflation had a problem: how it could end. Guth had concluded that the bubbles of the phase transition would not percolate. Andre D. Linde at the Lebedev Physical Institute in Moscow and the team of Paul Steinhardt and Andreas Albrecht at the University of Pennsylvania independently concluded that the observable part of the universe is contained inside one bubble. The old inflation theory had to be abandoned. Linde went on developing a new inflationary theory while Steinhardt proposed a new version of the 'Mexican hat' with a gently sloping middle section. This would allow inflation to exit gracefully without tunneling.

In a 3-week seminar in 1982, Stephen Hawking, Guth, and several other physicists could not agree on the math, so each modified their assumptions and recalculated until they had a concensus. For the very attractive GUT of Georgi and Glashow, the predicted amplitude was 5 or 6 orders of magnitude too large, requiring the Higgs fields to be 1013 times flatter. The Higgs fields needed to be where they were for spontaneous symmetry breaking to occur, so they invented a new field called the Inflaton field (notice the spelling). In 1985 the failure of the Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven detector to find a proton decay, spelled the end of the simplest GUT, the Georgi and Glashow GUT. [Occam's razor missed here.]

The new inflation theory explains the clumping of galaxies that is seen today. The COBE data showed the non-uniformity data that matched the predictions of quantum fluctuations from inflation.

Gravitational potential energy increases with distance. If we give the energy stored in the gravitational field a negative number, then it can cancel out all of the other energy, resulting in the total energy of the universe being zero! With the classical BB theory, the universe must start out with 10 billion times the total mass in the visible universe today.

To create an inflationary universe you only need one ingredient: a region of false vacuum (maybe as small as 10-26 centimeters across). This size would have a mass of about an ounce (25 grams), but would have a density of 1080 grams per cubic centimeter. If the mass of the entire observed universe were compressed to false vacuum density, it would fit in a volume smaller than an atom. [There is a lot of difference between this and nothing.]

A region of false vacuum will grow forever: once inflation begins, it never stops, producing an infinite number of "pocket" universes at an ever-increasing rate. A fractal pattern is created. [This would get out of control fast! God would never create anything that would get out of control.] The possibility of attaining an expansion velocity fast enough for universe creation runs into conflict with a theorem proved in 1965 by Roger Penrose. The interpretation of that theorem states that an inflationary universe must begin with a singularity with the characteristics of a white hole. The Penrose theorem implies that a false vacuum cannot be caused to expand fast enough to produce a universe.

To solve this problem, a lot of theories have been produced. In 1982, Alexander Vilenkin proposed an extension of an idea by Edward Tyron, that the universe was created by a quantum fluctuation from literally nothing. [Quantum fluctuations come from a vacuum. Without a vacuum, how would this be possible?] The vacuum is seen as enormously complicated, with nonzero values for the Higgs fields, and particle-antiparticle pairs popping in and out of existence. No one knows how to calculate the energy density of a vacuum. Particle physicists' estimates are about 10120 times larger than a value consistent with observations!

Very shortly after new inflation was proposed, Linde proposed another variant called chaotic inflation. In the late 1980s, Steinhardt and Daile La invented another called extended inflation. Before 1998 there were at least 50 versions that had been named and studied including double, triple, hybrid, mutated hybrid, tilted hybrid, hyperextended, and supernatural. Cosmologists have studied inflation that is gravity driven, spin driven, and vector field driven; also warm, soft, tepid, and natural.

(Adapted from The Inflationary Universe by Alan Guth, copyright 1997)

Near the end of his book (p. 276) he made this statement: "If the creation of the universe can be described as a quantum process, we would be left with one deep mystery of existence: What is it that determined the laws of physics?"

In part 3, I will talk about supernova observations and the cosmological constant.

Is the big bang theory in chaos? Maybe we need to get the actor Jeff Goldblum to help us out. We had an actor for President once!

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Guru
Engineering Fields - Aerospace Engineering - Retired South Africa - Member - The Rainbow-nation Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Relativity & Cosmology Popular Science - Cosmology - The Big Picture!

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 3804
Good Answers: 69
#1

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 1:34 AM

Hi S, what an excellent summary!

You commented on Alexander Vilenkin's proposal: "... that the universe was created by a quantum fluctuation from literally nothing. [Quantum fluctuations come from a vacuum. Without a vacuum, how would this be possible?]"

Answer to your question: "let there be light!"

I have just one thought to add, because readers very often misunderstand one fact of inflation theory: i.e.:

When inflation ended (through whatever mechanism), the expansion rate did not suddenly drop to the more sedate pace that we observe today; it is only the exponential acceleration that stopped and the hyper-fast expansion rate started to slow down gradually, apparently following ordinary relativistic physics.

The apparent reason for this common misunderstanding is the log-log scale that is used to show the separation over all time scales, from the Planck scale to cosmic scales. It has an abrupt change of slope at around 10-32s, which is sometimes wrongly interpreted as an abrupt change in expansion rate, rather than an abrupt change from accelerating rate to decelerating expansion.

This figure(1) illustrates such a log-log expansion plot:

: :

On this plot, the slope during the inflation phase changed continuously (upwards), meaning exponential acceleration in expansion rate. At 10-32s the slope changes abruptly to (log-log) 0.5, meaning a decelerating, but still extreme expansion rate. This lasted for around a thousand years (the radiation dominated epoch). Then the slope changed gradually to 0.67 (the matter dominated epoch), meaning slightly slower deceleration. (This plot ignores dark energy, which may have taken over as the dominant force some 5 billion years ago, but such a time is virtually "now" on a log-log scale...)

-J

PS: S, you made no confusing statements about it and I do not intend to hi-jack your thread, but I've noticed this misunderstanding so often in the past that I thought it worthwhile to mention.

(1) Figure 15.3 from Relativity 4 Engineers.

__________________
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge." -- Kahlil Gibran
Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#2
In reply to #1

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 9:19 AM

Hi Jorrie,

Thanks! You're inputs will always be welcome. Although Vilenkin's proposal is not necessarily what I believe, I like your answer to it. I wish I knew more about inflation theory - why 10-32 seconds for the end of it, etc.

Regards,

S

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#3

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 11:41 AM

That is a remarkable feat - extreme condensation without losing the sense (though I fear I'm using that term somewhat loosely when it comes to my understanding of cosmology).

To pick a nit: one area of "disagreement" - you say:
"This would get out of control fast! God would never create anything that would get out of control."

To which I have three answers:
Paraphrase of Bohr's reported answer to Einstein "How would we presume to know what God would create?"
"Out of control" from our perspective - but not necessarily from God's?
According to the Bible, God all ready created at least two groups that appear to be out of control - the "fallen angels", and (of course) mankind ourselves

Regards
Fyz

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#4
In reply to #3

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 12:10 PM

Hi Fyz,

I don't much care what Niels Bohr had to say, I have little respect for him. I'll stick with Einstein any day!

Now, to get back to the subject, what are the chances, do you think, of the dark matter in the universe being magnetic monopoles?

S

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#5
In reply to #4

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 12:26 PM

You're definitely asking the ignorant here - but here's my tuppence-worth (apologies that I'm overstating the value)

As these monopoles are predicted to be extremely heavy, that would correlate with a low interaction with 'light' (up to at least much of what we regard as X-rays). We just need a good mechanism for the apparent extreme segregation from ordinary matter. And, so far as I know, we'd need to adjust (understatement?) any of the expansion theories to date to get the proportions of the mass in the universe to match the requirements.

That would just leave a little question about dark energy...

P.S. I agree about Einstein - but (even?) Bohr is still out of my league...

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Aerospace Engineering - Retired South Africa - Member - The Rainbow-nation Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Relativity & Cosmology Popular Science - Cosmology - The Big Picture!

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 3804
Good Answers: 69
#6
In reply to #5

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 1:50 PM

Hi S and Fyz,

My understanding is that inflation saved our observable universe from having many monopoles, if any. Our observable universe was such a small patch of the pre-inflation universe, that it is probable that only one magnetic monopole could have formed inside it.

We obviously have little chance to stumble upon that one specimen, if it exists. Likewise, this one (or at least very few) cannot make up the amount of dark matter that observations point to...

Finally, I feel that dark energy can only be refuted if we either find that the apparent accelerating expansion is not happening, or find a deviation from Newton/Einstein gravitation theory.

-J

__________________
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge." -- Kahlil Gibran
Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#7
In reply to #6

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 3:23 PM

You are right, Jorrie, about magnetic monopoles not being produced in an inflationary universe - it was the very reason for Alan Guth and others to pursue it. If magnetic monopoles were discovered, it certainly would 'deflate' inflation. Could they be discovered in a telescope? What would the signs be? Has anybody looked? These are questions to consider. As scientists we should always question everything.

Do any of you have any idea why the calculation of the energy density of a vacuum by particle physicists is 120 orders of magnitude larger than a value consistent with observations? This is an extreme disagreement with theory!

S

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#8
In reply to #7

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 5:12 PM

The following is entirely contrary to what I hope to be my normal mode of working - speculation without any numerical back-up or fundamental justification. And not just without declared numbers (which I sometimes do for the sake of brevity), but without any background calculations/justification either. From which I intend you to understand that, in this area, I am not only out of my depth, but also a non-swimmer and without a lifebelt.

I had always assumed that the basic answer was symmetry - i.e. the available energy should actually be identically zero. If we equate mass to available energy (definition??) that gives zero mass. But my understanding is that inflation breaks symmetry, if ever so slightly. That is one reason I never liked it - but if you are going to accept inflation, I see no reason you should not look for similar discrepancies elsewhere. (If I've got it right, that argument does not leave the sweetest of tastes ...)

The next thought is that is is zero after all, inflation is an interesting theory that is no longer necessary, and there are indeed large numbers of particles that inflation would have destroyed. That feels better, but I think there would be too many of these particles. Then again, they could be lighter than we thought - see below

The next is a comment on the bases of QM and particle physics. QM really consists of two parts - an elegant theoretical formulation, and a set of rules as to which solution we choose. Electromagnetism works very naturally in the equations, but it seems to me that the solutions for bosons are somewhat "forced". That is not to say they are wrong - they work far too well. What it says is that I haven't understood the fundamental basis that drives what solution we pick - and I have the impression that I am far from alone here. Which is a long-winded way of saying that maybe we need a better method for driving solution choice if we art to obtain "correct" predictions of vacuum energy. (Isolated magnetic poles are possibly too similar to bosons to allow of that excuse??)

As I said, I am way outside my competence here. I'm writing as the child invited to watch the procession and who doesn't know enough even to hold his tongue - so please feel free to correct what are probably numerous misapprehensions.

Fyz

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#9
In reply to #8

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/19/2007 7:22 PM

Hi Fyz,

"I am not only out of my depth, but also a non-swimmer and without a lifebelt"

Don't feel bad, you are not alone. I have learned immensely since joining CR4, but still have much to learn. Only physicists and cosmologists are swimmers here, and I am neither. I am here to learn (and to teach if possible).

"But my understanding is that inflation breaks symmetry, if ever so slightly."

One thing I didn't say much about was symmetry. cosmologists assume that all the galaxies are made of matter, and not antimatter, and they have their reasons. Guth talked about a visit from Stephen Weinberg who spoke about quarks. He explained that the at 10-6 second after BB there were no protons or neutrons but there were quarks. For every 300,000,000 quarks there were 299,999,999 anti-quarks. As the universe cooled, the pairs annihilated leaving one quark for every 300,000,000 original ones. These formed into the baryons we see today. My impression is that the symmetry was broken by values chosen randomly by Higgs fields during inflation.

S

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#11
In reply to #9

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/20/2007 6:43 AM

I don't feel bad about it - just need to provide a warning given my moniker. "Only physicists" probably means "only physicists working in an appropriate field"...

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#13
In reply to #11

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/20/2007 8:16 PM

Fyz,

I hope I didn't insult you. I wasn't even thinking about your moniker. I am probably the least qualified of the 3 of us to discuss this, but I had the guts to post this with some of my own comments. I know nobody want to be wrong, so people are afraid to take a chance and comment. At least you and I are not using our real names. Come on guests, give us your opinions! I changed my avatar in case it was too intimidating, besides it was rather 'cold' don't you think? I am just an ordinary guy with a curiosity.

S

p.s. I posted part 3 yesterday. Just go to the General forum and you should see it.

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#14
In reply to #13

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/20/2007 10:32 PM

>>Come on guests, give us your opinions!<<

Not me. I'll just sit here and watch you three try to out name-drop each other.

(I'm not signing on anymore either)

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#15
In reply to #13

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/21/2007 12:26 PM

No insult perceived by me - there are plenty out there who are happy to try*.

Shame - I liked the Dewar - perhaps because it looked so much like like my old plater at that resolution. I thought it was cool rather than cold. Plus, it's good to have something truly individual.

Fyz

*Like guest #14... He should know that it's hard to write about a contentious field without attributing authorship. So I'm not certain who is name dropping - I didn't notice that any of us claimed to know these guys.

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#18
In reply to #15

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/21/2007 7:34 PM

Hi Fyz,

"...it's hard to write about a contentious field without attributing authorship."

Yes, in fact it is necessary to keep the lawyers away, not to mention common courtesy to give credit where credit is due. He has no basis.

S

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Aerospace Engineering - Retired South Africa - Member - The Rainbow-nation Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Relativity & Cosmology Popular Science - Cosmology - The Big Picture!

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 3804
Good Answers: 69
#10
In reply to #7

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/20/2007 2:36 AM

Hi S, you asked: "Do any of you have any idea why the calculation of the energy density of a vacuum by particle physicists is 120 orders of magnitude larger than a value consistent with observations?"

I know little of this and also feel (like Fyz) uncomfortable with speculation. In Wikipedia's False Vacuum, I noticed this passage:

"A more recent application of these tunneling phenomena in cosmology and particle physics is the string landscape in which string theory is conjectured to be populated by an exponentially large "discretum" of false vacua, and the small observed value of the cosmological constant (see dark energy) can be explained by the anthropic principle and quantum mechanical tunneling to the lowest positive energy vacuum."

Too quantum-technical for me to comprehend, but what I do gather from it is that our understanding of vacuum fluctuations is still developing - we simply do not have solid answers. OK, that may be the case in many fields!

-J

__________________
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge." -- Kahlil Gibran
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#12
In reply to #10

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/20/2007 7:03 AM

Hi Jorrie

At this point, string theory generally seems more obfuscatory than relevatory to me. The string (stet) of words you quote is a case in point. The reason for my scepticism is that there seem to be so many fitting parameters in string theory that you can match any behaviour that you want. If (and only if) a simple constraint forces a prediction, I may change my view.
Until then, the only higher-dimensional theory that has actually managed to communicate anything significant (to me) is John Carroll's work in 3+3 space-time, where at least the electromagnetic quantisation results drop out in a natural way.

Fyz

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Aerospace Engineering - Retired South Africa - Member - The Rainbow-nation Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Relativity & Cosmology Popular Science - Cosmology - The Big Picture!

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 3804
Good Answers: 69
#16
In reply to #12

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/21/2007 1:29 PM

Hi Fyz,

I could not find the 3+3 space-time of John Carroll that you referred to. Sounds interesting - any reference you can recommend?

-J

__________________
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge." -- Kahlil Gibran
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3531
Good Answers: 59
#17
In reply to #16

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/21/2007 3:34 PM

Hi Jorrie

Some stuff on the web is:

John Carroll's website at
http://www.eng.cam.ac.uk/~jec/
which gives pointers as to his thinking, but doesn't have any detail

http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~jec/carroll-pirt04.pdf
is a link to a paper:
"A Unified View Of Correlations, Relativity, Clifford Algebra And Quantum Theory"
It's got a load of heavy stuff in it, but also includes pretty good descriptions of what it is all about.

Regards

Fyz

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North America, Earth
Posts: 4528
Good Answers: 106
#19
In reply to #10

Re: State of the Big Bang Theory - part 2

05/21/2007 7:48 PM

Hi Jorrie,

That false vacuum stuff is interesting, but I saw no reference to the physists' estimates which are much larger. I was hoping someone with knowledge of this would reply, but I guess that was too much to hope for. Goldsmith mentioned the anthropic principle, but I saw little value in posting it. I am getting the impression that there is no real evidence of inflation except maybe the CMB, but it happens to solve a lot of "problems", so they go with it. One hopes that the exotic math means something, and that they are not twisting everything to fit the theory.

S

__________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” - Richard Feynman
Register to Reply
Register to Reply 19 comments
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (1); Jorrie (4); Physicist? (7); StandardsGuy (7)

Previous in Forum: Magma Power   Next in Forum: New Bright & Brilliant BILLBOARDS Day or Night

Advertisement