|
| quote: | Originally posted by nrjizer
Ok, in a nutshell, to the best of my understanding:
Newtonian physics tell us that gravitational force between objects is dependent on two things: the mass of the objects, and the distance between them. The closer and bigger they are, the more their gravitational force will be.
Einstein later proved that gravity is dependent on two other factors: energy (such as heat) and pressure. He also discovered that in certain situations, there exists the possibility for negative pressure, meaning that the pressure would exert a repulsive force of gravity. However, for gravity to actually be repulsive instead of attractive, the negative pressure force would have to overcome the other three gravitational forces of mass, distance, and energy. But, for ordinary matter and in every day conditions, the pressure variable is insignificant compaired to those of mass and distance (energy is too), thus amount of gravitational repulse exerted by a negative pressure force would be negligible. In other words, it would take a lot of negative pressure to overcome the ordinary attraction of gravity, and make it actually push away instead of pull.
Gravity is actually the weakest of all the natural forces (the fact that a small magnet will stick to the fridge instead of falling demonstrates this). But during the time before the big bang, gravity was the dominant force. You must understand, when you have the ENTIRE universe squished into the size of a marble, the density, mass, and energy within this marble become so great that they are completely inconceivable.
You also have a Higgs field within this marble that violently fluctuates in intensity from all of the enormous forces inside. Now, a few decades ago, a couple of scientists observed that when the energy of a Higgs field hits a certain point, perfectly balanced, it will exert a negative pressure force. Now, imagine a bowl with a sewing needle standing straight up in the middle. Within this bowl is a small ball that bounces around and does not stop. Imagine if it were to bounce directly onto the point of that needle, so that it was perfectly balanced on that needle (not impaled on it). It would be an incredibly precise landing, to say the least. That's sort of what the Higgs field is like. Once it reaches that perfect balanced intensity, right in the middle, it exerts a negative pressure. Of course, the ball does not stop bouncing, so it only lands on the needle for a very brief moment. In other words, the fluctuating Higgs field will only reach that plateau and exert a negative force for a very brief moment before it stops.
These scientists found that the Higgs field can fluctuate as quickly as every 10^(-35) seconds (which you could say is a trillion-trillionth of a second). They also realized that when it does happen to land on this plateau, the negative pressure it creates is nearly 10^100 times greater than Einstein predicted. That is an ENORMOUS force.
So basically, in the beginning of the universe, you have such extreme energies within this marble that they create an extremely strong Higgs field, that fluctuates at an extremely high rate. When it happens, to land on that plateau....
BOOM
You get a ridiculously strong, repulsive gravitational force that lasts for a fraction of a fraction of a second.
I hope that makes sense. I actually had my own physics exam today and have been working on it since, so my brain is fried. Not only that, my knowledge of physics is nowhere near that level yet, so I've pretty much had to wing this explanation as best I can from quickly reading this section of the book. So forgive me if it's hard to follow... |
That's really interesting. In the same breath, do you ever feel like a lot of this science sounds kind of like BS? I mean, on the one hand you the Law of Conservation of Matter which clearly states that matter cannot be created nor destroyed in the universe. It can change form (solid/liquid/gas), or even convert into energy (E=MC^2), though not 100% efficiently. In the same breath, I can look at planet earth and without question know that it could never, not in a billion years by any method I am aware of, be compressed into something the size of a marble! And that's a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the universe in the very most! Either we're talking about a really big marble or something doesn't quite add up!
I've also never heard of a Higgs Field before. Is that theoretical?
Then again, as I think this through a bit as I type...
It's possible that 99.99999% of the matter in the universe prior to the Big Bang existed in the form of pure energy--and I have no idea, but somehow was "reverse-vonverted" back into matter during the bang, exploding outward at a virtually immeasureable rate. This doesn't seem like the likeliest of outcomes though, so I propose something different...
Could it be that the secret is to think about it at a micro- level. Hell, a nano- level, no at the atomic level... Anyone who's taken a basic chemistry class knows that at the atomic level, the relative space between the electrons and the nucleus is itself somewhat massive (though at the atomic level). Imagine if all of that space at the atomic level could be compressed, filling all of that empty space, creating a mega-compressed piece of "matter", sitting in a resting state, in molecular harmony. Then suppose there's this Higgs Field you described. If it is any sort of force acting at a near singular point against the "marble", it's concentration at that point would be incredibly repulsive, likely setting off a massive chain reaction unlike anything ever observed by anyone. The force would cause the ball to shatter and for atoms to expand instantly, occupying a near infinite amount of space in the blink of an eye. Boom. Big Bang.
Either that, or God spanked that marble with a louisville slugger and shattered the mother****** all over the place.
Anyway, interesting reply, thanks for making my brain stir.
|
i still dont understand how the bang could travel so much faster than the speed of light its ridiculous?
maybe coz im a luddite 
