Chicken or the Egg?

[jacks]

I have a physics question, hopefully someone can answer. (Note: I'm not trying to "trick" anyone into a theological debate.)

According to latest big bang theories what came first Mass or Energy? And why is it thought to be one or the other? (I can see some good puns already, but really I'm curious.)

Thank you.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I have a physics question, hopefully someone can answer. (Note: I'm not trying to "trick" anyone into a theological debate.)

According to latest big bang theories what came first Mass or Energy? And why is it thought to be one or the other? (I can see some good puns already, but really I'm curious.)

Thank you.

The Big Bang theory states that the universe has been expanding for 13.5 billion years, from a tiny singularity (wherein all matter and energy was squished) to its current size. It's still expanding, and this expansion is called the 'Big Bang'.

Matter per se didn't exist, as far as we can tell, but rather everything was in an as-yet poorly understood energetic state.

So, what came first? Energy, we think.

It's worth mentioning that the start of the Big Bang isn't necessarily the start of the universe - we only know that it's been around for about 13.5 billion years at least; we don't know if anything happened before then.

 

[jacks]

Thank you for responding to my question, very interesting. Your response made me wonder a few other points.

The Big Bang theory states that the universe has been expanding for 13.5 billion years, from a tiny singularity (wherein all matter and energy was squished) to its current size. It's still expanding, and this expansion is called the 'Big Bang'.

Is the "singularity" the same we theorize for Black Holes? Was the universe at some point in essence a giant Black Hole? If so how could it have escaped itself, given the speed of light restrictions? Or is it thought that Black Holes will also "bang" at some point?


Matter per se didn't exist, as far as we can tell, but rather everything was in an as-yet poorly understood energetic state.

Energetic as at the Quantum level?

So, what came first? Energy, we think.

It's worth mentioning that the start of the Big Bang isn't necessarily the start of the universe - we only know that it's been around for about 13.5 billion years at least; we don't know if anything happened before then.

I'm always glad to see this point made!

Again, thank you.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Is the "singularity" the same we theorize for Black Holes?

A singularity is what happens when something asymptotes to infinity in real life - with a black hole, matter is squeezed ever tighter, hence why the heart of the black hole is a 'singularity'. The singularity at the start of the Big Bang is just the name we give to the universe when it was at its smallest - we just don't know what it was like. It could well have been like a black hole, but we just don't know.

Was the universe at some point in essence a giant Black Hole? If so how could it have escaped itself, given the speed of light restrictions? Or is it thought that Black Holes will also "bang" at some point?

There are some (rather speculative, in my opinion) ideas that the universe began at the evapouration of a black hole. What's interesting about it is that the laws of nature would be 'inherited' by the 'daughter' universe - thus, universes would literally evolve, tending towards those natural laws which cause lots of black holes to form.

This neatly explains the anthropic problem: there are many universes, each with varying physical laws. We will find ourselves in whichever one which happens to have those laws conducive to life. It also explains the origin of the universe: we were born from a black hole.

Energetic as at the Quantum level?

So energetic that we don't know how matter would behave. That's why we built the LHC: among other things, to see how matter behaved at the earliest moments of the universe.

One interesting feature is that, shortly after the dawn, the universe was filled with a superhot plasma that behaved like a liquid (see the other thread for more details - be warned, it's gone rather off-topic...).

 

[jacks]

A singularity is what happens when something asymptotes to infinity in real life - with a black hole, matter is squeezed ever tighter, hence why the heart of the black hole is a 'singularity'. The singularity at the start of the Big Bang is just the name we give to the universe when it was at its smallest - we just don't know what it was like. It could well have been like a black hole, but we just don't know.


There are some (rather speculative, in my opinion) ideas that the universe began at the evapouration of a black hole. What's interesting about it is that the laws of nature would be 'inherited' by the 'daughter' universe - thus, universes would literally evolve, tending towards those natural laws which cause lots of black holes to form.

This neatly explains the anthropic problem: there are many universes, each with varying physical laws. We will find ourselves in whichever one which happens to have those laws conducive to life. It also explains the origin of the universe: we were born from a black hole.


So energetic that we don't know how matter would behave. That's why we built the LHC: among other things, to see how matter behaved at the earliest moments of the universe.

One interesting feature is that, shortly after the dawn, the universe was filled with a superhot plasma that behaved like a liquid (see the other thread for more details - be warned, it's gone rather off-topic...).

Thank you, you've made some very intesting points and I also learned a new word "asymptotes". It could also explain the 9+1 dimensions of string theory.

I will check out the other thread and if it hasn't gone off topic by 5 posts I assume I have fallen into a more evloved universe.

Now for an off topic math question, I'm almost embarressed to ask, but you've been very patient.

Why are portions of forumals squared? Is it to arrive at a positve number? For instance E=mc (Can't make a superscript) squared. So it is saying that there is a lot of Energy in Mass (Mass is Energy?) but why square the speed of light? Why not cube for instance or just leave it alone. If this is super obvious, try to be kind in your answer....

 

[USincognito]

For instance E=mc (Can't make a superscript) squared.

I think the code is [sup]2[/sup].

Producing E=mc[sup]2[/sup].

 

[jacks]

[sup]T[/sup]hank [sup]Y[/sup]ou!

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Thank you, you've made some very intesting points and I also learned a new word "asymptotes". It could also explain the 9+1 dimensions of string theory.

If a line gets ever closer and closer to some other, simple, straight line, that straight line is call an 'asymptote' - it's something the main line 'tends' towards, but never actually hits.

The line gets infinitely close to the dashed line, but never actually hits it.

(technically, it doesn't have to be a straight line, it could be any curve at all, but it's easier to imagine straight lines)

I will check out the other thread and if it hasn't gone off topic by 5 posts I assume I have fallen into a more evloved universe.

Now for an off topic math question, I'm almost embarressed to ask, but you've been very patient.

Why are portions of forumals squared? Is it to arrive at a positve number? For instance E=mc (Can't make a superscript) squared. So it is saying that there is a lot of Energy in Mass (Mass is Energy?) but why square the speed of light? Why not cube for instance or just leave it alone. If this is super obvious, try to be kind in your answer....

Squaring can happen for any number of reasons. In E = mc[sup]2[/sup], the 'square' comes from the definition of Kinetic energy: a mass m moving at velocity v has kinetic energy E[sub]k[/sub] equal to

The square there is the source of the square in E = mc[sup]2[/sup], which, in its fullest form, is actually E[sup]2[/sup] = p[sup]2[/sup]c[sup]2[/sup] + m[sup]2[/sup]c[sup]4[/sup].

Now, that square is there because the general relationship between two variables is that one is proportional to the other; "y is proportional to x" is written as:

In other words, y is equal to x times some constant:

We can integrate this to work out related properties.So, if we integrate y with respect to x, we get:

(Ignore the fact that it says 'PE'; I stole this equation from Wikipedia )

And that's where we get the 'square' from. This is why the square crops up in so many places - we have one variable that is proportional to another variable, and a third variable can be derived from the first. Thus, we integrate, which creates this square.

It's a little more tricky when it comes to kinetic energy, but that's the core technique.

There's a thread over here devoted to physics and science-y questions, though you may get inundated with replies

 

[jacks]

Hey thank you so much! I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions. I will check out "over here". I'm full of science-y questions, especially related to theortical physics. It seems like a fun field, basically: "Here is a morphing box of facts, present whatever theories you like that fit within the box. Or even out of the box, but be prepared for a fight." A great blend of structure and imagination.

Thanks again.

 

[dad]

The Big Bang theory states that the universe has been expanding for 13.5 billion years, from a tiny singularity (wherein all matter and energy was squished) to its current size. It's still expanding, and this expansion is called the 'Big Bang'.

Matter per se didn't exist, as far as we can tell,

That actually seems quite an understatement! You can't tell squat. Try to remember you made the whole thing up, from looking at present state phenomena.

but rather everything was in an as-yet poorly understood energetic state.

I'll say!

So, what came first? Energy, we think.

Maybe we ought to look to what is known to form thoughts?

It's worth mentioning that the start of the Big Bang isn't necessarily the start of the universe - we only know that it's been around for about 13.5 billion years at least;

Lie. You do not know any such thing.

we don't know if anything happened before then.

Can't argue with that, we don't know anything happened before Santa either.

 

[dad]

...

 

[Gracchus]

Why are portions of forumals squared? Is it to arrive at a positve number?

It is not done to arrive at a positive number. When you square "i" you get minus one. It is because some quantities are related to the square of other quantities.

For instance E=mc (Can't make a superscript) squared.

Well, you could write it c = |(E/m)[sup]1/2[/sup]| or E = mc^2! It means that E/m is a constant, which just happens (!) to equal the square of the speed of light in a vacuum.

So it is saying that there is a lot of Energy in Mass (Mass is Energy?)...

Mass and energy are two ways to perceive the same phenomenon.

... but why square the speed of light? Why not cube for instance or just leave it alone.

It is for the same reason that the area of a circle is equal to (pi) X r[sup]2[/sup] and not (pi) X r or (pi) x r[sup]3[/sup]. It just is.

If this is super obvious, try to be kind in your answer....

It is super obvious if you know some physics. The formula can be derived from physical observations. I once saw it done without calculus. But you would probably need high school physics to understand the explanation. (That's as kind as I can be.)

 

[Wiccan_Child]

[snip]

Yawn.

 

[jacks]

It is super obvious if you know some physics. The formula can be derived from physical observations. I once saw it done without calculus. But you would probably need high school physics to understand the explanation. (That's as kind as I can be.)

Don't feel bad Brahma-vihara is a life long (at least one) pursuit.

 

[ug333]

@dad ........ nice to know we can't tell squat from the current level of scientific understanding, but you can tell a ton from one book (Genesis).

 

[dad]

@dad ........ nice to know we can't tell squat from the current level of scientific understanding, but you can tell a ton from one book (Genesis).

Thanks. I agree.

 

[dad]

[snip]

[unsnip]


Originally Posted by Wiccan_Child

The Big Bang theory states that the universe has been expanding for 13.5 billion years, from a tiny singularity (wherein all matter and energy was squished) to its current size. It's still expanding, and this expansion is called the 'Big Bang'.

Matter per se didn't exist, as far as we can tell,
​

That actually seems quite an understatement! You can't tell squat. Try to remember you made the whole thing up, from looking at present state phenomena.

but rather everything was in an as-yet poorly understood energetic state.
​

I'll say!

So, what came first? Energy, we think.
​

Maybe we ought to look to what is known to form thoughts?

It's worth mentioning that the start of the Big Bang isn't necessarily the start of the universe - we only know that it's been around for about 13.5 billion years at least;
​

Lie. You do not know any such thing.

we don't know if anything happened before then.
​

Can't argue with that, we don't know anything happened before Santa either.




Lurkers take note.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

According to latest big bang theories what came first Mass or Energy? And why is it thought to be one or the other?

How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin?

"I myself have had always problems with this point of view [The Big Bang] because they are somewhat against the principles of physics, the most basic principles of physics, which are related with the conservation of matter and conservation of energy." — Andre K. Assis, plasma physicist, 2000

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

The Big Bang theory states that the universe has been expanding for 13.5 billion years, from a tiny singularity

Source?

"Because the Big Bang supposedly occurred only about twenty billion years ago, nothing in the cosmos can be older than this. Yet in 1986 astronomers discovered that galaxies compose huge aglomerations a billion light-years across; such mammoth clusterings of matter must have taken a hundred billion years to form." -- Eric J. Lerner, plasma physicist, The Big Bang Never Happened, 1990

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_8webbsiB4

 

[AV1611VET]

"Because the Big Bang supposedly occurred only about twenty billion years ago, nothing in the cosmos can be older than this. Yet in 1986 astronomers discovered that galaxies compose huge aglomerations a billion light-years across; such mammoth clusterings of matter must have taken a hundred billion years to form." -- Eric J. Lerner, plasma physicist, The Big Bang Never Happened, 1990

They'll just move the decimal point, and then agree with you.

While our faith moves mountains, theirs move decimal points.