Why are things in space the shape that they are?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by paddoboy, May 11, 2020.

  1. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Do you understand the theory of inflation?
    It appears to deal with the initial period and ended in a very short time..but it has to be in there that we can only find a singularity so in that case we must give credit to Alan Guth
    Alex
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Just the very basic concepts Alex.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I do think we need to look at this..it seems that extrapolation takes us back the the end of inflation ..the question is what math is used in inflation.
    I do maintain that it would seem that we can only go back to the end of the inflation epoch, obviously the theory of inflation takes us back further..well when I say obvious I mean that is the way I see it...I think we need to address how we arrive at this hot dense state and identify what this term singularity actually means...I thought singularity meant nothing more than where the equations are clearly wrong ...like extrapolating that based on growth rates observed between the ages of five and ten years in a human we can have them being sixty feet tall by age fifty...the equations of GR break down they say and I certainly would like to know where we need to stop trusting them...the term singularity is curious ..it seems to mean a point where the sums do not work but some folk have it as a real condition creating the idea of something hot and dense and somewhat beyond our understanding...but how can this be so?

    The sums break down so why are there folk not recognising this and claiming a singularity is somehow real?

    I sincerely believe religion is corrupting the reality ..whatever it may be...a singularity is a non event yet it is treated as something real..that does not add up.

    Further I would like to know where the singularity fits in given the period called Inflation.. is GR used in the theory of inflation?

    If not or even if so how do we arrive at this thing called a singularity?

    Has the maths of GR brought us to a singularity or has the maths of inflation given us a singularity and if so was that math GR...also why did GR not take us back to the BB? And this inflation, a patch in my view, why is it called upon to make sense of the theory up to this point?
    Honestly this first micro second needs to be examimined for me to understand things..I hope you can help.
    Alex
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2020
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Infaltion from what I know was really a fudge figure to explain the flatness and isotropic and homegenty of the universe/space/time.


    The singularity is defined twice actually...the obvious one where our laws and GR break down at the quantum/Planck level [which essentially may mean a surface of sorts at or below that level]
    And the singularity as defined by infinite spacetime curvature and density. This is what cosmologists now reject.

    Must go Alex, back later!!
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    In saying the above, Inflation is still rather popular......
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)
    Observational status
    Inflation is a mechanism for realizing the cosmological principle, which is the basis of the standard model of physical cosmology: it accounts for the homogeneity and isotropy of the observable universe. In addition, it accounts for the observed flatness and absence of magnetic monopoles. Since Guth's early work, each of these observations has received further confirmation, most impressively by the detailed observations of the cosmic microwave background made by the Planck spacecraft.[70] This analysis shows that the Universe is flat to within 0.5 percent, and that it is homogeneous and isotropic to one part in 100,000.

    Inflation predicts that the structures visible in the Universe today formed through the gravitational collapse of perturbations that were formed as quantum mechanical fluctuations in the inflationary epoch.
    The above is something I have read a fair bit on.....
    It goes like this, for any particular mass to become a BH, it must reach and surpass its Schwarzchild limit. Once this happens, further collapse is compulsory. For the Sun, the Schwarzchild limit is about 3 km radius. Or squeeze the current mass of the Sun into a volume of around 6 km diameter. Of course this cannot happen as the Sun would need to be far more massive.
    Anyway as per the compulsory edict according to GR, the collapse will continue, at least up to the quantum/Planck level where GR breaks down. a defined singularity.
    Couple that with the fact that the singularity as defined by infinite spacetime curvature and density is now thought impossible, one can then reasonably speculate, that the collapsed mass must be where the quantum/planck level starts and/or just below that. So we would then have a surface of sorts, of the collapsed mass in an otherwise unknown state or form.
    This could also be argued I believe for the BB singularity...remember the BB starts describing the universe from 10-45 seconds, the quantum/planck region.
    Does that make sense?
     
  9. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Well I am following it reasonably well.

    Thanks for taking the time.

    I read an interesting article re inflation covering both it's rejection and acceptance...the rejection based mainly it seems upon, what seems a reasonable claim, that it does more to enable hundred of papers rather than contribute to the science, ... But bottom line I was left with more questions than answers.

    I was going to post a link but after reflection concluded although of interest it was more about uncertainty in this area and if we are to consider such I felt maybe we need to first understand inflation as included in the current model.

    Although, and I have actually said this, the article said that inflation was introduced to solve problems that actually did not need to be solved...maybe I should see if I can find it again...anyways I am forming the impression there is activity in this region that may see adjustments.

    Must go I am acting as a driver for a couple of days to help someone out who is without their car...should be fun.

    You would not believe the wild life I am seeing while laying in bed.. these little finches..must be no bigger than ones thumb..and the little Joey was out of the pouch and he is just the cuttest little thing.

    Again thanks I appreciate hearing things from you because we both hold the interest but have to got at it without the math.
    Alex
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    And a lot more beneficial and knowledgable then arguing/debating with fanatical religious ratbags, conspiracy nuts and the like!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Well yes and no. I think it is good to be reminded that there are so very odd folk out there..and to think there are Jans and Vs not doubt smart as can be and yet???..I once thought I was a bit out there but in comparison I find I am rather rational and rather ordinary...plus the banter gives me a very light work work out ..just a bit of fun...however when I get into cosmology and GR I find it gives me a very decent work out indeed and research can take days out of my life. I have a grip on it even understand a little of how the math works now...not enough to use it of course.

    And I will post that link...you may find it as interesting as I did but damn it I can't stop thinking about inflation starting conditions which of course gets one back to speculation of before conditions.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...ary-universe-a-scientific-theory-not-anymore/

    Alex
     
    paddoboy likes this.
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Infinitely reducible complexity. A singularity is the simplest possible mathematical object (value), regardless of size?
     
  13. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Thank you.

    Can you weave into that the aspect that I pick up that there is a recognition that at some point it becomes clear that the math is not working?

    At the moment I feel like a singularity is much like calling for dark matter in a situation where we really don't know...or rather we are unable to apply what we know to produce a more complete model.

    Is it a position where it becomes clear that following the path laid down by extrapolation we have run well past any situation that could exist in reality but certainly unsupported by observation.

    I have heard that the universe started with a size smaller than an atom which I simply can not accept, and when we talk about it this way is it a starting point for the observable universe but seen it in a context that many other atom universes existed which presumably also evolved along lines muchtmuch same as our observable universe.

    Alex
     
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    I don't see why. A singularity is a mathematical object.
    What about the center of a supermassive Black Hole. Talk about reduction in size. Those things eat entire galaxies and crunch them into how big?

    Beyond the black hole singularity
    by Sam Sholtis, Pennsylvania State University

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    https://phys.org/news/2018-12-black-hole-singularity.html
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2020
  15. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    We do not know the size of anything that is below the event horizon...there is no observation that can be made to verify that the maths is correct in this area ...let's face it past the event Horizon we can only speculate...with math but for me I do like the idea of observation being included in science.

    I suppose this is my question...if we could ever observe a black hole consuming a huge galaxy we still have no idea of how big the object below the event Horizon would be... At this point where the maths reaches a singularity how big is the hidden object...as small as an atom?
    I don't buy that one in the least.

    My trouble is I know so little but I would assume when we have a theory of quantum gravity it almost certainly, I expect, show something not infinitely small...although it seems your last reference does not seem to lead things that way.

    My problem also gets back to my inability to believe all we can observe, rather all that is in the observable universe can fit into the space of an atom, or a tennis ball or in fact could fit in the space occupied by the largest star we can observe.

    I really think there is something wrong if we can fit the billions of galaxies into the space of a grape fruit and frankly I don't t understand why others don't find such a proposition unrealistic...heck just reducing the Earth to the size of a grape fruit seems unrealistic.

    Alex
     
  16. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Absolutely, and it is.....up to a point. But we cannot see inside a BH and we cannot see smaller than Planck scale either. But we know from their behavior and the mathematics that incredibly small dense objects can and do exist.

    Personally I believe in the Big Bounce, where all of the pre-existing condition collapsed into itself, building energy as the collapse progressed until a threshold size (singularity) was passed and all that compressed energy was released in a single mega-quantum event, accounting for the inflationary epoch, and still expanding.

    But I agree that whatever the singularity was comprised of, it was not matter. I would guess it was pure energy and how dense can energy be compressed?
    Hint; E = Mc^2


    But I admit that I do not have the scientific chops to justify my intuitive logic.

    p.s. Remember, size is a relative measurement and in relation to a near infinitely large universe a solar system may well appear as a singularity, just like an atom is a singular physical object inside the universe of a human biome, but not irreducibly complex.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2020
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Can energy be compressed?

    The Super Ball, Compressed Energy and Super Wrong

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    50,000 lbs (22,727 kg) of compressed energy!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    At position 1 in the diagram above, the ball has kinetic energy. At position 2 (the instant it is stopped) it is not moving and has zero kinetic energy. However, in this short time interval the system consisting of the ball has to be constant. This means that if it decreases in kinetic energy, it has to increase in something else. In this case, that something else is "compressed energy" or what we normally call elastic potential energy.....more.
    https://www.wired.com/2011/03/the-super-ball-compressed-energy-and-super-wrong/

    Elastic potential energy.........

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2020
  18. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    The article linked for Paddo indicates the opponent's of inflation are with you...me too...although I do prefer a steady state approach.

    No problems same here with probably a lot less knowledge...but I do think a lot ... I can explain your energy problem but to do so would have me presenting ideas no one could manage so I keep this stuff all to myself...
    Alex
     
  19. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    No

    A simple, but easy to understand definition for energy, the ability to perform work

    Energy is a measurement. The physical ball is comprised (using energy). This equates to energy being stored within the compressed region

    In the ball diagram 1 kinetic energy is the hight and speed as it falls

    Work done, as it hits the ground, kinetic energy is converted into compressed energy (or elastic energy) stored within the ball

    Part of the kinetic energy is converted into heat. This is the side effect of the work of compression being done on the ball. So we have -
    • Kinetic (hight+speed down) energy to
    • Heat + stored (elastic) energy to
    • Mechanical (ball forced up against gravity) energy to
    • Kinetic (hight+speed down) energy and
    • REPEAT
    • Bounce bounce bounce

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2020
    Write4U likes this.
  20. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Google Types of Energy and should find this and other such diagrams

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Write4U likes this.
  21. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I have no energy.
    What happens if you drop the ball sideways?
    And you left out energy drinks.
    Also are you in favour of a big bounce?
    Stay safe.
    Alex
     
  22. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Don't over exert, go slow, pace yourself
    That would be throw, not drop. The throw would impart mechanical energy to the ball
    If you are meaning the chart, comes under chemical. After drinking might consider any energy to be considered biological
    No I go for the big rip. As I understand (probably 10% - I don't understand why expansion is accelerating) the gravitational force is becoming weaker as everything flies apart. Eventually it is possible everything will be reduced to atoms dispersed throughout the Universe (if it could still be called Universe) with only the mechanical energy of speed and no ability to interact with other atoms

    Questionable if atoms will disintegrate
    Intend to with my secret weapons

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    You mean proton decay?
    Never been seen, but seems logical considering its made up of quarks.
     

Share This Page