CMBR : Early Photons or ?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by The God, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.

    For basics wiki link can be looked into.

    The points for discussions are,

    1. How come it is same from all the directions? Ideally if some light is arriving from a given source, then it is expected to arrive as a wavefront covering maximum the hemisphere only.

    The text answers that BB was everywhere, in every direction. Is it not the dilution of a theory? Moreover universe at that time (recombination era) was very young, and new spacetime much much larger than that got added afterwards. So where is the question of BB happening everywhere.

    2. Is it ok to expect that there may be an object in universe where CMBR is only arriving in some portion of it (say half)?

    3. What is the most saner alternative explanation for CMBR? If at all.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Boris2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    we are embedded in the source.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    re: 3. Continuous creation of the material universe, with perturbations, from pre-existing (pre-universe) energy
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    What kind of perturbation from pre existing universe would be so uniform?
     
  8. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Elaborate pl.
     
  9. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Causal irrregularity in an otherwise (fairly) uniform equilibrium condition. Cause of the causal irregularity? . . . . same as for quantum fluctuations, I'd guess (virtual?). Once 'triggered' the process proceeded much like (analogy) of water (i.e., 'energy') cascading over a waterfall . . . and is still continuing at present. All of this is IMHO, of course!
     
  10. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,158
    I am curious how is material created ?
     
  11. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    IMHO, "material" (to distinguish from non-matter) is 'created' by virtual particle pair-production. Some speculate that virtual particles arise from quantum fluctuations, perhaps at the subquantum level, in which a vibrational mode of the primordial (pre-existent) energy converts temporarily to primary, virtual particle entities. These 'pairs' may either persist or anihilate. In order to persist, would seem to require that each particle of the 'pair' must separate from the other sufficiently so that they cannot 're-interact' (my term) with each other and undergo mutual anihilation, disappearing back into the energy (field) from whence they derived. If the particles survive (i.e., 'persist'), they may undergo further energetic interactions (not much anilhilation, tho') with other 'survivors' from other 'pairs' and thus participate in the combinatory processes of synthesizing 'matter'. Once entained in the matter-forming processes, (i.e., has escaped anihilation), and except for rare reversals by specific particle and energetic interactions, the new matter (material) thereafter follows the more mechanistic paths of atomic combination, and agglomeration governed by gravitation. Hence evolved our observable, detectible interactive massive universe . . . . and we, the fortunate observers of such.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2017
    ajanta and Walter L. Wagner like this.
  12. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Sorry, The God . . . . . . On retrospection, it seems I focused a bit too much and flew-off on a tangent to your original post . . . . . . 'my bad?
     
  13. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,158
    Is that real what you have posted or is it a mathematical play to explain something to fit a theory ?
     
  14. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    That is my understanding of the process, timojin. Additional depth/detail/corrections can be added. BTW: complex maths are not required to understand or describe most physical processes - and, besides, I am not a mathematician. . . . I guess "time" will tell if that (above), and other postulated hypotheses/theories for this and other phenomena, are "real" truths!
     
  15. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,158
    What kind TRUTH.is it " perhaps at the subquantum level, in which a vibrational mode of the primordial (pre-existent) energy converts temporarily to primary, virtual particle entities. These 'pairs' may either persist or anihilate. In order to persist, would seem to require that each particle of the 'pair' must separate from the other sufficiently so that they cannot 're-interact' (my term) with each other and undergo mutual anihilation, disappearing back into the energy (field) from whence they derived. If the particles survive (i.e., 'persist'), they may undergo further energetic interactions (not much anilhilation, tho') with other 'survivors' from other 'pairs' and thus participate in the combinatory processes of synthesizing 'matter'."
    Have some one observed or measured all the action taken place ?
     
  16. Boris2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    The whole Universe was a plasma. It now isn't. As the whole Universe was a plasma then there is no single place that is the source, it was everywhere. That is why it is the same everywhere.
     
  17. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,158
    Interesting before was nothing , now is plasma why don't you guys get into an agreement.
     
  18. Boris2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    We are talking about the BBT not the creation event. Try to keep up as ignorant comments like this tend to derail the discussion.
     
  19. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Timogin: TRUTH does not come in "kinds" . . . . . it either is, or isn't!! Also, I have no argument with Boris . . . primordial plasma is OK with me . . . . it's still 'energy'.
     
  20. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,158

    Sorry what is BBT ? If you don't specify what you are aiming on then you are just BSing.
     
  21. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    H-m-m-m-m- Timogin . . . . MY first guess for BBT is . . . . ready for this? . . . . .BIG BANG THEORY!!
     
  22. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,158
    No doubt plasma is energy , some way it had to be in a small volume, so what could contain such a large amount of energy , that we have at the present 4.5 K due to expansion ? And second , what could packet the plasma into the small volume to expand ?
     
  23. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Timogin: Depending upon one's concept/understanding of such a plasma environ, one might see it (the plasma) as originally confined to a limited volume, which then expanded . . . .this could be one vision of BB (Big Bang) in which expansion produced the remnant CMBR as a vestige of expansive thermodynamic 'cooling'. I prefer to envision such an energy field (or plasma) as all-pervasive (i.e., fills a pre-existing spatial volume - might be infinite) rather than located at a 'singular point' (as preferred by the Standard Model BBT). Perturbation of this pervasive pre-existent energy matrix, initiated by quantum fluctuations (or other), became a dominant thermodynamic process of cascading disequilibrium and pair-production within the energy matrix. This process is characterized by the (see foregoing discussion) production of virtual particle pairs - some were persistent (became massive) whilst other were not (i.e., mutual annihilation and readsorption into the remnant energy field). The Standard Model mantra also speculates that time and space (spacetime?) were non-existant prior to the BB - others think that is not a requirement.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2017

Share This Page