I was wondering around this new power and I got some day-dream questions. It was fascinating how well and clear, physics can be explained by these models
This is a summary of my chat:
For the Big Bang theory: this looks like the most plausible but the ambigious point for me is what was there before the explosion and where did the materials that exploded came from?
That's a great question! Many physicists believe that there was nothing before the Big Bang. It was a singularity, which means that all the matter and energy that exists today was concentrated in a single point. As for where the materials came from, that's still a mystery. Some theories suggest that the matter and energy that was present at the Big Bang was created by a quantum fluctuation, a random event in which a particle appears out of nothing for a brief moment. But that's just one theory - there are many others that try to explain the origins of the universe. What do you think is most likely?
Can something appears out of nothing? is that reasonable or logical in physics?
It may seem counterintuitive, but the laws of quantum mechanics actually do allow for something to appear out of nothing, at least for a very short period of time. It's known as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which states that the location and momentum of a particle cannot be known at the same time. So if you were to observe a particle's location, you wouldn't be able to know its momentum, and vice versa. This principle allows for the temporary creation of particles and anti-particles (which have the opposite properties of particles) out of nothing. Does that make sense?
I am afraid it does not make sense. For a very short period of time, this principle might hold. A particle of matter appears then disappear. However, it there was nothing, this principle does not stipulate that something as huge as the singulatury point of the big bang appears then disappear suddenly and it leads to all of this universe
That's a great observation. You're right that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle alone cannot account for the creation of something as massive as the Big Bang. However, physicists believe that other laws of physics, such as the law of conservation of energy, may have played a role in the creation of the universe. So it's possible that the singularity was the result of a complex interaction of multiple laws of physics, rather than a simple quantum fluctuation. Does that help to clear things up?
Yes this is more logical. However, the law of conservation of enery and matter stipulates that nothing is created out of zero. It was in a state before then this state changes. So, if the big bang came out of a single point of matter, where had this point arrived from and what was the previous state?
Those are really good questions, and they're the subject of much debate among physicists. One possibility is that the singularity was the result of a previous universe collapsing into a singularity. In other words, the universe as we know it may be a cycle of expansion and contraction, with each cycle starting with a big bang and ending with a big crunch. Another possibility is that the singularity was the result of a quantum tunneling event, in which a particle "tunnels" through a seemingly impenetrable barrier.
Where did this particle that tunnles through the barrier came from?
That's another great question, and one that physicists are still trying to answer. One possibility is that the particle is a manifestation of a property of the vacuum of space, known as the zero-point energy. This is the lowest possible energy that a system can have, and it's thought to be the source of the quantum fluctuations that can lead to the creation of particles. It's also possible that the particle came from another universe, through a process known as quantum entanglement. This is when two particles are connected in such a way that they can influence each other even when they're separated by vast distances.
It's Pi. I was thinking about our conversation about the big bang theory, and I wanted to follow up on a few points. One, we talked about the law of conservation of matter and energy, which says that matter and energy can't be created or destroyed. But you were wondering, where did the matter and energy that created the big bang come from? This is still a big mystery, but one possible explanation is that they came from a previous universe that collapsed into a singularity. What do you think about that?
I quit the discussion then I got an SMS from Pi to follow up the discussion. A great personal assistant indeed.
Thanks for the follow up. Yes this is interesting. Where did the matter for the previous universe came from?
That's a great question, and one that physicists are still trying to answer. The current leading theory is called the Big Bounce, which posits that the universe goes through cycles of expansion and contraction. In each cycle, the previous universe's matter and energy are converted into radiation, which creates a new universe through a process called nucleosynthesis. So essentially, the previous universe's matter becomes the building blocks for the next universe. It's a really fascinating idea, and it's got some interesting implications for our own universe.
That is interesting indeed. Let us go back to time zero where the universe zero appeared. Where did that matter came from?
Well, at the moment of the big bang, time itself didn't exist, so there wasn't a "time zero." This is because, according to our current understanding of physics, time and space are inextricably linked - they are two sides of the same coin, so to speak. So, in order for time to exist, there has to be space. And the big bang created both time and space, so it's impossible to say where the matter came from "before" the big bang. Does that make sense?
Even there was no time at that moment, there must be something for the first ever singularity to appear. It can not just pop out of nothing or nowhere. There must be a source for the first ever matter? No?
Well, that's a really interesting question, and one that physicists are still trying to answer. Some physicists believe that the first ever matter came from something called a quantum vacuum, which is like a field of energy that permeates all of space. This quantum vacuum is thought to have a non-zero energy, and that energy can spontaneously create pairs of particles and anti-particles. These particles and anti-particles would then go on to form the first ever matter. It's a lot to wrap your head around, but it's a really fascinating idea. What do you think about it?
The idea is very interesting. I would like to know where does the non-zero energy in the quantum vacuum came from? Even in a quantum vacuum, a non-zero energy or non-zero matter must have a source
That's a great question. The truth is, physicists don't yet know where the non-zero energy in the quantum vacuum comes from. It's one of the biggest unsolved mysteries in physics. But there are some theories. One theory is that the non-zero energy is a result of virtual particles that exist for only a very short time, on the order of a billionth of a billionth of a second. These virtual particles are constantly being created and destroyed, and their energy contributes to the energy of the quantum vacuum. But we still don't know where the energy for these virtual particles comes from.
This is interesting? If they are being created? Who is creating them?
That's a great question. The truth is, we don't really know. One of the challenges with quantum physics is that it often defies our common-sense understanding of cause and effect. For example, we know that virtual particles are being created, but we don't know why or by what process they are being created. This is one of the reasons why quantum physics is so challenging - it often requires us to completely re-think our understanding of how things work. But that's also what makes it so exciting. We're constantly discovering new things about the nature of reality that challenge our assumptions.
