Stronger gravity in the early universe may solve a cosmological conundrum

[Admin]

The inflationary epoch that caused our universe to rapidly expand in its earliest moments may be connected to the modern era of dark energy.

Stronger gravity in the early universe may solve a cosmological conundrum : Read more

 

[rod]

My observation. Some interesting testing proposed in the report. "But while it's an intriguing story, astronomers still need to test the hypothesis. Thankfully, this model produces a lot of potentially observable relics of the early universe. For example, in this scenario, gravity can be so strong in places that black holes spontaneously form and survive to the present day. Finding evidence of these primordial black holes would help bolster the idea. Another approach is to search for gravitational waves from the early universe that are left behind when inflation is done. Astronomers can look for these gravitational waves either directly, by trying to detect them in the faint background hum of the universe, or through their influence on this so-called cosmic microwave background."

So for the tests we have an abundance of primordial black holes and potential gravity waves observable from inflation. The arxiv paper cited is interesting to read. https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.11384, the abstract states, "...This enhances discovery potentials of primordial gravitational wave emission and primordial black hole formation. The strong gravity effect may be enormous if massive clumps are energetically dominated by cold dark matter made of inflaton field, and created black holes may become a major candidate of cold dark matter."

Question. Where today in the Universe do we see the *inflaton field* operating?
Question. What test(s) show the Universe expanded > 10^20 c during inflation and is there any where that 4D space can be shown to be expanding faster than c velocity today - directly measured?

 

[Catastrophe]

"is there any where that 4D space can be shown to be expanding faster than c velocity today - directly measured?"

Would not the space FTL be running away faster than you can use light to investigate it?

Cat

 

[rod]

"is there any where that 4D space can be shown to be expanding faster than c velocity today - directly measured?"

Would not the space FTL be running away faster than you can use light to investigate it?

Cat

Did Tycho Brahe except Copernicus position that Mars at opposition would be closer to Earth than the Sun, without testing to confirm?

Looks like Cat in science we must accept such concepts about the early Universe and 4D space expansion velocities today. Does not sound very scientific. This includes the postulated inflaton field too. I did not see this operating today in the Universe.

 

[Catastrophe]

"Looks like Cat in science we must accept such concepts about the early Universe and 4D space expansion velocities today."

Rod, there seems to be some punctuation missing there? Please clarify.

Cat

 

[rod]

"Looks like Cat in science we must accept such concepts about the early Universe and 4D space expansion velocities today."

Rod, there seems to be some punctuation missing there? Please clarify.

Cat

Cat, it appears to me that you accept the inflation field as real in nature and 4D space expanding >> c velocity, without definite tests to confirm. So, those in science today who accept cosmology like this, do so because the math says it must be so it seems.

 

[Catastrophe]

"Looks like Cat in science we must accept such concepts about the early Universe and 4D space expansion velocities today."

OK, I got it. Easy when you know the answer. I was not intentionally obfuscating.

Cat, in science, it looks like we must accept such concepts . . . . . . et cetera.

Cat

 

[rod]

The inflaton field used in this report must be assumed to be real. Alan Guth in 2013 published his paper on inflation where 10^-53 m size maps to 1 m size today. Using the Universe some 93 billion light years in diameter today, the inflaton field operated when the Universe as small or smaller than 10^-27 meter. I am confident that astronomers using telescopes do not see this.

 

[Catastrophe]

"it appears to me that you accept the inflation field as real in nature and 4D space expanding >> c velocity, without definite tests to confirm."

No.

Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

"it appears to me that you accept the inflation field as real in nature and 4D space expanding >> c velocity, without definite tests to confirm."

Rod, yes and no.

I sort of accept BBT because I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to understand all of it. I provisionally accept it, in general, meaning I take it as a working model - obviously not very close to t = 0.


Cat

 

[rod]

"it appears to me that you accept the inflation field as real in nature and 4D space expanding >> c velocity, without definite tests to confirm."

Rod, yes and no.

I sort of accept BBT because I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to understand all of it. I provisionally accept it, in general, meaning I take it as a working model - obviously not very close to t = 0.


Cat

I feel that is part of the problem now with BBT or Big Bang model. The esoteric physics are pushing events back to Planck time and Alan Guth in 2013 pushes sizes to sub-Planck length levels in his paper. See, The Big Bang: What really happened at our universe's birth, https://forums.space.com/threads/the-big-bang-what-really-happened-at-our-universes-birth.53947/

 

[rod]

The history of the universe: Big Bang to now in 10 easy steps, https://forums.space.com/threads/the-history-of-the-universe-big-bang-to-now-in-10-easy-steps.53876/

Has a direct quote from December 2013 Alan Guth paper.

 

[Catastrophe]

Rod, thank you for that. I found this interesting:
""I think time in our universe started with the Big Bang, but I think we were a fluctuation from a predecessor, a mother universe," Filippenko said."


This directly accords with 'my' nexus idea. But see also:

forums.space.com/threads/the-universe-and-expansion.55748/#post-568200

The Universe and expansion. | Space.com Forums

Link does not seem to be working, so: *** link fixed *** anyway . . . . . .

"After all (no pun intended) how can you compare conditions during inflation to current time measurements. There were no seconds, no hours, no clocks to compare the time planet Earth would take to rotate billions of years in the future. And how can you compare a definition based on the speed of light when, according to modern physics, no material object can exceed the speed of light? Was the entire Universe not material? Space, maybe. But another idea suggests that everything is travelling through SpaceTime at the speed of light. How would that affect the calculations? Pick and choose "facts" according to how one wants the answer to turn out?"

It was suggested that inflation was at over 16,000,000,000,000 times the speed of light.


Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

Rod, so my gut feeling is that time was warped around inflation so that these tiny billionths were actually decades, or eons, in our time scale.

Cat