How could first big-bang explode?

[Bunyip]

Bunyip...you do not understand even when it has been explained so many times....initially there were no particles.

Correct, but there was energy. Energy is a component of the quantum universe.

..when cooling of space reached a certain point, some of the energy converted to particles..

SUBatomic particles Ben, you keep forgetting that bit. QM studies such SUBatomic particles Ben.

.there was much activity during this phase until there was sufficient stability for the formation of the atomic elements to occur...when the first atom formed...the particles that made it up are known as sub atomic particles... The sub atomic particles are not the same as the first particles that came into existence when the space cooled sufficiently for the energy to convert....

The first particles to emerge were the SUBatomic elements QM refers to.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Not necessarily because of both string theory and also that charge "particles" are quite possibly in play, according to the cosmologists that I've read. And just a reminder that "particle" doesn't mean "matter" in the conventional use of the latter term.

I skimmed this article because I don't have much time right now, but it seems to be going the direction I'm mentioning: No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

But that is the definition of quantum mechanics....see my post #367. Of course I understand what the leptons and hadrons that make up an atom are...for heaven's sake, do you think I'm posting this stuff based on just a casual reading!

The article you linked to is the one I started a thread on some time back...it is using quantum theory to prove there was no beginning, but was not to do with supporting evidence for quantum mechanics being in play before particle formation.....btw, that article did not go over well with the big bang true believers....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I refuted the concept of "nothingness", so I believe you have me on the wrong side of this, which may be the confusion we're running across.

Gotcha...sorry..metis....but there were others earlier on this thread that were making the claim and so if any are reading this...please respond?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, and the Big Bang was such an event Ben. Energetic particles emerged for the first time. The BB begins with a quantum vacuum fluctuation. The definition you posted even states outright that energy itself is QM. (...incorporating the quantization of ENERGY...)

You can't have quantum fluctuations before you have a quantum vacuum....the energy in the expanding space has to cool to a certain level before it can convert to particles... The quantum fluctuations occur at the same times as particle formation...not before... There were no quantum vacuum fluctuations before this....the big bang event itself was not quantum mechanical ....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Of course the BB is a QVF, that is what it starts with. The BB begins with a QVF, which is by definition a quantum scale event.

There was no quantum vacuum present at the time of the big bang...it came later....get over it already!

 

[Bunyip]

You can't have quantum fluctuations before you have a quantum vacuum....the energy in the expanding space has to cool to a certain level before it can convert to particles... The quantum fluctuations occur at the same times as particle formation...not before... There were no quantum vacuum fluctuations before this....the big bang event itself was not quantum mechanical ....

LOL Of course it was Ben. But tell you what - why don't you just keep repeating the same mistake and telling everyone who corrects you that they don't know what they are talking about? That is all you have done so far, and it is hilarious.

 

[Bunyip]

There was no quantum vacuum present at the time of the big bang...it came later....get over it already!

LOL The BB begins with a QVF Ben.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Correct, but there was energy. Energy is a component of the quantum universe. SUBatomic particles Ben, you keep forgetting that bit. QM studies such SUBatomic particles Ben. The first particles to emerge were the SUBatomic elements QM refers to.

Of course they do Bunyip....the periodic table is now known and the arrangements of all the sub atomic particle that make it up are out there....but sub atomic particles did not exist initially...the first particles that formed from quantum vacuum fluctuations were not the sub atomic particles as there were no atoms in existence....atoms had not formed yet....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

LOL Of course it was Ben. But tell you what - why don't you just keep repeating the same mistake and telling everyone who corrects you that they don't know what they are talking about? That is all you have done so far, and it is hilarious.

No one has corrected me....and all I am doing is putting the science out there so that you are shown to be as ignorant on the science as you are on religion....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

LOL The BB begins with a QVF Ben.

What was the state of the big bang universe at the beginning? ....note that QVF can only appear in the period covered in the last sentence that I've bolded.

BIG BANG TIMELINE

The Big Bang
10-43 seconds
The universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and time, as well as all the matter and energy the universe will ever hold. For an incomprehensibly small fraction of a second, the universe is an infinitely dense, hot fireball. The prevailing theory describes a peculiar form of energy that can suddenly push out the fabric of space. At 10-35 to 10-33 seconds a runaway process called "Inflation" causes a vast expansion of space filled with this energy. The inflationary period is stopped only when this energy is transformed into matter and energy as we know it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Bunyip.....try and understand....in the big bang chronology....particles came into existence from the energy of the quantum vacuum fluctuation...they were energetically free and not forming part of any matter...atoms did not exist....later in the time line...some of them came together and formed the first atoms....it is these same atoms that exist today...and the electrons, protons, etc., that make them up are called sub atomic particles...

Why are they called sub atomic? Because they are the parts that make up the atom...before atoms existed...there were no sub atomic particles....there were just transient particles coming into and going out of existence....

 

[Bunyip]

Bunyip.....try and understand....in the big bang chronology....particles came into existence from the energy of the quantum vacuum fluctuation...they were energetically free and not forming part of any matter...atoms did not exist....later in the time line...some of them came together and formed the first atoms....it is these same atoms that exist today...and the electrons, protons, etc., that make them up are called sub atomic particles...

Why are they called sub atomic? Because they are the parts that make up the atom...before atoms existed...there were no sub atomic particles....there were just transient particles coming into and going out of existence....

LOL No Ben. Subatomic particles existed first, atoms are made from them. You are claiming that flour could not exist before bread.

Oh and those 'transient particles' you referred to were SUBatomic.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

LOL No Ben. Subatomic particles existed first, atoms are made from them. You are claiming that flour could not exist before bread.

Oh and those 'transient particles' you referred to were SUBatomic.

No Bunyip...I explained to you in an earlier post that the there was a shake out phase during the first particle formation phase before the atoms appeared....here.....

Jerzy Michał Pawlak PhD in High Energy Physics (experimental)

It is very difficult to say what where the first particles in the universe, because we don't know what particles exist at very high temperatures immediately after the big bang. Any particle can be created at high enough temperature, via pair creation process. Therefore shortly after the Big Bang and after the inflationary epoch all known particles existed, and, as temperature dropped, some of them disappeared via annihilation or decays. Therefore it is probably not true, that photons were first particles in the universe.

Were photons the first particles of the universe? If so, what the photons initially collide to form? If electrons and positrons? How were first hadrons formed? - Quora

 

[Bunyip]

No Bunyip...I explained to you in an earlier post that the there was a shake out phase during the first particle formation phase before the atoms appeared....here.....

Yes, the first particles being subatomic. Hence QM.

Jerzy Michał Pawlak, PhD in High Energy Physics (experimental)

It is very difficult to say what where the first particles in the universe, because we don't know what particles exist at very high temperatures immediately after the big bang. Any particle can be created at high enough temperature, via pair creation process. Therefore shortly after the Big Bang and after the inflationary epoch all known particles existed, and, as temperature dropped, some of them disappeared via annihilation or decays. Therefore it is probably not true, that photons were first particles in the universe.

Were photons the first particles of the universe? If so, what the photons initially collide to form? If electrons and positrons? How were first hadrons formed? - Quora

Nice list of subatomic particles.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, the first particles being subatomic. Hence QM. Nice list of subatomic particles.

That sentence doesn't make sense....the first particles existed before atoms....so they can not be sub atomic at that time....some of them came through the creation of matter evolution to exist today as sub atomic... Why hence QM? What list of sub atomic particles?

 

[Bunyip]

That sentence doesn't make sense....the first particles existed before atoms....so they can not be sub atomic at that time.

Why not? Why aren't subatomic particles called subatomic particles until the first atom?

...some of them came through the creation of matter evolution to exist today as sub atomic... Why hence QM? What list of sub atomic particles?

Photons, hadrons, quarks, positrons etc are all subatomic particles.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Why not? Why aren't subatomic particles called subatomic particles until the first atom?
Photons, hadrons, quarks, positrons etc are all subatomic particles.

Because all particles that could ever possibly exist, existed as part of the particle 'zoo' after the inflationary epoch of the big bang....and as space expanded and the temperature dropped, the higher energy particles decayed or disappeared through annihilation.... So during this phase of cosmic evolution, it would be obviously wrong to refer to these first particles as sub atomic as atoms did not exist and some of them will never be a part of the atom...

 

[Bunyip]

Because all particles that could ever possibly exist, existed as part of the particle 'zoo' after the inflationary epoch of the big bang....and as space expanded and the temperature dropped, the higher energy particles decayed or disappeared through annihilation.... So during this phase of cosmic evolution, it would be obviously wrong to refer to these first particles as sub atomic as some of them will never be a part of the atom...

So what? How does that change the fact that a subatomic particle is a subatomic particle? You are not making sense Ben.
That any given subatomic particle will never be a part of an atom is irrelevant to the fact that it is still a subatomic particle.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So what? How does that change the fact that a subatomic particle is a subatomic particle? You are not making sense Ben.
That any given subatomic particle will never be a part of an atom is irrelevant to the fact that it is still a subatomic particle.

It is you not making sense Bunyip ...if a particle came into existence, endured fora time, but disappeared from nature before the first atom came into existence...how could it be considered a part of an atom?

 

[Bunyip]

It is you not making sense Bunyip ...if a particle came into existence, endured fora time, but disappeared from nature before the first atom came into existence...how could it be considered a part of an atom?

It wouldn't. It would just be considered a subatomic particle, because it is a subatomic particle. Why would you imagine it would be considered a part of an atom? You are talking about a time before the first atom aren't you? Subatomic particles existed before the first atom - not sure what has you so confused about that. Or why you imagine atoms had to exist before the things that atoms are made of existed - seems totally backwards.

SUBATOMIC refers to any particle smaller than an atom by the way Ben. Photons, quarks etc are all called SUBATOMIC particles because they are smaller than atoms.
Atoms, being made from subatomic particles naturally had to come AFTER the subatomic particles that they are made from. Why you imagine that atoms which are made of subatomic particles had to exist first, I am struggling to imagine.