(April 14, 2014 at 10:04 pm)Jiggerj Wrote: We've always heard that nothing but gases came out of the Big Bang. Even gases are made up of atoms. Science now tells us that atoms are made up of quantum particles.
Well, if those atom-made gases are what exploded out of the Big Bang, then where (in what dimension) did the quantum particles come together to form those atoms?
The key to understanding the early Universe is a proper understanding of Symmetry and more specifically the spontaneous breaking of symmetry.
If we take the four fundamental forces, electromagnetic, gravity, nuclear-strong and nuclear-weak. There is an enormous difference today in the observed effects of electromagnetic and nuclear-weak forces (and their respective carriers), we can say these forces are unsymmetrical. But, from an experiment in the early 80s at CERN we know of the existence of a unified electroweak force that would have existed under the conditions that occurred in the early stages of the Universe, when the forces were much more symmetrical.
Symmetry breaking is key to understanding why the Universe looks the way it does today, and many believe why it looks this way at all.
The spontaneous breaking of gauge symmetries is better known to us today as the Higgs mechanism, an important component in understanding the origin of particle masses in the Standard Model.
Despite being the subject of a Nobel Prize, Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking has yet to fulfil its full potential and I personally believe it will play a significant part in the development of a Unification Theory in the not too distant future.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
