The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .  (Read 841 times)

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
A good place to start would be with this summation of the origins of the Big Bang theory:

The Ukrainian-American physicist George Gamow was the first to realize that, because the universe is all there is, the huge heat from a hot Big Bang could not dissipate in the same way as the heat from a regular explosion and therefore it must still be around today.

Hello... am I missing something here , it seems that micro-wave electro-magnetic radiation was trapped within the Universe  and must still be around,  BUT what about light  (optical photons) ??? Consider, the photon is how the electron regulates or mediates its energy. For instance an electron emitting blue light would emit roughly 580 x 10 10  photons a second, so there would have been a massive accumulation of photons while light could not propagate, it is no exaggeration to say that as the Universe expanded these literally limitless number of photons must have flooded the Universe, what happened to them ? Why don't we have a COBR ( Cosmic optical background radiation) ? To suppose that the light escaped from the bounds of the Universe is absolutely unrealistic, there was nothing to escape to, the only logical conclusion  is that the light remained within the Universe and that the same light exists within the Universe to this day.  How would this be possible. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle as it relates to energy and time supposes that if something has a very minimal energy then it could exist for any length of time . The same is true of the converse situation, if the time for which an interaction exists is extremely small then the energy involved could be extremely large. These extremely low energy photons permeate the whole Universe and constitute a 'virtual photon aether' it is this aether that enabled the CMBR to propagate through space and to be detectable today.
This radiation was emitted approximately 300,000 years after the Big Bang, before which time space was so hot that protons and electrons existed only as free ions, making the universe opaque to radiation. It should be visible today because, after this time, when temperatures fell to below about 3,000°K, ionized hydrogen and helium atoms were able to capture electrons, thus neutralizing their electric charge (known as “recombination”), and the universe finally became transparent to light.
« Last Edit: 13/03/2016 04:45:29 by McQueen »


 

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 554
  • Thanked: 43 times
    • View Profile
Re: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .
« Reply #1 on: 12/03/2016 14:17:22 »
One consideration that is often overlooked about the BB energy balance is, if we go from the BB singularity, into the extreme energy sub-particles from which hydrogen atoms will form, we get a huge increase in entropy; singularity to umpteen sub-particles. Each sub particle has new degrees of freedom compared to all those particles merged into a singularity.

Since entropy needs energy for entropy to increase, the heat used for the initial expansion/inflation will quickly chill due to the high percent of that energy going into countless sub particle entropy. Why should the universe continue to expand, since it is now cool enough for gravity to take over? If we assume there was enough energy for both entropy and expansion, that means we need extra energy for the needs of both.

A better model for the BB expansion, that needs far less starter energy, to overcome gravity, is a quantum expansion model. In this model, the singularity splits into 2, like in cell division; see below. This split takes much less energy than a full atomization into sub particles, since the change of entropy is tiny in comparison. What this difference means is, if we started both scenarios, side-by-side, with the same starting energy, the quantum division has far more energy left over for separation/expansion.



A quantum division model for the big bang has the BB singularity splitting into two, which expand, which then divide and expand, again and again, in an exponential way, with spacetime expanding via the energy left over; lower entropy load. The observation that the universe is expanding relative to the galaxies, with black holes in the center of many galaxies, suggests the galaxy was the terminal daughter cell singularity split.

At the galaxy level singularity split, we would get the extreme entropy increase; trillions of local little big bangs. This will be the quick chill step, but with the matter of the universe already spread relative to the galaxies. The main impact of gravity will be more local and limited to each galaxy. Black hole singularities will form in the center of galaxies, but sufficient matter will remained septet for stars.

Studies have shown that there are superstructures to the universe. The cell division analogy for the quantum expansion, combined with this super structure observation, suggests the universe became differentiated as it split, sort of like the way the human body does from a fertilized ovum. The body of the universe may reflect how energy and forces add holographically.

In this model, the uniform CBR is different. It is due to the galaxy level little big bang phase, where the energy potential from these terminal cells, is about the same coming from all the little big bangs. This is weaker since much of the original energy has been absorbed into cell expansion and entropy.
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .
« Reply #2 on: 12/03/2016 19:37:22 »
It seems to me that diffusing the process into a number of little bangs in order to conserve energy, detracts much from the original concept of the Big Bang as envisaged as being not so much an  explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe; as space itself expanding with time everywhere, increasing the physical distance between two  points.
« Last Edit: 12/03/2016 19:40:11 by McQueen »
 

Offline Phractality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .
« Reply #3 on: 13/03/2016 14:50:03 »
an electron emitting blue light would emit roughly 580 x 10 10  photons a second,

Don't confuse the frequency of blue light with the frequency of emitting photons. One electron drops to a lower energy level and emits one photon with a wavelength of 1/580 x 1010 Hz. Before it can emit another photon, it has to be pushed back up to the higher orbital.

In the first 300,000 years after the big bang, we are told, the universe was opaque, so photons were reabsorbed before they could go anywhere. This fact makes the term "speed of light" meaningless during that epoch. To turn the clock back to the beginning, as Hawking is supposed to have done, one must invent different definitions of time and distance, not based upon light.

The blue photons that first managed to propagate more than a few microns thru the quark soup, are now redshifted due to the expansion of space. Consequently, we now see them as microwaves, with an average wavelength corresponding to 2.7K.

Longer wavelength corresponds to higher entropy.

If we assume there was enough energy for both entropy and expansion, that means we need extra energy for the needs of both.
That is the reason for postulating the existence of dark energy. Something is making space expand at an accelerating pace, against the drag of gravity trying to pull it all closer together.

In my model, that energy comes from a smaller-scale universe, about 60 orders of magnitude smaller, whose cosmic foam is our aether foam. The smaller-scale universe operates in reverse time; as we get older, it gets younger. As its cosmic foam bubbles expand, they pop; this converts two bubbles into one, and time reversal makes that into an increase in the number of our aether-foam bubbles, and thus one additional Planck volume of new space in our universe. It takes about 1088 Planck volumes of new space per cubic meter per second to equal the Hubble parameter, about 2.5 x 10-18/sec.

Since entropy needs energy for entropy to increase, the heat used for the initial expansion/inflation will quickly chill due to the high percent of that energy going into countless sub particle entropy. Why should the universe continue to expand, since it is now cool enough for gravity to take over? If we assume there was enough energy for both entropy and expansion, that means we need extra energy for the needs of both.

That smaller-scale universe gives us its entropy, and time reversal converts it to exergy, which keeps our universe interesting.

 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .
« Reply #4 on: 14/03/2016 03:42:00 »
Phractality
Quote
Don't confuse the frequency of blue light with the frequency of emitting photons. One electron drops to a lower energy level and emits one photon with a wavelength of 1/580 x 1010 Hz. Before it can emit another photon, it has to be pushed back up to the higher orbital.
This is a seriously flawed viewpoint, I think, and one on which Quantum Mechanics is hung up. Everything, especially at the atomic level, is dynamic, it is completely wrong (dare I say ridiculous )  to view these processes as unitary and one off. The electron fires off a photon and then returns to rest and waits around and fires off another one and so on. Not so. As long as the electron is being irradiated with  the correct energy radiation, it is in an excited state and jumps  ( vibrates) rapidly back and forth from excitation to rest and back again in a continuous motion,  emitting photons at the given frequency. 
 
Quote
The blue photons that first managed to propagate more than a few microns thru the quark soup, are now redshifted due to the expansion of space. Consequently, we now see them as microwaves, with an average wavelength corresponding to 2.7K.
While this would seem plausible with the one off 'theory' of photon emission  quoted by you in the first quote above, it would be unacceptable from a  mathematical and practical point of view if the theory of photon emission put forward in this post is accepted. There would simply be too great a number of photons present for the scenario put forward of light being red-shifted into microwaves to work. Further according to the GAT theory put forward by myself  all photon wave-lengths longer than optical wave-lengths would be composed of composite 'conduction' photons. The use of this theory of 'conduction' photons, makes it possible for the photon to emit any of trillions and trillions of possible photons wave-lengths and frequencies, with little or no effort. While the existing Quantum Mechanics( and standard) theory would require that each of those trillions of frequencies and wave-lengths existed ( within the electron) as independent entities.  According to GAT it would be impossible for an optical photon to be red-shifted into a radio wave, it could only be red-shifted into a larger wave-length optical photon. In support of this is the fact that light from 12.5 billion years away is still optical and not in the radio wave range.
Quote
In my model, that energy comes from a smaller-scale universe, about 60 orders of magnitude smaller, whose cosmic foam is our aether foam. The smaller-scale universe operates in reverse time; as we get older, it gets younger. As its cosmic foam bubbles expand, they pop; this converts two bubbles into one, and time reversal makes that into an increase in the number of our aether-foam bubbles, and thus one additional Planck volume of new space in our universe. It takes about 1088 Planck volumes of new space per cubic meter per second to equal the Hubble parameter, about 2.5 x 10-18/sec.
I have not had time to go through your theory, but I have to say, it does sound interesting.
« Last Edit: 14/03/2016 03:44:43 by McQueen »
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .
« Reply #5 on: 15/03/2016 02:50:20 »
To return for a moment to the quote made in the OP:

Quote
The Ukrainian-American physicist George Gamow was the first to realize that, because the universe is all there is, the huge heat from a hot Big Bang could not dissipate in the same way as the heat from a regular explosion and therefore it must still be around today.

It is interesting to speculate as to WHY exactly George Gamow chose to concentrate on trying to detect the residual heat left over from the Big Bang rather than to attempt to detect residual light from that event. Perhaps with hindsight, and taking into account that light ( at least incoherent light) as it propagates, conforms with the inverse square law, he rightly realised that by the time the original light had crossed the Universe a couple of times, having rebounded off its edges, its intensity would have been so low as to be impossible to detect.  This as it turns out might be closer to the truth than is at first apparent.

If this concept is followed to its logical conclusion it is possible that in this reasoning lies the 'Casus belli' of the all pervading aether.  There can be little doubt that if there was heat in that early Universe, that even earlier to that,  when the Universe was still a cauldron of electrons and nucleii, there would have been light, that goes without saying, the fact that that light had no means to propagate is for the moment moot.  With the huge flux of electrons and nucleii constantly undergoing changes in their energy states a massive number of photons would have been released. The question as put in the original post still stands, what happened to that light ? The hypotheses put forward is that ( and this is seconded by implication by George Gamow) that early light is still around. As the Universe expanded the available light expanded with it, pervading the whole Universe, as a completely natural progression to this process, the light,  as it spread further and further over an ever increasing area,  steadily reduced in intensity, until finally its energy became so low as to be virtually undetectable.  To the question of "How is that possible ?" The answer that has been given is that in keeping with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle :

35b4eb3255269a4e6bd4a199c556bc75.gif

if the energy of an object is sufficiently small then the time over which that object can exist becomes largely indeterminable. Meaning that if the photons had low enough energies they could in theory exist for practically ever.  For instance this would mean that photons, the present definition of which is of an ephemeral nature, would possess the same lifetimes as protons or electrons.  According to GAT theory it was with the establishment of the aether providing a means of propagation for light, that the speed of light as a constant came into being, providing to a large extent the infrastructure for the laws that govern the Universe.

 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Questions on photons and the CMBR during the Big Bang .
« Reply #5 on: 15/03/2016 02:50:20 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums