« Last post by Ultimate on Today at 10:03:36 »
Precisely, but to what extent did he let others pass him in the race for recognition?
As far as I can see he didn't, he had two jobs so wasn't a full time mathematician or cosmologist. I don't seem to be able to post links, but from wiki if you check him out. He was awarded or nominated for the following :-
On 17 March 1934, Lemaître received the Francqui Prize, the highest Belgian scientific distinction, from King Léopold III. His proposers were Albert Einstein, Charles de la Vallée-Poussin and Alexandre de Hemptinne. The members of the international jury were Eddington, Langevin, Théophile de Donder and Marcel Dehalu. The same year he received the Mendel Medal of the Villanova University.
In 1936, Lemaître received the Prix Jules Janssen, the highest award of the Société astronomique de France, the French astronomical society.
Another distinction that the Belgian government reserves for exceptional scientists was allotted to him in 1950: the decennial prize for applied sciences for the period 1933–1942.
In 1953, he was given the inaugural Eddington Medal awarded by the Royal Astronomical Society.
Lemaître was the first theoretical cosmologist ever nominated in 1954 for the Nobel Prize in physics for his prediction of the expanding universe. Remarkably, he was also nominated for the 1956 Nobel prize in chemistry for his primeval-atom theory.
As Evan_au indicated above he was both a scientist and a catholic priest. The subject (cosmic egg) of what preceded the big bang is still a hot topic, few appears to have ideas on the subject. Lemaitres first guess at the primordial egg was ahead of its time, and signed up to by the then pope.
From the singularity(which few believe in) onward and quoting from another link on this forum
The singularity was so small that it has to be observed using quantum physics, which deals with things on the smallest scale scientists have ever postulated. At the beginning of existence, the universe had a temperature of 1 x 1032 degree Celsius and only covered a region of 1 x 10-33 centimeters. It’s hard to believe that expanded to become the universe spanning billions of light years we know today!
As tiny fractions of a second passed after the big bang, the universe expanded rapidly. It doubled in size several times in less than a second and cooled during the process.
At t = 1 x 10-11 seconds after the big bang began, the universe had expanded to a point where we could graduate from speculating on events from the quantum viewpoint to being able to simulate the environment in lab conditions with particle accelerators.
Then, the period of standard cosmology began .01 seconds after the big bang. Here, protons and neutrons are fully formed. After a full second,the nuclei of light elements like hydrogen, helium, and lithium were forming
From the above "It’s hard to believe that expanded to become the universe spanning billions of light years we know today!" Its not hard to believe the universe is expanding, the singularity and extrapoloating that all matter was formed at it and moved at speeds excedding the speed of light is a little on the edge! The distance between galaxies and particles can expand at in excess of the speed of light, but matter itself does not move in excess of the speed of light from any reference point.
Bosons in the form of photons can all occupy the same point in space, theoreticlally. Particles made of fermions can not.
The Primordial particle must therefore have occupied a region of space(which I think is inline with current understanding), and the expansion of space itself moved apart. At some stage during the process evidentially the primordial particle exploded.
"At t = 1 x 10-11 seconds after the big bang began, the universe had expanded to a point where we could graduate from speculating on events from the quantum viewpoint to being able to simulate the environment in lab conditions with particle accelerators."
At the end of the speculation of what might have been, what do we know we had. As I understand it particles are created as particle antiparticle pairs. Would these be exactly the same as we have in the standartd model? Further more when is a particle considered a virtual particle, Quark lifetimes are shorter than the times in the Big bang model, can they also be considered virtual, like unstable chips off the block. How could they survive, the big bang, and what did they form from?