Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: chris on 08/06/2017 08:15:53
-
David says:
In reference to the LHC at CERN, if we are unsure what Dark Matter/Dark Energy is, can we be accurate and correct with the experiments done in giving an explanation for the creation of the Universe?
In not taking Dark Matter/Dark Energy into account, can we be truly accurate as to the present methods being used (colliding protons close to the speed of light - LHC) to explain the creation of the Universe?
What do you think?
-
David says:
In reference to the LHC at CERN, if we are unsure what Dark Matter/Dark Energy is, can we be accurate and correct with the experiments done in giving an explanation for the creation of the Universe?
In not taking Dark Matter/Dark Energy into account, can we be truly accurate as to the present methods being used (colliding protons close to the speed of light - LHC) to explain the creation of the Universe?
What do you think?
One main problem is, if we assume the universe began with a BB singularity, the universe began under extreme pressure like that of a black hole. Particle accelerators work under very low gravitational pressure. In chemistry, material properties are both temperate and pressure dependent. Our best tools can reach an extreme temperature equivalence, but only at low pressure.
If you look at the diagram below, the state of the art has been following the x-axis, while keeping y close to zero; bottom of the curve. But the early universe, based on the singularity assumption would have had very high y, approaching infinity. This is the top of the diagram. These will be different phases than anything we make in the lab.
As an example on earth, at the temperature of the earth's core, the element iron is a gas on the surface. But if we increase pressure, at that same temperature, iron becomes a solid. The future may require we investigate the phase diagram of matter at larger and larger y, so we can fill in the phase diagram. For example, dark matter may not be a separate phase at higher pressure, just like iron in the mantle is part of a single fluid phase.
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chemguide.co.uk%2Fphysical%2Fphaseeqia%2Fpdco2.gif&hash=01a715b1e3ae1b6e1f49f3c46459e2f6)
-
At speeds very close to light speed relativistic mass becomes important. How would an object's gravitational potential vary due to the increase in relativistic mass? If the speed is close enough to that of light we could reproduce conditions very closely resembling those of the big bang.