Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
Thank you for your post.
My rants on these matters are motivated my desire to learn more by presenting my interpretation of what I have read so as to get feed back hopefully from others who can offer a better interpretation.
Ok you have covered the "first" stage. I think I have read the inflationary epoch actually deals with growth (inflation) from the point where the Universe was indeed the size of a grapefruit.
It is my understanding the inflationary epoch as presented via "The Theory of Inflation" presents a model where the universe grew from the size of a grape fruit ( no doubt the theory would mention a specific size and probably made no reference to fruit) to the size of more than the observable universe in, again this is not taken from the paper outloning "The Theory of Inflation" but these words were used by Neil DeGrasse in a documentary whete he was in effect dumbing down the proposition outlined in that theory for laymen...his words as I recall was that the growth took place in "a zillionth of a zillionth of a zillionth of a second" ..again the paper would no doubt use a specific time reference I expect however I think we can take it that the period of time allocated for this alledged inflationary event was a very very small fraction of a second...Neil did not call such a period of time instant but would it not be reasonable to extend the meaning of "instant" to be covered by a time period described as "a zillionth of a zillionth of a zillionth of a second"...in any event perhaps you could point out if my understanding as I have tried to convey is close enough to the model presented in "The Theory of Inflation" to be a reasonably close representation of the model presented by Alan Guth known as the inflationary epoch....My understanding is as outlined so if I am in any way off the mark I would appreciate being corrected. If I am close to understandimg what the model presents I say it asks us to accept that the universe grew from the size of a grape fruit to the size of the universe thst we call the observable universe and further to all that which is outside the observable universe...further as I unferstand it that size is consideted infinite which irrespective of how you define or interpret " infinite" is extrodinarilary huge...so am I incorrect to say the big bang includes a period where its evolution includes a growth from the size of a grape fruit to perhaps infinite in "a zillionth of a zillionth of a zillionth of a second" and further that there is no observation or proof that supports such a notion.
Please show me where I have it wrong else I am doomed to consider our cosmogy as based upon an unsupported unevidenced fact the absence of which makes the big bang model unworkable.
I find the proposition of the big bang most unlikely if it relies upon the growth suggested given no observation or proof is provided to support such a claim.
Thanks for your interest...
Alex
|
I'm not a cosmologist so I'm not really qualified to comment.
There are 1000s of articles on it:
https://aether.lbl.gov/www/science/i...beginners.html