To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

History of the Big Bang theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to the Big Bang model, the universe expanded from an extremely dense and hot state and continues to expand today. A common analogy explains that space itself is expanding, carrying galaxies with it, like spots on an inflating balloon. The graphic scheme above is an artist's concept illustrating the expansion of a portion of a flat universe.

The history of the Big Bang theory began with the Big Bang's development from observations and theoretical considerations. Much of the theoretical work in cosmology now involves extensions and refinements to the basic Big Bang model. The theory itself was originally formalised by Father Georges Lemaître in 1927.[1] Hubble's Law of the expansion of the universe provided foundational support for the theory.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    3 378 275
    143 642
    3 415 385
    1 892 430
    13 998
  • Science, Religion, and the Big Bang
  • The Big Bang Theory | Roger Penrose, Sabine Hossenfelder, Sean Carroll, Chris Impey and more
  • Physics’ greatest mystery: Michio Kaku explains the God Equation | Big Think
  • Brian Greene - What Was There Before The Big Bang?
  • The Big Bang: Timeline Overview

Transcription

Physicists used to think that the universe had existed forever, unchangingly, because that's what their observations of the night sky suggested. Needless to say, this view clashed with the "origin" or "creation" stories of most major religions, which hold that the universe had a beginning. So it's not surprising that it was a Catholic priest, Georges Lemaître, who was one of the first major proponents of a new scientific viewpoint - that the universe DID have a beginning. Lemaître, of course, was also an excellent mathematician and scientist and based this conviction not (just) on his religious beliefs but upon new experimental evidence from Edwin Hubble that showed the universe was expanding. This evidence, combined with the mathematics of general relativity allowed Lemaître to "rewind" cosmic history and calculate that the farther back in time you go, the smaller the universe had to be. The natural conclusion is that everything we can currently see in the universe was at one point in time more or less at one point in space. Lemaître called this idea the "primeval atom", but of course today we know it as "the big bang theory". Except "big bang" is a horrible name - it would be much more accurate to call it "the everywhere stretch". Because one of the most common misconceptions about the big bang is that it implies that the entire universe was compressed into a single point from which it then somehow expanded into the surrounding... nothingness? It is true that the observable universe, that is, the part of the whole universe we can see from earth, WAS indeed shrunk down to a very very small bit of space, but that bit of space was NOT a single point, nor was the rest of the Universe also in that same bit of space. The explanation for this is the magical power of infinity. The whole universe is really big - current data show it's at least 20 times bigger than the observable universe, but that's just a lower bound - it might be infinite. And if you have an infinite amount of space, you can scale space down, shrink everything to minuscule proportions, and still have an infinite amount of space. Kind of like how you can zoom out as much as you want from a number line, but it'll still be an infinite number line. Essentially, space doesn't need anywhere to expand "into" because it can expand into itself and still have plenty of room. In fact, this is possible even if space turns out not to be infinite in size, though the reasons are complicated and have to do with the infinite differentiability of the metric of spacetime... But anyway, the event unfortunately known as the big bang was basically a time, long ago, when space was much more squeezed together, and the observable universe, that is, everything that we see from earth, was crammed into a very very small piece of space. Because the ENTIRE early universe was dense and hot everywhere, spacetime was curved everywhere and this curvature manifested itself as a rapid expansion of space throughout the universe. And although people call this "the big bang", it wasn't just big, it was everywhere. And it wasn't really an explosion - it was space stretching out. It's really quite unfortunate that "the Everywhere Stretch" isn't nearly as catchy as "the Big Bang". Which brings us to the "big bang singularity", which is an even horribler name because every single word is misleading. I mean, "singularity" seems to imply something that happened at a single point. Which isn't at all what it's referring to - it SHOULD be called "the part of the Everywhere Stretch where we don't know what we're talking about." Basically, our current physical models for the universe are unable to properly explain and predict what was happening at the very very beginning when the universe was super SUPER scaled down. But rather than call it the "time when we don't have a clue what was happening, ANYWHERE", for some reason we call it a "singularity". This ignorance, however, does conveniently answer the question What happened BEFORE the big bang? Because it tells us the question isn't well defined - back when space was so incredibly compressed and everything was ridiculously hot and dense, our mathematical models of the universe break down SO MUCH that "time" doesn't even make sense. It's kind of like how at the north pole, the concept of "north" breaks down - I mean, what's north of the north pole? The only thing you can say is that everywhere on earth is south of the north pole, or similarly everywhen in the universe is after... the beginning. But once time began, whenever that was, space expanded incredibly quickly all throughout the universe - for a little while. Then expansion slowed, the universe cooled, stuff happened, and after a few billion years, here we are. One thing we still DON'T know is why this Everywhere Stretching happened - that is, why did the universe start off in such a funny, compressed state, and why did it follow the seemingly arbitrary laws of physics that have governed its expansion and development ever since? For Georges Lemaître, this might be where God finally comes into the picture to explain the things science can't. Except that experimental evidence doesn't actually rule out the possibility that there may indeed be a time "before" the beginning, a previous age of the universe that ended when space collapsed in on itself, getting quite compressed and dense and hot, but not enough to mangle up our ideas of what time is. It would have then bounced back out, stretching in a fashion similar to what we call the big bang, but without the "we don't know what we're talking about" singularity part. So, physics may actually be nudging us back to the view that the Universe is eternal and didn't begin after all. In which case Professor Lemaître might have to rethink his interpretation of the words "in the beginning."

Philosophy and medieval temporal finitism

In medieval philosophy, there was much debate over whether the universe had a finite or infinite past (see Temporal finitism). The philosophy of Aristotle held that the universe had an infinite past, which caused problems for past Jewish and Islamic philosophers who were unable to reconcile the Aristotelian conception of the eternal with the Abrahamic view of creation.[2] As a result, a variety of logical arguments for the universe having a finite past were developed by John Philoponus, Al-Kindi, Saadia Gaon, Al-Ghazali and Immanuel Kant, among others.[3]

English theologian Robert Grosseteste explored the nature of matter and the cosmos in his 1225 treatise De Luce (On Light). He described the birth of the universe in an explosion and the crystallization of matter to form stars and planets in a set of nested spheres around Earth. De Luce is the first attempt to describe the heavens and Earth using a single set of physical laws.[4]

In 1610, Johannes Kepler used the dark night sky to argue for a finite universe. Seventy-seven years later, Isaac Newton described large-scale motion throughout the universe.

The description of a universe that expanded and contracted in a cyclic manner was first put forward in a poem published in 1791 by Erasmus Darwin. Edgar Allan Poe presented a similar cyclic system in his 1848 essay titled Eureka: A Prose Poem; it is obviously not a scientific work, but Poe, while starting from metaphysical principles, tried to explain the universe using contemporary physical and mental knowledge. Ignored by the scientific community and often misunderstood by literary critics, its scientific implications have been reevaluated in recent times.

According to Poe, the initial state of matter was a single "Primordial Particle". "Divine Volition", manifesting itself as a repulsive force, fragmented the Primordial Particle into atoms. Atoms spread evenly throughout space, until the repulsive force stops, and attraction appears as a reaction: then matter begins to clump together forming stars and star systems, while the material universe is drawn back together by gravity, finally collapsing and ending eventually returning to the Primordial Particle stage in order to begin the process of repulsion and attraction once again. This part of Eureka describes a Newtonian evolving universe which shares a number of properties with relativistic models, and for this reason Poe anticipates some themes of modern cosmology.[5]

Early 20th century scientific developments

Observationally, in the 1910s, Vesto Slipher and later, Carl Wilhelm Wirtz, determined that most spiral nebulae (now called spiral galaxies) were receding from Earth. Slipher used spectroscopy to investigate the rotation periods of planets, the composition of planetary atmospheres, and was the first to observe the radial velocities of galaxies. Wirtz observed a systematic redshift of nebulae, which was difficult to interpret in terms of a cosmology in which the universe is filled more or less uniformly with stars and nebulae. They weren't aware of the cosmological implications, nor that the supposed nebulae were actually galaxies outside our own Milky Way.[6]

Also in that decade, Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity was found to admit no static cosmological solutions, given the basic assumptions of cosmology described in the Big Bang's theoretical underpinnings. The universe (i.e., the space-time metric) was described by a metric tensor that was either expanding or shrinking (i.e., was not constant or invariant). This result, coming from an evaluation of the field equations of the general theory, at first led Einstein himself to consider that his formulation of the field equations of the general theory may be in error, and he tried to correct it by adding a cosmological constant. This constant would restore to the general theory's description of space-time an invariant metric tensor for the fabric of space/existence. The first person to seriously apply general relativity to cosmology without the stabilizing cosmological constant was Alexander Friedmann. Friedmann derived the expanding-universe solution to general relativity field equations in 1922. Friedmann's 1924 papers included "Über die Möglichkeit einer Welt mit konstanter negativer Krümmung des Raumes" (About the possibility of a world with constant negative curvature) which was published by the Berlin Academy of Sciences on 7 January 1924.[7] Friedmann's equations describe the Friedmann–Lemaitre–Robertson–Walker universe.

In 1927, the Belgian physicist Georges Lemaitre proposed an expanding model for the universe to explain the observed redshifts of spiral nebulae, and calculated the Hubble law. He based his theory on the work of Einstein and De Sitter, and independently derived Friedmann's equations for an expanding universe. Also, the red shifts themselves were not constant, but varied in such manner as to lead to the conclusion that there was a definite relationship between amount of red-shift of nebulae, and their distance from observers.

In 1929, Edwin Hubble provided a comprehensive observational foundation for Lemaitre's theory. Hubble's experimental observations discovered that, relative to the Earth and all other observed bodies, galaxies are receding in every direction at velocities (calculated from their observed red-shifts) directly proportional to their distance from the Earth and each other. In 1929, Hubble and Milton Humason formulated the empirical Redshift Distance Law of galaxies, nowadays known as Hubble's law, which, once the Redshift is interpreted as a measure of recession speed, is consistent with the solutions of Einstein's General Relativity Equations for a homogeneous, isotropic expanding universe. The law states that the greater the distance between any two galaxies, the greater their relative speed of separation. In 1929, Edwin Hubble discovered that most of the universe was expanding and moving away from everything else. If everything is moving away from everything else, then it should be thought that everything was once closer together. The logical conclusion is that at some point, all matter started from a single point a few millimetres across before exploding outward. It was so hot that it consisted of only raw energy for hundreds of thousands of years before the matter could form. Whatever happened had to unleash an unfathomable force, since the universe is still expanding billions of years later. The theory he devised to explain what he found is called the Big Bang theory.[citation needed]

In 1931, Lemaître proposed in his "hypothèse de l'atome primitif" (hypothesis of the primeval atom) that the universe began with the "explosion" of the "primeval atom" – what was later called the Big Bang. Lemaître first took cosmic rays to be the remnants of the event, although it is now known that they originate within the local galaxy. Lemaitre had to wait until shortly before his death to learn of the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation, the remnant radiation of a dense and hot phase in the early universe.[8]

Big Bang theory vs. Steady State theory

Hubble's Law had suggested that the universe was expanding, contradicting the cosmological principle whereby the universe, when viewed on sufficiently large distance scales, has no preferred directions or preferred places. Hubble's idea allowed for two opposing hypotheses to be suggested. One was Lemaître's Big Bang, advocated and developed by George Gamow. The other model was Fred Hoyle's Steady State theory, in which new matter would be created as the galaxies moved away from each other. In this model, the universe is roughly the same at any point in time. It was actually Hoyle who coined the name of Lemaître's theory, referring to it as "this 'big bang' idea" during a radio broadcast on 28 March 1949, on the BBC Third Programme. It is popularly reported that Hoyle, who favored an alternative "steady state" cosmological model, intended this to be pejorative, but Hoyle explicitly denied this and said it was just a striking image meant to highlight the difference between the two models.[9] Hoyle repeated the term in further broadcasts in early 1950, as part of a series of five lectures entitled The Nature of The Universe. The text of each lecture was published in The Listener a week after the broadcast, the first time that the term "big bang" appeared in print.[10] As evidence in favour of the Big Bang model mounted, and the consensus became widespread, Hoyle himself, albeit somewhat reluctantly, admitted to it by formulating a new cosmological model that other scientists later referred to as the "Steady Bang".[11]

1950 to 1990s

Comparison of the predictions of the standard Big Bang model with experimental measurements. The power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background radiation anisotropy is plotted in terms of the angular scale (or multipole moment) (top).

From around 1950 to 1965, the support for these theories was evenly divided, with a slight imbalance arising from the fact that the Big Bang theory could explain both the formation and the observed abundances of hydrogen and helium, whereas the Steady State could explain how they were formed, but not why they should have the observed abundances. However, the observational evidence began to support the idea that the universe evolved from a hot dense state. Objects such as quasars and radio galaxies were observed to be much more common at large distances (therefore in the distant past) than in the nearby universe, whereas the Steady State predicted that the average properties of the universe should be unchanging with time. In addition, the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964 was considered the death knell of the Steady State, although this prediction was only qualitative, and failed to predict the exact temperature of the CMB. (The key big bang prediction is the black-body spectrum of the CMB, which was not measured with high accuracy until COBE in 1990). After some reformulation, the Big Bang has been regarded as the best theory of the origin and evolution of the cosmos. Before the late 1960s, many cosmologists thought the infinitely dense and physically paradoxical singularity at the starting time of Friedmann's cosmological model could be avoided by allowing for a universe which was contracting before entering the hot dense state, and starting to expand again. This was formalized as Richard Tolman's oscillating universe. In the sixties, Stephen Hawking and others demonstrated that this idea was unworkable,[citation needed] and the singularity is an essential feature of the physics described by Einstein's gravity. This led the majority of cosmologists to accept the notion that the universe as currently described by the physics of general relativity has a finite age. However, due to a lack of a theory of quantum gravity, there is no way to say whether the singularity is an actual origin point for the universe, or whether the physical processes that govern the regime cause the universe to be effectively eternal in character.

Through the 1970s and 1980s, most cosmologists accepted the Big Bang, but several puzzles remained, including the non-discovery of anisotropies in the CMB, and occasional observations hinting at deviations from a black-body spectrum; thus the theory was not very strongly confirmed.

1990 onwards

Huge advances in Big Bang cosmology were made in the 1990s and the early 21st century, as a result of major advances in telescope technology in combination with large amounts of satellite data, such as COBE, the Hubble Space Telescope and WMAP.

In 1990, measurements from the COBE satellite showed that the spectrum of the CMB matches a 2.725 K black-body to very high precision; deviations do not exceed 2 parts in 100000. This showed that earlier claims of spectral deviations were incorrect, and essentially proved that the universe was hot and dense in the past, since no other known mechanism can produce a black-body to such high accuracy. Further observations from COBE in 1992 discovered the very small anisotropies of the CMB on large scales, approximately as predicted from Big Bang models with dark matter. From then on, models of non-standard cosmology without some form of Big Bang became very rare in the mainstream astronomy journals.

In 1998, measurements of distant supernovae indicated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, and this was supported by other observations including ground-based CMB observations and large galaxy red-shift surveys. In 1999–2000, the Boomerang and Maxima balloon-borne CMB observations showed that the geometry of the universe is close to flat, then in 2001 the 2dFGRS galaxy red-shift survey estimated the mean matter density around 25–30 percent of critical density.

From 2001 to 2010, NASA's WMAP spacecraft took very detailed pictures of the universe by means of the cosmic microwave background radiation. The images can be interpreted to indicate that the universe is 13.7 billion years old (within one percent error) and that the Lambda-CDM model and the inflationary theory are correct. No other cosmological theory can yet explain such a wide range of observed parameters, from the ratio of the elemental abundances in the early universe to the structure of the cosmic microwave background, the observed higher abundance of active galactic nuclei in the early universe and the observed masses of clusters of galaxies.

In 2013 and 2015, ESA's Planck spacecraft released even more detailed images of the cosmic microwave background, showing consistency with the Lambda-CDM model to still higher precision.

Much of the current work in cosmology includes understanding how galaxies form in the context of the Big Bang, understanding what happened in the earliest times after the Big Bang, and reconciling observations with the basic theory. Cosmologists continue to calculate many of the parameters of the Big Bang to a new level of precision, and carry out more detailed observations which are hoped to provide clues to the nature of dark energy and dark matter, and to test the theory of General Relativity on cosmic scales.

See also

References

  1. ^ "Big bang theory is introduced – 1927". A Science Odyssey. WGBH. Retrieved 13 September 2023.
  2. ^ Seymour Feldman (1967). "Gersonides' Proofs for the Creation of the Universe". Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research. 35. Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, Vol. 35: 113–137. doi:10.2307/3622478. JSTOR 3622478.
  3. ^ Craig, William Lane (June 1979). "Whitrow and Popper on the Impossibility of an Infinite Past". The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 30 (2): 165–170 [165–6]. doi:10.1093/bjps/30.2.165.
  4. ^ McLeish, Tom C. B.; Bower, Richard G.; Tanner, Brian K.; Smithson, Hannah E.; Panti, Cecilia; Lewis, Neil; Gasper, Giles E. M. (2014). "History: A medieval multiverse" (PDF). Nature. 507 (7491): 161–163. doi:10.1038/507161a. PMID 24627918.
  5. ^ Cappi, Alberto (1994). "Edgar Allan Poe's Physical Cosmology". Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society. 35: 177–192. Bibcode:1994QJRAS..35..177C.
  6. ^ "Big Bang: The Accidental Proof | Science Illustrated". Retrieved 4 July 2020.
  7. ^ Friedman, A. (1922). "Über die Krümmung des Raumes". Zeitschrift für Physik. 10 (1): 377–386. Bibcode:1922ZPhy...10..377F. doi:10.1007/BF01332580. S2CID 125190902. (English translation in: Gen. Rel. Grav. 31 (1999), 1991–2000.) and Friedman, A. (1924). "Über die Möglichkeit einer Welt mit konstanter negativer Krümmung des Raumes". Zeitschrift für Physik. 21 (1): 326–332. Bibcode:1924ZPhy...21..326F. doi:10.1007/BF01328280. S2CID 120551579. (English translation in: Gen. Rel. Grav. 31 (1999), 2001–2008.)
  8. ^ "Georges Lemaître, Father of the Big Bang". American Museum of Natural History. Archived from the original on 17 January 2013.
  9. ^ Mitton, S. (2005). Fred Hoyle: A Life in Science. Aurum Press. p. 127.
  10. ^ The book in question can [no longer] be downloaded here: [1]
  11. ^ Rees, M., Just Six Minutes, Orion Books, London (2003), p. 76

Further reading

This page was last edited on 28 April 2024, at 15:03
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.