Slashdot Mirror
The Origin of the First Light In the Universe
StartsWithABang writes Before there were planets, galaxies, or even stars in the Universe, there really was light. We see that light, left over today, in the form of the Cosmic Microwave Background, or the remnant glow from the Big Bang. But these photons outnumber the matter in our Universe by more than a-billion-to-one, and are the most numerous thing around. So where did they first come from? Science has the answer.
If only Google would see the light and keep the old(er) version of Google Maps.
Nobody wants to use the new version by choice and Google definitely appear to have their collective heads where there is no light on this.
Let there be light.
I don't understand science anymore, it doesn't have any answers, just some bunch of new theories, based on some old stupid theories, which most people defend with there lives, even if they are incorrect... If they could at least invent some stuff that wouldn't destroy our environment, that would be nice, because this way, in a few years, there won't be anyone alive, because the air ain't breathable anymore...
1. Why would the big bang be unique?
2. Why are there not two big bangs or 2 billion big bangs?
3. Why is the light seen as background radiation not from these OTHER big bangs?
4. Why not simply the glow from the universes out that made its way into our space before us?
5. A trillion universes that existed long enough for the light to reach us, how would they look if not a glow everywhere?
6. If its from *our* big bang, why is it heading towards us when all 'individually' observable stars are heading away from us? Why are these photons not heading away too?
1. What if all matter is made of +ve stuff AND -ve stuff (which is experimentally observed with the electron).
2. What if particles are simply 'stable' assemblies of these two particles. Each a certain stable configuration.
3. Any stable assembly you can make, can have the +ve and -ve swapped to make the inverse particle, the anti-particle.
4. What if light is actually matter
5. What if light is one +ve and one -ve, the smallest combination of these particles.
6. What if the 'photon' as observed is actually just a cloud of these +ve and -ve that is sufficient to promote an electron, since we use electron energy states to detect photons, it follows we couldn't observe partial photons. i.e. in Young Slits the 'photon' goes through *both* slits.
7. What if QM is garbage, no magic time travelling photons, no wibbly wobbly effect over a distance, just photons with an initial spin state, and experiments that filter by 'time the photon was emitted'.
What if our model is wrong? I mean so wrong that crap has been built on crap that now has become a religion, a test of faith, do you believe the equations explain the system, or only predict how the system would look through the limits of the detection mechanism.
What if its become a business, with budgets assigned based on false assumption and jobs that would be lost if the science broke the experiment? Experts that are really priests, when the knowledge changes they are no longer experts but foolish believers.
What if.
From the penultimate paragraph:
and that is all that there will be left --- according to current theories at any rate!
I thought spacetime started with the big bang and we had no insight into what came before ?
The article says that the fabric of space was expanding and the big bang was an event that got its energy from spots of crumbling spacefabric (bad analogy) ?
Were there 2 big bangs: The one that inflated space and the other one (recombination) that decoupled matter from photons ?
Have you just created an extra "big bang" to be able to explain the question and don't you regress now to the question: Where did spacetime get the energy to begin with ?
BTW, don't dare ask. You know the answer. It is aum all the way. aum sweet aum all the way aum.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
So where did they first come from? Religion has the answer!
mass = number of photons * h-bar * frequency / c^2 (IIRC, it's been 15 years...)
Question: Has this mass been considered in all the dark matter estimations?
Is it me or the article totally bypassed the question of how light and photons come from?
Nice that the author wants to tackle the question, but a "we don't know it yet" would suffice (for the moment). Going to how matter and aardvarks came to be just makes the article longer; though it was interesting, too, it looks like pondering for a moment and then saying "Look, what an interesting bug!".
With no way of proving this rubbish every little tosser claims a new idea as the truth. What pathetic little creatures you are to believe this rubbish.
And in the beginning all was in darkness and all was with god and the lord your god saith let there be light and there was light.
Matter antimatter annihilation is the reason. During the early stages of the Big Bang, matter and antimatter were created in nearly equal amounts. Electrons and positrons, protons and antiprotons, etc. They annihilate on contact and produce two gamma rays. But due to expansion of the universe the photons lose energy as they are stretched in transit and lose the ability to transform back into particles. Today they are very low energy indeed and roughly one thousand times less energetic.
Thus they are very numerous but make up only a small fraction of the energy in the universe. The ratio of these photons to normal matter essentially is the symmetry breaking that tipped the balance in favor of matter throughout the visible universe. No one knows exactly why it's this ratio, a successful theory could net someone a novel prize.
Just outside it a little to the West, actually.
Summary: God went bowling to knock some sense into wayward particle clumps.
Table-ized A.I.
There is a perfectly good non-scientific explanation for the origin of light, but for some reason, many are hesitant to accept it.