About LHC and early Universe

[funestis]

My question is about LHC.

As I understand the LHC will simulate time of few milliseconds after Big Bang.

A time before predicted inflation.


If there was an inflation then theory predicts an different topology of pre and post inflatory universe.

Diferent topology means different interactions between paricles.

So how can LHC give a clue about early Universe as the interactions (regardless the energy) will be essentially different than interactions predicted for early (pre inflatory) Universe?

I apologize for may bad English as it is not my native language.

[Cougar]

As I understand the LHC will simulate time of few milliseconds after Big Bang.

A time before predicted inflation.

Inflation is suggested to be a lot earlier than a few milliseconds after t=0. More like 10^-34 seconds. The LHC will be 10 or 15 orders of magnitude short of that.

If there was an inflation then theory predicts an different topology of pre and post inflatory universe.

Diferent topology means different interactions between paricles.

It's questionable whether there were any particles pre-inflation. Just energy.

So how can LHC give a clue about early Universe as the interactions (regardless the energy) will be essentially different than interactions predicted for early (pre inflatory) Universe?

They'll test whatever can be tested. It will take some studying to understand what they're doing.

[m1omg]

Isn't energy represented by the photon particle?

[JTankers]

The Loop Quantum Gravity line of thought predicts that the pre-big bang universe was actually very similar to the post big-bang universe.

Similar lines of thinking at BigCrash.org, smaller open source project based on educated speculation along the lines of Loop Quantum Gravity theory that appears to fit well with cosmological observation including otherwise not well explained cosmological phenomena.

[selden]

Isn't energy represented by the photon particle?

Well, no. Energy is represented by (measured in) units of Joules or electronvolts (eV). (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronvolt )

Photons have energy. Photons can be described as both particles and waves. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon)

I'm being picky about the way you use the words because the distinctions are important. Not understanding the differences leads to confusion and inappropriate belief in ATM points of view.

And don't forget that although they're convenient, Wikipedia articles may contain serious errors.

[mugaliens]

My question is about LHC.

As I understand the LHC will simulate time of few milliseconds after Big Bang.

A time before predicted inflation.


If there was an inflation then theory predicts an different topology of pre and post inflatory universe.

Diferent topology means different interactions between paricles.

So how can LHC give a clue about early Universe as the interactions (regardless the energy) will be essentially different than interactions predicted for early (pre inflatory) Universe?

I apologize for may bad English as it is not my native language.

I have a pet ATM theory that the Big Bang was caused by scientists trying to recreate the first moments of the universe, and when they succeeded, it ripped the very fabric of space-time, essentially breaking down every fundamental physical phenomenon which currently governs our own universe, including the speed of light. All matter is converted to pure energy which then instantaneously appears at a singular and BANG!

A Big Bang.

And it all begins anew...

Cheery thought, huh?

[John Mendenhall]

A Big Bang.

And it all begins anew...

Cheery thought, huh?

And, by evolution over infinite time, creates a new universe which will produce intelligent life to probe the origins and create a new cycle . . .

Scary thought, huh?

Why, we could be sitting here happily typing away and suddenly just disap

[mugaliens]

You're abolutely corre

[m1omg]

Well, no. Energy is represented by (measured in) units of Joules or electronvolts (eV). (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronvolt )

Photons have energy. Photons can be described as both particles and waves. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon)

I'm being picky about the way you use the words because the distinctions are important. Not understanding the differences leads to confusion and inappropriate belief in ATM points of view.

And don't forget that although they're convenient, Wikipedia articles may contain serious errors.

I do not mean UNITS but that PHOTONS are PARTICLES that carry energy.
I do not know of any thing as "pure energy" except for radiation=photons.

[alainprice]

What about a charged battery or a hot piece of something? Can't that be classified as energy separate from the particle(s)?

An electron carries energy as well, its mass.

Calling a photon the energy particle limits your options too much to fit current observations.

[korjik]

I do not mean UNITS but that PHOTONS are PARTICLES that carry energy.
I do not know of any thing as "pure energy" except for radiation=photons.

Gravitational energy, strong and weak nuclear forces, phonons in crystals...

Lots of ways to have energy without a single photon around.

Photons are carries of electomagnetism. That is all.

[korjik]

What about a charged battery or a hot piece of something? Can't that be classified as energy separate from the particle(s)?

An electron carries energy as well, its mass.

Calling a photon the energy particle limits your options too much to fit current observations.

aaack, I cant believe I forgot currents!

[m1omg]

What about a charged battery or a hot piece of something? Can't that be classified as energy separate from the particle(s)?

An electron carries energy as well, its mass.

Calling a photon the energy particle limits your options too much to fit current observations.

Sorry but are you all ignorant or playing word games ?We are talking about the time before the inflation, just a moment after the BB when no "hot piece of something" or electrons or what existed, there was one unified force and no matter.So what was that "pure energy"?Surely high energy photons.

[korjik]

Sorry but are you all ignorant or playing word games ?We are talking about the time before the inflation, just a moment after the BB when no "hot piece of something" or electrons or what existed, there was one unified force and no matter.So what was that "pure energy"?Surely high energy photons.

Even then they wouldnt be photons. Once you get up to energies where electromagnetism and weak force combine, the carrier particles are different.

[m1omg]

Even then they wouldnt be photons. Once you get up to energies where electromagnetism and weak force combine, the carrier particles are different.

Well, but what particles they would be?

[alainprice]

Symmetry breaking, my man, symmetry breaking.

The W and Z bosons play a role in the unified electroweak force, so they cannot be discounted in favor of the photon.

[korjik]

Well, but what particles they would be?

Go look it up.

[alainprice]

Go look it up.

Don't give him the right answer, I'm still busy playing word games.

[funestis]

Inflation is suggested to be a lot earlier than a few milliseconds after t=0. More like 10^-34 seconds. The LHC will be 10 or 15 orders of magnitude short of that.




It's questionable whether there were any particles pre-inflation. Just energy.



They'll test whatever can be tested. It will take some studying to understand what they're doing.

Tks Coguar.

And, my error fo time of Inflation (at least for majority accepted theory).