[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question about inflation theory

Subject: Re: Question about inflation theory
From: "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 08:10:32 -0700
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Dear George:

"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message 
news:[email protected]
> Recently, new results were released from NASA's
> Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP)
> satellite, launched in 2001 to measure the
> temperature of radiant heat left over from the Big
> Bang, which is the theoretical beginning to the
> universe.  The new WMAP observations,
> announced at a NASA press conference today,
> reveal what the universe was like in the first
> trillionth of a second after the Big Bang. From
> the microwave background, researchers
> teased out a new signal called the "polarization
> signal."  According to the conclusions of this
> report, during this growth spurt, a tiny region,
> likely no larger than a marble, grew in a trillionth of a 
> second to become larger than
> the visible universe.

"... a trillion trillionth of a second"

> Well, I'm confused.  According to Einstein nothing
> can travel faster than the speed of light.

Right.  You can't apply enough energy to an object to get 
anywhere near c.

> If that is true, how is it that the universe
> expanded from the size of a marble to
> something large than the visible universe in
> a trillionth of a second?

No explosion.  No energy required.  No massive particles involved 
(since none of the "four forces" had congealed yet).  Simply an 
adjustment in the distance between all "bits" of energy.

>  I'm neither an astrophysicist nor a physicist, which is why 
> I'm asking this question here.  And please
> be kind, as my calculus is a little rusty these days.
> Any thoughts?

It is what the data points to, couched in the Standard Model. 
Stay tuned!  More sights to be revealed.

I'd vote for Ernest Wittke building another EinsteinHoax page.

David A. Smith 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>