Science Matters!

- The Big Bang -

Questions -

Q601 - Current theory has the Universe originating from a singularity (Big Bang). Why do we believe it began from a single point? Why not from something the size of a ping pong ball? A star?: [No Answer Yet - Do You have a candidate answer?]
Q602 - One zillionth of a second after the big bang, did the universe qualify as a Black Hole?: Answer provided by Kevin Brown
Q603 - When scientists talk of the first fractions of a second after the Big Bang, are they referring to 1) Time as measured near the center of the expanding ball? or 2) Time as measured near the edge of the expanding ball? (or are they equivalent? or does it matter?) At first glance it would appear that time would move much slower towards the center of the big bang since it contains such a greater concentration of mass.: [No Answer Yet - Do You have a candidate answer?]
Q604 - If there was a Big Bang then presumably we'd be somewhere close to the edge of the expanding balloon. Why then do we see such uniformity in the space around us?: [No Answer Yet - Do You have a candidate answer?]
Q605 - Presumably time was distorted (slowed down) during the first few fractions of a second after the Big Bang due to the immense concentration of mass. If I recorded the Big Bang on video and played it back at "normal" speed (time as measured away from gravitational fields) how long would it take to view the first full second of the Big Bang? An hour? A year? Longer?: [No Answer Yet - Do You have a candidate answer?]

Answers -

Current theory has the Universe originating from a singularity (Big Bang). Why do we believe it began from a single point? Why not from something the size of a ping pong ball? A star?

A 601

[No answer yet - Do you have a candidate answer? See Below]

Q 602

One zillionth of a second after the big bang, did the universe qualify as a Black Hole?

A 602

No. At least, not if you define the term "black hole" in the way that general relativists usually do. The term as it is generally defined refers to a sufficiently massive concentration of stuff embedded in otherwise empty space. Since the big bang (according to standard models) has stuff everywhere, it doesn't meet this definition.

Of course, this is just a definition, and if you choose to, you could define the term "black hole" in a different way. If you do adopt a nonstandard definition, then you should bend over backwards to make sure the people you're talking to know that that's what you're doing, lest horrible confusion ensue.

12 May 96 - Ted Bunn - bunn@leporello.berkeley.edu

Q 603

When scientists talk of the first fractions of a second after the Big Bang, are they referring to 1) Time as measured near the center of the expanding ball? or 2) Time as measured near the edge of the expanding ball? (or are they equivalent? or does it matter?) At first glance it would appear that time would move much slower towards the center of the big bang since it contains such a greater concentration of mass.

A 603

[No answer yet - Do you have a candidate answer? See Below]

Q 604

If there was a Big Bang then presumably we'd be somewhere close to the edge of the expanding balloon. Why then do we see such uniformity in the space around us?

A 604

[No answer yet - Do you have a candidate answer? See Below]

Q 605

Presumably time was distorted (slowed down) during the first few fractions of a second after the Big Bang due to the immense concentration of mass. If I recorded the Big Bang on video and played it back at "normal" speed (time as measured away from gravitational fields) how long would it take to view the first full second of the Big Bang? An hour? A year? Longer?

A 605