Quake3World.com Forums
     General Discussion
        MKJ (or NS or other physics types)


Post new topicReply to topic
Login | Profile | | FAQ | Search | IRC




Previous topic | Next topic 
Topic Starter Topic: MKJ (or NS or other physics types)

guru
guru
Joined: 13 Mar 2001
Posts: 18068
PostPosted: 06-05-2007 04:56 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


MKJ - Was it your brother who was getting a master's in astronomy or cosmology or something to that effect?

I'm trying to find someone who can explain something -

When you look at the current models for symmetry breaking from unified field theory you see that the proposed 'break' for electromagnetic/weak from electroweak don't occur until around 10 to the -10th or so second. But when I read current descriptions of early conditions post big bang (from plank time up to when this symmetry breaking would occur - a fraction of a second, but still several orders of magnitude - most descriptions indicate the presence of photons present BEFORE symmetry breaking would have seperated weak and electromagnetic forces from the unified electroweak force...now, I'm pretty much completely self-taught in this area, but I didn't think you could have photons, the exchange particle for electromagnetic force prior to that force having broken from the unified electroweak. What am I missing here?

What form would the energy present in the universe prior to this symmetry breaking have been in if not photons (and definitely not matter)?

Thoughts?




Top
                 

straight at you
straight at you
Joined: 18 Dec 2000
Posts: 27931
PostPosted: 06-05-2007 05:52 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Let's see... Before the break, weren't there only basic, uniform particles/quarks, that were all identical? It was my understanding that the break of the singularity caused those basic particles to become the 6 (is it 6?) differently charged, differently spinning particles/quarks that we have today -- i.e. some became the building blocks of photons, some of protons, some of electrons, etc.


crap nevermind, now i've confused myself -- photons aren't built the same way as protons and electrons.




Top
                 

guru
guru
Joined: 13 Mar 2001
Posts: 18068
PostPosted: 06-05-2007 06:16 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


R00k wrote:
Let's see... Before the break, weren't there only basic, uniform particles/quarks, that were all identical? It was my understanding that the break of the singularity caused those basic particles to become the 6 (is it 6?) differently charged, differently spinning particles/quarks that we have today -- i.e. some became the building blocks of photons, some of protons, some of electrons, etc.


crap nevermind, now i've confused myself -- photons aren't built the same way as protons and electrons.


Yea, that's not it - not an answer to the question being asked I mean...and there are some things mixed up in there, but I don't imagine this is something you are focusing on everyday so no worries... thanks for trying.




Top
                 

Messatsu Ko Jy-ouu
Messatsu Ko Jy-ouu
Joined: 24 Nov 2000
Posts: 44139
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 04:21 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


(he already has his masters :icon32: )

paraphrased;


Quote:
in a nutshell; there is a force called electroweak. This force is conveyed between matter through special particles, 'gauge bosons'. The electroweak force is devided in four bosons; Aminus, Aplus, Bminus and Bplus.

When the amount of energy decreased in the universe (due to the inflation), the bosons' properties changed. Three of them suddenly had mass. This process is called Electroweak Symmetry Breaking.

The three particles that have mass still work as conveyers of the electroweak force, but since they now have mass they can only do this over short distances (the more mass something has, the bigger the chance that it degrades).
The one particle that didn't change properties is able to travel indefinitely (no mass, therefore no degredation). This particle is what we know as the Photon.

Ergo, photons didn't change during the Electroweak Symmetry Breaking which means it is perfectly acceptable to have a theory that says there were photons before electroweak.



also had to say that R00k is completely wrong, quarks are very much not the building blocks of photons and electrons. (you was right about the protons though). singularity has nothing to do with this at all.




Top
                 

straight at you
straight at you
Joined: 18 Dec 2000
Posts: 27931
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 05:03 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Everything I know about this subject I got out of A Brief History of Time, so a lot of it is probably outdated (and a little oversimplified in my brain :p ).

Looks like I'm also remembering it slightly wrong; I'll have to go back and do some re-reading.

What you say about the mass is familiar though. It seems like I also read that the particles that are the vehicles for gravity don't have mass either, which is why they're able to work over such long distances.

After I finish ABHoT, are there any other books you guys would recommend to bring me up to date on the more recent advances and theories?


edit: and when i said singularity i was talking about the big bang. i was under the impression that everything was essentially a singularity just before the bang -- is this not true?




Top
                 

god xor reason
god xor reason
Joined: 08 Dec 1999
Posts: 21100
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 07:31 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


There was a chapter about this in The Elegant Universe but I dont remember much besides what MKJ quoted.




Top
                 

guru
guru
Joined: 13 Mar 2001
Posts: 18068
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 02:42 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


R00k wrote:
Everything I know about this subject I got out of A Brief History of Time, so a lot of it is probably outdated (and a little oversimplified in my brain :p ).

Looks like I'm also remembering it slightly wrong; I'll have to go back and do some re-reading.

What you say about the mass is familiar though. It seems like I also read that the particles that are the vehicles for gravity don't have mass either, which is why they're able to work over such long distances.

After I finish ABHoT, are there any other books you guys would recommend to bring me up to date on the more recent advances and theories?


edit: and when i said singularity i was talking about the big bang. i was under the impression that everything was essentially a singularity just before the bang -- is this not true?


I've mentioned this book several times, but I can't emphasize it enough - the next book you MUST read after ABHoT is Alpha and Omega by Charles Seife. Bar-none, the best, most accessible and thorough book I've ever read on the work that has been done, and is being done, looking at the history and fate of the universe. The only downside is that it is from 2002, so a tad dated already - but don't let that affect a decision to read it. YOu can get this one on amazon a couple bucks now. Again, I recommend this book for everyone interested in cosmology because after reading it you will have the background you need to really be able to get into the other books on the subject. The book is great because it doesn't just give an overview of what cosmologists have discovered, it goes through HOW they discovered it as well as what they are trying to figure out today (i.e. ways to detect gravitational waves, etc.).

I hope you're getting my point here that you should read this book next.




Top
                 

straight at you
straight at you
Joined: 18 Dec 2000
Posts: 27931
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 03:06 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Sheesh, okay, I'll get it already!

j/k :p


As it happens I've got a book on order at Barnes and Noble that I'll have to go pick up in a couple days anyway, so I'll probably pick it up then. Thanks for the recommendation. :icon14:




Top
                 

Knight of the Sad Countenance
Knight of the Sad Countenance
Joined: 12 Nov 2001
Posts: 8035
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 03:33 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


bitWISE wrote:
There was a chapter about this in The Elegant Universe .


I have the Documentary..... Watched it a few times...I dont remember any of it. My brain just farts on this subject.



_________________
My Flickr page

A lot of people would say it's a bad idea, on your first day out of prison, to go right back to stalking the tranny hooker that knocked out five of your teeth. But that's how I roll..


Top
                 

Messatsu Ko Jy-ouu
Messatsu Ko Jy-ouu
Joined: 24 Nov 2000
Posts: 44139
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 11:14 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


recommended Big Bang reading; the first chapter of A Brief History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson




Top
                 

straight at you
straight at you
Joined: 18 Dec 2000
Posts: 27931
PostPosted: 06-12-2007 03:18 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


So just the first chapter?

I'm going to B&N to pick up the book I ordered, and Alpha and Omega. Is Bryson's not purchase material? Is it perhaps over my head?




Top
                 

menkent
menkent
Joined: 22 Jul 2000
Posts: 4758
PostPosted: 06-12-2007 06:14 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


on this corollary topic - anyone read "Gravity's Arc"? recommended?




Top
                 
Quake3World.com | Forum Index | General Discussion


Post new topic Reply to topic


cron
Quake3World.com
© ZeniMax. Zenimax, QUAKE III ARENA, Id Software and associated trademarks are trademarks of the ZeniMax group of companies. All rights reserved.
This is an unofficial fan website without any affiliation with or endorsement by ZeniMax.
All views and opinions expressed are those of the author.