Friday, October 12, 2012

Why was the Big Bang not a Black Hole?

A documentary about what happened before the Big Bang was repeated on the BBC last night, and it got me wondering why the Big Bang was not a Black Hole, a Super-duper-massive Black Hole. There was all this matter, all the matter in the universe, in this tiny, tiny space. So why the explosion? And why an inflationary explosion? And why is the universe still accelerating? Did dark energy make it all happen? That does sound like a physics of the gaps.
......I had already been wondering why an amount of antimatter equal to the observable matter of the universe would not be in the form of an uncollapsed standing wave (like electron shells around atomic nuclei). The popular theory of where all the antimatter went is that there was originally a lot more extra matter and an equal amount of antimatter which annihilated each other. But that would just create a lot of heat and light, none of which could escape a Black Hole. But, were the antimatter in a standing wave, then the uncollapsed antimatter suffusing the primordial atom would make it effectively massless, so there would be no Black Hole, while the repulsive force between the matter and the antimatter would cause an explosive expansion. Furthermore, the appearance of dark matter would be explained; while the standing wave would enforce a certain uniformity, much as the inflationary period is supposed to have done.
......I have not heard of any such theory, so that thought is not even philosophy of physics, but listening to the physicists in that documentary made me wonder whether there might be such a theory. The things they were saying were pretty off the wall (according to each other).

No comments: