Here’s a nice brief history of time. Plasma formed a few seconds after the bang. We know about those seconds, but not the first milliseconds or how spacetime became spacetime.
At the beginning of the Universe, within minutes of the Big Bang, space was filled with a hot, dense fog of ionized plasma. What little light there was wouldn’t have penetrated this fog; photons would simply have scattered off the free electrons floating around, effectively making the Universe dark
.
Or look like this?
The universe is made up of space plasma, the fourth state of matter.
The universe is made of up of space plasma. Plasma is the word given to the fourth state of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma).
A plasma is a gas that is so hot that some or all its constituent atoms are split up into electrons and ions, which can move independently of each other. Because they are made up of electrically charged particles, plasmas can be strongly influenced by electrostatic and electromagnetic fields and forces, which can lead to very complex and interesting behaviour.
Abstract
The scarcity and contamination of water, aggravated by the effects of Climate Change, endanger the food supply, cause health problems to humans, and are a critical concern. New research has been carried out to improve the quality of water used in the agricultural sector. One of them is the technology of non-thermal plasma (NTP) generated by corona discharges using air as a working gas.
In this study, the NTP is applied directly and causing the activation to three water sources: potable, wastewater from poultry farming, and rain, on the legume “lentil.” The results show that the NTP applied to the different water conditions modifies the legume structure, obtaining a better germination and growth rate. In particular, it found that the best condition to stimulate the plant structure growth is using wastewater from poultry activities, which NTP activates.
Likewise, it identified the internalization of pathogenic microorganisms such as Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium since the early development of the plant. The bacteria reduction after NTP application is detected due to the effect of the reactive species generated by the NTP. The NTP application for water activation can represent an alternative to solve the demand for food since the development of the structures of legumes, particularly of lentils, is promoted.
Agronomy | Free Full-Text | Non-Thermal Plasma as an Alternative to Enhance the Early Growth Structures in Lentil Plants
Again, my curiousity. Why? Why do you simply post something else about plasma? How is that a response?
Nope. That’s not what a singularity is.
Maybe you are referring to this quote
The first state of matter
Shalom and Yaffa Eliezer write in their book, The Fourth State of Matter, An Introduction to Plasma Science:
“Over 15 billion years ago our Universe was squeezed into an extremely small ball, that was unstable and exploded violently. This was the most gigantic explosion of all time. This description of the early Universe is known today as the ‘Big Bang’ model. […]”
“The matter which composed the Universe was so hot that everything was in the form of plasma. Thus, in the very beginning, plasma was the first state of matter. The fragments of this explosion became the stars of our Universe, including our own Sun. During the expansion of our Universe, the matter cooled down and thus some of the plasma changed into gas, which further cooled down and became transformed into the liquid and eventually the solid states. This is the reverse of the sequence of events which will be discussed in Chapter 2 on generating plasma as the fourth state of matter.” (emboldening added) [3]
But note, this is about matter, which didn’t come about until there was a place for matter to exist.
Of course, everything came after the BB.
But relational values emerged early during the cooling of the pasma and information exchange started as self-organizing elements with specific relational values began to emerge from the chaos.
Also after the singularity
Yes the singularity came first, which means it was homogenous, but also dynamic.
IMO, Life is just another expression of dynamism.
dy·na·mism
/ˈdīnəˌmizəm/
noun
You still have not addressed nothing. That’s not a double negative. Nothing is the topic. Singularities or these other theories of matter are off of this topic.
This leaves the only logically possible nothingness that can have been the first state of reality: an ontologically potent nothingness, a nothingless with the inalienable property of inevitably collapsing into something else.
[quote=“lausten, post:25, topic:10715”]
Also after the singularity
Yes, the expanding singularity spread 360 degrees creating spacetime in the process. It replaced nothing with something. We don’t have any testable models what came before the singularity that inflated as the “BB”.
Let me answer that with a model that describes the process.
Causal dynamical triangulation (CDT), theorized by Renate Loll, Jan Ambjørn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz, is an approach to quantum gravity that, like loop quantum gravity, is background-independent.
This means that it does not assume any pre-existing arena (dimensional space) but, rather, attempts to show how the spacetime fabric itself evolves.
There is evidence [1] that, at large scales, CDT approximates the familiar 4-dimensional spacetime but shows spacetime to be 2-dimensional near the Planck scale, and reveals a fractal structure on slices of constant time.
These interesting results agree with the findings of Lauscher and Reuter, who use an approach called Quantum Einstein Gravity, and with other recent theoretical work.
Causal dynamical triangulation - Wikipedia
I don’t see how that’s an “answer”. Why do you want to believe that there are facts about the beginning of the universe that are agreed upon and have consensus? CDT is interesting, I’m glad you introduced me to it, but it’s not “the answer”.
This is the concluding line of a science direct article,
Future challenges to CDT include incorporating matter, black holes, and Big Bang cosmology
Or
.
First, this was in response to your comment :
I merely identified the place where matter can exist, inside the expanding universe itself, which originated as a singularity.
Everything else, like strings (fields) comes after, not before inflation.
I don’t see how it is. It’s not about something from nothing. If you’re saying the topic is the entire universe, then you could say anything and you would be in topic. So, that wouldn’t be a topic at all. The topic is the place where the math breaks down, where our ability to describe it fails.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument begins with, “everything that exists has a cause”, but is that true?
As more thoroughly stated in one of the sub-links
This is the fundamental problem with the Kalam’s first premise. It is self-contradictory to propose that a causal principle itself ‘has’ to be caused; but allowing that it is not caused refutes the principles. Until the causal principle comes into existence, the principle that anything ‘has’ to be caused does not exist. So the causal principle itself cannot have had a cause, any more than there can have been a time before time, or a location north of the north pole. And as for that, so for anything else.
Saying “it’s a singularity” leads to “what caused the singularity?”
So we are trying to describe that “something” emerged from a condition of absolute “nothingness” prior to the emergence of a singularity and the subsequent BB .
Yes, that’s an age-old riddle.
Frankly, I have no idea how something can emerge from nothing, but that problem exists for any model that starts from “nothing”, and there is now “something” so whatever came before is irrelevant and outside our knowledge or utility.
But tracing back the expansion we do begin with a singularity as the simplest mathematical object that can exist in physical reality. What came before, who knows.
This may be of interest.
The field definition in physics is “a region of space in which a force acts.” Because a field is a region of space, it can be made of anything (or nothing if it is a vacuum). Fields are important to society at large, not just to physicists. Dec 12, 2022
Fields in Physics | Definition, Types & Examples | Study.com
You are so difficult
No, this is mainstream science. That is what I quote, mainstream science.
We can only expect to understand in principle how our current universe was made and evolved.
Of necessity, this first quantum event can only be measured from t=1 and forward.
We have some very reliable data that supports the concept of an expanding singularity of pure energy . Hence mainstream consensus for an Inflationary Epoch and the current concept of an expanding universe within this growing universal manifold.
I’ve pointed out things you said and you have not shown me quotes for them. You switch to talking about other things.
Like
And
What is inconsistent in those statements?
As the spacetime fabric is “stretched”, the potential energy contained in the expanding singularity becomes plasma, a collection of several quantum fields, and still later these fields produce the first physical elements, from which matter is made and the mathematically dynamical universe begins its self-ordering pattern forming.
You said you were quoting science. Where is your citation?
Every one of them, take your pick. I differ with convention only in support of Tegmark’s Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (MUH).
**## Description
Tegmark’s MUH is the hypothesis that our external physical reality is a mathematical structure.[3] That is, the physical universe is not merely described by mathematics, but is mathematics — specifically, a mathematical structure.
Mathematical existence equals physical existence, and all structures that exist mathematically exist physically as well. Observers, including humans, are “self-aware substructures (SASs)”. In any mathematical structure complex enough to contain such substructures, they “will subjectively perceive themselves as existing in a physically ‘real’ world”.[4]
The theory can be considered a form of Pythagoreanism or Platonism in that it proposes the existence of mathematical entities; a form of mathematicism in that it denies that anything exists except mathematical objects; and a formal expression of ontic structural realism.**
None of those contain or support the quotes you made that I copied in post 35. I didn’t say the universe as it exists now is not mathematical. Being correct about one thing doesn’t make you correct about a different thing.
I am glad when I am correct about a thing. I am happy to discuss when I am called wrong.
