The 1st few seconds of the Big Bang: What we know and what we don't

By Paul Sutter 

The infant universe was a busy place.

·  

Paul M. Sutter is an astrophysicist at SUNY Stony Brook and the Flatiron Institute, host of Ask a Spaceman and Space Radio, and author of How to Die in Space. He contributed this article to Space.com's Expert Voices: Opinions and Insights.

Believe it or not, physicists are attempting to understand the universe when it was only a handful of seconds old. 

But the situation here is complex, to say the least, and while we've made significant headway, there's still a lot left to learn. From miniature black holes to exotic interactions, the infant universe was a busy place.

The known knowns

Let's start with the general framework. 13.77 billion years ago, our universe was incredibly hot (a temperature of over a quadrillion degrees) and incredibly small (about the size of a peach). Astronomers suspect that, when our cosmos was less than a second old, it went through a period of incredibly rapid expansion, known as inflation.

This inflation event was perhaps the most transformative epoch ever to occur in the history of our universe. In less than a blink, our universe became incredibly larger (enlarging by a factor of at least 10^52). When this rapid expansion phase wound down, whatever caused inflation in the first place (we're not sure what) decayed, flooding the universe with matter and radiation (we're not sure how).

A few minutes later (literally), the first elements emerged. Prior to this time, the universe was too hot and too dense for anything stable to form — it was just a giant mix of quarks (the fundamental building blocks of atomic nuclei) and gluons (the carriers of the strong nuclear force). But once the universe was a healthy dozen minutes old, it had expanded and cooled enough that the quarks could bind themselves together, forming the first protons and neutrons. Those protons and neutrons made the first hydrogen and helium (and a little bit of lithium), which went on hundreds of millions of years later to build the first stars and galaxies.

From the formation of the first elements, the universe just expanded and cooled, eventually becoming a plasma, and then a neutral gas. 

While we know that this broad-brush story is correct, we also know that we're missing a lot of details, especially in the time before the formation of the first elements. Some funky physics may have been in operation when the universe was only a few seconds old, and it's currently beyond our theoretical understanding — but that doesn't stop us from trying. 

This graphic shows a timeline of the universe based on the Big Bang theory and inflation models. (Image credit: NASA/WMAP)

The known unknowns

A paper recently appearing in the preprint journal arXiv, and accepted for publication in The Open Journal of Astrophysics, lays out some of the more exotic very-early-universe scenarios.

For example, there's the whole question about dark matter. We don't know what dark matter is made of, but we do know that it's responsible for over 80% of the matter in the universe. We have a well-understood story for how normal matter originated in the hot, dense soup of the early cosmos, but we have no clue when or how dark matter came on the scene. Did it appear in the first few seconds? Or much later? Did it mess up the cosmic chemistry that led to the first elements, or stay in the background?

We don't know.

Then there's inflation itself. We don't know what provided the power source for the incredible expansion event, we don't know why it lasted the length of time that it did, and we don't know what eventually stopped it. Perhaps inflation lingered for longer than we've been assuming, and made its presence known for an entire second, rather than the tiny fraction that we've been assuming. 

Here's another one: there's this massive thorn in the side of every cosmologist known as matter-antimatter asymmetry. We see from experiments that matter and antimatter are perfectly symmetrical: for every particle of matter made in reactions throughout the universe, there's also a corresponding particle of antimatter. But when we look around the cosmos, we see heaps and heaps of normal matter and not a drop of antimatter in sight. Something huge must have happened in the first few seconds of the universe's existence to throw off that balance. But as to who or what was responsible, and the exact mechanism, we're not sure.

And if dark matter and inflation and antimatter weren't enough, there's also the possibility that the early universe might have manufactured a flood of small black holes. Black holes in the present-day cosmos (i.e., the past 13 billion years) all come from the deaths of massive stars. Those are the only places where the density of matter can reach the critical thresholds necessary to trigger black hole formation. But in the exotic early universe, random patches of the cosmos may have achieved sufficient density, triggering the creation of black holes without having to go through the whole star-formation thing first. Maybe.

Images: Black holes of the universe

Click here for more Space.com videos...

The Oldest Light: The Cosmic Microwave Background Explained

Digging deeper

While our theory of the Big Bang is supported by a wealth of observational data, there are plenty of mysteries to satisfy the curiosity of generations of cosmologists. Thankfully, we're not completely blind when trying to study this early epoch. 

For example, even if we can't directly see the state of the universe when it was only a few seconds old, we can try to recreate those conditions in our powerful particle colliders. It's not perfect, but it can at least teach us about the physics of those kinds of environments.

We can also look for clues left over from the first few seconds. Anything funky going on then would've left its mark on the later universe. Changing the amount of dark matter or a lingering inflation would upset the creation of hydrogen and helium, something we can measure today. 

And the universe transitioned from a plasma to a neutral gas when it was 380,000 years old. The light released then has persisted in the form of the cosmic microwave background. If the universe popped out a bunch of small black holes, they would affect this afterglow light pattern.

We might even hope to observe this epoch directly. Not with light, but with gravitational waves. That chaotic inferno must have released a torrent of ripples in the fabric of space-time, which — like the cosmic microwave background — would have survived to the present day. We don't yet have the technological capability to directly observe those gravitational waves, but every day we're inching closer.

And perhaps when we do, we'll get a glimpse of the newborn universe.

Learn more: "The First Three Seconds: A Review of Possible Expansion Histories of the Early Universe"

                                                               MY COMMENT

 Probing of the Universe speeds on with new revelations arising regularly.  As existing opinions are scrutinised, many are proved to be false.  The more we discover, the more we realise we do not know. Scientists are forced to "invent" new words or phrases to describe processes they suspect but of which they have no knowledge.  e.g.  The Universe is expanding at an increasing rate for no known reason, so the term "Dark energy"  has been invented but we know nothing about it whatsoever. Also "Dark Matter" which is the name given as the source of a gravitational effect they cannot identify.   and as many distant galaxies appear to moving away faster than the speed of light, (which is the supposed maximum speed of matter) it is claimed the  the actual fabric of space is expanding.  However, we know that some galaxies are speeding towards us at about 250000 mph.  and the distance between the stars in the Milky Way remains constant. so that the space fabric within many  is not expanding.  Theory has been put forward that the expansion of the universe space is balanced by gravity within a galaxy but not outside thereof.  What next!. Many "scientists" then proceed on the basis that their theorys  are facts. Clearly the Universe was intelligently designed by an Intelligence far beyond our understanding but many refuse to acknowledge the exixtence of such an intelligent being. I believe (my opinion, not from scripture) that the concept of "Space-time" will be retracted as "space" and "time" are two entirely different concepts. You can easilly move around in "Space" (even if remaining within the Earthly environment) but we cannot move about in time. Time moves on inexorably and carries us with it. Even though radiation is ariving from the past it is now in the present and cannot proceed into the future ahead of the present.

 One thing is very clear. Virtually all scientists of many branches of science agree that the Earth and the Universe are billions of years old but the Bible appears to indicate a period of less than 10000 years.. Obviously, those two understandings are totally incompatible.

I am not competent to assess the scientific calculations so, until otherwise is proven I have to accept the Scientist's view and examine the Bible to determine what it does and does not say.. The Bible view is expressed Genesis chapter 1, with some further amplification in Genesis 2.
The immediate impression is that the creation sequence in the Bible narrative is amazingly similar to the sequence expressed by most scientists including that the Universe was created. i.e. The Universe was created from nothing, not transposed from something else. All scientific evidence currently available also points to that conclusion. As I understand it, scientists calculate that beginning as being about 13 billion years ago, basing their calculation on the present size and the expansion speed of the Universe having been constant after an initial very short period (less than one second) of super inflation. That period of super inflation is consistent with God creating the Universe by his word. Furthermore, the order of creation events set out in the Bible corresponds remarkably with the order believed by most scientists. Whether the Earth is 10000 years old or vastly older, I believe the Bible is accurate in spite of us not being entirely sure of what it is saying on this matter. A lot is beyond a true believer's comprehension and a lot is beyond scientists' knowledge but God is sovereign over all.

 
Psa 33:6  By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 

Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 

The Bible does not specify how long a period "the beginning" covered.

Gen 1:2  And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 

However, the first word  "was"  is more correctly translated "became" - compare with

Isa 45:18  For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Here "in vain" is "Tohu",  the same word as translated "without form and void" in Genesis 2:2  making it clear that when first formed  the Earth was not  "Tohu".. This appears to mean that there was a time gap between Geneses 1:1  and  1:2.

 
Gen 1:3  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 

Gen 1:4  And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 

I understand that most scientists agree that "light" did not exist until well into, or after, the initial expansion.

Gen 1:5  And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 
Gen 1:6  And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 

Gen 1:7  And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 

Gen 1:8  And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 

This makes it clear that the Earth once had a vast "canopy" of water vapor, similar to the canopy currently around Venus.  

Gen 1:9  And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 

Gen 1:10  And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 

The Bible probably records the collapse of the Earth's canopy in Noah's flood 

Gen 7:11  In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 

where the term "windows of heaven" appears to include something higher than the firmament.

It has long been established that there was originally one super-continent containing all the dry land on Earth,  called   "Pangaea" which subsequently split and drifted apart to form the present land masses. In fact, the Bible records the Earth was divided (Peleg means "Earthquake") long before any human could possibly have known that. This means all the waters under the firmament were gathered together. I would love any scientist explain to me how, between 7000 BC and 2000 BC  any human could have known of the drift of continents - not proposed by any scientist until AD 1500+ ,with no acceptance until the 20th century.

Gen 10:25  And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan. 

Gen 1:11  And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 

Gen 1:12  And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 

Gen 1:13  And the evening and the morning were the third day. 

This fully accords with science in that vegetation appeared before animals.
However, the Bible says 

Gen 1:14  And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 

Gen 1:15  And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 

Gen 1:16  And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 

Gen 1:17  And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 

Gen 1:18  And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 

This conflicts with science and present knowledge that sunlight is necessary for vegetation but different frequencies of light .do have different effects on and responses from, vegetation photosynthesis and the light created on Day 1 may have been sufficient.

Gen 1:20  And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 

Gen 1:21  And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 

Gen 1:22  And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 

Gen 1:23  And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 

Gen 1:24  And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 

Gen 1:25  And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 

Gen 1:26  And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

 
Scientists believe life began in the seas and that man was the last animal to develop.

Gen 1:29  And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 

Gen 1:30  And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 

It seems all animals, including man, started off as vegetarians, which was changed in

Gen 9:3  Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. 


With regard to the length of time covered by Genesis 1,the word translated "day" in Genesis 1 does not indicate a 24 hour period. In fact it is used before the creation of the Sun so could not have meant a day as we understand it today. The scriptures make it quite clear that time has no limitation on God.

2Pe 3:8  But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 

"Day" is used just to indicate the passage of sequence of events The net result of the foregoing is that there is no discrepancy between science and the Bible except for the creation of vegetation before sunlight.  The answer may be that we have no detail of the source of the light created on day one. It could well have produced the requirements for vegetation.
Of course we must not ignore the possibility that the Genesis record is accurate in it's apparent interpretation and the observations and conclusions of many scientists flawed. That would require a deliberate arrangement of the evidence specifically for the purpose of misleading humans - fully possible for a sovereign God.  One way or another, I believe that the Bible will turn out to be correct once we have all the facts clearly available. 

Consider this. Scientists clearly acknowledge that all dry land on Earth was once gathered together in one vast continent (Pangea).. The Bible was saying that thousands of years before science "discovered" it. The various mountain chains were formed, eventually, by the breakup and movement of  that super continent, so the original Pangea would have been relatively flat, with no high mountains like there are today. The Bible records the Flood as being prior to the land dividing., so the depth required to flood Pangea would have been quite low.

Also consider:   The Bible clearly states  that at a specific time the "Land divided"

Gen 10:25  And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided;

It clearly means the land, not the people at the Babel incident because  "Peleg"  means  "Earthquake".  How could any human have known that at the time the Bible was originally compiled???  

General Appraisal Of  Earth's Age and other items from other sites