http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_nucleosynthesis In physical cosmology, Big Bang nucleosynthesis (or primordial nucleosynthesis, abbreviated BBN) refers to the production of nuclei other than those of the lightest isotope of hydrogen during the early phases of the universe. Primordial nucleosynthesis is believed by many scientists to have taken place just a few moments after the Big Bang and is believed to be responsible for the formation of a heavier isotope of hydrogen known as deuterium (H-2 or D), the helium isotopes He-3 and He-4, and the lithium isotopes Li-6 and Li-7. In addition to these stable nuclei some unstable, or radioactive, isotopes were also produced notably: tritium or H-3; beryllium-7 (Be-7), and beryllium-8 (Be-8). These unstable isotopes either decayed or fused with other stable nuclei.
It explains plenty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe Read the part about the earliest universe being too hot for particles to form.
http://astronomy.nju.edu.cn/~lixd/GA/AT4/AT427/HTML/AT42703.htm That just explained that the matter was there from the beginning. This Primordial Nucleosynthesis only explains how other matter formed from the preexisting matter. Nice try Denny, but your response doesn't prove there was no matter at singularity.
Dude!!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence "E=MC2" redirects here. For other uses, see E=MC2 (disambiguation). 4-meter-tall sculpture of Einstein's 1905 E = mc2 formula at the 2006 Walk of Ideas, Berlin, Germany. Part of a series on Special relativity Principle of relativity Introduction to special relativity Special relativity Foundations[show] Mathematical formulation[show] Consequences[hide] Time dilation Relativistic mass Mass–energy equivalence Length contraction Relativity of simultaneity Relativistic Doppler effect Thomas precession Relativistic disks Spacetime[show] People[show] v t e Explication In physics – in particular, special and general relativity – mass–energy equivalence is the concept that the mass of a body is a measure of its energy content. In this concept, mass is a property of all energy; energy is a property of all mass; and the two properties are connected by a constant. This means (for example) that the total internal energy E of a body at rest is equal to the product of its rest mass m and a suitable conversion factor to transform from units of mass to units of energy. Albert Einstein proposed mass–energy equivalence in 1905 in one of his Annus Mirabilis papers entitled "Does the inertia of an object depend upon its energy-content?"[1] The equivalence is described by the famous equation: Energy is mass or matter. WTF are you talking about?!?! In your link it calls for energy; which is mass. Stop being stubborn!
You have a reading comprehension problem. Your quote supports what I have been saying. No mass until the initial energy cooled sufficiently. Read your own quote which talks about 100s after the Big Bang.
OMG dude... Listen to me very carefully... Energy = Mass, therefor energy at the beginning consisted of mass. So fucking what if the mass we know of today wasn't present at the time of the beginning. If there was energy, there was mass because they are one of the same.
Denny believes that the mass we see today didn't exist, therefor mass didn't exist. But he is stubbornly refusing to agree that energy = mass; therefor the energy from the beginning was mass. It may have been different, but it is still matter.
You're being a fool. The universe was so hot that there was no mass, no particles, etc. the laws of physics as we know them did not exist right away. You are misinterpreting the scholarly writings you blindly quote.
Fool? What creates heat Denny? Oh right that's energy!!!! And now you are tossing theories that are as empirical as the Bible! LMAO!!!! We know that mass = energy. Plain and simple. Obviously you need to go back to school.
LMAO!!!!! Dude, I am talking matter. You keep bringing up "mass". Show me any empirical evidence that matter can be created without matter. I'll be waiting patiently.
How fast was the speed of light? In the singularity, it could not move at all. And there was no time. So something like 0 (feet, meters, whatever) / 0 (minutes, hours, seconds, whatever) = what? The laws of physics did not exist at time 0. So what makes you think e=mc^2 applied? (hint: it didn't) And you are the one confusing mass and matter. Like in this post:
Nice dodge. I don't give a fuck about the speed of light. It doesn't explain or give evidence that matter was in that singularity
No dodge. Stephen Hawking's site: http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broken down. This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang. The universe will evolve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before. Even the amount of matter in the universe, can be different to what it was before the Big Bang, as the Law of Conservation of Matter, will break down at the Big Bang.
Hawking is a genius and I agree with his statement. But at singularity; there was still energy; therefore there was still matter. It doesn't matter if the "laws of physics" may not have existed. It's still matter. You keep saying there wasn't matter and you are dead wrong. There was matter.
It seems to me there are a few important components to the Big Bang timeline. First was the instance of the singularity, and at that moment, laws break down and even the best theoretical physicists don't know what was going on. All the forces are intertwined and part of the same. The next important moment is when quantum theory takes over. At this moments, the physicists have a decent grip on what was going on since their models can be built around actual equations that have definitive laws. Following that moment, still just a tiny fraction of the first second, Classical Physics takes root along with quantum physics. Is there matter at the big bang? depends on which of my previous moments you are talking about. The first one, most likely not in the form that we understand it. The second moment, there is matter, but it is still coupled with energy. sometime during the second moment but before the third, matter as we understand it comes into play and matter is uncoupled from energy. This is all just my breaking it down, I could be bat-shit crazy.
