On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 5:14 AM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why has the inflation not been seen at LHC? >>> >> >> >> The LHC just went offline, when it comes back online after 2 years of >> upgrades it should reach energies close to 15 TeV which corresponds to a >> temperature of 10^17 Kelvin, and that is the temperature the entire >> universe was in when it was about 10^-17 seconds old. But inflation was >> over by the time the universe was 10^-35 seconds old. To inflation the >> universe was already ancient when it was 10^-17 seconds old. >> > > *> I meant to write that the "inflaton", the particle associated with the > inflation field, would have been seen at LHC since it must couple strongly > to normal matter, * > If the creation of the inflaton required conditions that existed when the universe was 10^-44 seconds old and inflation had decayed away when it was 10^-35 seconds old then the particle associated with the inflation field would have decayed away too and we wouldn't expect to see it today even at places where we can reproduce conditions the universe was in when it was 10^-17 seconds old. If it still existed it would still be strongly connected to regular matter but we could not detect it but the universe could and would still be expanding at an exponential rate and galaxies stars and planets would not exist, we couldn't detect it because we wouldn't exist either. > *> Getting density fluctuations from quantum mechanics would violate > energy conservation.* > If there were no density fluctuations in a gas you could know both the position and velocity of every particle in it and that would most certainly violate the laws of quantum mechanics. And we've had experimental confirmation for nearly a century that at the cosmological scale energy is not conserved. The expansion of the universe causes all photons to be redshifted and lose energy, a clear violation of energy conservation. And there are theoretical reasons for thinking so too. Noether's theorem says for every symmetry in physics there is a corresponding conservation law, so if the laws of physics don't change with time then energy is conserved. But General Relativity says the space a particle is moving through* can* change with time so energy is *not* conserved. If spacetime is curved the energy associated with a point in it doesn't even have a unique definition. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
