New theory illustrates the development of the universe may be different than we thought

February 11, 2019, Stony Brook University
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

The history of the universe is predicated on the idea that, compared to today, the universe was hotter and more symmetric in its early phase. Scientists have thought this because of the Higgs Boson finding—the particle that gives mass to all other fundamental particles. The concept is that as one analyzes time back toward the Big Bang, the universe gets hotter and the Higgs phase changes to one where everything became massless. Now, physicists are presenting a new theory that suggests an alternative history of the universe is possible.

The research, funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy, is led by Patrick Meade, Ph.D., Associate Professor in the C.N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics at Stony Brook University and his former Ph.D. student, Harikrishnan Ramani. The findings are published in the latest edition of Physical Review Letters.

The researchers propose a theory beyond the Standard Model of particle physics that describes how electroweak symmetry is not restored at high temperatures. If correct, this would lead to many potential consequences during the development of the universe, such as other phases of matter, particles staying massive in primordial plasma, and new possibilities for explaining the matter-antimatter asymmetry. The theory also highlights how the history of the universe could be very counterintuitive compared to many phenomenon on earth that demonstrate symmetry restoration.

Explore further: New finding of particle physics may help to explain the absence of antimatter

More information: Patrick Meade et al. Unrestored Electroweak Symmetry, Physical Review Letters (2019). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.041802

Related Stories

Explaining a universe composed of matter

February 4, 2019

The universe consists of a massive imbalance between matter and antimatter. Antimatter and matter are actually the same, but have opposite charges, but there's hardly any antimatter in the observable universe, including the ...

New theory on the origin of dark matter

August 8, 2017

Only a small part of the universe consists of visible matter. By far the largest part is invisible and consists of dark matter and dark energy. Very little is known about dark energy, but there are many theories and experiments ...

Could 'Higgsogenesis' explain dark matter?

October 22, 2013

(Phys.org) —The recently discovered Higgs boson is best known for its important role in explaining particle mass. But now some physicists are wondering if the Higgs could have played an equally significant role in generating ...

Recommended for you

CMS gets first result using largest-ever LHC data sample

February 15, 2019

Just under three months after the final proton–proton collisions from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)'s second run (Run 2), the CMS collaboration has submitted its first paper based on the full LHC dataset collected in ...

Gravitational waves will settle cosmic conundrum

February 14, 2019

Measurements of gravitational waves from approximately 50 binary neutron stars over the next decade will definitively resolve an intense debate about how quickly our universe is expanding, according to findings from an international ...

15 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Bob West
1 / 5 (3) Feb 11, 2019
The energy described in the following article at the scale of our Universe's super-supermassive black hole is dark energy.

'Black holes banish matter into cosmic voids'
http://www.spaced...999.html

> "Some of the matter falling towards the [supermassive black] holes is converted into energy. This energy is delivered to the surrounding gas, and leads to large outflows of matter, which stretch for hundreds of thousands of light years from the black holes, reaching far beyond the extent of their host galaxies."

Our visible universe is in the outflow of a super-supermassive black hole. As ordinary matter falls toward the super-supermassive black hole it evaporates into dark matter. It is the dark matter outflow which pushes the galaxy clusters, causing them to move outward and away from us. The dark matter outflow is dark energy.
Joe1963
1 / 5 (2) Feb 11, 2019
I offer an explanation for dark matter and dark energy that also explains the behavior of Oumuamua. I paste an abstract here along with a link to my article on this.
ABSTRACT
Galactic rotation rates, the distribution of matter in the early universe shown by the scale of anisotropies in the CMB, and cosmological expansion present problems that current theory attempts to resolve by positing dark matter and dark energy. This paper posits that gravitational force is a dampened wave function dependent upon mass and distance. Therefore gravity reverses at regular dampened intervals. This reversal would also be in effect at smaller scales such as our own solar system, implying that current theory may have overlooked evidence of this in the data from various probes that have been launched.
LINK: https://redd.it/ao8vfo
Da Schneib
2 / 5 (2) Feb 11, 2019
This is like a "theory" that when you drop things out of windows they don't actually fall.

This one I don't buy. Nice that someone's looking into it but I hope they're not too credulous.
ScienceSquid
3 / 5 (1) Feb 11, 2019
By no means do I have the education to back up this thought, but could it be that black holes are made up of only anti-matter and any matter that falls in to them is converted to dark energy and expelled? Could the number of black holes account for the lack of Anti-Mater in the universe and the energy produced when matter comes in to contact with it is forcing the expansion of the universe?

Feel free to simply answer "nope" and we can all move on :)
valeriy_polulyakh
1 / 5 (1) Feb 11, 2019
If we believe that our World has started sometimes ago we are still in the position to decide which hypothesis, Lemaître's or Gamow's was closer to reality. There is an opinion that the problems in the standard cosmology could be solved by adjusting of details. Our suggestion is that we have to go back to the conceptions and use the observations accumulated since.
https://www.acade...osmology
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4 / 5 (4) Feb 12, 2019
Disregarding the crackpots, two comments merit response:

Nice that someone's looking into it


Agreed, but these types of non-standard theories are ubiquitous meritorious (or not) work. They stand and fall on observation which we don't yet have, so are often put in the arxiv (literary) for a rainy day.

could it be that black holes are made up of only anti-matter


From lack of annihilation spectral lines, there is not enough anti-matter [ https://www.forbe...ows-why/ ].

But the type of matter doesn't ... *ahem* ... matter for the black hole. The "no-hair theorem" says all of its properties is mass, spin and charge [ https://en.wikipe..._theorem ].
Seeker2
1 / 5 (1) Feb 12, 2019
The only development of the universe we can see is that of the observable part, being maybe 5% of the total energy. Converting 5% to matter/antimatter would seem to be easily explainable as some local turbulence in the total energy of spacetime. Where there is energy there is turbulence - heating, cooling, condensation, expansion, etc. You'd think it wold happen all the time - the latest 13.7 billion years we find ourselves in only a typical recurring event. Which would answer questions about how some of those humongous black holes came about - leftovers from previous similar events.
Seeker2
1 / 5 (1) Feb 14, 2019
So the lights go out and the storm just sort of dissipates. Except, I understand, for the black holes, where their rate of dissipation is not matched with their merger rate. Resulting in fewer and fewer but larger and larger black holes, until they are merged into regions of spacetime originally separated during inflation by the forces of annihilation and selection. That is annihilation and expansion drive inflation until matter and antimatter settle into mostly separate domains. At least separated by observation. But eventually the separate domains will be rejoined as their black holes merge, with the merger point appearing as the single point from which a new U originates. And the second law of thermodynamics appears to again take affect.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
5 / 5 (3) Feb 14, 2019
"the observable part, being maybe 5% of the total energy".

1) We observe all the energy density - which is likely what you mean - in modern cosmology, or we couldn't model the universe.

2) The universe is perfectly flat so zero total energy so likely infinite in space and time (eternal inflation). So your (unintended) "total" is either zero (total energy) or infinite (total volume with energy).
Seeker2
not rated yet Feb 14, 2019
"the observable part, being maybe 5% of the total energy".

1) We observe all the energy density - which is likely what you mean - in modern cosmology, or we couldn't model the universe.

2) The universe is perfectly flat so zero total energy so likely infinite in space and time (eternal inflation). So your (unintended) "total" is either zero (total energy) or infinite (total volume with energy).
I was thinking of the WMAP pie charts. I'm thinking the inflationary process from annihilation I describe would force a constant energy distribution as long as equal amounts of matter and antimatter are formed.
Seeker2
not rated yet Feb 14, 2019
cont
That is when particle pairs are formed they separate in opposite but random directions so there is no preferred direction. Inflation has to continue until matter and antimatter settle into opposite domains and by this time I should think the energy densities should be mixed up enough to form a mostly uniform energy distribution.
Seeker2
not rated yet Feb 14, 2019
cont
Separate domains may be a better term than opposite domains. They may be like separate bubble universes which don't interact until they decay and form merging black holes. When there is not enough outlying matter outside of the black holes, there is nothing left to interact with matter of the opposite type and continue annihilation and inflation. That is until the black holes themselves begin annihilation on a grander scale.
Seeker2
not rated yet Feb 16, 2019
cont
You might take the rather morbid point of view that matter/antimatter is only the fuel to establish and maintain the separation and flatness of the bubble universes. When it is all used up, the bubble universes have at it again.

"He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword:"
Seeker2
not rated yet Feb 16, 2019
Note there is a reference to a parallel universe at https://en.m.wiki...ld_spot. Also some mention of a hot ring around the cold spot, which would be consistent with the collision surface around the area of colliding black holes.
Seeker2
not rated yet 17 hours ago
cont
An obvious reason why the universe is flat is that the higher energy density regions formed galaxies, as I understand the WMAP data. Same reasoning would apply to any parallel universe.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.