3 ms·
This makes a lot of sense. In those first few seconds, that incredibly hot, dense soup of matter would've immediately "pitted" through with absolutely enormous
by netbioserror 3y ago
This makes a lot of sense. In those first few seconds, that incredibly hot, dense soup of matter would've immediately "pitted" through with absolutely enormous black holes, and like rain, those black holes were probably the "seeding" nuclei for the remaining matter to clump around and form galaxies. Which suggests that galactic core supermassives are drifting leftovers from the formation of the universe. It might also suggest that after the primordial age, they may not have consumed much matter at all (though we have plenty of evidence of some early supermassives consuming quite a lot at the fringes of the observable universe).
- MaxikCZ 3y agoI still dont get it. If during the first few second there was so much matter in so little space that enormous blackholes should form, then why did big bang even happen? In the first instance, there was all the matter in the tinies of space, everything should have immediatelly form a blackhole and bigbang should have not happen
- netbioserror 3y agoDisclaimer: I am a lay man and a physics enthusiast, no more. My thought is that the initial inflationary event of the Big Bang was far more powerful than early gravity’s ability to counteract it, maybe even on the order of the nuclear forces. I’d speculate that the “pits” (“low pressure systems” if we analogize to storms) would have formed in this period. Once expansion slowed, maybe even just a few seconds in, the conditions might have been conducive for the pits to collapse into black holes.