As in, are there some parts of physics that aren’t as clear-cut as they usually are? If so, what are they?

  • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve read that all math breaks down as you approach the big bang. I’m not educated enough in math to understand how, or why, but apparently they cannot mathematically understand the origin of the universe.

    • Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s probably this:

      Another problem lies within the mathematical framework of the Standard Model itself—the Standard Model is inconsistent with that of general relativity, to the point that one or both theories break down under certain conditions (for example within known spacetime singularities like the Big Bang and the centres of black holes beyond the event horizon).[4]

      My ELI5: Both theories work great, supported by vast amounts of evidence and excellent theoretical models. It seems they are two tools with distinct purposes. One for big and heavy stuff, the other for small and energetic stuff. The problem arises when big and heavy stuff is compressed into tiny spaces. This case is relevant for both theories, but here they don’t match, and we don’t know which to apply. It’s a strong hint we lack understanding, one of the biggest unsolved problems in physics.

      So math itself is probably fine, we’re just at a loss how to use it in these extreme cases.

    • Wilzax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The universe is infinite, as far as we know.

      But if you condense it all into something infinitely dense, then is it suddenly finite in size? Does it still have infinite size and simultaneously infinite density? Why didn’t the immense density cause it to form a black hole?