this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
50 points (96.3% liked)

Space

1624 readers
53 users here now

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  2. Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
  3. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics

Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instanceโ€™s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.


Related Communities

๐Ÿ”ญ Science

๐Ÿš€ Engineering

๐ŸŒŒ Art and Photography


Other Cool Links


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Link to the actual research paper

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Ooh, I like this idea! I've always found physics (espeicsly cosmology) to have a few too many handwaves around some pretty odd ideas. Renormalization for one. The rapid inflationary model for another. It's just a silly suggestion. "The big bang happened, but then the universe expanded super fast for no reason before it slowed way down also for no reason. Inflatons maybe?"

An emergent model based in interactions of known forces would seen much more sensible to me.

[โ€“] pyre@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

i don't understand how super fast expansion following the big bang can be described as "for no reason"

[โ€“] Stillwater@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

(I'm not a physicist) I think the rapid inflation proposed didn't begin at the instant of the big bang but a little later

load more comments (2 replies)