We understand that the Big Bang created the universe, but how did existence remain stable after the Big Bang?

This question creates other questions about why particles didn’t disintegrate after this monumental explosion. What held existence altogether? What force kept dust in certain areas, forming planets and suns in vast numbers?

There are a couple of theories of why the Big Bang didn’t make the universe completely collapse.

Something missing?

Many scientists speculate that something could still be missing from physics as we know it. As of now, the standard model of particle physics has not explained why the universe survived the Big Bang, says Professor Arttu Rajantie of the department of physics at Imperial College London.

The last known area of the standard model involves the Higgs Boson particle and its relation to gravity. So far, this area cannot be measured in a particle accelerator. It does, however, have a large effect on the instability of the Higgs during inflation.

The key here, apparently, is to study this relationship closely and apply what is learned to the beginning of the universe. Cosmological observations can monitor other areas of the universe for telltale signs of the same interactions, and this can complete areas of physics which, as of now, remain a mystery.


Gathered from this information, is the idea that gravity may be the missing part of the equation. Even a small amount of gravity can hold particles together without the need for new physics. Physicists from London, Copenhagen and Helsinki have a simple explanation for gravity’s role on the creation of the universe. Apparently, the basic reaction between gravity and the Higgs Boson was enough to hold the universe together.

In a nutshell, if cosmological data can provide correct measurements between gravity and the Higgs Boson field, we will have the last unknown number missing from the standard model of physics. We will be one step closer to understanding life and how we came into existence. It is well worth the work, the curiosity and the dreams of the human race.

Copyright © 2012-2024 Learning Mind. All rights reserved. For permission to reprint, contact us.

power of misfits book banner desktop

Like what you are reading? Subscribe to our newsletter to make sure you don’t miss new thought-provoking articles!

This Post Has 4 Comments


    No tiene rigor científico ni a nivel divulgación. Parece escrita por un simpatizante del creacionismo.
    1º No es científico afirmar que el Big Bang “creó” el universo, incluso sin saber que es lo que había o no antes.
    2º El universo no es estable sino que está en expansión constante, es decir, en movimiento y cambio.
    3º No se puede hablar de una “creación” del universo en términos científicos.

    1. Sherrie

      Um, en realidad, encuentro validez en ambos extremos del espectro. Soy una de esas personas que necesitan mucha prueba para creer algo 100%. ¿Sabes lo que realmente creo, Enrique? Creo que el 100% de hecho que no sé. Tengo tantas preguntas y nunca me parece obtener mis respuestas. Por eso me encanta aprender cosas. No es porque un día voy a saber todo lo que hay que saber. Es porque un día me contentaré con no saberlo y será un buen día.

  2. Major Tom

    The big bang is absolutely nonsense, it did not happen, it is a complete fraud, so why do you repeat it? To have personal integrity, you have to not bow to any masters except truth. Read “30 reasons the big bang did not happen” to get started.

    1. Anna LeMind

      how do you know if it happened or not? were you there? 🙂 the Big Bang, as well as your point of view, is only a theory, so there is no point to be so categorical about it

Leave a Reply