posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 07:46 AM
This is a chicken or the egg dispute. Normally we can easily say "the egg" with dawrinism, but the true question should be "Which came first, the
chicken or the chicken's egg?" Then it's a conundrum - because ONLY a Chicken and lay a Chicken's Egg, but only a Chicken's Egg produce's a
In the same way, since we don't know what happens at Time=0 in universal history, we can't fully say which came first, mass or force - although it
seems to bend in the direction of force - since mass didn't appear in forms that we know until almost a full SECOND after the universe began in the
Big Bang Model.
However, Neutrinos, or other unknown portions of Dark Matter, could still have had mass, and yet still existed, during the Big Bang.
So, in short, the answer is "we don't really know".
Now, Temperature can exist without mass, but since we need the mass to read the temperature, you could (under technicalities) argue that temperature
didn't exist in the very early universe.
It's like gravity. Gravity exists... whether there's mass there or not. It's a force of nature. However, without mass, one would never know of
gravity's existance or power. In fact, there could be a million unknown forces in the universe, but since there's no fundamental particle or wave or
"thing" that interacts with it, even if it were to exist, we would never know, and it would - for all intents and purposes - NOT exist.
So, if you're looking for an answer to your immediate question (which doesn't make much sense anyways), I'd have to say I'd rather know the MASS
of something than the temperature it was at. If I knew what that mass was made of, then I'd care more of the temperature, but since it's just mass,
then it's possible for it to be any number of things.