Big Bang

[cdowis]

Dwannism posted a comment on youtube:

 

The same evidence can lead to very different conclusions, if you didnt know. It is the bias of the researchers that makes it lead in a certain direction. They started on the big bang path because they observed the universe expanding. The hidden assumption immediately became that the universe has always been expanding, and thus needs to have a starting point where the universe began. They never for instance recognized the possibility that the universe also contracts and did not always expand.

+++++++++++++++

 

Is the Big Bang established as scientific fact, or is the universe eternal, with no beginning.

[thesometimesaint]

We really have no way of knowing what, if anything, came before the Big Bang. Maybe it was God that said "Let there be light" and it was. Unfortunately science can't posit any God. So we're back to just the Big Bang, and nothing before it.

 

If you see a baseball speeding away from you. It is a reasonable thought that at some time in the past it wasn't speeding away from you. That it had a starting point.

 

Whether there will be a Big Crunch(contraction of the universe) or an very long time expanding universe is dependent on the amount of matter in the universe. All the evidence so far indicates that it will be an very long time expanding universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch

[Questing Beast]

No fact, just theory. I've even heard/read that it expands in different directions, not from a singular, central "point". In other words, evidence of multiple "bangs" not just one BB. Another part of it all is the speed of the expansion: faster toward the perceived "edges", slower toward the perceived "center", with the fastest, oldest objects moving so fast that they finally exceed the speed of light and vanish from our purview. All very speculative theory....

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The big bang is just speculation as is abiogensis. They really don't know so they offer up their best guess.

[David T]

here was a place.

There was a space.

Where matter was not yet matter.

Unorganized.

Wandering.

Here and there ascatter.

 

(The Spell)

 

Knot it.

Bind it.

Fasten it with glue.

Hold it.

Twist it.

Into a matter stew.

 

Shrink it.

Crush it.

Until it’s just a tittle.

Pack it.

Stack it.

Until it cannot wiggle.

 

Until . . . ?

 

Until Bang!

Until KaBoom!

Expanding space

Extending time

 

And then there was light.

And it all seemed quite right.

 

And then a swirl soft lit appeared,

Of stars thick spinning through the cloud,

Then another and another graced the expanding mere,

As light through night serenely plowed,

Then for joy the sons cried at a universe made,

And in ecstasy daughters clapped and sang,

For the foundation of delight was in matter laid ,

And from that beginning all that would later emerge sprang,

‘How long?’ his children begged and pled,

‘Before our warm bodies completed stand?

What wait, before complexity will widely spread,

That we may in doughy matter gently land?’

‘No one knows,’ said God, ‘What the future holds,

But we must watch and wait until it all unfolds.

 

 

 

- SteveP

Edited August 21, 2013 by David T

[The Nehor]

The big bang is just speculation as is abiogensis. They really don't know so they offer up their best guess.

It is a little more then a guess. You have the relative homogeneity of the Universe, cosmic background radiation, the age of stars, abundance of light elements, etc.

It is also important to note that the Big Bang theory is not a theory about an origin. It is a theory about the development of the Universe. It does examine the origin of matter, elements, galaxies, etc but what set off the events is a subject of study and theory.

[thesometimesaint]

Scientific Method Step 1: Ask a Question

You can ask any question, providing you can devise a way to answer the question! Yes/no questions are common because they are relatively easy to test. You can ask a question where you want to know whether a variable has no effect, greater effect, or lesser effect if you can measure changes in your variable. Try to avoid questions that are qualitative in nature. For example, it's harder to measure whether people like one color more than another, yet you can measure how many cars of a particular color are purchased or what color crayon gets used the most.

Scientific Method Step 2: Make Observations and Conduct Background Research

Scientific Method Step 3: Propose a Hypothesis

Scientific Method Step 4: Design an Experiment to Test the Hypothesis

Scientific Method Step 5: Test the Hypothesis

Scientific Method Step 6: Accept or Reject the Hypothesis

Revise a Rejected Hypothesis (return to step 3) or Draw Conclusions (Accepted)

[cinepro]

The big bang is just speculation as is abiogensis. They really don't know so they offer up their best guess.

 

They should make a rule that no one is allowed to express an opinion on anything for which they haven't at least read the Wikipedia article.  

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

[halconero]

Theory.

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

[rameumptom]

There is lots of evidence suggesting the Big Bang. It explains the expansion of the universe, the background cosmic radiation, etc.  No other theory comes closer.

 

As for singularities, we have proof of those: black holes.

[thesometimesaint]

"Is the Big Bang established as scientific fact, or is the universe eternal, with no beginning".

 

The Big Bang is an established scientific fact. The explanation of that fact is a theory, and as such subject to change.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-powered-the-big-bang/

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

They should make a rule that no one is allowed to express an opinion on anything for which they haven't at least read the Wikipedia article.  

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

Your Mom.

[Rob Osborn]

"Is the Big Bang established as scientific fact, or is the universe eternal, with no beginning".

 

The Big Bang is an established scientific fact. The explanation of that fact is a theory, and as such subject to change.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-powered-the-big-bang/

The Big Bang is not an established fact. They cant even tell if thete is an edge to the universe. As far as they can see it just goes on forever. Kind of impossible to establish facts about something you cant even wholly behold.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It is a little more then a guess. You have the relative homogeneity of the Universe, cosmic background radiation, the age of stars, abundance of light elements, etc.

It is also important to note that the Big Bang theory is not a theory about an origin. It is a theory about the development of the Universe. It does examine the origin of matter, elements, galaxies, etc but what set off the events is a subject of study and theory.

I should have prefaced that it is a pretty good guess and it accounts for a lot of things. But there are so many unknowns that I am amazed at the level of speculation that goes on.  And that theory to some = absolute truth. That really is what my issue with it all is.

Edited August 21, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[cdowis]

They should make a rule that no one is allowed to express an opinion on anything for which they haven't at least read the Wikipedia article.  

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

As usual, you add insight into the discussion.

 

Here is an interesting quote from the article

 

 

 In 1929, Edwin Hubble discovered that the distances to far away galaxies were strongly correlated with their redshifts—an idea originally suggested by Lemaître in 1927. Hubble's observation was taken to indicate that all very distant galaxies and clusters have an apparent velocity directly away from our vantage point: the farther away, the higher the apparent velocity, regardless of direction.^[16]Assuming that we are not at the center of a giant explosion, the only remaining interpretation is that all observable regions of the universe are receding from each other.

 

This has always made me confused.  So the entire universe is running away from us, then that means that everything is running away from everyone else.  So this means that it is like the surface of a balloon that continues to expand.  But if point A is moving away from point B, it has to be moving *towards* point C. But point C has all points running away from it?  So point A is both running towards and running away from point C.

 

Huh?  What am I missing here. 

 

I am either brilliant, or profoundly stupid.

Edited August 21, 2013 by cdowis

[thesometimesaint]

The Big Bang is not an established fact. They cant even tell if thete is an edge to the universe. As far as they can see it just goes on forever. Kind of impossible to establish facts about something you cant even wholly behold.

 

 

There is no edge to the universe.

[BCSpace]

Is the Big Bang established as scientific fact, or is the universe eternal, with no beginning.

 

When one understands the science, one realizes that both can be true at the same time.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

As usual, you add insight into the discussion.

 

Here is an interesting quote from the article

 

 

 

This has always made me confused.  So the entire universe is running away from us, then that means that everything is running away from everyone else.  So this means that it is like the surface of a balloon that continues to expand.  But if point A is moving away from point B, it has to be moving *towards* point C. But point C has all points running away from it?  So point A is both running towards and running away from point C.

 

Huh?  What am I missing here. 

 

I am either brilliant, or profoundly stupid.

The universe exists as a curved space time continuum.  The balloon example you mentioned is perfect. All points are moving away from each other. The surface of the balloon is a two dimensional surface curved around a third dimension.  The universe is a 3 dimensional place curved around a fourth dimension. http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/961202c.html

[The Nehor]

This has always made me confused.  So the entire universe is running away from us, then that means that everything is running away from everyone else.  So this means that it is like the surface of a balloon that continues to expand.  But if point A is moving away from point B, it has to be moving *towards* point C. But point C has all points running away from it?  So point A is both running towards and running away from point C.

 

Huh?  What am I missing here. 

 

I am either brilliant, or profoundly stupid.

Welcome to the weirdness that is reality. Things at the most basic level of existence are strangely counterintuitive. Someone once pointed out that if you do not think quantum theory is weird you do not understand it. In spite of this I have used at least six machines today that run because they work.

Theory.

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

This is also true. Gravity is still a theory. I have seen people argue against theories on the internet not realizing that if those theories (the math behind them) did not work then their computer would not work.

There is no edge to the universe.

Depends on which definition of the word Universe you are using. Not sure about their being an edge but that does not mean the Universe is infinite. One of my Second Coming questions.

[thesometimesaint]

Welcome to the weirdness that is reality. Things at the most basic level of existence are strangely counterintuitive. Someone once pointed out that if you do not think quantum theory is weird you do not understand it. In spite of this I have used at least six machines today that run because they work.

This is also true. Gravity is still a theory. I have seen people argue against theories on the internet not realizing that if those theories (the math behind them) did not work then their computer would not work.

Depends on which definition of the word Universe you are using. Not sure about their being an edge but that does not mean the Universe is infinite. One of my Second Coming questions.

 

While definitions are by definition relative. The Universe is all there is. IF, and that is a big IF anything exists outside of our universe it can not be observed, detected, or measured. It truly doesn't exist for us.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe

 

The Universe is commonly defined as the totality of existence,^[1][2][3][4] including planets, stars, galaxies, the contents of intergalactic space, and all matter and energy.^[5][6] Similar terms include the cosmos, the world and nature.

 

I have lots of Second Coming questions.

[The Nehor]

While definitions are by definition relative. The Universe is all there is. IF, and that is a big IF anything exists outside of our universe it can not be observed, detected, or measured. It truly doesn't exist for us.

That gets tricky though because as it stands right now there are parts of our Universe (stuff that came from the same Big Bang that made us) which we cannot and will not be able to observe, detect, or measure. Does all that not exist for us either?

[thesometimesaint]

That gets tricky though because as it stands right now there are parts of our Universe (stuff that came from the same Big Bang that made us) which we cannot and will not be able to observe, detect, or measure. Does all that not exist for us either?

We're down to a trillionth of a trillionth of a second past the Big Bang. So that makes it pretty close to the actual event. It would be like standing incredibly close to the baseball pitcher as the ball left his hand. Yet because we didn't actually see the ball leave his hand it don't occur.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/03/new-planck-data/

[The Nehor]

We're down to a trillionth of a trillionth of a second past the Big Bang. So that makes it pretty close to the actual event. It would be like standing incredibly close to the baseball pitcher as the ball left his hand. Yet because we didn't actually see the ball leave his hand it don't occur.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/03/new-planck-data/

Admittedly if a ball left a pitcher's hand at that speed rather strange and cool things would happen:

http://what-if.xkcd.com/1/

[Rob Osborn]

There is no edge to the universe.

There is no sanity, thats for sure! Whether theres an edge or not we cannot at this time know. What is for certain though is that we havent found any end in sight which creates a lot of problems for big bang theorists because at some point you would be looking at something older than the supposed big bang. Of course though, then they would just push the date back- typical scientific answer, see it all the time in evolutionary theory.

[trim]

There are variations on the big bang theory that explain the observed expansion of the universe.  The difficulty with the big bang theory in my view is that there is a requirement for nearly infinite density and infinite temperature in an almost infinitely small volume.  It is difficult to imaging how that happens spontaneously.

 

The inflation theories are interesting because they offer a mechanism for creating observable matter and energy as a product of the expansion and they align with observations.  What is interesting about inflation theory is the that they allow for a beginning of space time for our universe without the need for eliminating eternitiy.  They offer a "beginning" to creation without a finite timeline to the creator.