Big Bang

A little introduction: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html

Use this wisely.

Originally posted by adam warlock
A little introduction: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html

Use this wisely.

Some good quotes from the article:
Contrary to the common perception, BBT is not a theory about the origin of the universe. Rather, it describes the development of the universe over time.

However, no similar consensus has been reached on ideas about the ultimate origin of the universe.

I often find in these forums that I have to go over the above points several times, because too many people think that "The Big Bang Theory" = "Origin of the Universe Theory" just as they confuse The Theory of Evolution with The Big Bang, and Bio-genesis.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Some good quotes from the article:
Contrary to the common perception, BBT is not a theory about the origin of the universe. Rather, it describes the development of the universe over time.

However, no similar consensus has been reached on ideas about the ultimate origin of the universe.

I often find in these forums that I have to go ov ...[text shortened]... rse Theory" just as they confuse The Theory of Evolution with The Big Bang, and Bio-genesis.

You wouldn't believe how mad I get when I read some of the stuff people say in here about the Big Bang.
That's why I looked for the best article on it could find on the web and posted it in here.

Even though I'm not the number one fan about the Big Bang, and in my view that article has a very big self serving angle, it is useful nonetheless to dispel some of the myths you have just pointed out.

I don't think most opponents of the Big Bang theory are interested in rational arguments, since their objections are usually based on emotional arguments.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Some good quotes from the article:
Contrary to the common perception, BBT is not a theory about the origin of the universe. Rather, it describes the development of the universe over time.

However, no similar consensus has been reached on ideas about the ultimate origin of the universe.

I often find in these forums that I have to go ov ...[text shortened]... rse Theory" just as they confuse The Theory of Evolution with The Big Bang, and Bio-genesis.

It typically occurs to when people are trying to dispel creation they will bring up
the Big Bang as if it is an apples and apples discussion. Dragging the Bing Bang into
the theory of evolution discussion isn't really that far off, I agree they are different
topics; however, the principle is the same, over time things evolve into other things
more complex from simpler forms.
Kelly

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I don't think most opponents of the Big Bang theory are interested in rational arguments, since their objections are usually based on emotional arguments.

I've asked a lot of questions about the Big Bang, and with all my attempts at
getting answers leave emotion out of it. I think some of the defense around the
Big Bang are not rational as what happened before the Big bang, what changed
from that state to the one that would cause the Big bang and so on.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I've asked a lot of questions about the Big Bang, and with all my attempts at
getting answers leave emotion out of it. I think some of the defense around the
Big Bang are not rational as what happened before the Big bang, what changed
from that state to the one that would cause the Big bang and so on.
Kelly

Well, whatever questions you may still have, perhaps they can be answered if you read the link.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Well, whatever questions you may still have, perhaps they can be answered if you read the link.

No, from the parts I read it doesn't come close.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
No, from the parts I read it doesn't come close.
Kelly

and it doesn't. Because no one knows what happened before the big bang. The problem is Stephen Hawking and (some) other physicists actually have said that it doesn't matter what happened prior to that Singularity we call the BB. "Doesn't matter"??!! Nah---just theanswer to the most important question ever.....

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
and it doesn't. Because no one knows what happened before the big bang. The problem is Stephen Hawking and (some) other physicists actually have said that it doesn't matter what happened prior to that Singularity we call the BB. "Doesn't matter"??!! Nah---just theanswer to the most important question ever.....

Why is it such an important question?

If Stephen Hawking says that, then he is saying it because he believes that the way we are now, is a result of things that happened during the big bang and not a result of what came before.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
and it doesn't. Because no one knows what happened before the big bang. The problem is Stephen Hawking and (some) other physicists actually have said that it doesn't matter what happened prior to that Singularity we call the BB. "Doesn't matter"??!! Nah---just theanswer to the most important question ever.....

I think what they are trying to imply is "what does it matter for the validity of the BB theory? The answer to that is rather simple, of course. The theory of gravity does not describe lion hunting behaviour. That does not mean the theory of gravity is wrong. Physicists are very interested in what was "before" the BB (if such a question means anything). If you have any ideas, you're welcome to try and get them published.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Physicists are very interested in what was "before" the BB (if such a question means anything).

I think what he is referring to is the possibility put forward by some physicists that no information about what came before is available. ie it may be impossible to know what came before. The question then is, does it matter, and further - does /did it exist?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I think what he is referring to is the possibility put forward by some physicists that no information about what came before is available. ie it may be impossible to know what came before. The question then is, does it matter, and further - does /did it exist?

We are learning new tricks in deciphering the CBR data, hints of what came before the BB and such. It is not a foregone conclusion we can never know what happened before BB.

For one thing, as our knowledge of fundamental physics grows, every new discovery constrains notions and conjectures about what COULD have happened 'before' the BB. The story of the BB and more fundamental questions has just started to be answered so I wouldn't get in too much of a sweat over the issue, it's just on the back burner for now, but on the burner it is.

For instance, here is a link of the latest work with the Planck space telescope, expanding on previous work about the CBR:

http://www.physorg.com/news197534140.html

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why is it such an important question?

If Stephen Hawking says that, then he is saying it because he believes that the way we are now, is a result of things that happened during the big bang and not a result of what came before.

He should know?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
He should know?
Kelly

If he says he know, then he knows better than anyone else.
Few knows more than Stephen Hawking in these matters.