It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Major Discovery: Smoking Gun for Universe's Incredible Big Bang found

page: 3
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:01 PM
link   

lostbook
This discovery, if proven true, will be far-reaching. What say you, ATS?

"They" already teach BBT as truth in the schools. They still include the caveat "this is only a theory", but of course students are expected to know it and believe it anyway.

If scientists are still attempting to validate their theories, why did our educational institutions accept them as truth a long time ago? Shouldn't the things we teach as truth be confirmed before we start pronouncing them as truth?

Doing it the other way around is... well, unscientific (put nicely).




posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by NthOther
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...
all essentially the same threads

..3

just saying
edit on 3/18/2014 by unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 04:02 AM
link   

NthOther

lostbook
This discovery, if proven true, will be far-reaching. What say you, ATS?

"They" already teach BBT as truth in the schools. They still include the caveat "this is only a theory", but of course students are expected to know it and believe it anyway.

If scientists are still attempting to validate their theories, why did our educational institutions accept them as truth a long time ago? Shouldn't the things we teach as truth be confirmed before we start pronouncing them as truth?

Doing it the other way around is... well, unscientific (put nicely).

Do you know what a scientific theory is? A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.
en.wikipedia.org...

It's not a blind guess, but neither is it 100% undeniable "truth" like they have in religion. So far, the vast majority of evidence supports the BB, hence it is the acceptable model that is taught to students.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 04:13 AM
link   

wildespace
It's not a blind guess, but neither is it 100% undeniable "truth" like they have in religion. So far, the vast majority of evidence supports the BB, hence it is the acceptable model that is taught to students.

Right. It's not undeniable truth. You said it, not me.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   
On other sites reporting this you've got Christians commenting things such as



I can tell you how the Universe was created, by God in 6 days.

and



God did it, end of research.

and etc.

I'm all for freedom of religion, but seriously....shut the f**k up.

S&F



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


Ok So now we're sure it started at some point, maybe...right ?

"Energy can be neither created nor destroyed"
...
Square 1



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by NthOther
 




Right. It's not undeniable truth. You said it, not me.


Correct. Because in Science there is no such thing as 100% undeniable certainty.

It is as simple as that.

It has nothing to do with not being right, it has to do with science's refusal to paint itself into a corner that it cannot get out of. Science doesn't say that it is a 100% undeniable certainty that the Sun will come up in the morning - there is always a slim chance that an asteroid might strike the earth and stop its rotation after all.

On the other hand, religion will say that the Sun will always come up and always go down (Ecclesiastes 1:5), no matter what, even though God can supposedly stop it if he wishes (and supposedly has done so in the past). There is nothing new, nothing changes, including our knowledge of the universe.

Religious answers to non-religious questions are nowhere near as reliable as scientific answers, yet you would prefer religion taught to students instead?

And I know you can't answer this post because since Quantum Physics is 'just a theory' there is no such thing as transistors, computers, display monitors, or keyboards, so don't worry about it too much.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   

ProphetZoroaster
reply to post by rnaa
 


Ok So now we're sure it started at some point, maybe...right ?

"Energy can be neither created nor destroyed"
...
Square 1

There are various hypotheses that suggest that the Big Bang itself was the result of something that existed prior to it. en.wikipedia.org...
Personally, I support the idea of "Eternal Inflation" which suggests that the Big Bang was an event in a multiverse.



posted on Mar, 19 2014 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 




Personally, I support the idea of "Eternal Inflation" which suggests that the Big Bang was an event in a multiverse.


That's safe.
But...so what? Who cares? I mean really, as far as we're concerned there is one Universe. Right?
edit on 3/19/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 05:34 PM
link   
I know this is somewhat necro-ing the thread, but I saw a story on Space.com today related to this and I have a question that I am sure Phage or someone of the more high minded science can explain for me.

According to the article, for the first 380,000 years or so the rate of expansion was superluminal. So my question, simply, is how could it have been superluminal? I thought the speed of light in a vaccuum was a constant and upper limit without some special relativity things happening that kind of broke down the Standard model? Maybe I'm mixing theories and just don't understand. Can you help?

Here is the story: Space.com story



posted on May, 9 2014 @ 10:01 AM
link   
The speed of light limit in relativity theory applies to the travel of something through space. It does not apply to the expansion of space itself, which is what was happening at faster than light speed in the earliest days of our universe.

This is also why it might be possible to intentionally cause a small area of space to expand in one direction and contract in the opposite direction (warping space) in order for a space vessel to travel at an effective velocity much greater than that of light, without violating the well known light speed limit in relativity.
edit on 9-5-2014 by Ross 54 because: improved paragraph structure.

edit on 9-5-2014 by Ross 54 because: inserted space between words



posted on May, 9 2014 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Ross 54

Thank you! I figured it was something like that, and I was just not thinking through it completely. It's along the same lines of why the universe is expanding in all directions simultaneously, but we can't see it on the local level because gravity overcomes the rate of expansion locally.




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join