The Big Bang? More Like The Big Who Gives A #.

a reply to: GetHyped

Damn, sounds like I've been missing out. My invitations must've been lost in the mail!

a reply to: sweets777

Except that the Big Bang wasn't an explosion. The name is a misnomer, but that is because the person who coined the phrase Fred Hoyle, was a critic of the theory and didn't believe that it was true.

originally posted by: danielsil18
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

But the thing you have to keep in mind is that Inflation (AKA The Big Bang) is still only a theory.

What do you mean by "is still only a theory"?

I wonder the same question...

Regarding thread, not sure how to approach discussion about scientific theory with someone who while asking also mentions not to believe in science and scientist. I take point that while you might have interest, you still have many doubts... and that is OK, I feel the same while reading any scriptures... knowing it all being folklore tale and wondering why would grownups believe in those fairy tales...

Its all mostly already explained, including CMB and CNB, witch added additional proof to already existing theory of expanding universe... There is still lots we will learn about universe and how unimportant we are as Dr. Sagan said in great video that I can watch every day and still be awed by it...

I recommend both Cosmos TV shows (First with late Dr. Carl Sagan, and second one with Dr. Neil DrGrasse Tyson) as good start if you really interested to learn about universe with use of simple terms and examples.

ps. @ Peter Vlar and GetHyped - I knew it! I knew it! Waiiiittt... where is my invitation??

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: peter vlar

It's an atheist liberal conspiracy to promote same and mixed sex orgies. Big... Bang. Need I say more? Read between the lines, duuuuude!

This guy gets it.

a reply to: Eunuchorn

So if it's just an atheist conspiracy for more orgies and you don't believe anything especially as presented by that monolithic madman behind the screen names Science, why bother starting the thread and asking the question in the first place? It just seems rather counter productive to ask a question and discount every legitimate response because of your own preconceived notions.

a reply to: peter vlar

Existence is counter productive. Why should you care if I ask a question or my response to it?

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Eunuchorn

As far as I'm aware there is no proof but there is evidence , the fact that Galaxies are moving away from each other is part of that evidence.

Maybe they are moving towards something?
Like other Universes, or giant galaxy clusters with huge gravitational pull.

Maybe this stuff is travelling to higher gravity denser areas, maybe the outskirts of our universe have greater pull, like being on the inside of a bubble and being pulled to the wall?

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: peter vlar

Existence is counter productive.

What a sad, insular little world you must live in to think your entire existence is counterproductive.

Why should you care if I ask a question or my response to it?

Maybe because people wasted their time engaging in what should've, or at least could have, been a legitimate and reasonable dialogue when you are really just trolling to fill your own emptiness. Some people are actually here to earn or share knowledge. You're just a bottom feeder. Which is cool I guess if it's what makes you happy. I just know better than to bother in the future.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: peter vlar

Existence is counter productive.

What a sad, insular little world you must live in to think your entire existence is counterproductive.

You have no idea. You should be more thankful you're "normal" than judging me based on my nihilistism & fatalism.

I guess judging others who don't share your views is "normal".

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: peter vlar

Existence is counter productive.

Maybe because people wasted their time engaging in what should've, or at least could have, been a legitimate and reasonable dialogue when you are really just trolling to fill your own emptiness. Some people are actually here to earn or share knowledge. You're just a bottom feeder. Which is cool I guess if it's what makes you happy. I just know better than to bother in the future.

I think we had 3 wonderful pages of legitimate, reasonable dialogue until you showed up.

Which one of us is trolling to fill our own emptiness? We will let the viewers decide.


Did you even notice the thread title? Sardonic, but accurate.

originally posted by: Toadmund

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Eunuchorn

As far as I'm aware there is no proof but there is evidence , the fact that Galaxies are moving away from each other is part of that evidence.

Maybe they are moving towards something?
Like other Universes, or giant galaxy clusters with huge gravitational pull.

Maybe this stuff is travelling to higher gravity denser areas, maybe the outskirts of our universe have greater pull, like being on the inside of a bubble and being pulled to the wall?

This was one of my first thoughts actually when people were talking about the idea of an outward push.

I can see why your star count far exceeds your post count

The numbers are fake, but don't tell anyone!


DoH!

a reply to: Toadmund

Maybe they are moving towards something?

The Big Bang theory is a curious animal in that it isn't all about the bang , Galaxies are moving away from each other so we also have Cosmic Inflation to take into account , sort of like blowing up a balloon with spots on it.
Here's a better explanation than I can give.


While the Big Bang is our best explanation at the moment I'm not convinced it is the whole story or even the correct one of how or why the Universe came into being.

originally posted by: gortex

While the Big Bang is our best explanation at the moment I'm not convinced it is the whole story or even the correct one of how or why the Universe came into being.

No one in science believes this for any theory. Only a naive fool would believe the book is closed on ANY science topic. All a theory is, is the best explanation we have using the current evidence discovered for the event in question. "Best" doesn't mean "final" though.

Eunuchorn :

What exactly is considered proof of the Big Bang happening?

Wow! That was quick! It only took 28 posts before a poster arrived with the purported evidence (which fits the facts of our observations). Well done to KrazyShot.

Unfortunately, he provided the evidence with links. It would have been great if he had provided a brief commentary of his own thinking and learning, and then supplied the links, but let us not split hairs.

The CWBR is indeed taken to be the resonant echo of the Big Bang, the leftover heat from the initial explosion. However, the Big Bang refers to the first initial inflation, there were two phases of inflation. Once the first phase reached the first length of a second, a number of things occurred, the most important of which was the first decoupling of a 'force' from the massive pure energy radiation of the Big Bang. That force was the strong force, which helped to bond dense condensations of the pure energy into the particles that billions of years later would come to be called 'quarks'.

These quarks bonded in groups of threes, and from thence the quark groups bonded to make up protons and neutrons, at which point, two other forces - weak force and electromagnetic force - decoupled out of the initial pure energy radiation, which caused the second inflation mode which is still ongoing today.

Of course, the full picture is not yet complete, and may never come to be known.

If I was to believe there was a big bang, I would have to believe in more than one.
Otherwise I will entertain other ideas.

The thought of other Universes out there past the boundaries of our own, is mindblowing, so is infinity, Infinity to me means there is stuff out there we can't even fathom.

How far away from a neighboring Universe would one have to be away from to see the whole thing? (imagine taking a pic and getting it all in one shot). What would it look like? A big ball, a disc? Does it rotate?

Is there a super massive black hole in the middle of the Universe, do other Universe revolve around each other?


Could Universes group together like galaxies and form megaverses?

See, it's just to much to comprehend.

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
Despite the sardonic title, I have a legitimate question.

What exactly is considered proof of the Big Bang happening? I have enough trouble believing anything provided to us by scientific sources as it is, but determining "The Big Bang" happened doesn't seem like something actually doable.

Any satellite/telescope nerds think they have the answer?

Any evidence provided is going to be scientifically based, of course.......

Were you expecting evidence provided by psychics or something similar?

originally posted by: Toadmund
If I was to believe there was a big bang, I would have to believe in more than one.
Otherwise I will entertain other ideas.

Why would you have to believe in more than one? We've only got evidence for one having happened. Sure if multiple universes exist then it is conceivable that more than one big bang has occurred, but first you have to show that multiple universes like ours exist first.

The thought of other Universes out there past the boundaries of our own, is mindblowing, so is infinity, Infinity to me means there is stuff out there we can't even fathom.

How far away from a neighboring Universe would one have to be away from to see the whole thing? (imagine taking a pic and getting it all in one shot). What would it look like? A big ball, a disc? Does it rotate?

Is there a super massive black hole in the middle of the Universe, do other Universe revolve around each other?


Could Universes group together like galaxies and form megaverses?

See, it's just to much to comprehend.

Well that is the thing with science, answer one question and spawn 1000 more questions. It really isn't too hard to comprehend. At one point in the past, the world couldn't conceive of the idea that the universe is as vast as it is and all the things that make it up. Now it is common knowledge. All it takes is the right evidence and proliferation of information and it can be comprehended.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Why would you have to believe in more than one? We've only got evidence for one having happened. Sure if multiple universes exist then it is conceivable that more than one big bang has occurred, but first you have to show that multiple universes like ours exist first.

Of course it's an assumption, but with infinity, it could almost go beyond assumption.

OK, here is a rant:
I don't believe 100% in a god, just let me have my gall darned Multiverse!
It's all I got to play with in my head when I get spacy.

a reply to: elysiumfire

Wow! That was quick! It only took 28 posts before a poster arrived with the purported evidence (which fits the facts of our observations).

it appears that you missed mine. i am not quite so eloquent or informed as krazyshot but the research appears to be valid.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No one in science believes this for any theory. Only a naive fool would believe the book is closed on ANY science topic.

Perhaps you should read my post again then.

While the Big Bang is our best explanation at the moment I'm not convinced it is the whole story or even the correct one of how or why the Universe came into being.