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.

 

Is the Big Bang a hoax?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Since the Supreme is always same space-time Universal,
and there was always similarities between all sizes of bodies from super-galactic to atomic,
is it possible that the Universe is just like a fractal? with no beginning or end?


I was wondering if anyone could give me some insights about this.
Peace.

[edit on 10-1-2010 by _SilentAssassin_]




posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I have always struggled to understand the big bang, the reason is, i just can't get my head around everything exploding from nothing, if you have a firework and set it off it explodes from something small into enormous beauty, but it exists somewhere first, i suppose i can't comprehend nothingness.

Regards

Satellite1



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Don't know if it's a Hoax, but the fact is it's a theory, nothing more, you either buy into or not, I don't.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
It is perfectly acceptable for something to come from nothing in the quantum world. The Big Bang probably represents the same phenomenon, on a much bigger scale.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Just remember, the big bang isn't an explosion, just a sudden expasion. And you can't say that there were always similarites because we can't know that.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I dont believe there was a big bang. I believe there was a perfect compression of energy. That created matter (existence).

When the compression stopped we have expansion. We all know that existence is expanding. Its not exploding.

Our existence is expanding back to what it used to be before the compression. And that's pure energy.






[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by np6888
 


This subject really confuses me.


[edit on 10-1-2010 by _SilentAssassin_]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by _SilentAssassin_
 



Just like the whole 'world was created in 6days' or whatever. Its equal parts urban legend too.
I doubt that the big bang is a lie, if so science is a lie but people will argue that point anyway. Its the what started the whole thing off in the first place and how did that get there and so on. The question goes on forever really.
If a allah created us then who created the allah?

Edit: oh you edited your post, now mine seems out of context. You should always quote, remember that people.
Still stands though


[edit on 10-1-2010 by pazcat]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by np6888
It is perfectly acceptable for something to come from nothing in the quantum world. The Big Bang probably represents the same phenomenon, on a much bigger scale.


I don't understand the quantum world so i still find it hard to accept. I can't get my head round the "thing" that is the big bang, where is it to begin with, before it explodes (or what ever the descritpiton is)



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Evidence refuting the big bang:
The Big Bang Never Happened

plenty more where that came from.

modern cosmology is a sick joke perpetrated on the public that serves as nothing more than a mechanism to loot us of our tax dollars and keep us ignorant as to the true nature of the universe.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
There is 100% proof the big bang did happen.. It happened kinda like this.........



The above video does not represent the posters point of view, he has no idea how the or if the big bang actually happened like they state. he does however thinks the above clip can explain the big bang about as good as the above video can.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by satellite1

Originally posted by np6888
It is perfectly acceptable for something to come from nothing in the quantum world. The Big Bang probably represents the same phenomenon, on a much bigger scale.


I don't understand the quantum world so i still find it hard to accept. I can't get my head round the "thing" that is the big bang, where is it to begin with, before it explodes (or what ever the descritpiton is)


The big bang theory doesn't describe what happened "before".

Also, it isn't a case of "something" coming from "nothing".

It's merely a description of what appeared to have happened, based on certain observations such as the expansion of the universe, background radiation and the red shift phenomenon.

Basically, it appears that the universe is expanding, so if you go back in time, it was probably smaller then... and if you go back far enough, it was probably very very very small.

That is just what the big bang theory describes: a hot and very dense universe that expanded and cooled... and is continuing to do so.

It's doesn't appear to be possible to know what happened before the big bang. It is completely out of the realm of science. In short, science doesn't care what happened before existence as we know it because it has no bearing on reality and has nothing to do with anything whatsoever except some primitive notion of "meaning of existence" - that is up to metaphysics, philosophy, and religion to debate. Yet, in the long description, a theory called Loop Quantum Gravity reveals a model of a "breathing" universe that expands and collapses over and over again.

Again, the general idea is this: The universe appears to be expanding. If it's expanding, it used to be smaller. If you imagine a reversal of the expansion, what do you end up with? You end up with something very hot and dense.

The expansion, perhaps, was when time began. It's a very interesting thought because one doesn't think of existence manifesting itself, no?

An extremely hot and dense collection of energy manifested into physical matter, there for who knows how long... suddenly reaches some critical situation causing it to expand and end up with what we have today.

Answers are hard to come by, and imagination often triumphs over realistic observation and science: God did it.

Before you were born, existence existed, but you didn't.

Before the universe was born, existence existed, but it didn't.

Alas, it all seems like a dream.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by RestingInPieces
 


You kind of made me understand more and thank you. I get that the universe is expanding and if you reverse that i suppose that's the big bang ? ? But thats not what i don't get, i suppose what i'm saying is, when the universe is but a tiny spec this is the bit i can't comprehend, this spec must (in my head) exist somewhere, just like life did before i was in it, like a tap of running water filling up a cup, take it back to the first drop, that drop exists in the cup, the cup exists in the kitchen, the kitchen in the house . .etc etc etc ... could this universe be incased in another universe and so on . . my head hurts .. ha ha :-)



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
It's possible. The average person does not have access to a radio telescope. let alone a high-end amateur astronomers telescope. This would make it VERY hard to independently verify an astronomer or astrophysicists claim



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 




I didn't read that entire thread, nor that entire post, but it looks like you're arguing that, in the big bang theory, red shift indicates distance from us. T his is false; rather, it is thought to indicate motion away from us.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
The evidence for the big bang was put there to mislead us! It is God's hoax! OR the aliens'.

I don't actually believe this, but it had to be suggested... In jest or in devil's advocacy, you decide!



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by satellite1
 


According to Einstein, our perception of time(or more accurately the rate of change to different states) within something is different from someone outside of that something. In other words, what may seem like 14 billion years to us may seem like an instant to someone outside of our universe(or someone from a higher dimension), just like how we perceive an electron popping in and out of existence in an instance(but would seem like 14 billion years to the "people inside of the electron."



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by satellite1
reply to post by RestingInPieces
 


You kind of made me understand more and thank you. I get that the universe is expanding and if you reverse that i suppose that's the big bang ? ? But thats not what i don't get, i suppose what i'm saying is, when the universe is but a tiny spec this is the bit i can't comprehend, this spec must (in my head) exist somewhere, just like life did before i was in it, like a tap of running water filling up a cup, take it back to the first drop, that drop exists in the cup, the cup exists in the kitchen, the kitchen in the house . .etc etc etc ... could this universe be incased in another universe and so on . . my head hurts .. ha ha :-)



That's as far as the big bang theory goes: the universe is but a "spec" in the beginning. With the big bang theory, that spec already exists. The big bang theory does not attempt to describe why or how the spec exists. It just exists already. The theory doesn't start with "nothing" and end up with "something"... it starts with the exact amount of matter and same physical laws (and this area has variable theories) that our current universe has, but in a highly compressed state.

If you want to go further back, to when the spec doesn't exist, you need to look at loop quantum gravity or even branes from string theory.

If you get too open or too confused then it's turtles all the way down.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Are you saying that the galaxies are not moving away from each other, because our observation of redshift is flawed?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Reply to post by pazcat
 


Proving a theory wrong doesn't prove science is invalid. It's a philosophy, an approach. It doesn't need the Big Bang Myth to exist.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join