Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Big Bang - Where's the hole?

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Awen24
The big bang theory is full of holes.
It has changed so many times since its inception (although depending on where you want to place that inception it's either more or many, many more) that it's barely recognisable now.

I found this article this week really interesting:

Gravitational Lensing: Astronomers spot arc from distant galaxy

Science and scientific journals are littered with examples of phenomena that simply shouldn't exist if the big bang were true. We need to move past the big bang as a theory of universal origin, it's flawed, and the observations and the models don't have any synergy between them.




Someone PLEASE help me with this... I'd really like to know the answer.


Universe = 13/2 billion years old
oldest gallaxy clusters still forming stars formed in an arc = 13 billion years.

So if we look in that direction, 13 billion years, that would put us at the center, or the end of the origin from which it came.




posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Our universe is spiraling outwards as it evolves. It is becoming larger as time passes.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:56 AM
link   
Big bang was an expansion of all space, not an explosion. There is no center, or we could say that the center is everywhere. Like a surface of an inflating baloon, every point in space gets farther apart from every other point, with the speed of expansion proportional to the distance between two points.

Metric expansion of space
edit on 6/7/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:14 AM
link   
First of all, Big Bang is a theory ... and in many (if not most) scientists minds, it's a "sham" that's supposed to bridge the religious and science.

And then, even if there was some sort of Big Bang, and the galaxies are moving away ... you still have the situation, where there is no more space, than there was originally. In layman terms, the Universe is not a room with fixed walls ... it doesn't even have walls. Since the "origin" defines the space, it also defines the finite of that space that is available.

Let me try and explain this to you ... imagine some "dot" in space that explodes. Since this "dot" is the origin of all material, it also defines the finite volume of space. This is the paradox of the Big Bang theory ... and the very same that makes the scientists that voice it, religious and not scientific. And when you hear it presented, it's always presented with a religious undertone, of the "7 days of creation".

You cannot define infinity in finite terms ... so, Big Bang is just nonsence.

And then you have the good old telescopes that are giving you a sight to the beginning of the Universe. First of all, even a photon has a finite size. Thus, even to a beginner, it should be obvious that the distance a telescope can look at ... is finite. Thus, you need to see where this "finite" term applies ... and even a layman should know, that when you use a telescope, at some point it actually starts being a microscope.

So, before you start buying all those stories about galaxies, and endless sizes and bla bla bla ... I suggest you have them show you the mathematics, on paper. And then spend the next decade to scrutinize those mathematics ... rather than looking at pretty pictures. And don't buy Phage explanations, that he's better at math than you ... it's not the skill of math that is needed here, it's the "scientific mind" of being able to question the nature of things.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lionhearte
People still believe in the Big Bang? It's completely outdated, totally impossible, illogical, non scientifical and nonsensical and is only even feasible as a mathematical equation on a piece of paper, if hardly. Yet if you ask a believer of this dying faith they will ask you to ignore the "small problem" of something coming out from nothing, and look at the rest of the theory, which is also has some problems.. and more problems. Then more problems arise with the theory.

People just look at the so-called "proof" via interpretations of observational data that do not relate to reality. Microwaves MUST mean that everything was once in one spot that exploded/expanded? Red Shifts MUST indicate greater velocity the older the light is from ever farther objects away from Earth?

Where are our free thinkers?

You guys can believe whatever you want, and state whatever opinion you'd like. My opinion is this - Stop making false assumptions and interpretations and use your deductive reasoning abilities to understand that this never has nor ever will be proven as a viable theory.


People still believe in this thing called god, and yet there is zero evidence for it - not just a small problem here or there with our limited thinking, but a flaming great abyss bereft of evidence.

Dying faith indeed lol

I find your post the most hysterically ironic thing I've read all year


thanks for that !!!
edit on 6-7-2012 by mainidh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
Big bang was an expansion of all space, not an explosion. There is no center, or we could say that the center is everywhere. Like a surface of an inflating baloon, every point in space gets farther apart from every other point, with the speed of expansion proportional to the distance between two points.

Metric expansion of space
edit on 6/7/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)


What scientific evidence do we have of a space that is expanding, actually forming a solid?

All matter that take up space are compressed.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lionhearte
reply to post by Kryties
 


Lol. Sure, call yourself "rational" and "logical" all you want. Doesn't make it so. I call your beliefs a religion, because it requires faith. Your deity is called "Chance" and "Time" and with them, all things are possible. They have brought us to where we are today, according to your very own religion.


Calling something a religion does not a religion make, no matter how much you delude yourself into thinking so. Science does not require faith, by its very nature science requires proof extracted from method and process.

Chance and Time? Do you even know what the hell you are talking about? (that's rhetorical by the way, I already know the answer).


What evidence is there, exactly, of the Big Bang?

As far as I know, there are dozens and dozens of issues with the entire theory that any logical and rational person would realize, and since you claim you are such a thinker, this shouldn't be a problem for you.


You answered your own question. ITS A THEORY. You do know the definition of theory and how it works within scientific process don't you? They teach this in Primary School, you should know.


For one, you should know that static universe models fit observational data better than the expanding universe models, as they match most observations with no adjustable parameters. The Big Bang can match each of the critical observations, but ONLY with adjustable parameters, one of which (the cosmic deceleration parameter) requires mutually exclusive values to match different tests. This essentially falsifies the theory. Hell, even if the discrepancies could be explained (though, that does require a problem for you), Occam's razor favors the model with fewer adjustable parameters.

Secondly, our most distant galaxies visible (using the Hubble Deep Field) reveal insufficient evidence/proof of evolution, with some of them having higher Red shifts (z=6-7) than the highest Red Shift QSOs. Essentially, with the Big Bang theory, all stars/quasars/galaxies/celestial bodies should be "primitive", meaning mostly metal-free, because it requires many generations of supernovae to build up metal content in stars. Except, latest evidence suggests lots of metal are found in the (supposedly) earliest QSOs, there's a full review of that here.


All it means is that the theory is wrong and further scientific research is required. This is absolutely normal and definitely not indicative of existence of a God.

Again, this is basic stuff, how on Earth you don't know this is beyond me.



The creation needs a creator. Would you laugh at someone who claims a watchmaker made their watch, calling them insane? Based off your logic, I suppose you would.


What? That the single worst comparison I have seen all year, well done on that. Why would anyone question whether a watchmaker made a watch? If necessary, I can toddle off to the place where my watch was made and meet the bloke (or lady) who made it. I cannot, however, stroll into 'heaven' and shake hands with God. You know why? HE DOESN'T EXIST.

Try again.
edit on 6/7/2012 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 05:50 AM
link   
Hello.
In a topic like this one I`d really like english to be my native language... and it isn´t, so please excuse me in advance. I need to clarify a few concepts before answer the question of the OP.

The "problem" with the classic Big Bang theory (not the tv show) is that it doesn´t take multidimensional space into consideration. That, in fact, is the problem with the mainstream cosmology today. We try to explain (and to great sucess) every interaction in a 3+1 D model, and it doesn´t have to be like that at all.

That´s why in the General Relativity + Standard Model we cant´t unify gravity with the other 3 forces (electromagnetic and weak - strong nuclear interaction). The problem without that unification is that the theories fails to explain what we call a SINGULARITY.

And the entire Big Bang Theory revolves about a Singularity "expanding" not in "space" but "becoming space itself". And the superluminical speed of that expansion is what we call "inflation". And that Singularity wasn´t anywhere, because there wasn´t any space at all, and it doesn´t have any volume but almost infinite energy (wich is the same as mass, in relativity) and in some "strange way" it "explodes" or "expand" "and voila", here we are
.

Well, we all can see why we can argue to death about the topic. Is quite vague in many ways.... but it kind of works


But... it becomes a completely different story when you look at things ABOVE the 3+1 D classic model.

We may find the answers in M-Theory. And that needs a 10+1 D space to work. And even with that it doesn´t give ONE correct result (yet), but millons of probable "universes to be" and one and only one of those is the one we´re living today. (if "today" or "now" is a real thing at all, btw).

So...a 10+1 D Universe..... that´s a lot of dimensions. And that means a LOT of potential energy. And that means it would be naturally unstable, as the (flawled but practical) quantum physics model predicts. And of that "unstabilty" is from where we, as a 3+1 D Universe (probably) came to (probable) existence.

It wasn´t "and explosion" or even "an expansion" from "nothing". It was a kind of RIP, from a multidimensional Universe, wich was already "everywhere" (and it still is, if M-theory gets to be confirmed some day) and that´s why we doesn´t need a "BANG" or a "INFLATION". And by RIP we mean a multidimensional RIP.

It could be imagined as a 10D water into a pressure cooker. Energy could make the "water" to boil, wich would creat bubbles... and as they grow bigger and bigger they would generate (how do I put it?).... pressure. And with enough pressure the entire cooker would or could "RIP" (or break). We don´t know anything for sure, but maybe the "water" or a single "bubble" of that water could be the entire Universe we inhabit today... or not... or there could be 2 or 3 or 3.14 + 1.618 Universes out there... and we don´t know. But there is something, as we can all see.

I´m not talking about "a parallel ATS in wich we all love TPTB" and "we live upside down" or things like that. I´m talking abot "physical" dimensions and physical Universes, wich we can only "see" in mathematical models, but could well explain all the weirdness of Quantum physics. Or even "Dark" matter/energy.

It´s hard to explain, and even harder with my horrible limited english, but we have to take away what we think about the Big Bang and start taking hyperspace into consideration.

Well, I´ll be here for a little while. Maybe we can discuss this even further


BTW, all the post WASN´T an answer in strict sense. It was more of an approximation, and it raises even more questions, wich we can´t answer . Quite a paradox..



hint: we ARE the hole...


edit on 6-7-2012 by PragmaticBeliever because: missing letters
edit on 6-7-2012 by PragmaticBeliever because: hint



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


You're still thinking of the Big Bang as the moving of matter. It's not. The "Bang" did nothing to cause matter to move. The energy of expansion is not acting on matter to push it out, away, or any other direction.

The most promising physical analog of the cosmological constant (the thing expanding the universe in Einstein's field equations) is vacuum energy. Vacuum energy is the potential energy released when the quantum vacuum collapses to a lower energy level. This energy has negative pressure, which means it causes space to stretch. It doesn't push objects away from each other...it causes the space in between objects to stretch.

So, forget the expanding balloon. Cut a circle out of the balloon and lay it out flat (so you have a flat rubber circle), and put a bunch of dots on it to represent matter. Now, you and a couple friends grab around the outside of the rubber circle and stretch it out. What happens? The dots all get further apart, expanding away from each other. But, did you move the dots? No...you stretched the rubber. In the same way, nothing is causing the matter in the universe to physically move further away from all other matter...the negative pressure of the cosmological constant is causing space itself to stretch.

Of course, you may say, the circle of rubber still has a center. And that's true. If the universe is in any way bounded, then it does have a center. But that doesn't mean everything is moving outward, toward the edges, away from that central point. The rubber is stretching and, in fact, that also means that the space between the edge and the matter near the edge is expanding. So, objects near the edge are getting further away from the edge. Objects near the center are getting further away from the center. And you can say that for any location... objects near Point X are getting further away from Point X. The closer you get to Point X, the slower this action is; the further you get from Point X, the faster the actions is. The speed of this expansion is proportional to the object's distance from Point X.
Objects at the center stay at the center. Objects near the center get further away from the center at a slow rate. Objects far from the center get further away from the center at a fast rate.
Objects at the outer edge stay at the edge. Objects near the edge get further away from the edge at a slow rate. Objects far from the edge get further away from the edge at a fast rate.

Yet we can still avoid a universe with a center by saying that the universe is infinite in size. An infinite space has no center. Plus, it makes more logical sense. By saying that the universe has an edge, then we arrive at the "well, what's on the outside?" issue. An infinite space contains all of our perceived reality and has no outside and no center. With this in mind, the rubber circle you and your friends were stretching earlier has to be infinite in size, but it's the same principle.
Also, it should be pointed out that, although I'm getting you and your friends to expand the rubber circle by pulling it from the outside, the negative pressure of the cosmological constant is actually a 'force' pushing outward on space from the inside. At every point in space, there is this outward pressure pushing outward on the space surrounding it. This pushes every point in space away from every surrounding point in space, and, consequently, every other point in space.
Your belief that the expansion is starting at a single point and pushing outward is essentially correct, The problem is, you're limiting it to a single central point. This outward push is actually happening everywhere, not just at a single central point. And it isn't pushing on matter, it's pushing on space.

In fact...the universe didn't even contain matter when it started expanding. Using vacuum energy as the cause, we have the following series of events:

1) the universe is infinite in size and completely empty (100% vacuum)
2) the vacuum is a quantum vacuum, capable of spontaneous energy collapse
3) the quantum vacuum spontaneously collapses to a lower energy level
4) a uniform amount of energy is released throughout the universe
5) this energy has negative pressure, pushing outward on the space around it
6) the universe experiences an initial period of rapid expansion (inflation)
7) the energy released by the vacuum collapse condenses as the universe cools
8) the condensing/cooling energy forms matter particles

Now, this is an overly simplified version, but it should help to get the gist.
In this scenario, when you and your friends are stretching the rubber circle, the circle initially has no dots on it. It's actually the energy of your stretching that causes dots to appear on the circle.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by article

Someone PLEASE help me with this... I'd really like to know the answer.


Universe = 13/2 billion years old
oldest gallaxy clusters still forming stars formed in an arc = 13 billion years.

So if we look in that direction, 13 billion years, that would put us at the center, or the end of the origin from which it came.


There are actually four possibilities (that I can think of). First, it could be that such structures really did form that soon after the Big Bang. It could also be that our distance estimate is wrong. Or, it could be that our age for the universe is wrong. And, finally, both our distance estimates and our age for the universe could be wrong.

Really, the only way our age for the universe could be wrong is if we have misinterpreted the Cosmic Microwave Background. Which, of course, is possible, given our limited vantage point and relatively primitive understanding.
edit on 6-7-2012 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


The galaxies are moving away from each other because of inflation, the space between them is growing, it's not exactly that the force of the big bang sent them flying off, it's the fact that the entire universe sprang from a singularity and now empty space, which isn't really empty, is inflating, the space between the galaxies is growing, and the speed at which they are moving away is getting faster, the exact opposite of what you would expect if the force of the big bang is the only reason they are moving away.

There is little to no friction in space, so once an object is set in motion, it will continue at that speed until it hits something. It should not gain speed.

It would appear that inflation is actually speeding up.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

The raisins inside the loaf of raisin bread are separate masses from each other. The dough/bread/sponge is equivalent to space. Forget about the mass of the dough/bread/sponge and imagine that only as the medium of space which expands.


The Big Bang released a set amount of material. In other words, whatever was contained in the singularity is now out and no more material is forthcoming.

So, let's give the dough in raisin bread a set amount: One loaf's worth. Now, allow that loaf to stretch until it's paper thin. Let it keep going, constantly pulling the dough from the center. A hole would appear.

But the Universe isn't "pulling from the center," the Universe is pulling in all directions at once. Every part of it is pulling away from every other part of it. The Big Rip is a theory about the eventual fate of the Universe where as space expands faster and faster, the expansion starts to overcome even the forces holding matter together and even the atoms and sub-atomic particles that make up the matter in the Universe can no longer overcome it and are ripped apart, not from one point at the center, but every point in the Universe this pulls apart from every other point.

The raisin bread analogy only works up to a point, it's not a perfect metaphor for how the Universe will behave throughout its entire history, which I think you keep trying to make it work for. It only serves to explain how things that start off close together at first expand outwards in all directions all at once. It's a limited, three dimensional model of this effect used to show how this basic process works at a physical scale our brains can better comprehend.


Now, the question is: Is the dark energy pushing everything in different directions, or is it pushing everything away, further and further out?


It's not pushing things, it is expanding the space between things. Paint that black dot red in your image above and make it move as well as the others and you'll get a better approximation of how this works.


Originally posted by article
Someone PLEASE help me with this... I'd really like to know the answer.


Universe = 13/2 billion years old
oldest gallaxy clusters still forming stars formed in an arc = 13 billion years.

So if we look in that direction, 13 billion years, that would put us at the center, or the end of the origin from which it came.

Those galaxies presumably still exist today, though they would probably look a lot different now since galaxies evolve and change over time. There is probably someone on a world in one of those today looking at an image from their version of Hubble of a very young galaxy 13 billion light years away that would eventually evolve to become our own galaxy. From their point of view, because they are so far away, our own galaxy looks just like one of those very young galaxies we're looking at from our vantage point.
edit on 7/6/2012 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I believe, due to mere speculation, that the big bang is banging at an accelerating rate and that the source of this bangingness is moving away at an accelerating rate. So the edge of the universe has expanded past what we can see with any size telescope and it is still expanding and it is still being created. It is still banging, and banging even more that it did yesterday. I believe that this big banging matter creator is so unique and so powerful and so responsible and so infinite that it can only be called, "God". Imagine if the big bang never stopped happening.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I believe, due to mere speculation, that the big bang is banging at an accelerating rate and that the source of this bangingness is moving away at an accelerating rate. So the edge of the universe has expanded past what we can see with any size telescope and it is still expanding and it is still being created. It is still banging, and banging even more that it did yesterday. I believe that this big banging matter creator is so unique and so powerful and so responsible and so infinite that it can only be called, "God". Imagine if the big bang never stopped happening.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Don't know much but I think the big bang was less like a bullet through glass and more like a water balloon being filled rapidly. In the beginning all matter and forces of the universe were compressed into a small area and then the big bang happened forcing everything outwards in all directions. Personally I believe this dense area was the center of massive black hole but that is just my opinion. Whether that would leave a void I do not know but because of our limitations in viewing the center of the Universe, due to the fact we can only see far into the distant past when viewing everything, who knows what the center looks like at the present time.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
the OP makes no sense at all.

The analogy is all wrong to begin with.

where did the glass come from where did the bullet come from where did the gunpowder come from. who pulled the trigger??


The universe is EXPANDING outwards faster and faster, which means its growing exponentially. The alternate realities created by choice are pushing matter apart.

It all began with thought.

The original big bang was the first thought.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
The accererated expansion could well be explained as a Mirage.

A multidimensional mirage.

It´s better explained here.

Euclidean Relativity


Please take a look, and don´t let personal metaphysical beliefs cloud reason
edit on 6-7-2012 by PragmaticBeliever because: poor english



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


You are living in a fairy tale.


And to the christian guy saying the Big Bang didn't happened because something can't emerge out of nothing I'd like to ask one question : where does God comes from then ?



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by jiggerj
 


The galaxies are moving away from each other because of inflation, the space between them is growing, it's not exactly that the force of the big bang sent them flying off, it's the fact that the entire universe sprang from a singularity and now empty space, which isn't really empty, is inflating, the space between the galaxies is growing, and the speed at which they are moving away is getting faster, the exact opposite of what you would expect if the force of the big bang is the only reason they are moving away.

There is little to no friction in space, so once an object is set in motion, it will continue at that speed until it hits something. It should not gain speed.

It would appear that inflation is actually speeding up.


I wonder how physicists came up with the idea of the space filling in between galaxies? Where is this dark energy coming from? Is it like a cloud of ever swirling of smoke?



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by iamhobo
The Big Bang couldn't have occured unless the universe existed inside of another space. Hence, in order to have an explosion, it must occur within an already existing area.

Unless of course, the law of physics isn't really a law to begin with.

Thats just it, physics break down inside a singularity, and our known laws do not apply.

No different than the inside of a black hole. We simply do not, nor cannot know the laws inside.





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join