Big Bang Theory confirmed.

Mather and Smoot analyzed data from NASA's Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE), which studied the pattern of radiation from the first few instants after the universe was formed. In 1992, the COBE team announced that they had mapped the primordial hot and cold spots in the cosmic microwave background radiation. These spots are related to the gravitational field in the early universe, only instants after the Big Bang, and are the seeds for the giant clusters of galaxies that stretch hundreds of millions of light years across the universe. …

The team also showed that the big bang radiation has a spectrum that agrees exactly with the theoretical prediction, confirming the Big Bang theory and showing that the Big Bang was complete in the first instants, with only a tiny fraction of the energy released later

www.nasa.gov...



Mather shares the prize with George Smoot of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, Calif. They received the award for their work that helped cement the Big Bang theory of the universe and deepened our understanding of the origin of stars and galaxies.



Interesting that I never even heard of this, well I guess all speculation is laid bare and we have an answer....from nasa.... *queue xfiles theme*

Wow amazing news.
Next question is why? heck I love our human race we are so intelligent and thirsty for knowledge I just wish I had the brains to understand the math behind it all
S&F
But I bet many here still will not except it.

reply to post by Knives4eyes


Wrong forum.
And without even searching myself I am 100% certain this has been covered here extensively.

the question I'm always left with is how did the matter we're all made of come into existence in the first place, and what made it explode?

the big bang isn't the beginning, it's just the earliest bit we're capable of understanding right now.

reply to post by Knives4eyes


Nice. Now what caused it? God farting? Why is this in Religion forum?

The egg is good for you. The egg is bad for you. The egg is good for you again. Now it is just the yolk (again) that is bad for you.

That is the way I feel that "the beginning" arguments end up being because who really knows eh? It could be two "branes" bashing together and our Universe are the sparks that fly off.

Just a little bit ago I heard that this is a closed Universe we live in and the WMAP shows a coouple cool spots where there seems to be some sort of attraction by the nearby galaxies leading some to believe that there is a Universe right outside that is "pulling us, causing the cold spot and the galaxy drift towards them.

I never was comfortable with a singularity big bang that expanded to everything we can see and can't see. We are still missing a thing or two about the very fundamentals of things like the weak force of gravity. Hell... we can't even really explain electricity and are just smart enough to use it to great advantage.

So now it's the Big Bang again. I think all the thinking of the world will fall on the same scrap heap as our wars and religions long before this Universe grinds to a halt or whatever is in store for it.

It's fun to think about but it really isn't that important. Like family or even expressions of Love.

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Knives4eyes

 

Nice. Now what caused it? God farting? Why is this in Religion forum?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is why it's in religion

reply to post by Terminal1


Gravity may not be a weak force after all. It could be "weak" because it is the one force that permeates through all dimensions...holding everything together.

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Terminal1

 

Gravity may not be a weak force after all. It could be "weak" because it is the one force that permeates through all dimensions...holding everything together.

I do not believe gravity to be a weak force since it is influenced by mass.

Its not science when its not repeatable observable or testable
The universe is expanding, why?
The universe exists, why?

How did nothing become so much?
How and why did chemicals evolve.from a BB?
I think this confirmation of the big bang leaves us with more questions than answers. How?

reply to post by Knives4eyes


It isn't influenced BY mass. It INFLUENCES mass. Hell, it creates mass.

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Knives4eyes

 

It isn't influenced BY mass. It INFLUENCES mass. Hell, it creates mass.

Doesn't seem so weak now with that perspective change huh?

Its still going to be called a theory, because there is no way of knowing for sure.
For now it can't be tested, and observed big bang is only a means to help with
The study of physics.

But what do I know,I love this kind of stuff, but it only ever leaves me baffled

I won't believe that mankind can correctly guess at the origin of the universe no matter how much evidence he steers to substantiate it. I would guess the universe is more like a crystal leaf like frost growing on a window but floating in space.

reply to post by terriblyvexed


Just because it is called theory doesn't mean it isn't fact.

The United States National Academy of Sciences defines scientific theories as follows:

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)...One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.[7]

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by terriblyvexed
Its still going to be called a theory, because there is no way of knowing for sure.
For now it can't be tested, and observed big bang is only a means to help with
The study of physics.

But what do I know,I love this kind of stuff, but it only ever leaves me baffled

I'm sorry it's actually not called the Big Bang Theory, it is listed as The Big Bang.


Want to know the real knee jerker? I was looking for worldwide information from science data bases regarding the Rhesus factor and negative blood studies.

All I found was " information has been removed from database" and lo and behold I find everything from WARP simulation source codes, and the Big BANG but nothing about Negative blood research at all.

reply to post by Knives4eyes


No its theory, and will always be. I'm not arguing rather its fact or not.

People hella smarter than me have studied this, but I'm positive they would
tell you its a theory. If you prefer a highly educated, and well studied guess.

reply to post by JayinAR


That does make sense to me. I mean my "gut" feeling tells me this and I am a firm believer in M-String. Entanglement just really tears at mundane conventional thinking and proves things just may not be as they seem. Or what we currently understand to be true.

It really is fun to think about really. But it can't compare to having my wife snuggled up against me at night. I also am lucky enough to have a wife that cares and talks about it with me,

I guess I just am tired of the arguments this creates that always degenerate into discussions of God(s) and it is enough to give one a headache that rivals a bad night of Mezcal drinking and waking up with your head in the dog bed.

reply to post by terriblyvexed


science.nasa.gov...

Some more info on this subject from nasa.


By combining this evidence with theoretical models of the Universe, scientists have concluded that the Universe is "flat," meaning that, on cosmological scales, the geometry of space satisfies the rules of Euclidean geometry (e.g., parallel lines never meet, the ratio of circle circumference to diameter is pi, etc).

This left me chuckling....first the world was flat then it's round, now the universe is flat.....


Actually I've got a feeling ( yes uneducated gut feeling ) that the universe is set up like a treadmill that expands due to inertial force. I also think time is set up like a treadmill with the present as a vehicle set inbetween 2 more vehicles that represent the past and the future. This is just the opinion of this particular human.

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Terminal1

 

Gravity may not be a weak force after all. It could be "weak" because it is the one force that permeates through all dimensions...holding everything together.

Ding ding ding ding!!!

I said this just the other day here.

Like a tesseract, I feel gravity is only what we can measure in this dimension, of what the actual force is. We can't fully measure or understand it as it's across everything.

Now it doesn't answer anything... so.. yeah..