English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have often heard that we cannot say anything sensible about what was "before" the Big Bang. The universe as we know it began with a singularity etc. etc. But shouldn't we reason thus: if from this singularity there followed the Big Bang, this singularity evidently was not in equilibrium. In fact, from the fact that there is change - the only thing which I consider a fact, since even if everything is merely a hallucination, this hallucination is changing - we can reason out that this change cannot have begun nor will ever stop - we can reason that there has never been, nor will there ever be, equilibrium. Dontcha think?

2006-07-20 11:40:12 · 11 answers · asked by sauwelios@yahoo.com 6 in Science & Mathematics Physics

11 answers

you have a point, but. . you're making assumptions. Like you say, "the universe .. began with a singularity". .

how do you know that? Were you there? No?. .

Actually, a rapidly increasing number of top scientists (astrophysicists, etc.) are rejecting the Big Bang because it doesn't agree with observable science, and what the Big Bang view says should be observed clearly isn't, so it's out of touch with empirical science.

for a look at an open letter published recently in New Scientist, signed by hundreds of top scientists, go to:

http://www.cosmologystatement.org

and at the bottom you can see the ever-expanding list of names of the top researchers from around the world who are rejecting the Big Bang as not fitting with observable science.

You also are making some other assumptions in believing that everything that has been has always been changing. If causality is true (and nobody can point to a known exception), then something had to cause the beginning of the universe. The universe is running down, and so it had to have a beginning, or if it hadn't had a beginning, then it would have reached equilibrium by now (everything everywhere would all be the same temperature, for one thing).

2006-07-20 11:47:12 · answer #1 · answered by Wayne A 5 · 0 0

Well, I'm pretty sure physicists are still trying to figure out just exactly what the heck happened and they get closer all the time. I wouldn't say these people are not thinking. For many people though the Big Bang Theory is a knee jerk response to the question of where the universe came from in the same way that God is a knee jerk response for others.

2006-07-20 11:48:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

"call one actual merchandise which could be made from no longer some thing!" precisely, you won't be able to create some thing from no longer some thing. the aspect you're failing to appreciate is that there is not any component to massive bang theory that makes this declare. enormous bang theory only claims that all and sundry rely, area, and time in our universe stronger from a unmarried element about 14 billion years in the past. That a lot is actual observable by using measuring the stream of gadgets interior the universe and noting that they are all shifting far flung from one yet another. added, the idea predicts that the early speedy boom might want to go away in the back of strains of radiation. The technologies to visual demonstrate unit and degree such radiation did not exist on the time it changed into envisioned. even as it did develop into accessible, the prediction changed into shown. by using twist of destiny, i'd upload. the lads who first reported it theory there changed into some thing incorrect with their radio telescope. however the idea makes no claims about what, if some thing, existed earlier to even as the universe began increasing, or why it stronger. There are different hypothesis that take care of those questions, yet they don't seem to be component to massive bang theory, and maximum of them have not been examined yet. also, you seem perplexed about atomic theory. actual gadgets (rely) aren't from now on "created" by using atoms. All rely in our universe is *composed of* atoms. those atoms, in turn, are composed of sub-atomic debris. the position did all of it come from? properly, the finest answer is: we do not comprehend, precisely. the widely huge-spread theory is that sometime in the course of the early boom of the universe, a number of the ability collapsed into trouble-free debris, which right now condensed jointly to variety the gentle aspects (helium and hydrogen). over the years, large parts of those aspects collided and condensed by using gravity, and formed stars. The fusion reactions interior the celebs formed the heavier aspects (carbon, oxygen, etc), or perhaps as a celeb is going supernova, a huge component to the rely from its outer shell receives ejected and spreads for the length of area. specially, you should attempt to appreciate that there are a form of issues we do not realize about the universe. and that is positive. we've purely been round for a tiny fraction of the era of time the universe has existed, and it is an fantastically large position, with many mysteries to study. yet we are learning more effective each and every of the time.

2016-11-24 23:16:17 · answer #3 · answered by drinkwater 4 · 0 0

What caused the the big bang blob to appear.For ? amount of time it sat until suddenly it decided to explode.It lit it's own fuse and blew up.
The outcome?
An precision universe and complex life.
Did the blob have an equilibrium before it self destructed?

2006-07-20 11:51:10 · answer #4 · answered by robert p 7 · 0 0

That's the concept. It keeps on changing and changing, and eventually the universe will re-implode, and blow the **** up again and someone will think up this same theory, and then they'll get imploded too. That's the principal of the thing.

2006-07-20 11:53:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We are in one giant black hole. The singularity was the creation of the blackhole from another universe.

2006-07-20 13:40:14 · answer #6 · answered by beren 7 · 0 0

Yes.

2006-07-20 11:43:04 · answer #7 · answered by wtfapricot 2 · 0 0

come back to me when you know more about the big bang.

2006-07-20 11:47:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If that is your question then you should stop thinking..

2006-07-20 11:44:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What ever you say...........dont make much sence at all , but ok.

2006-07-20 11:44:49 · answer #10 · answered by c g 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers