could we see the moment of the big bang thru a telescope?

Question

i know that when looking out into deep space a telescope is looking into the past, if there was a telescope powerful enough would scientisits be able to see the moments directly after the big bang, before stars and galaxies formed properly?

Answer 1

No. The limit into the past is the point where things cooled down enough for light to get through (when space became transparent). This was about 300,000 years after the Big Bang. When we look at the Cosmic Background Radiation, this is essentially what we are seeing.

To go past that point, we would have to develop a non-photon based telescope. Neutrinos would be nice. Even then, there is a point when the temperature is high enough that space was opaque to even neutrinos. That would be back a considerable ways, though.

Answer 2

No, because these telescopes see stars 40 to about 70 million light years (70 million years into the past) but if you had a powerful enough telescope you would still not be able to see it, because the WHOLE universe was created in less than 1/2 a second, so if you could imagine by the time you focused the telescope by the time you were done it would have happened.

Answer 3

I believe you are responding to the idea that "the deeper one looks into space, the farther back in time." That is, light from more distant objects must have been travelling for a longer time, and hence the images it makes are older.

This is true, but unfortunately you cannot see the big bang, for the "simple" reason that at the moments immediately following the bang, the universe was a dense soup of charged particles (no neutral atoms yet) and so the light would have been reabsorbed many, many times.

What is seen is the remnant of the more or less uniform distribution of light once the soup cleared up--this is called the cosmic microwave background. It is the visible remnant of the bang.

Answer 4

Who says the universe is shrinking? The current value of the Hubble Constant suggests that though the Universe is still expanding it will eventually stabilise and not shrink at all.

Anyway the answer's is no as the material has already moved away from the big bang to form the universe.

Answer 5

A couple people have the correct answer.
About 300,000 years after the big bang,
the Universe cooled enough th release
free photons from the plasma. The cosmic
background we observe is these first photons
reaching us (which they have always been,
just at cooling temperatures). Before that time,
there would be nothing reaching us to observe.

Answer 6

We can see as far as the cosmic microwave background, which by one team's calculation happened 380,000 years after the Big Bang. Before that, the theory says the universe was opaque to all types of radiation, and therefore not observable.

Answer 7

"technological know-how proves that no longer something is created out of no longer something" In a common, Newtonian international, this is authentic. besides the undeniable fact that it is not authentic interior the quantum international, the place debris pop into life for all time. in fact, we are in a position to do it in particle accelerators--break 2 issues jointly, and you'd be able to confirm debris unexpectedly look out of the ability of the collision. just to be sparkling, i'm no longer speaking approximately basically seeing debris fly out--i'm speaking a pair of song from a particle basically appearing some distance from the collision. it is like in case you hit a baseball with a bat, and a marble starts off on the pitcher's mound and flies previous the 2nd baseman. The basic answer to "what created the super Bang" is: we don't be responsive to yet. the situation we've is that until a tiny fraction of a 2nd after the universe began (the tip of the "Planck epoch") our information of the mathematics and physics isn't good adequate--they "break down" and initiate giving us nonsense solutions like "countless tension and temperature". regrettably, Ivan does not understand the BBT besides as he thinks he does. on the initiating of the universe, there became _no_ matter--the universe became too warm for it to exist. What did exist became ability, and many it. matter could no longer exist until the universe extra desirable and cooled adequate. So the place did the subject come from? It got here from the ability. you're probable responsive to E=mc^2, that's the formula for calculating how plenty ability is produced in case you break matter (like in nuclear fusion--the atom that consequences weighs somewhat under the atoms that fused. the version is the ability this is given off). The equation works the two strategies--matter could be switched over into ability, yet ability could be switched over into matter besides.

Answer 8

yes and it does not even require a powerfull telescope. The famous microwave background radiation is the oldest 'light' in the universe and was emitted well before the first stars had time to form.

Answer 9

Did you know that they took a long term exposure at a dark place in the sky which yielded an ugly picture (printed in the Smithsonian) which looked like an incandescent mangled bunch of chicken wire? Perhaps this is consistent with matter from a large number of cosmic eggs colliding on various fronts.

Answer 10

It's looking into the past because that's how long it took the light (image) to get from there to here. Therefore, we would have had to have gotten from the Big Bang to here much faster than the light (image) of the BigBang, that is, much much faster than the speed of light in order to be here before it and receive it...
so NO. Unless of course, we were already here before the big bang, which then would refute the big bang theory in its entirety.