2006-10-17 09:40:31 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
No. and not even close to be related. Well, except that fundies hate them both. And yes, they are very original.
2006-10-17 09:48:27 · answer #1 · answered by Manny 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Nope, totally different aspects of science. Big Bang has more to do with physics and chemistry, cosmology specifically. Evolution (Darwin's theory) has to do with biology and genetics. Big bang has to do with the origins of the universe while evolution deals with the origins (or more accurately, the progression) of life. They are only related if you want to tell the story of... everything... about how the universe was formed, then throw in our theories of galaxy and solar system formation, planet formation, our theories of how life first BEGAN on Earth, which is seperate still from evolution for the most part, then talk about evolution, through the eras up until man, possibly also discussing man's influence on the Earth... that's like the grand theory of how we got here... mildly related but certainly not the same. It's kind of like saying that Big Bang and the development of architecture are the same...
2006-10-17 17:21:18 · answer #2 · answered by iMi 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Big Bang is a theory that tries to explain the creation of the galaxies and the expanding universe. Darwin's book on the origin of species suggests a theory on the evolution of living organisms from a very basic form of life. Organisms that are fit for their environment will survive. Both theories can be melted to a unique theory on the evolution of life - associating quantum theory, astrophysics, thermodynamics, evolution theory, philosophy... giving an explanation on the origin of the universe and a prediction on the destiny.
I believe these theories are elements of a larger theory that is still...in evolution.
2006-10-17 17:09:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The first explains the origin of the Universe. The second one explains the development of life. Both are accepted by the very vast majority of the scientific community. Evolution (as opposed to Darwinism) even more so. Both also contradict a literal explanation of the creation stories (There are two!) contained in the book of Genesis. Both also form a neat history of the Universe and how life came to be on earth.
So it's really up to you. Would you rather believe the greatest minds humanity has to offer in their collective acceptance of the general outlines of these theories, or the strict, literal interpretation of a book whose original version was never found, and that was included in a sacred canon by religious authorities millenniums after it was written and put back together from different sources?
2006-10-17 16:59:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Like Manny said, those two are not related in the least. The Big Bang theory describes how our Universe was created. The theory of natural selection describes how species on Earth evolve.
BTW, Earth formed some 9 billion years after the Big Bang.
2006-10-17 16:57:43 · answer #5 · answered by kris 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Big Bang is Cosmology.
Darwin (natural selection... evolution) is biology.
One is the study of the origin of everything, the other is the study of adaptation of life.
2006-10-17 16:55:57 · answer #6 · answered by Holden 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Que?
2006-10-17 16:46:44 · answer #7 · answered by Pseudo Obscure 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋