Describe the Big Bang Theory.?

Question

Not matter how hard I try, I cannot grasp my mind around the concept of having one singular smaller then an atom create the entire universe.

And how'd it get there, anyway?

And how'd it manage to create gravity, and protons, and neutrons... and all that.

And what was outside of the singular?

Anyone else find this difficult to understand? My science teacher makes it sound like second grade knowledge.

Answer 1

The big bang theory is just that: a theory. I have found it to be science fiction. It finds its strength in the redshift of distant star light. The assumption is if a star looks red, it is either red in color or the light from it with respect to our position is of the red-light wavelength. This can be true if the star is receding from us "or we are moving away from it).

However, there are other explanations some people have suggested for the red shift.

The problem with the universe starting from a single point is that the bang would need to be so big to overcome infinite gravity as well as to overcome the event horizon of that point. i.e. to come out of the gravitational sphere in which even light cannot escape.

Answer 2

Don't worry about your teacher - he/she is using "old" school knowledge.

First of all, scientist are not all that certain that the Big Bang developing from a singular point particle is correct anymore (although it hasn't been disproved).

There is a point, as one approaches time zero, where all mathematics and laws of physics break down into non-sensical answers and if you examine the theories of expansionism, they are convinced that the universe did not develop from a Big Bang. Their main argument is because the universe is expanding at an even greater rate than it would have at time zero.

There is another theory, the Cyclonic Theory, which basically states that the universe goes through expansion from singularity to a limit and then contraction to a singularity. This theory has pretty well been debunked, however, because with each cycle the universe would lose a little bit (cosmologically speaking) of energy. This would imply that there would have been a beginning and eventually an end to the universe.

In quatum physics, this question becomes even more abstract. Under this discipline, it is thought that all matter and energy is composed of strings (String Theory, M-theory, etc.) and the properties of these strings. It also suggests that we could be only one of many "pocket" universes that could be bounded by "branes". Of course all of these ideas are theoretical because we do not have technology (nor understanding) to make observations to valid one theory over another. The hopes are that in the particle accelerator that is due to be operation in 2007, some of these questions will be answered. This accelerator is suypposed to have the capaility to create microscopic black holes.

Don't be confounded because everyone is in the same boat that you are in and with regards to quantum physics the whole idea of human experience may not be reality, anyways.

Answer 3

I only want to add that the Big Bang *only* refers to the inflation of the Universe which is the hypothesis that explains the empirical observations of the smoothness of the cosmic microwave background (and coupled with quantum mechanics, the spatial spectrum of the roughness that exists) and the uniform expansion of the universe. Throw in general relativity, our understanding of particle physics and quantum mechanics and you can also explain why hydrogen, deuterium, helium and lithium exist in the proportions they do, why the universe today is as lumpy as it is (distribution of galaxies into clusters, superclusters and sheets) and probably some other stuff.

It DOES NOT explain why we have gravity, or why the fundamental forces of the universe are what they are (which led to the formation of protons and electrons and such as the universe cooled) or where all this matter/energy came from (or even its characteristics prior to the Planck time). It is a difficult topic to grasp and I agree that the teacher who is not answering your questions probably does not have a good grasp himself.

There are lots of layperson books out there you will get something out of. In addition to the previous recommendation try "A Brief History of Time" and Part 3 of Ed Harrison's textbook "Cosmology" will help. The more times you read this from different presentations, the closer you will come to grasping it. Good luck.


http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/052166148X/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-7735916-8685767#reader-link"

Answer 4

what the first responder fails to understand is that when the universe was compressed into a singularity like point, there was no surrounding space or time. the big bang, is not an explosion like you might see on tv. it is more like an inflation of space like a balloon blowing up.

you are right that it is difficult to understand, and that it raises almost as many questions as it solves. the big bang therory is a model of how the universe began from our perspective, not necssarily fact. the big bang does take into account many strange phenomena that the steady state universe theory fails to explain. primarily that time only moves in one dirrection and that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate outward from some central starting point.

your first question of how did it get there is not reasonably answered from the human frame of reference, because space and time a woven together in the space time fabric time did not exist before space, and space did not exist before the big bang. so to ask what happened before time began is not a reasonable question. however in terms of string theory you can understand the big bang as being caused by two membranes in space colliding, but this theory may be above your current understanding, just know that eventually you will be able to look at extensions and alternate interpretations to the big bang.

your second question is very complicated and mathematically rigerous but can be simply put as all matter can be converted to energy and vice versa so the the universe inflated out from the point, and cooled, allowing particles to from, which then became nuclei, and atoms, and the light elements in the universe

this question again has no physical significance, as space did not exist, there is no such thing as being outside of it.

the longer you are exposed to it the easier it is to understand, but the harder it is to explain to others, so don't be too hard on your science teacher.

Answer 5

Man you're right. The universe can't create itself. There was an intelligent creator, GOD created the heaven and the earth. You're question is right, how can a single atom create the whole universe? People don't wanna believe in GOD, so they made up the theory. Leave it alone, the big bang is unscientific.
Refer to this for an insight of why the big bang is not true, scientifically.
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/index.htm
Read the bible to find out how we got here.