if the big bang theory is correct where did the original components come from?( nitrogen ,oxygen etc)?

Question

not the by produts, the two original atoms that first came together to start the whole thing going if the big bang started at one single point in the universe where did the reactents come from

Answer 1

If the theory is indeed correct, the only possibility is that matter/energy pre-existed the "big bang", and all that the "big bang" accomplished was rearranging things. This is perhaps an interesting theory on how things were formed from pre-existent matter, but hardly a good explanation of the origin of matter. It has been fairly well established that matter and energy are somehow the same thing. According to the law of entropy, if energy always existed, it would inevitably (after an infinite period of time) be evenly distributed by the actions of random process. Since this is not the case (stars are obviously hot spots in the soup of matter), matter cannot possibly be infinitely old. So we find ourselves coming back to the question of origin, again...

Answer 2

Atoms formed just microseconds after the big bang. The universe went through an incredible cooling during the first few moments. Before the big bang was nothing. NO THING, nothing at all. no space, no time, no matter, it is very hard to imagine nothing. You can't even call it nothing because nothing denotes not something. Get it? There was a shapless formless void. Then the big bang. There is proof of the big bang as background radiation in the universe. Kinda like an 'echo' of the moment. Imagine that, there is still echo left over - that's how big of a bang there was. From nothing came matter and anti-matter. In equal amounts. If today you add all the positive forces in the universe and all of the negative forces, the sume will be ZERO. Nothing. Billionths of a second after the big bang, matter and anti-matter started cooling and condensing into atoms, molecules, particles, radiation, etc. We can trace the universe back to the moment just after the big bang to prove this. We just cannot reach time = zero. Because when there was nothing, there was no mathmatics either. So scientists must become philosophers at the point of the big bang.
Again, there is absolute proof of what happened after the big bang. Just not at the moment of the big bang. Entropy just says mass and energy continually reduce to a lower but more stable state. If you trace the universe back to the big bang, that is the moment Entropy was the least - infinately nothing. And now entropy is always increasing. It never reverses direction.

Answer 3

The elements you mention were NOT original componenets in the Big Bang. All there was was a lot of hydrogen, and plasma particles and high energy radiation. The elements we are familiar with like carbon, helium and others were formed only after stars were formed and then collapsed, going Novae and SuperNovae. This created enough pressure from nuclear fusion to combine atomic nuclei and form the larger atoms.
When the stars exploded, these atoms then were dispersed into the universe. Those elements heavy enough to be held onto by planetary gravitational fields were retained, those that were too light, were not. Gaseous elements like N2 and O2 were retained in our atmosphere, because our gravity was strong enough. But it was not strong enough to hold onto H2 or methane, that the larger planets like Jupiter and Saturn did. Weak gravity planets like Mars, couldn't hold much of anything, and mostly did so by having colder temperatures.

Answer 4

No ones really sure what happened before. As I understand it, there is little to no observable evidence of what may have existed before. Three theories I am aware of are; 1. The 'matter & energy' of the previous universe fell back into a 'super' black hole. On reaching a theoretical critical mass, the black hole 'detonated' becoming the big bang, 2. Our 'big bang' and all the matter & energy we have observed is but one region of a greater universe that exists beyond our current ability to detect. Our universe could be something like a star that has gone super nova and the remains of that blast have become our universe, 3. The last theory deals with parallel universes and that these universes could randomly intersect, causing mass and energy to transfer into a new universe.

Basically, it's all theory. Feel free to offer your own.

Answer 5

Nitrogen, oxygen, etc. were not components of the big bang. The big bang condensed matter, in the form of subatomic particles, out of the pure energy of thepre-universe vacuum. Atoms did not form for hundreds of thousands of years after the big bang.

Answer 6

They come from fusion that takes place in stars. Stars are primarily Hydrogen, fusion forces the nuclei together to form Helium (2 protons) then when the hydrogen runs out, the star turns red and huge and starts fusing helium into Beryllium. Some stars go supernova which then creates alot of oxygen and many other heavy elements--even uranium.

Answer 7

If you mean the elements, they are made of more basic forms of matter like quarks and electrons, but they are made in stars by nuclear fusion. Hydrogen molecules, the most basic element made of one proton and one electron, gathers together in space because of gravity until so many are squeezed so tightly together the nucleus's fuse the same way they do in a nuclear weapon to make heavier elements like helium, oxygen, etc. (aka a star)

Answer 8

byproducts of the expansion into normal space...the original seed was a mass very small but holding all the objects in our universe...the atoms would have been packed into something we would not begin to understand or recognize in normal soace...just like a popped popcorn seed, but a whole lot bigger

Answer 9

The "Big Bang" theory is exactly that- nothing more than a theory. There is no scientific proof whatsoever that even supports it remotely. The "Big Bang" is only a desperate attempt by "scientists" to try to disprove the facts of Creation...