surely we would only detect a red shift in one direction only (and possibly a 'blue shift' in the opposite direction), unless planet Earth is at the centre of the thing, in which case a star in ANY direction would appear red shifted?This 'big bang' thing sounds like trying to fit into a framework of words, something that is not so easily comprehensible?
2006-12-30 23:12:57 · 7 answers · asked by shyteforbrains 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
The observed red shift is that everything is moving away from us. This, however, does not place us in the centre of the universe. Think of the surface of an inflating balloon - which is also expanding - and all point on it recede from all other points as it is blown up.
2006-12-30 23:18:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
One problem that does cause a spot of bother is when a galaxy is 'blue-shifted' even though the other comments are right. If the Big Bang theory is correct then all the galaxies should red-shift, like the balloon. Or it be that the Big Bang theory is wrong in whole or part, another theory is called the tired light theory, in which the light slows in the medium it is travelling through and has the effect of a colour variation.
One thing is for sure that the big bang theory has been changed so many times!
for example, the big bang supposedly started from the explosion of a 'singularity' (a point source of infinite mass) if this is the case then the explosion should scatter the matter uniformly, therefore NO formation of stars planets etc. as all matter would be uniformly attracted to the matter around it... this should result in a collapse! but yet there are planets and stars! so the theory was changed to accommodate this!
Personally, I don't believe the Big Bang theory in it's entirety and think that too much research is based on this theory being sacrosanct.
2006-12-31 21:31:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We can measure that light is redshifted.
However the interpretation that thhis is caused by the doppler effect is only *one* interpretation. There is evidence to suggest that this is the wrong interpretation.
As Astronomer Halton Arp wrote:
‘The fact that measured values of redshift do not vary continuously but come in steps—certain preferred values—is so unexpected that conventional astronomy has never been able to accept it, in spite of the overwhelming observational evidence. ... For supposed recession velocities of quasars, to measure equal steps in all directions in the sky means we are at the centre of a series of explosions. This is an anti-Copernican embarrassment. So a simple glance at the evidence discussed in this Chapter shows that extragalactic redshifts, in general, cannot be velocities. Hence the whole foundation of extragalactic astronomy and Big Bang theory is swept away’
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i3/doppler.asp
2007-01-01 06:47:23 · answer #3 · answered by a Real Truthseeker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Get a bowl of water, sprinkle some rice in one spot and watch each rice kernel move away from every other. The same analogy can be seen with dots on a balloon being blown up. No matter which dot you look at, each dot is moving away from every other dot. The same applies to galaxies in our expanding universe. From any place, it will look like everything else is moving away from you. This is thought to happen because it is the space itself between the galaxies that is actually expanding (like how the elastic on a balloon expands).
2006-12-31 11:34:38 · answer #4 · answered by Roman Soldier 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The universe is expanding in a way that no matter where you are, everything appears to be moving away from you. Redshift picks up the relative velocities.
2006-12-31 08:56:32 · answer #5 · answered by mathematician 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, if the Universe is expanding, the distance between all points is increasing, whichever way you look. The places nearer to you aren't going away as fast as the more distant ones, and it seems as if you are at the centre of the expansion. But if you were on one of those more distant galaxies (as we on Earth see them), the ones closer to you aren't leaving as quickly as those in our Earth's location - so you would also seem to be at the "centre of the Universe" there, too.
2006-12-31 07:26:11 · answer #6 · answered by Paul FB 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If there was a big bang then the universe would be hollow in the middle, unless there is continuous creation, in which case, there was no big bang. Is it hollow?
2006-12-31 07:40:03 · answer #7 · answered by bo nidle 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋