how to disprove big bang theory.?

Question

im doing a speech for a class and mii topic is dealing with disproving the big bang.Any help?

Answer 1

I don't think your best bet is to put forward a competing hypothesis. If you do that, you will make yourself vulnerable to all the weaknesses of the hypothesis you propose. So leave religion and other theories out of it.

Instead, you should focus on the weak points of big bang theory. Pretty much the only thing holding it together right now is inflationary theory. Dig this:

For the Big Bang theory to work, the universe had to not only expand, but expand at a super-fast rate. Ridiculously, unaccountably fast. Inflationary theory is supposed to explain how this happened, but it doesn't every really explain HOW it happened... just that it did and what its effects would be.

If there were no inflationary theory, we would expect the universe to be much smaller. There should be magnetic monopoles lying around. And perhaps even some spatial curvature. None of these things are observed, and it is inflationary theory that makes them all automagically go away as problems.

So look into the weaknesses of inflation. If you can make that seem ridiculous, then the whole Big Bang theory crumbles to meaningless garbage. Good luck (you'll probably need it).

Answer 2

I wish I had a book present that I lent out to someone. There is now physical evidence for the big bang theory. All I can remember is it had to do with the temperature being measured in a certain part of space which turned out to be what they thought it should be if the big bang theory was true. There were a number of theories proposed but they all easily fell apart. Even Stephen Hawking proposed a theory but when questioned he openly admitted the terminology he used was totally fictitious and had no basis in reality. The book I read this information in was called the case for the creator by Lee Strobel. In it he interviews a number of scientists and astronomers. The reason people want to disprove the big bang theory is because they are uncomfortable with the implications of that theory. If there is a beginning then there must have been a cause. The best any side can hope to do is offer evidence as know one can prove something that happened or didn't happen unknown lprecise time ago. There is no proof just evidences which can be weighed.

Answer 3

I really think this would be a difficult topic for a class that doesn't necessarily have a background in astronomy and physics, as you really need to understand a thoery before attempting to disprove it,

I suppose in your case, what you would want to do is look at the scientific method and see what is the criteria for a theory, and then describe ways in which you can "break" it.

Here are two resources that describe some of the problems with the big bang, to help you get a start. But keep in mind, you have to display why these problems affect the status of the thoery.

http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/top10BBproblems.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Features.2C_issues_and_problems

Answer 4

No. It has not been disproven. Nor will it be. There are a great many details about the first few seconds after the Big Bang that are as of yet unanswered, details that are up for debate, and that *are* being debated, and studied. But that the Big Bang occurred, and the basics of the theory, are, for all intensive porpoises, scientific fact.

Answer 5

1 - The Big Bang theory is based on theoretical extremes

2 - Nothingness cannot pack together.

3 - A vacuum has no density.

4 - There would be no ignition to explode nothingness.

5 - There is no way to expand it.

6 - Nothingness cannot produce heat.

7 – The calculations are too exacting.

8 - Such an equation would have produced not a universe but a hole.

9 - There is not enough antimatter in the universe.

10 - The antimatter from the Big Bang would have destroyed all the regular matter.

11 - There is no way to unite the particles.

12 - Outer space is frictionless, and there would be no way to slow the particles.

13 - The particles would maintain the same vector.

14 - There is no way to slow the particles.

15 - There is no way to change the direction of even one particle.

16 - Neither hydrogen nor helium in outer space would clump together.

17 - Because gas in outer space does not clump, the gas could not build enough mutual gravity to bring it together.

18 - Gas clouds in outer space expand; they do not contract.

19 - If the Big Bang theory were true, instead of a universe of stars, there would only be an outer rim of fast-moving matter.

20 - Gas in outer space which was circling a common center would fly apart, not condense together.

21 - Hydrogen gas in outer space does not clump together.

22 - The nuclear gaps at mass 5 and 8 make it impossible for hydrogen or helium to change itself into any of the heavier elements. This is an extremely important point, and is called the "helium mass 4 gap"

23 - There are high-velocity stars that are traveling far too fast to accommodate the evolutionary theories of matter and stellar origins.

24 - Evidence is accumulating that the entire universe is rotating! This is angular momentum on the most gigantic of proportions. Yet the Big Bang should only have produced linear movement outward from it.

Answer 6

The only two competing theories are the steady-state theory and the oscillation theory. The only theory you need is the steady state theory because the oscillation theory has a big bang.

The steady state theory states that the Universe lacks sufficient mass to have been large enough to form the mono-block. The stars just blow up or die and then are rebuilt through gravity and collision to re-ignite into stars again. The universe will expand only so far and then will stop.

Answer 7

Go to this site. www.answersingenesis.org

When you get there go to the "Get Answer's" section and then select the article topic of astronomy and astrophysics. Near the bottom of these articles you'll see a whole section about problems with Big Bang theory.

This is a good resource since the articles are well documented--the information cited always mentions where it came from there are no accepted facts! The articles are also often written by scientists and researchers at public universities and their credentials and academic achievements are listed as the end of the article. It's easy to make a bibliography from this site!

Answer 8

hard to disprove something that happened so long ago and in space, but if you really needed to, you can use the bible (although I hate when people use religion to try to disprove scientific theories)
another one is the fact that the galaxies are moving toward the center of the galaxy, not outward

Answer 9

There is no real evidence against it. The theory is based on the evidence available to us, so all that evidence points to the theory being true. There is also no rock solid evidence to prove it either. It is widely accepted now in the scientific community. It will be a tough sell. Good luck.

Answer 10

how can you disprove a theory of something that has never been observed?

it's a question of faith.. or science...

You can't prove either creation or big bang, nor can you disprove either.

If that was your assigned topic, your teacher has set you up to fail.