Please educate me on the evidence we have to support the big bang.?

Question

In my last question:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ar4XKOJRO8lQ.Aq2V9Dv.VDsy6IX?qid=20070514065337AAlkv57

I got this answer from a R/S regular I respect. He makes a good point.


"Science reveals facts based on evidence. If you want to introduce a supernatural deity into the equation go ahead but by doing so you would be ignoring the most basic scientific principle that there must be hard evidence to support your viewpoint. "

Is there hard evidence to support the big bang theory without the presence of a creator?

Now I know there is no hard evidence that exists to support any kind of intelligent design theory either.

Answer 1

The Big Bang actually IS a hypothesis. No scientists (or advocate of science) would ever claim that it isn't. We claim that Evolution is not a guess.

So far the basic evidence for the Big Bangs existance (factoring in that we have no travelled outside our solar system yet, and that the Big Bang is subject to intensive modifications as it is not yet a theory, or a law) is observational. It deals with whats called The Hubble Red Shift.

Basically, light, and its action, can be measured. The further away something is, the color of the observation shifts toward red.

You can also measure how something is moving over time. By using instruments, it has been demonstrated on earth using objects in the same room with each other to be accurate.

The measurements show that the distance between two points is increasing, not decreasing because the colors of the red are actually getting darker as the galaxies move away from each other (and from us).

..... you know, you could have saved yourself alot of trouble by typing the words "Big Bang" into google and getting a more accurate answer than anything you'll find on here.

Answer 2

Big Bang Theory - Evidence for the Theory
What are the major evidences which support the Big Bang theory?

First of all, we are reasonably certain that the universe had a beginning.
Second, galaxies appear to be moving away from us at speeds proportional to their distance. This is called "Hubble's Law," named after Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) who discovered this phenomenon in 1929. This observation supports the expansion of the universe and suggests that the universe was once compacted.
Third, if the universe was initially very, very hot as the Big Bang suggests, we should be able to find some remnant of this heat. In 1965, Radioastronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered a 2.725 degree Kelvin (-454.765 degree Fahrenheit, -270.425 degree Celsius) Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (CMB) which pervades the observable universe. This is thought to be the remnant which scientists were looking for. Penzias and Wilson shared in the 1978 Nobel Prize for Physics for their discovery.
Finally, the abundance of the "light elements" Hydrogen and Helium found in the observable universe are thought to support the Big Bang model of origins.

Answer 3

I never tell people that the Big Bang is a proven theory, only a possibility. Though I agree with your friend, I do not have a conflict with God being responsible for it. In science a theory may have to be proven, though some are accepted without total proof...but in religion, we believe in God based on faith alone.

Intelligent design is not a scientific theory...its doublespeak for God is responsible for evolution. I have had the honor of witnessing the plan. For me randomness is chaos and I do not see the chaos, but a marvelous interworking of life.

I feel having to have proven facts before accepting any idea or concept is very one-dimensional thinking and leads to a very limited life.

The Ol' Hippie Jesus Freak
Grace and Peace
Peg

Answer 4

Big Bang theory and the theory of Evolution-two different things. I just wanted to make that clear.

But the most conclusive proof of the big bang is Hubble's law, which states that the universe is expanding.

Answer 5

> Is there hard evidence to support the big bang theory without the presence of a creator?

Science has made this claim for a long time. Have you not heard? Or, are you deaf?

Answer 6

You are asking two different questions, evidence for the Big Bang and evidence that the Big Bang happened without the causation of an outside, creative influence/creator.

Which is the question?

Answer 7

The universe is expanding uniformly. From their speeds can estimate when they were all close together -- 13.7 billion years ago. Light from distant galaxies and galaxy clusters shows their formation withing a billion years of that start. The temperature of space is 2.7 degrees above absolute zero, indicating how much it has cooled by expansion.

Science has you to determine the source. There is no evidence for the requirement of a Creator, nor any disproof there is one.

Answer 8

No, there is no hard evidence for both claims. But it seems more logical to me that the big bang created the universe, rather than a cosmic entity that we don't have evidence about it except the bible(which is not considered evidence).

Answer 9

Read Brief History of Time to know about everything.

And why asking this question in R&S section when it's related to Astronomy?

Answer 10

order comes from order. order does not come from chaos. that is plain philosophy. and one can proove this also scientifically, if desired. these are the two major forces in the universe: order and chaos.
and light comes from light and darkness comes from darkness. everything comes from its own spiritual matrix. that is what we gotta understand if we wanna be wise someday.