How does Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation provide evidence for the Big Bang?

Answer 1

The reason why background radiation (whether light or microwave) is useful to demonstrate the expanding nature of the universe is because of it demonstrates that distant objects are moving, but their speed is not constant, but a function of the distance from earth. The change in frequency of the radiation (Doppler effect) received from those objects shows this type of movement, and the reason that supports the Big Bang theory is because by calculating the previous position of all those objects one can conclude that all of them were at some point in time located at the same point in space.

Hopefully this helps. The theory is a bit more complicated than that but I hope this guides you towards an answer. A lot of this theory has been developed after the discoveries of Sir Edward Hubble in 1929.

In other words,

Answer 2

it doesn't provide an absolute evidence for the big bang theory but wat it does is it strengthens the validity of the theory.... the reason is that the microwave cosmic radition is same in intensity in whichever direction we look...thus we can say that it exists in the whole universe with uniform intensity. also the red shift in the radiation, based on doppler's effect, tells us that the far away galaxies are moving farther away from us at an increasing rate, as compared to the nearer ones. this gives evidence of an expanding universe. if we trace the source of this radiation backwards, we find it is actually the light from the very early universe, which is only now reaching us, but due to the great amount of red shift it appears as microwave radiation. this supports the concept of accelerated expanding universe, which is possible only if at some point in time (actually there wouldn't have been any time then, lol) in the history of the universe, all the galaxies and everything that's there in the universe, would have been at one place of infinite density. and then a big bang took place which resulted in the accelerated expanding universe that we see today.

Answer 3

Theory of the "hot big bang" predicted that as the universe expanded, the hot radiation generated in the "big bang" would (in simple terms) cool as the universe expanded. Therefore, its peak wavelength, which initially would have been extremely short (X or even gamma rays) would have become much longer and indeed fall in the microwave region.

Nobody actually went out looking for this radiation, possibly because it was thought too speculative and too expensive to search. Penzias and Wilson were working on microwaves for different reasons when in 1965 they found this persistent noise in their receivers. It was only after much puzzlement that someone realised that this "noise" exactly fitted the predicted microwave background!
In science, when a theory predicts something that is then found, it's pretty convincing evidence that the theory is correct.

Answer 4

Microwave Background Radiation measures the same whatever time of day it is measured (so its source cannot be the sun or local galaxy) and wherever on earth it is measured - i.e. whichever part of the galaxy the measurer is facing. If it measures constantly throughout the galaxy then its source cannot be within the galaxy but rather an intergalactic event. No one could think of a better explanation of this event than a big bang, evidence for which had already been suggested by Hubble's galactic red shift and the old chestnut "why is the sky dark at night?" (because the cosmos must have had a point of origin or light would have reached us from all points by now).

Answer 5

It does not.
First of all we need to understand a little about the supposed ‘evidence’ for the ‘big bang’. Many may not realize that to date, the ‘big bang’ has consisted of much speculation based on only three pieces of observation, all of which have alternative possible explanations.

One of these ‘evidences’ is the microwave radiation coming in from all directions. This radiation (the same as would be given off by heat) is interpreted as the ‘echo’ or ‘left-over heat’ of the big fireball that started everything off. This radiation has in the past been found to be extremely uniform—it’s the same everywhere!

However, because the universe itself has been found to be extremely clumpy (with great walls of galaxies, and great voids in between) then, if this happened as a result of the ‘big bang’, this background radiation should also be clumpy. In other words, the temperature of this radiation should be uneven—there should be hot spots and cold spots. Because the radiation had been found to be so uniform, even secular scientists were saying that the ‘big bang’ idea was in trouble. The search for an unevenness in the radiation became intense.

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1825



Plenty of articles here with further food for thought.
http://www.googlesyndicatedsearch.com/u/creationontheweb?q=microwave+radiation&hl=en&lr=

Answer 6

Since the concept of the Primordial Atom was action caused by fusion due to compression of the atomic components it would be expected that Gamma Radiation would be emitted.

It is normal to observe Gamma radiation these days near black holes.

Gamma rays were long predicted in fusion and fission postulate, long before there was an A Bomb or H Bomb.

It's a chain of events that proves atomic theory.

As the MASS expands and explodes RADIATION would be the first thing one would expect to be emitted and thus would be the outer most portion of the universe.

It travels outward evenly at or near light speed

The rest of the mass emitted would travel slower.

Only low mass or no mass particles can travel at or near light speed.

The so-called Cosmic rays fit that model.

Answer 7

Robert_C: hold on!
BEFORE the big bang has no meaning: time came to existence AT the big-bang. It will end at the big-crunch or continue forever if the Universe expands forever.
First answer is closer to the correct one.

Answer 8

Everybody expects a start and finish to everything, and i must admit to get your head around the thought of the universe having always been there and always will be there is hard to accept. I think we are only just starting to begin to understand how the universe works, more new discoveries are being made all the time, and there will always be lots of information we will never know about.

Answer 9

In the late 1940s, most theories about the behaviour of the universe had been shown to be wrong, except two of them. One was the theory we now know as Big Bang (not its original name) which described a universe where the energy density - a.k.a. "temperature" - went down as space expanded. Same total amount of energy, more space to spread it out. The other (from Fred Hoyle) is called Steady State and it describes a universe where the energy density remains the same, despite the expansion of space (the total amount of energy increases slowly as space expands). Fred is the guy who gave the other theory, the awful nickname "Big Bang" (which does NOT describe the theory). One BIG difference between the two theories was relatively simple: In Steady State, the universe remains at the same temperature forever. In Big Bang, the temperature drops as space expands. Therefore, in the past, the universe was hotter. In the Big Bang universe, if you go back far enough in time, there was a time when the temperature was higher than 4000 K (roughly 6700 F). At higher temperatures, electrons cannot remain in orbit around protons (neutral hydrogen is impossible) and the universe cannot be transparent (a cloud of charged particles absorbs light). When the temperature drops from above to below 4000 K, the universe suddenly becomes transparent, and all the light, trapped in the charged gas, is suddenly liberated. From everywhere AND in all directions. Hence a radiation that is cosmic (comes from all directions) and forms a background (can't see anything beyond it, because the universe further "away" is not transparent). At 4000 K, this light would peak in the yellow (slightly orange) part of the spectrum. However, because of the expansion of space, since then, the photons would be red-shifted all the way down to the microwave (short radio waves) part of the spectrum. The Cosmic Microwave Background radiation was predicted by Big Bang. More importantly, it is impossible under Steady State. THAT is how the CMB radiation helped to support the Big Bang theory.

Answer 10

It doesn't..............

Like all theories, none can be proven... as for the big bang, that’s just other people repeating what others have already theorized...

First of all, there never was a beginning just as there is no ending to space... space always was, is and always shall be and extends outward from any given point for eternity.

It is not expanding for it already extends outward from any given point for eternity...

Only in ones mind is it expanding in ones mind as would be in the contemplation of measurement...

However, in order to measure the distance between two points, you must pick two.

Any point being point A would be the starting and the other the ending...

Since there is no end to space, there is no ending point for which to pick to conclude the measurement, if there were, there would be an end to space...

Yet, if the space that were, were finite, let the area inside a balloon represent it and the balloon surface being the rubber represent the finite point... which of coarse, unless the balloon were continually being blown up and area inside being made bigger, there would be no expansion.. and yet, what separates the area from inside the balloon from that outside the balloon is but a pin prick away, for if you do away with the rubber, the area outside the balloon and the area inside the balloon become one... and the are outside has no boundaries and extends already for eternity as in only increasing as in an attempt to measure or travel to ever increasingly distances from any starting point in a straight line in any one direction never ever curving back to the starting point...

and by the way, are you saying that before the big explosion, space did not exist? that is impossibility for it is impossible to have no space...

and if nothing existed until the big bang, what was it that was before it if not explosives?

everything has a source from which it is gathered...

you do not get figs from thorns or thistles... instead, from a fig tree... and what makes one trees wood different from another when they both come out of the ground if not the seed?

for even the mighty oak tree was once a nut like me...

take the seed of an oak tree, over time, all the wood that stems from the earth and the mass there of was multiplied form the mass of the seed for out of the seed came the tree and all of its wood and mass there of and not the ground...

the ground only gives stability to support the tree by its roots for without it, it could not take root and would whither and die...

all elements that make up the periodic table existed as did space for out of space came they for space is the source of all things no mater how small or large, nothing exists outside of space for space is the union set of all subsets and anything that does exist has some size to it or it would not exist other then the exception of ones thoughts that exist in ones mind.

you believe in space because is... you think therefore you are and do not question the existence of things you know to exist... yet before any of us were born into this world, we were not and thus knew not the world that existed before us and yet it existed whether we did or not just as it did whether we were not able to believe that it did or not... so what we believe or not does not prove or disprove the existence of anything we can not see or present as appearing to exist...

the desire to have others believe in us is like unto the desire to be believed... how is that any different then the desire of God that one might believe in space not withstanding that Space and God are one... for God has many names but only space always was, is and always shall be and that was said only of God...

for out of Space came man, if not from where do you say he came?