Why do people still negate the existance of the big bang?

Question

The big bang has been proven. The Wmap satellite orbiting Earth has already taken images of the big bang in its infancy, roughly 370,000 years after its birth. How about we just accept it being that it has been shown true. I'm sick of hearing people talk about how the big bang is ludicrous, ITS NOT!

Ok Aztec276 before you answer a question you should read it. This has nothing to do with science. It has been shown, not by experiment, or mathematical calculations, but by actual sight. IT HAS BEEN SEEN! And your thoughts about science are completely naive and unfounded. Science is based on fact. If you can't prove a theory experimentally it remains a theory and nothing more.

I guess my worst fears are true, I really do live in a world full of idiots. Will someone read what I wrote and then respond otherwise just don't answer. Thanks!

Answer 1

John Dobson is one of the best known critics of the "Big Bang Theory". His basic question is "how can you get something out of nothing?"

He advances what he calls a "recycling" theory.

Here's a wikipedia article about Dobson that touches on this subject

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dobson_(astronomer) >

I don't know who is right, but regardless of what you choose to believe, there are still unanswered questions.

Answer 2

The problem is that people does not take the time to understand the basics behind the Big Bang, or any other scientific theory that they have a problem with. They keep saying that they don't belive in the theory without offering a hint as to why. Anybody who says that there is no evidence to support the Big Bang has obviously never researched the subject. Science is not about personal beliefs. Science is about evidences and predictions. The Big Bang theory is the best we have right now about the origin of the Universe. If you don't believe in it, offer the world some solid evidence why you don't think it is right. Next offer the world some solid evidence for an alternate theory. Finally, make a prediction that can be proven with your alternate theory. If anybody can do all that, I have no doubt that science is more than willing to embrace your version of creation theory and hand you the Noble prize to boot.

By the way, for all those who says that a theory is not fact, you are right. However, there are two types of theories, accepted theories and unproven theories. Accepted theories are theories that have been proven through observation and made predictions that have came true (Relativity, Quantum Mechanic, Big Bang, Evolution, Thermodynamics, etc..). Unproven theories are theories that can be proven through observation but has yet to make any verifable preditions (String Theory). Accpeted theories can change if observations came along that can't be explained (Relativity replaces Newtonian Mechanics) but until they are disproven, they are our best bet.

Answer 3

The Big Bang is a theory with a significant amount of proofs and a significant amount of unexplained problems that shouldn't be there or haven't been solved yet. As far as your statement goes, we need a link to this picture, because I have heard of none.

One of the major tenents of General Relativity, Special Relativity and the Red Shift is the fact that everything moves away from you making it look like you are the center. This was predicted long before observed.

There is no predicted event for the central location, other than it's almost impossible to find.

You have to imagine yourself somewhere out in the ocean on a raft with other rafts all around you moving away from you and you are moving too, but you can't see land anywhere.

So, how do you find the center of the ocean without a GPS and how do you know when you found it. No matter where you go there are rafts and they are all moving away from you. You can paddle in any direction you like all you see is water and rafts and all the rafts are moving away.

Among the controversies include was space created flat, contoured or spherical. Evidence exists for all three motifs. Evidence exists dismissing all three motifs.

There are all sorts of unanswered questions that proofs are being searched for.

The Big Bang is largely supported by CBR and Hubbles Red Shift, along with Einstein's Realtivity equations and the math of three scientists that came about to explain the propegation of the universe based on Einstein's work.

Based on Einstein's views it is hard to tell anything about anything. Gravity wells move apparent positions of stars and we don't know if what we see is there or slightly off centered.

Even with three reference points at 90 degree angles at the edge of the universe we couldn't navagate because of time and space distortions and the frame work factor that BILL and JOHN view each others motion in Time and Space based on their own reference frames.

Not to mention that it would take billions of years for the GPS information to reach us. And in that time period WE have traveled a distance in space in an unknown direction.

So how does one find the center.

OK you need to READ things more carefully. I just visited the Wmap which I'd seen long before this and here is WHAT THEY SAY

The new WMAP observations favor specific inflation scenarios over other long held ideas.

FAVOR specific inflation scenarios.

That's another aspect in content.

All this does is offer something that might back up one or more of the infaltion motifs.

The inflation motif, along with the flat, molded or spherical shape of the space is one of the man problems with Big Bang as an cure all explaination.

All this does is FAVOR it.

Answer 4

Ok - here's a theoretical problem -


The world is flat. How do I reach that conclusion? From my own opinion and observation that, on the whole, after evening out the valleys and the hills, the whole world must be flat. Also - all my friends say so and so too do the knowledgeable bodies of the day

Our opinion of the world is shaped by those around us and our own analysis of our own senses. It is only in the last couple of hundred years (since we learned to read) that information has been available to open out the education and understanding of the masses. This has allowed people to question the motives of the church and State (the primary source of knowledge in the dark ages).

Everyone has a theory - whether they have created it themselves or if it is something they have heard and accepted from others. Until the day arrives when someone can say, will provable certainty, that the big-bang occurred, there will be theories.

Now that our understanding of the world has expanded, we know that the world is not flat. Not only that, but we can point at things around us that show us how ludicrous this idea is. Yet, still there are those who hold to the idea that this world is flat - what right have you to disabuse them of their ideas?

It is human nature to think "I won't believe it, until I see it with my own eyes".

Now, who will join me in thinking that the moon is made of green cheese? - proven as fact by the authority of Wallace & Gromit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Grand_Day_Out

Enjoy the debate.

Answer 5

Because religion is comforting. Science is cold and objective.

Religion tells man that he is the center of a universe created for him by a personal God. It is like an opiate, it allows him to take comfort in ignorance, instead of stoically accepting that the universe is harsh and impersonal. Like drugs, religion can be a source of extremes; I've seen a drugged up man take a beating from police officers without breaking stride. I've seen a stoner talk philosophy. I've known people that are willing to kill because of their drug...

Rejecting religion is like rejecting drugs, and like drugs, it can be difficult to break a habit. And accepting a scientific theory that does away with the need for religion is the embodiment of that rejection. Have you never noticed the pattern behind the rejection of certain theories? The Big Band and Evolution. Theists don't contest, say, Atomic theory, or oceanography, or Newtonian mechanics. Because these theories do not directly compete with canon of most religions. But because there is contention, people must make a choice: accept the harsh, objective truth, or continue to enjoy the intoxicating comfort of religion.

Both theories, the Big Bang and Evolution, are as sound as any scientific theory ever concocted. That is to say, they can be proven wrong in light of a better theory. We call it falsifiability. Any theory can be proven wrong; science must leave that outlet, or it is no longer science. Religion, by contrast, must be un-disprovable, or the people won't accept it. That is why when the religious attack science, they go through ("misuse" is the more appropriate term) the channels of disproving the theory while clinging steadfastly to the knowledge that their own theory is beyond reproach.

In religion, it is a sin to question God. In science, it is a sin not to.

In conclusion, all I can tell you is that you need to leave them to their delusions. Just like you can't coerce a drug addict to come down off drugs; they need to make that decision for themselves. The truth finds a way.

Answer 6

The Big Bang hasn't been proven. It's mis-leading to say that it's "just a theory" because there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to support it. However, it still hasn't been "proven." By the way, taking photos of something 370,000 years after its birth isn't the actual moment of the Big Bang, is it? Most likely, we'll never see this initial event. We can theorize about it, but we'll probably never see it.

What irks me are the people who insist on inherent contradictions between science and religion. Honestly, you have to look pretty hard to find incompatibilites between the two. If one were to take the Genesis account literally, the Big Bang is still not inconsistent with this account.

Also, I don't think calling those with whom you disagree "idiots" really advances your cause. I'm going to guess-- by what appears to be arrogance on your part-- that you've never actually done any research yourself. Am I right? Because most scientists I know are very humble people who realize that what they currently believe now to be true, could be shown to be wrong tomorrow.

Science is what we believe to be true NOW; tomorrow, however, our view of the whole world can change.

Answer 7

Science is the best way to the truth; and right now, all the evidence and physics, is telling us there was a big bang, beyond a reasonable doubt. Unless some body can come up with a better explanation for all the evidence, the big bang is here to stay.

Answer 8

Good scientists carefully distinguish what is "proven" fact from a well proven and/or well established theory. In this specific case we must remember that we are imperfect witnesses who may not be providing a correct or comprehensive explanation for what we are witnessing. Astronomy, in particular, is rife with examples of this.
Constant criticism and questioning of theories and "facts" we believe in should be encouraged and welcomed, its part of the Scientific Method.

Answer 9

First of all
People either accept or don't accept this theory ---
they can not "negate" a theory unless they disprove it !!
Next, it is STILL, a theory --- and, whatever YOU have accepted as being the facts -- does not in the least bit
equate to what others are willing to accept !!

And, opting in with the Aztec Lizard
science has serious limitations and can only perform within the limited space of KNOWN platforms -- this leaves a lot of territory for mistakes -- and, as in ALL theories --- they have a lot of --- territory for mistakes !!

Oh, and there is this little thing of
The Big Bang is STILL a theory
and, will be such until it is proven without a shadow of doubt to BE the reality !! That may be quite some time from now !!

Answer 10

Religion. BTW, the Big Bang has not been proven. Its just an idea some people agree on.