I destroyed the Big Bang theory on this question (Do Atheists believe that nothing times nothing = everything?) Most of you replied you don’t believe in the Big Bang theory. I want to know your theory of how the world was made.
2007-11-27 07:14:21 · 22 answers · asked by King Arthur 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yeah, I read about your world-changing post. No more Big Bang Theory!!! Good job!
*sigh*
2007-11-27 07:17:36 · answer #1 · answered by ►solo 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I'm not a cosmologist, so I cannot comment on the Big Bang theory directly. However, what evidence I have heard of the Big Bang sounds pretty good:
- all observable stellar objects (stars, galaxies, etc.) are moving away from each other. Therefore there was probably some time when they were all much closer to each other, and from which they "exploded" away.
- the "microwave background" - leftover energy from a massive explosion around 13 billion years ago - has been observed.
- the amounts of certain rare elements (helium-4, helium-3, deuterium and lithium-7) are consistent with a massive, energetic event in the distant past.
- the ages of stars and other stellar objects (as calculated from entirely other theories about stellar evolution) are consistent with ~13 billion years of stellar evolution.
So, from an amateur viewpoint, I'm still going with the Big Bang. Of course, it is possible I just don't understand enough about any scientific alternatives. What I *do* know is that the universe is a lot older than 6000 years.
2007-11-28 11:24:03 · answer #2 · answered by gribbling 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Evolution isn't Big Bang. Two different concepts all together. Evolution just deals with how life came to be what it is on earth. And there's many theories for Big Bang. Just get the book "Physics for Dummies" (Actually, it's a pretty good book)... in the very back it lists that most scientists don't rely on the Big Bang theories and even lists the different ideas about it. It would be good for you to read up on this stuff before trying to "destroy" any theories. It's kind of hard to destroy something when you don't know the first thing about it. And it's not Evolution.
2007-11-27 15:35:24 · answer #3 · answered by River 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Evolution only deals with living organisms, not planetary formation. The current hypothesis for how Earth came into being is the nebular hypothesis, which postulates that our entire solar system was formed when a huge nebula contracted due to its own gravity (Or something like that, I'm not a scientist). This is only a hypothesis at this time, and it may well be impossible to ever test it well enough for it to become a theory.
Have you noticed that whenever you "destroy" a scientific theory, you do nothing more than demonstrate how little you understand them? You try to attack evolution by talking about micro-evolution and macro-evolution, which are not part of the theory, and claiming there are no transitional fossils, even though there are many. And here's how you "destroyed" the big bang:
"This asserts that some 12-15 billion years ago there was a suddenly expansion and explosion of all matter and energy out of an original point - out of literally nothing - and that not only space but even time began at this moment." They are saying that nothing exploded and here we are.
Not only were you quoting from a propaganda site, but you and the site somehow missed the fact that the big bang says, as mentioned here, that all matter expanded outward from the explosion. Matter is not nothing. It simply wasn't the universe before the explosion.
2007-11-27 15:28:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
You destroyed the Big Bang theory? Please be sure to submit your paper on this and let me know your publication date. I suspect you will be receiving a Noble prize. Your premise is actually a gross oversimplification of the idea of the Big Bang theory and whether "something" came from "nothing". See link. It takes an understanding of physics beyond that of most average people to really discuss the theory and I will admit I only have a lay person's knowledge with a year of physics in college. To be an atheist doesn't require being an astrophysicist. Your premise is that a creator made it all. Where is your evidence? Being an atheist is simply saying there is inadequate evidence to assume a supernatural deity poofed it all here. It is remaining skeptical until there is evidence that is more conclusive.
2007-11-27 15:25:46 · answer #5 · answered by Zen Pirate 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, your argument is a straw man, since you actually don't understand the Big Bang Theory. Hint: nothing times nothing = everything is no where near what the Big Bang Theory is. And I think most science people (many atheists) accept the Big Bang Theory.
If you can falsify the Big Bang Theory, try getting your paper published, since it might be the most important science work in the last 25 years, you might win a Nobel Prize.
2007-11-27 15:19:25 · answer #6 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 7⤊ 1⤋
By world, I am assuming you actually mean the universe. Planet formation is fairly well understood. I personally think that matter has always existed (pre and post big bang, whether that is the case or not) and is in a constant state of motion (evolution). I have never been presented with evidence to think otherwise. I am confident that matter exists in the present and is presently in motion. I am confident that it cannot be created or destroyed, just changed. So, asking how the world was "made" is a question for religious folks.
2007-11-27 15:23:46 · answer #7 · answered by zero 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I believe in the Change as the only constant on this Universe (I'm not sure if this is the only one).
Believing in the evolution of the life and believe in the theory of the Big Bang are two different things. In either of the cases believing in supernatural entity creator of all is nonsense and illogical.
2007-11-27 15:23:41 · answer #8 · answered by Lost. at. Sea. 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No you only showed that you don't have the slightest idea what the Big Bang says.
The First Law sort of implies the Universe was always here in some form don't you think? Just 'cause you want to stick a god in there that doesn't give you a free pass on it.
And just so you know the Big Bang doesn't say something from nothing at all. It just says it was all in a small point at one time. Please understand what you are arguing against the next time. It will keep you from looking silly.
2007-11-27 15:19:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 1⤋
Well. I don't know your Big Bang question
or how you tried to invalidate it. But if
"nothing times nothing = everything" had
something to do with it you just proved
that you know nothing x nothing about
the Big Bang theory.
2007-11-27 15:24:22 · answer #10 · answered by Alex S 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋