do you believe the big bang theary?

Question

please dont answer with idk or i dont know!!!thanks
but do yu believe in the big bang theary and why/why not!? i dont and most people dont because of religon but do you honistly think that 2 atoms came together and made the earth!!??

Answer 1

The big bang theary might have happened, but if it did, God caused it.

Answer 2

First off, your conception of the Big Bang is wrong.
The Big Bang theory does NOT say that the Earth was created by two atoms smashing together.
To begin with, quantum mechanics says that certain chemical reactions create very specific wavelengths (colors) of light. That's why neon tubes glow indifferent colors, and different substances can burn with different color flames.
Secondly, if something is moving towards or awy from you, the wavelength will be shifted one way or the other. You can experience this with sound very easily. Race cars, when coming at you, have a very high pitched sound, but as they pass, the sound drops in pitch. The same thing happens with wavelengths of light. So, if something is approaching you very quickly, it will appear with a shorter wavelength/appear shifted blue. If it is moving away from you, it will appear with a longer wavelength/appear red-shifted.
When astronomers first started looking at the wavelengths ha made up starlight (stellar spectroscopy), they noticed that the stars all had certain very bright lines. By those lines, they were able to determine the stars' chemical composition. But, many stars had lines that were shifted one way or the other. Also, the farther away the stars were, the more of a shift there was. Surprisingly, almost ALL of the stars were shifted towards the red. Almost all the stars they looked at were moving away from us, and from each other.
One man, Edwin Hubble, imagined that, since all the stars are moving AWAY from each other, then at some point in the past, they must have been much closer together. After many more observations, he and other astronomers were able to calculate that about 14 billion years ago, everything was all together.
A lot of people believed this was ludicrous. The universe existed, it ALWAYS existed, and it was foolish to think otehrwise. One of theose people, in a vicious slam, called Hubble's theory the Big Bang.
The name stuck.
Sine then, there have been hundreds of experiments to prove or disprove whether the Big Bang happeed or not. So far, no experiments have shown the possibility that there was NOT a Big Bang, and many very detailed items that would have been CAUSED by the Big Bang have been spotted in the universe.
What initial conditions of the universe were like during the Big Bang are extremely hard to determine, because the laws of physics that we understand right now did not exist. Most of those conditions are impossible for the average person to imagine. For instance, atoms did not even exist until several hundred thousand years AFTER the Big Bang. Before that, there were merely subatomic particles, and before that, therre were "wave functions." Many theories have attempted to discover those conditions, and have led to more and more outlandish theories. One of these is String Theory. However, these outlandish theories are starting to look like they may be true....
Ther thing about science is that there has to be PROOF. If you spout a crazy theory, nobody is going to believe you. But if you spout a crazy theory and can point at the stars for evidence, people ar going to start listening to you.
Scientists have been attempting to break down the Big Bang theory for 50+ years, and they can't do it. Every time they try, they may refine it a little here, tweak it a little there, and make all sorts of wild discoveries (Dark Matter? Dark Energy?), but they have not found another answer to all of the data they have collected.

Answer 3

I'm not sure where your two atoms making the earth came from, but I'm willing to accept the big bang theory. With very few exceptions no astronomer doubts the idea since it matches the facts. Since I am a librarian and not an astronomer, I accept what people more knowledgeable than myself say is the truth. If this was the 13th century I would accept epicycles. Epicycles worked. Data matched the theory. The system worked. Thats really all we can ever hope for. If another theory comes around that matches observations and allows predictions, and does it better than current theories, I'll swith to the new system without a qualm.

Answer 4

If that is your understanding of the Big Bang theory, it's no wonder that you don't believe it. But that is not what the theory says, not at all. Here's an idea: before deciding whether or not you believe something, why not try to get ACCURATE information about it? By accurate, I mean something other than what your priest/pastor/rabbi/imam tells you. In matters of science, those guys are almost always wrong. Fortunately, you have a terrific research tool at your fingertips - the internet. Now the only question is if you have the brains to know which information on the net is true, and which is false.

Answer 5

The law of thermo-dynamics is a law. The big bang theory is a theory. It implies that it can't be explicitly proved as we can't travel in time to observe it. Yet, the evidences of the red-shift from the distant galaxies and the cosmic microwave background seems to indicate that at one time all matter we can observe in the universe was concentrated in one point. Note that prior to that, neither time nor space existed. Both expand together with the material universe.
Of course, future discoveries may explain those observations in different ways. Maybe it is only a kind of optical illusion. But today it is the most plausible explanation and anything else would be science-fiction or religious wishful thinking.

Answer 6

Hubble observed that everything in the universe is receding from everything else and thus the universe is expanding. Further more, there is a uniform background radiation that leads us to believe that the universe came from a single origin. We can rule out theories that the universe is infinite because of Olber's paradox. (This is the idea that an infinite universe's infinite number of stars would fill the night sky with light as bright as the sun, because the night sky is not that bright, we can assume this is not true.(there is math to back this up, in case of any rebuttals)). We can assume then, if the universe is of finite size and expanding, sometime in the past it must have been much smaller. Perhaps infinitely small. I agree this theory sounds very strange, but it is the most supported universe model today. Anyone who disputes it would be hard pressed to find as much evidence for an alternative theory.

Answer 7

No. Of course not. One either knows science or is ignorant of it. There is no belief involved. For that kind of thing you have to go to a church where they ask you to believe in some ancient or not so ancient writings which bear no resemblance to reality and have no other than spiritual function.

Natural science is not spiritual but explanatory. If it can't explain something REAL, it ain't natural science.

So if you don't believe in science that is OK. Nobody asked you to. On the other hand, if you "believe" that science is about two atoms forming the earth, well, dear, than you are nothing but ignorant (aka stupid).

But I doubt that you reach even that stage. You are probably nothing but a troll.

Did I give you enough attention?

:-)

Answer 8

It is the theory that makes sense and stands up to observations. It has no bearing on the ridiculous notion that two atoms formed the Earth.

Answer 9

"2 atoms came together and made the earth"

I don't think that's the big bang theory.

Answer 10

You show yourself to not understand anything about what the "big bang" is.
And yes, I do "believe" in it, though I don't really like the term "big bang", because it really wasn't a "bang". It would be better understood if it was called something like "the great expansion." As for why I "believe" in it, there's too much information for me to explain in a forum like this. I believe in it because I've read up on the science behind it.

And please don't say things like "most people don't" (believe in it) because you're making that up. If you want to say "I don't believe in it", then that's fine. Making things up to attribute to other people does not improve your argument.

And for Pete's sake, please learn to use the spell check button. No one can take someone seriously who has as many spelling errors as you have. If you want to be respected and have people take you seriously, then you need to show enough respect for yourself to care about how you spell. Clicking "spell check" is very, very easy.

CORRECT info about the "big bang":
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html