Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: Big Bang is down!

  1. #1
    Celestron's Avatar
    Celestron is offline Raiders of The Lost Galaxy
    Points: 34,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience PointsGot three Friends100+ Threads Achievement!365 Days+ Registered Achievement!200+ Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,365
    Points
    34,879
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked 540x 428 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Angry Big Bang is down!



    Hey,

    The big bang theory is really bizarre. scientists think that the universe came from a particle. where in the world (maybe Universe), did the particle come from? it's silly! whos out there that agrees with me?
    Last edited by Celestron; 09-29-2008 at 10:00 PM.

  2. #2
    Vinnie's Avatar
    Vinnie is offline Guest
    Points: 24,260, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Got three Friends20+ Friends Achievement!First 1000 Experience Points5+ Referrals Achievement!100+ Threads Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    3,474
    Points
    24,260
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    41
    Thanked 683x 362 Posts

    Default

    Moderators note: The topic is the big bang theory, and I remind all members that this is an astronomy forum. By all means question the theory, because that is what it is, a theory, but I will not let this questioning fall into a Scientist v Creationist debate. Nor will it be used as a podium for anyone's religious or non religious beliefs.

    Thank you in advance for your co operation on this

  3. #3
    Michael Steen's Avatar
    Michael Steen is offline SUPER GIANT
    Points: 9,593, Level: 67
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!200+ Posts Achievement!2 Posts Achievement
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    619
    Points
    9,593
    Level
    67
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 42x 23 Posts

    Default

    You haven't dismantled the theory because you question where the particle came from. This is one of the huge questions that cosmologists struggle with on a daily basis. It's doubtful that anyone will ever come up with an answer, but you should really read up on the Big Bang theory; it's fascinating, and all the mathematics and models and measurements of cosmic microwave background radiation and calculations of the amount of helium in the universe, etc. etc. all point to this theory as being the answer.
    And BTW, for those who are prone to dismiss theory as "only a theory," many of those people are confusing theory with hypothesis.
    An hyposthesis is a guess, a conjecture, often based on nothing more than a hunch and intuition. Then, after careful observation and collection of data, theorists work incredibly hard to develop an explanation that will embrace ALL the observed data. That begins the theory. Then all the other scientists jump on the bandwagon and test the living daylights out of it, subjecting it to every bit of "doubting Thomas" scrutiny they can muster. When they find gaps or places where the theory doesn't fit observation, the theory gets refined or thrown out.
    But monumental edifices such as the theories of evolution, of relativity, and of the big bang have withstood every single hammer blow from contrarians and come out even more solid than they were before.
    So why aren't they laws, like the law of gravity or of planetary motion? Because certain elements of them can't be directly tested, and because (in the case of evolution) they aren't predictive.
    No matter how well we understand these theories, we'll never be able to get to before the big bang, never be able to predict what the chimpanzee will evolve into, and (probably) never be able to directly test the notion that an object's mass distorts space and time around it (though we're closer on that one than on any of the others).
    Sorry, saying it's silly just isn't much of an objection.
    Learning the sky--one star at a time.
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

  4. #4
    Carlos_dfc's Avatar
    Carlos_dfc is offline Moderator
    Points: 17,230, Level: 90
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Got three Friends20+ Friends Achievement!First 1000 Experience Points100+ Threads Achievement!365 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    near Darlington UK
    Posts
    1,760
    Points
    17,230
    Level
    90
    Thanks
    141
    Thanked 1,415x 703 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestron View Post
    ....scientists think that the universe came from a particle. where in the world (maybe Universe), did the particle come from?
    That shows a complete lack of understanding of the Big Bang - invariably, when non-physicists question the Big-Bang, they always show a lack of understanding.

    The Big-Bang did not 'come from a particle' - and also, the Big-Bang was not an explosion, in the sense that the layman would think of it.
    All matter in the Universe suddenly expanded from an area the size of a sub-atomic particle - not from an actual particle.
    The sudden expansion caused (or was caused by - we don't know yet) an immense release of energy, from that point.
    A lot of the energy released, converted into the matter which makes up our Universe - check out Einsteins 'relativity' which shows that matter and energy can be interchangeable.

    Admittedly, the Big-Bang theory isn't fully complete - for example, we still don't know 'why'
    But - the theory is solid, right the way back to just a nano-second after the event

    The only thing in this thread that is 'silly', is when someone attempts to discredit something of which they have very little understanding.
    Moderator

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

    Co-Founder: Bishop Auckland Astronomical Society
    Co-Presenter: Monthly "What's up in the Sky" programme - BISHOP FM radio

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

  5. #5
    Celestron's Avatar
    Celestron is offline Raiders of The Lost Galaxy
    Points: 34,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience PointsGot three Friends100+ Threads Achievement!365 Days+ Registered Achievement!200+ Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,365
    Points
    34,879
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked 540x 428 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Yeah, Thats just it! we DON''T KNOW!!!
    if we don't know, WHY DO WE BELIEVE IT???

  6. #6
    admin's Avatar
    admin is offline Administrator
    Points: 6,989,798, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience PointsGot three Friends20+ Friends Achievement!5+ Referrals Achievement!100+ Threads Achievement!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    13,479
    Points
    6,989,798
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    18,563
    Thanked 7,915x 3,807 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Hello guys,
    astronomy is a process of learning and I think Celestron is pointing at what we dont know (so dont be hard on him )... and I think we will never know what exactly happened. I have often thought of how "everything came from nothing", however its now stated by some scientists that there may be no beginning of time / our universe and that it is simply a continuation of another universe.... I havent read much about astrophysics for at least 10 years and even today we really dont know much more it seems.

    Maybe the hadron collider can shed some more light on this topic
    PBalu likes this.
    Name: Gus OTAs: ED 100 PRO refractor, Orion ST80 (not the CF), 8" Dob stuck in Canada Mounts:HEQ5PRO Synscan mount, Manfrotto Tripod CAMS: Guidecam Philips SPC900 webcams (4), Canon unmodded-450D DSLR

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    |
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    | My Astronomy Blog

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


  7. The Following User Says Thank You to admin For This Useful Post:

    PBalu (06-15-2012)

  8. #7
    GrandPrixChris's Avatar
    GrandPrixChris is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 33,524, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!200+ Posts Achievement!Visitor Messenger Achievement!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Genesee County, Michigan
    Posts
    4,681
    Points
    33,524
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    529
    Thanked 778x 708 Posts

    Default

    Celestron, there was a great show on the History channel not too long ago concerning this theory and the persons who pushed it more or less to the forefront. I will not elaborate on what I saw (I'm getting ready to leave work), but you might want to look at the program lineup for the History channel, TLC and Discovery. Good luck in your travels for information on this subject!
    Chris

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    :

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    XT10SkyQuest Classic.
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    6SE. White 8" Newtonian. Meade Coronado PST Double Stack.
    Binoculars: 10x42 Galileo. 11x56 Garret Optical.
    "Don't worry about what
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    you own, or its quality. Just get out under the night sky, and enjoy God's wondrous universe." --Thomas M. Back, 1957-2007
    >)))))*>

  9. #8
    jmitchell's Avatar
    jmitchell is offline Banned
    Points: 7,633, Level: 61
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 217
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!2 Posts Achievement1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    10
    Points
    7,633
    Level
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Celestron, You are right in not believing in the big bang, just as our ancestors were right in not believing in a flat earth. I posted earlier under big bang a bust explaining my theory.

  10. #9
    johnploss's Avatar
    johnploss is offline Junior Member
    Points: 7,317, Level: 59
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 33
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!2 Posts Achievement1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3
    Points
    7,317
    Level
    59
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0x 0 Posts

    Default

    The big bang theory is based on an expanding universe. If the universe were not thought to be expanding there would be no big bang theory. In observing celestial objects there is a distance beyond which no more blue shifts can be observed - only redshifts. One interpretation of this phenomenon assumes that this is analogous to a Doppler effect, and therefore the universe must be expanding. Another interpretation is that this is not a Doppler effect, but due to some unknown effect experienced by light traveling long distances through the universe, and is therefore not evidence of an expanding universe.

  11. #10
    Sjd-wth's Avatar
    Sjd-wth is offline Main Sequence
    Points: 8,866, Level: 65
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 184
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!3 Years + Achievement
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    104
    Points
    8,866
    Level
    65
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked 13x 7 Posts

    Default

    I think the key to expanding our knowledge about the beginning of the universe is to learn more about dark matter and dark energy, I'm guessing you all know that all galaxies that we can see are just formed around the dark matter?

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Big bang
    By nike_nikup in forum Astrophysics Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-11-2008, 08:14 PM
  2. Before the Big Bang?
    By Radium in forum UK Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 268
    Last Post: 11-03-2006, 07:49 AM
  3. big bang ?
    By M2414 in forum General Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-03-2005, 06:26 AM
  4. B, Big, Big Bang, Big Bang Books...
    By socalsw in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-07-2004, 08:17 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin« Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin«
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:58 AM.