big bang theory question?

[Pirate AM™]

Basically it was a very rapid expansion. Even though things were expanding out, particles still exert gravity on other particles and as they slowly built up, whirling clouds could form and create stars and other bodies.

[Fear Evolved]

It wasn't an explosion, it was an expansion. Planets are formed from left over clouds of dust and gas.

[Acid Zebra, Ask an a-the-ist.]

This universe is still flying apart. This is one of the observations that led to the theory. We're just temporary whorls in the aftermath. And Big Bang theory doesn't state anything about the origin of matter, for all I know it always was. You know, like how you love to claim your god always was?

[Labgrrl's injured & not 100%]

If you have a bucket of ball bearings and throw in a spherical marble you can witness a phenomenon very similar to how planets form from dust.

Planets didn't form *from* the explosion.

[Vincent K, disciple of Primus]

Go read up on the theory. It was an expansion, not an explosion.

And more importantly, yes, everything moved far far away from the epicentre. The matter then clumped together according to gravity. What part of that is so difficult to understand?

As for where it came from, we freely admit we don't possess that knowledge yet. It's only liars who make up stories about what came before, since no-one knows as of yet. Lack of knowledge, however, is certainly not proof that an old book is somehow correct in it's alternative idea of a magical sky-daddy. There's still not a shred of evidence for that.

[žä?ã????]

It took a lot of time for the planets to form. It didnt take one nano second.