The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Poll

what do you believe

The Big Bang
Constant Universe
Creationism
Other

Author Topic: is the big bang correct?  (Read 176269 times)

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #100 on: 11/01/2009 19:59:28 »
I agree with you Vern but when one considers how many galaxies there are in the universe its surprising that they only heat it up to 4 degK. Or am I wrong to think that the galaxies are doing it.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #101 on: 11/01/2009 20:43:17 »
It's been about 40 years since I read that article, but I seem to remember that they measured stars and estimated galaxies contribution. I don't know if they were right or not, but starlight should be counted as a warming agent for the CMB. It would modify it somewhat if not altogether.
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #102 on: 11/01/2009 21:05:21 »
One has to admire Eddingtons calculation no mean feat, I think we are in agreement on the MRB problem, any comment on Hubble red shift.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #103 on: 11/01/2009 21:38:18 »
I think photons lose energy as they age. I know there is a problem with this in that the CMB is blackbody radiation and so can't possibly be just aged starlight. There's also some observations of super nova that pose a problem. But I think the problems are a lot less with the tired light scheme than with the Big Bang.
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #104 on: 12/01/2009 17:17:38 »
I agree again the photon that is travelling from a ditant galaxy to us loses enery (cooling/ageing) during the time that it takes to travel to us. This energy loss can only happen if the path is curved which I think is in agreement with Einstien space curvature, the energy loss resulting in a frequency shift to the left (IR shift). My maths isn't good enough to do a calculation, has anybody attempted one.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #105 on: 12/01/2009 17:32:48 »
My maths isn't good enough to do a calculation, has anybody attempted one.

I'm not sure if he is still around but a physicist Arp, was his last name, did lots of work on Tired Light schemes and had pretty much all the math worked out. But there was such faith in the Big Bang that he couldn'g get agreement out of the scientific community.
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #106 on: 12/01/2009 17:49:48 »
Your very knowledgeable, not heard of Arp. Had a second thought, star shift is observed during a solar eclipse has any one obseved a frequency shift at the same time.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #107 on: 12/01/2009 17:55:05 »
The quote below from another forum discusses Arp's contribution.

Quote
Among the several thousand quasars known today (cf.
Hewitt & Burbidge 1993; VeŹron-Cetty & VeŹron 1993;
Hewett, Foltz, & Chaćee 1995) there are a number of cases
where a quasar is found in close angular proximity to a
galaxy (Monk et al. 1986; Arp 1987; Stocke et al. 1987;
Burbidge et al. 1990; Borgeest et al. 1991; Bowen et al.
1991; Womble 1993; Burbidge 1995), but where the redshifts
of the galaxy and the quasar are notably dićerent
from each other. This led Arp and others to conclude that
this points to a Doppler interpretation of the observed redshifts
of the quasars (Arp et al. 1990 and references therein).
In this hypothesis quasars are ejected from galaxies (cf.
Valtonen & Basu 1991) and, hence, do not lie at those
cosmological distances which are inferred from their measured
redshifts. This point of view has been criticized by
various authors (ôô The Redshift Controversy ¤¤ ; Weedman
1976). Serious arguments against the hypothesis of Arp et
al. are the agreement of the cosmological interpretation
with the observational data from gravitationally lensed
quasars (e.g., Dar 1991), the detection of the host galaxies
of some quasars (e.g., Bahcall 1995; Bahcall, Kirhakos, &
Schneider 1995; Disney et al. 1995; Hutchings & Morris
1995), the nondetection of tidal perturbations in the morphology
of quasar-galaxy associations (e.g., Sharp 1985,
1986), or other reasons (e.g., Newman & Terzian 1995).
Although the arguments for the cosmological interpretation
of the quasar redshifts are highly convincing, here I
discuss another observational test which could allow us to
check whether the apparent close angular proximity of
some quasars to galaxies is due to a spatial closeness of
these objects to each other.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #108 on: 12/01/2009 18:04:13 »
Quote from: A Davis
]Had a second thought, star shift is observed during a solar eclipse has any one obseved a frequency shift at the same time.
Gravity tends to give light a red shift. I don't know if anyone has reworked the numbers since we changed our thinking about the strength of ambient gravity to be close to an order of magnitude stronger.
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #109 on: 12/01/2009 18:42:21 »
Just read Hilton Arp on yahoo surprised to learn that the science community actually denied him access to their telescopes they make him out to be a heritic just like my hero Prof Eric Laithwaite unfortunately no longer with us, would like more data on ambient gravity.
« Last Edit: 12/01/2009 22:55:42 by A Davis »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #110 on: 12/01/2009 19:56:40 »
Here's a link to the great attractor. Looks like they now think there's an even greater attractor out there :)
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #111 on: 13/01/2009 15:16:19 »
Don't think you sent that Vern?
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #112 on: 13/01/2009 18:22:55 »
Quote from: A Davis
Don't think you sent that Vern?
You lost me here.

Edit: I just meant that the Great Attractor would contribute to the ambient gravity of a system. I know we speculate that somehow there is some kind of Dark Matter that does it. It might just be burned out stars.
« Last Edit: 13/01/2009 20:16:47 by Vern »
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #113 on: 13/01/2009 23:29:46 »
I asked you about Ambient Gravity a word I had not heard of before then you came up with the Great Attractor another word I haven't heard of before, know Dark Matter.
« Last Edit: 14/01/2009 08:15:20 by A Davis »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #114 on: 14/01/2009 00:27:28 »
Maybe I just made up the term ambient gravity; I haven't heard it used that way either. In electronics we talk about ambient as being the total amount of stuff there; or the natural amount; like ambient temperature is the temperature before we start adding or subtracting from it. Sorry it was confusing.

In recent times we have changed our thinking about the total amount of gravity present in galaxies by a great amount. That was the point I was trying to make.

The great Attractor is that thing what ever it is that is causing our Milky Way galaxy to move toward the constellation Leo at near 500 miles per second.
 

Offline A Davis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #115 on: 14/01/2009 15:59:41 »
Thanks Vern
 

Offline demadone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #116 on: 22/01/2009 07:23:09 »
Creationism doesn't contradict the big bang. It explains what was there before the big bang.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #117 on: 22/01/2009 11:57:57 »
Creationism doesn't contradict the big bang. It explains what was there before the big bang.
What was it that was there? The diety?
 

Offline CosmicAudioChic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #118 on: 28/01/2009 03:19:36 »
hmmmmm...seems like quite a bit of confusion here about the BBT.
BBT is not about the origin of the universe. It is about the development of the universe over time.

The best way I could describe this to you is in the distant past, the universe was very dense and hot; since then it has expanded, becoming less dense and cooler. The word "expanded" should not be taken to mean that matter flies apart -- rather, it refers to the idea that space itself is becoming larger.
 

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #119 on: 28/01/2009 09:32:33 »
The Uninverse was not very dense or very hot! Evidence for this is?

 

Offline CosmicAudioChic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #120 on: 28/01/2009 14:59:34 »
BBT Evidence:
a) Large-scale homogeneity
b) Hubble diagram
c) Abundances of light elements
d) Existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
e) Fluctuations in the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
f) Large-scale structure of the universe
g) Age of stars
h) Evolution of galaxies
i) Time dilation in supernova brightness curves
j) Tolman tests
k) Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect
l) Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect .
m) Dark Matter
n) Dark Energy

 

lyner

  • Guest
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #121 on: 02/02/2009 09:30:27 »
Yebbut how could you convince someone who just didn't choose to believe in the BBT? After all, "it just doesn't make sense" does it?
LOL
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #122 on: 02/02/2009 13:09:35 »
Yebbut how could you convince someone who just didn't choose to believe in the BBT? After all, "it just doesn't make sense" does it?
LOL
The key words are "believe in" as in believe in god. The Big Bang must be taken on faith.  To me it seems that when we must dispose of the physical laws in order to perpetuate a belief, there might be something lacking in the belief.
« Last Edit: 02/02/2009 13:37:38 by Vern »
 

lyner

  • Guest
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #123 on: 02/02/2009 19:29:12 »
I think it is appropriate to use the word "believe" in the context of Science. Evidence is, surely the best basis for belief.
Belief in a God is still based on some evidence, as far as the believer is concerned. You and I might say that it's not valid evidence, however.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
is the big bang correct?
« Reply #124 on: 02/02/2009 19:49:00 »
There is lots of evidence for the Big Bang; I readily admit that; but in science we only need one thing that don't fit the scenario. I used to read Halton Arp a lot. He had some very good arguments against the Big Bang theory. Then I see that Abbe Georges Lamaitre was a Catholic Priest and think he might be predisposed to some form of creationism.

 

The Naked Scientists Forum

is the big bang correct?
« Reply #124 on: 02/02/2009 19:49:00 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums