Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: thedoc on 15/10/2012 12:35:26
-
the big bang theory is a good one in all , but how does something just explode and create a universe?
what was it that exploded?
where did it come from?
whats it made of?
what is the fabric of space made of?
-
Oh, just a really simple question then! [xx(]
It didn't come from anywhere; it just happened. No-one knows for certain why it happened but it was possibly no more than a spontaneous event that occurred in the quantum foam. There are other theories such as that it was the result of a previous universe collapsing and rebounding.
<sits back and waits for DaveShorts to give a more complete answer>
-
I am not entirely sure, but believe it may be the colision of two "branes". I am sure i read that somewhere.
-
Nobody knows, and due to the causually encapsulated nature of the universe in which we live, it's very doubtful anyone will ever know. Even if we did, it'd always be replaced with another question. So, it was two branes colliding (string theory), but where did the branes come from?
That's why things like religion will never be invalidated from a philosophical standpoint. It always makes me laugh when pompous Atheists try, as if they can somehow dismiss something that's philosophically impossible to dismiss. You can say you think it's ridiculous to believe in something you can't prove to exist, but that's all you can say.
So while these kinds of questions may well have perfectly reasonable answers, the most extreme of questions will always be that of philosophy. For the moment that's what your question is, since we can only speculate for the time being, perhaps forever.
EDIT: Oh and as for the general question of what is the big bang, you can teach whole lecture courses on it :p Maybe try wikipedia for some basics.
-
so it seems. ta very much
-
well hmmm...i know im just a kid but i can try to make u dumber..lol...when there was nothing, no earth, no starts, no anything..the big bang occured. u see even tho there were no land or gas masses there was still energy and gravity. the 2 most important factors to the equation. Gravity pulled the energy particles together(i cant b specific on the types of energy there was because i do not know..but i will try and look it up) and caused a tremendous explosion. so big that teh effect is still happening today(red shift blue sh1t theory) and so it caused heat as we know when heat cools it hardens..thus land...yea i hope that kinda helps..lol
-
on the seventh day God said "stop the bag(ing) cant you see i am resting" [^]
-
At the moment, the theories just don't make much sense when taken to the extreme but a little more physics may enable the problem to be solved. the situation is a bit like the problem of stars towards the end of 19th century. The Geologists could see clearly that the earth had a history of hundreds of millions of years at least. and the physicists could see how stars could shine as a result of the gravitational energy of their collapse and even knew that the bigger stars would be brighter and hotter but the calculations clearly showed that the sun would only burn for about 10 million years. Then Einstein and e=mcsquared showed how the energy of nuclear fusion could keep them going long enough.
-
Isn't the big bang unscientific? Our evidence against it is huge, and our evidence for it is laughable. So why don't we scrap it? I thought our goal was to come up with a theory that explains the way our universe works right now. If the big bang did happen all the physics would have to be different and the applications of figuring out that physics would be completely useless.
You know what I think the big bang is, it's a religion created by a group of scientists, so that scientists can say our religion is better than yours. And it allows them to say yes Timmy science can explain why your here, therefore religion is unnecessary. I would not advocate the big bang or religion, if I don't have reason to assume something, then I wont.
-
Sorry you are talking tripe brain. The evidence for our universe being much hotter and denser in the past is now overwhelming. However when I was young it was much less certain. and stable "continuous creation" theories looked attractive.
If you wish to discuss religion you may look at my web pages and continue elsewhere.
I do however find this retreat into absolutes unsatisfying and tend to favour some of the current multiverse theories because they offer the possibilities of an overall stable structure to the multiverse where transient structures (like our universe) come into existence evilve and then die just as everything else we are aware of does.
The evolutionary path of life on earth is reasonsbly clear from the fossil record and the way evolution results in a wonderful balance coming out of eimple laws is clear. The laws of ohysics are similarly finely balanced to enable a high degree of complexity and it seems very likely that an evolutionary process has caused this. the only thing remainig is to understand the scale invarience of the process.
-
I was going to make a comment on the "cave art" that I have seen at Uluru but the replies have drifted away from the original question
-
I believe a Big Bang could be described as: The time when invisible light and energy began to ...reflect...itself to geometric representations. Or: The 'beginning' of the reproduction of energy resulting in infinite reflected mass of energy.
-
Blast, you mean we are not on a giant disc on the back of a turtle supported by 4 elephants.
-
Very smart, young man, but it's patterns all the way down.
-
So what's so wrong with the Steady State Theory?
Wasn't it calculated that it only required 1 particle to be created each year in a galaxy for it to work?
That would give the 2.7k heat and expansion that is observed?
It also does away for the need for a Big Bang.
-
discussions on what space time actually IS - have been split off to their own thread
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=46241.0