- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Do you accept the notion of the Big Bang as the origin of our universe?
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:53 pm
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:53 pm
That the universe from everything we can tell originated from an infinitely dense singularity and experienced an extrodinarily rapid inflation resulting in the universe we see today?
American astronomer Edwin Hubble observed that the distances to faraway galaxies were strongly correlated with their redshifts. This was interpreted to mean that all distant galaxies and clusters are receding away from our vantage point with an apparent velocity proportional to their distance: that is, the farther they are, the faster they move away from us, regardless of direction.[13] Assuming the Copernican principle (that the Earth is not the center of the universe), the only remaining interpretation is that all observable regions of the universe are receding from all others. Since we know that the distance between galaxies increases today, it must mean that in the past galaxies were closer together. The continuous expansion of the universe implies that the universe was denser and hotter in the past.
LINK
The earliest and most direct observational evidence of the validity of the theory are the expansion of the universe according to Hubble's law (as indicated by the redshifts of galaxies), discovery and measurement of the cosmic microwave background and the relative abundances of light elements produced by Big Bang nucleosynthesis. More recent evidence includes observations of galaxy formation and evolution, and the distribution of large-scale cosmic structures,[69] These are sometimes called the "four pillars" of the Big Bang theory.[70]
American astronomer Edwin Hubble observed that the distances to faraway galaxies were strongly correlated with their redshifts. This was interpreted to mean that all distant galaxies and clusters are receding away from our vantage point with an apparent velocity proportional to their distance: that is, the farther they are, the faster they move away from us, regardless of direction.[13] Assuming the Copernican principle (that the Earth is not the center of the universe), the only remaining interpretation is that all observable regions of the universe are receding from all others. Since we know that the distance between galaxies increases today, it must mean that in the past galaxies were closer together. The continuous expansion of the universe implies that the universe was denser and hotter in the past.
LINK
The earliest and most direct observational evidence of the validity of the theory are the expansion of the universe according to Hubble's law (as indicated by the redshifts of galaxies), discovery and measurement of the cosmic microwave background and the relative abundances of light elements produced by Big Bang nucleosynthesis. More recent evidence includes observations of galaxy formation and evolution, and the distribution of large-scale cosmic structures,[69] These are sometimes called the "four pillars" of the Big Bang theory.[70]
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:54 pm to DavidTheGnome
Until they come up with a better explanation. You got another idea of how it happened?
This post was edited on 1/3/18 at 9:55 pm
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:54 pm to DavidTheGnome
We already did this thread, but the universe is in a constant infinite cycle of expansion and contraction. Time is a loop.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:55 pm to DavidTheGnome
From our side of the Big Bang? Yes.
I really have no idea from the other side. I've seen the soap bubble theory and that seems to be the one I like (no particular reason, just seemed to make sense).
I really have no idea from the other side. I've seen the soap bubble theory and that seems to be the one I like (no particular reason, just seemed to make sense).
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:55 pm to DavidTheGnome
Anyone else have any ideas?
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:56 pm to DavidTheGnome
If you mean God may have used a big bang to start the universe then yes.
This post was edited on 1/3/18 at 10:06 pm
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:56 pm to The Quiet One
Yep lots of interesting theories about the other side of it.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 9:56 pm to The Quiet One
I like the theory that suggests that our universe experiences eras of expansion and eras of collapse. That it goes from being almost endless, to absolutely miniscule, and then back again. That our big bang was just it repeating it's expansion process and that's where the building blocks for existence come from
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:00 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Science people: we think we know how the universe formed. Our evidence? Scientific observation
Religious people: we know how the universe formed. Our evidence? A book.
Religious people: we know how the universe formed. Our evidence? A book.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:01 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
I like the theory that suggests that our universe experiences eras of expansion and eras of collapse.
There isn’t going to be a Big Crunch/Bounce though because our universe is not only expanding outwards, it’s accelerating.
Big Crunch
Recent experimental evidence (namely the observation of distant supernovae as standard candles, and the well-resolved mapping of the cosmic microwave background) has led to speculation that the expansion of the universe is not being slowed down by gravity but rather accelerating. However, since the nature of the dark energy that is postulated to drive the acceleration is unknown, it is still possible (though not observationally supported as of today) that it might eventually reverse its developmental path and cause a collapse.[6][7]
This post was edited on 1/3/18 at 10:04 pm
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:04 pm to Houma Sapien
quote:
Science people: we think we know how the universe formed. Our evidence? Scientific observation
Religious people: we know how the universe formed. Our evidence? A book.
Reductionistic, straw man, false dilemma.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:04 pm to DavidTheGnome
Is the universe expanding? If so, into what?
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:05 pm to Houma Sapien
quote:
Religious people: we know how the universe formed. Our evidence? A book written centuries ago when we had no understanding of physics, much less how the universe works.
FIFY
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:06 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
Is the universe expanding? If so, into what?
Not expanding into something, space itself is expanding. If you have two points in space, the space between them is what is growing.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:06 pm to DavidTheGnome
Insert black science guy meme. Universe don’t be like it is, but it do.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:06 pm to DavidTheGnome
It is the explanation that makes the most sense to me and is consistent with the accumulated evidence of the past 100+ years. I say this as someone with my Bachelor's in Physics and Astronomy who has personally reproduced several of the key experiments in lab to back this up.
That said, I don't think it matters much what origin story I accept, and I'm aware there are still unanswered questions at the margins.
That said, I don't think it matters much what origin story I accept, and I'm aware there are still unanswered questions at the margins.
Posted on 1/3/18 at 10:06 pm to DavidTheGnome
That could also mean we haven't hit max acceleration yet. We are probably constantly colliding with other universes.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News