This is a topic that is debated by scientists every day. Lets hear what you think.
Poll
Do you believe in the Big Bang theory?
| Yes | 53% | 53% - 56 | ||||
| No | 15% | 15% - 16 | ||||
| Somewhat | 26% | 26% - 28 | ||||
| I believe in another theory (If so specify) | 3% | 3% - 4 | ||||
| Total: 104 | ||||||
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
The short Fuse?ATG wrote:
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
I would reckon a small bang, as we needed something to compare the relative "big" one to.ATG wrote:
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
Ah so that's what they mean by the theory of 'relativity'...DesertFox- wrote:
I would reckon a small bang, as we needed something to compare the relative "big" one to.ATG wrote:
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
I have no reason to believe that the people who know way more about physics than me are wrong.
One idea that impresses me is that of M-Theory and brane collisions. It is the one that makes the most layman sense to me.
The idea being that if a string (string theory) had enough energy it could expand to be of massive 2D size and would resemble a membrane floating in multidimensional space. If two of these membranes collided there would be a massive release of energy. We know matter and energy are interchangeable so that energy could result in a conversion into matter. Consider all the matter in our universe as a scar on the membrane we exist on.
What is so nice about this theory is that it allows for time before the big bang.
The idea being that if a string (string theory) had enough energy it could expand to be of massive 2D size and would resemble a membrane floating in multidimensional space. If two of these membranes collided there would be a massive release of energy. We know matter and energy are interchangeable so that energy could result in a conversion into matter. Consider all the matter in our universe as a scar on the membrane we exist on.
What is so nice about this theory is that it allows for time before the big bang.
I believe it somewhat, as being the most logical answer, I just don't know that they have it completely correct. If you look and string theory I think it helps explain a lot of the Big Bang, but doesn't completely fit into the Big Bang model.
Lulz you should see what many of the string-theory based physics theories say..... Pretty fucked up shiznit tbh.ATG wrote:
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
I am swayed to the BB because, according to the evidence, that's what happened. Show me the evidence that a magic man willed it into being over the course of six days and I'll look at it.
Also, the "No" answer and the "I believe in a different theory" answer should be combined.
Also, the "No" answer and the "I believe in a different theory" answer should be combined.
Last edited by HollisHurlbut (2008-08-06 10:56:52)
Nothing. Time itself was created.ATG wrote:
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I believe that what science is discovering, in part, is the method God used to organize matter. As for our planet, it is simply one of many worlds he's put together and populated. Not sure why it's so hard to believe, but it's true.
Yes. But i have one question, if the whole of everything was microscopic, what was it floating in? Was it just a dot in a sea of nothingness, E.G. a pin hole on a piece of A1 paper? What was there?
Also, how did it happen?
Also, how did it happen?
Last edited by SEREVENT (2008-08-06 11:06:06)
Yes, it was even seen by the Hubble if I'm not wrong, Kmarion?
Very close. Within a few hundred million light years.sergeriver wrote:
Yes, it was even seen by the Hubble if I'm not wrong, Kmarion?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
There you go. You can't deny the evidence a huge telescope is bringing to you.Kmarion wrote:
Very close. Within a few hundred million light years.sergeriver wrote:
Yes, it was even seen by the Hubble if I'm not wrong, Kmarion?
String theory is pseudo science with nothing behind it. A thin veil of high math deception.
Less than that. The Universe was opaque until roughly 100,000 years after the Big Bang. That is the limit of our visual observation, even with the best telescopes. It's also the source of the cosmic microwave background radiation. Images of this can be seen by doing a simple Google search for WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe). That's the end of the line for seeing anything. Everything else has to be probed by particle accelerators.Kmarion wrote:
Very close. Within a few hundred million light years.sergeriver wrote:
Yes, it was even seen by the Hubble if I'm not wrong, Kmarion?
Last edited by HollisHurlbut (2008-08-06 11:22:40)
I found something charming in an American's use of the word "believe" for a scientific theory...
Do you 'believe' in evolution? :p.
Yes I do think that the theory of the big-bang offers the best plausible explanation insofar as to the big question of how we got here / how did it all start.
Do you 'believe' in evolution? :p.
Yes I do think that the theory of the big-bang offers the best plausible explanation insofar as to the big question of how we got here / how did it all start.
Last edited by Uzique (2008-08-06 11:25:09)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Before they retire the shuttle the hubble is scheduled for an upgrade. It is supposed to increase the power by 90.sergeriver wrote:
There you go. You can't deny the evidence a huge telescope is bringing to you.Kmarion wrote:
Very close. Within a few hundred million light years.sergeriver wrote:
Yes, it was even seen by the Hubble if I'm not wrong, Kmarion?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Foreplay?ATG wrote:
Yes, but the real crux question is what came before the big bang.
He asked me about Hubble. I was referring to optical and near-infrared wavelengths.HollisHurlbut wrote:
Less than that. The Universe was opaque until roughly 100,000 years after the Big Bang. That is the limit of our visual observation, even with the best telescopes. It's also the source of the cosmic microwave background radiation. Images of this can be seen by doing a simple Google search for WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe). That's the end of the line for seeing anything. Everything else has to be probed by particle accelerators.Kmarion wrote:
Very close. Within a few hundred million light years.sergeriver wrote:
Yes, it was even seen by the Hubble if I'm not wrong, Kmarion?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Aye, I believe this one too.ReTox wrote:
One idea that impresses me is that of M-Theory and brane collisions. It is the one that makes the most layman sense to me.
The idea being that if a string (string theory) had enough energy it could expand to be of massive 2D size and would resemble a membrane floating in multidimensional space. If two of these membranes collided there would be a massive release of energy. We know matter and energy are interchangeable so that energy could result in a conversion into matter. Consider all the matter in our universe as a scar on the membrane we exist on.
What is so nice about this theory is that it allows for time before the big bang.
inane little opines
I believe it more than any other theories
"Belief" has no place in science. With scientific theories all you can do is await evidence that will either prove or disprove it. Now do I "like" it as a theory? In the absence of other equally convincing ones, yes, somewhat. In the meantime, I'm open to other suggestions.
ƒ³