The Big Bang: Why is it still being taught?

classical_hero

In whom I trust
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
33,262
Location
Perth,Western Australia
We have spent many decades looking fr things such as "dark matter", "Dark energy" and other things that are basically fudge factors and violate known physics. Here are 21 questions about the Big bang that need to be answered. The first question is a religious question, so it is not included.
http://creation.com/dark-matter-crisis-for-big-bang
Spoiler :
  1. A priori it started in a low entropy condition smoothly expanding uniformly in all directions. How did it get that way?
  2. If you include ‘inflation’, that started without a known cause and stopped without a known cause.
  3. It involved the spontaneous creation of energy, space and time from nothing, where nothing means nothing, not even space or time.
  4. Why did it bang? No-one knows. How did it start? The physics does not exist to describe it. A “god of the gaps” here.
  5. The universe must be homogeneous and isotropic on largest scales, but we observe something different on all scales.
  6. The universe has no center and no edge; the big bang was everywhere.
  7. Currently the big bang universe is open and infinite; so it must have always been infinite in extension.
  8. How could a zero dimension universe become one of infinite size? From the explosion matter and anti-matter formed from pure normal energy? But we only observe normal matter. A particle asymmetry is therefore assumed but theoretically and experimentally cannot be justified.
  9. Stars must form from hydrogen and helium gas initially, but without dark matter conveniently at the right density at their putative centers where they form, no star will/can form. Without dark matter physics must be violated.
  10. Same problem exists for formation of galaxies and clusters of galaxies. So in all simulations an initial concentration of dark matter is assumed.
  11. The universe is Euclidean. Why is that? It is unknown, and the standard model requires that it has always been so to within a part in 10^50 over the history of the universe.
  12. Why is the cosmic microwave background radiation so uniform (3°K)? This must mean that the universe came into thermal equilibrium early in its history, but light we see today from opposite sides (horizons) of the universe only now reaches us and has never mixed—the horizon problem—which needs superluminal light to solve it, because inflation cannot.
  13. How do you know the universe is expanding? You can’t measure it experimentally so you must assume it to be so without proof. Faith; blind faith required.
  14. How do you know the expansion of the universe is accelerating? Only by applying the standard model with dark matter and dark energy to the observations. Two fudge factors are required to come to that conclusion.
  15. What is dark energy? It is not normal energy that we know like electromagnetic photons, i.e. radiation. It has the effect of anti-gravity. Normal energy gravitates—does not anti-gravitate.
  16. You cannot experimentally test your big bang universe model on the actual universe, because we don’t know what the universe should look like—cosmic variance problem. Humans then judge what a good simulation looks like.
  17. Why does the axis of evil exist—the axis seen in the temperature anisotropies of the CMB radiation? The axis is a real effect, proven by three different independent sets of observations, using different equipment on separate satellites.
  18. Why do galaxy clusters not show a foreground shadow if the CMB is the afterglow of the big bang fireball? They should but they don’t.
  19. Millions of spiral galaxies rotate too fast and hence they need a universe of 85% dark matter, but it is not observed in the lab. If it is so ubiquitous why has it not been discovered after 40 years of searching?
  20. There are many more problems—like the cosmological constant problem, the monopole problem, the isotropy problem, the smoothness problem and the anthropic universe (also called the Goldilocks universe) where it is finely tuned for life to exist.
  21. Lastly, why are atheists so determined to eliminate a Creator from their universe? Even now the origin in time is the one thing they hate the most about the standard model and they want to find a way that either the universe had no beginning or that it had many possible beginnings and humans sample several of them simultaneously, which makes no sense at all. But that is Professor Stephen Hawking’s idea.
Yet the one thing we have searched for the most is dark matter an yet there has observation of dark matter. No sign of dark matter in underground experiment
LUX, the most sensitive dark matter detector yet, fails to capture mysterious particles.

A US team that claims to have built the world’s most sensitive dark matter detector has completed its first data run without seeing any sign of the stuff.

In a webcast presentation today at the Sanford Underground Laboratory in Lead, South Dakota, physicists working on the Large Underground Xenon (LUX) experiment said they had seen nothing statistically compelling in 110 days of data-taking. “We find absolutely no events consistent with any kind of dark matter,” says LUX co-spokesman Rick Gaitskell, a physicist at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island.

Physicists know from astronomical observations that 85% of the Universe’s matter is dark, making itself known only through its gravitational pull on conventional matter. Some think it may also engage in weak but detectable collisions with ordinary matter, and several direct detection experiments have reported tantalizing hints of these candidate dark matter particles, known as WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles). Gaitskell says that it is now overwhelmingly likely that earlier sightings were statistical fluctuations.

LUX contains more than 300 kilograms of liquid xenon held 1,480 metres underground at the Sanford lab, where rock shields it from the confounding effects of cosmic rays striking Earth's surface. The hope is that dark matter particles, passing through Earth, will occasionally hit xenon nuclei, causing flashes of light that can be picked up by the experiment’s 122 photomultiplier tubes, situated in arrays above and below the xenon. But only 160 events were seen, a level consistent with background levels of radioactivity from the materials making up the experiment, and well short of what would be expected if candidate dark matter particles seen by previous experiments were real, says Gaitskell.
 
Because most people are not flat earthers
 
Because there's no evidence that god created the world and the big bang is the most logical theory so far.
 
Because there's no evidence that god created the world and the big bang is the most logical theory so far.

The best answer.

Even with all of the mysteries left to figure out (of which Dark Matter and Energy really isn't one, that's a separate thing), The Big Bang is still a much better explanation than any other, religious or otherwise.
 
Why use that dumb tv show in any class? ;)

Re the theory: i have only looked a little into physics (apart from the stuff in highschool), and also talked to some physics students at the unis here, and it does seem that theory is a dead-end, cause they cannot get to a "zero point" anyway using the current models on which the theory supposedly owes its existence. I suppose that at some point it is going to be given up, when a theory which presents clearly the need to view infinity with new complexities and models slowly takes over.

Of course the possible demise of the "big bang" (what a stupid name, btw) theory, does not have to do anything with a god or other such stuff being in the new theories to replace it.
 
It took 48 years to find experimental evidence for the Higgs Boson.

Dark matter may take longer or they may come up with a better Idea.
 
Because that's how science works, they come up with a theory based upon the best evidence they have at the moment, and then they continue to research it to see if they can find more support or ultimately disprove it. They dont just toss out an entire theory and shrug their shoulders when at the moment its not 100% nailed down. We still have tons of questions on how gravity works, that doesnt mean we just toss the whole idea out the window. It is the best idea we have at the moment, and as such it will continue to be researched until its disproven or evidence more solidly suggests a different idea.
 
What's your proposed alternative? The book of Genesis, since that clearly doesn't violate known physics?

god did it


in six days


which is clearly rational and doesn't violate any known laws because
 
I suspect Classical Hero might be among these fine people.

"hai gaiz i gona use scienz to disproov seyenz!"
 
The german cosmologist Christof Wetterich proposes a promising alternative that has no inherent flaws, according to theoreticians:

Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding
Paper

Basically he proposes the universe is not expanding, instead a so-called "Cosmon field" leads to all elementary particles increasing in mass over time. This explains the red-shift of far-away galaxies: we observe the light that has been emitted by them billions of years ago, when they still had lower masses and thus emitted in lower frequencies. Sounds very interesting and shows that alternatives to big bang should always be pursuited. And by alternatives i mean reasonable alternatives.
 
I suspect Classical Hero might be among these fine people.

"hai gaiz i gona use scienz to disproov seyenz!"

enhanced-27109-1391576856-1.jpg


Amazing

enhanced-12602-1391576927-22.jpg


for what purpose does a rabbit exist on earth other than to find salvation in a god it cannot comprehend
 
I keep hearing things like that all the time.

"I don't understand how it works, so God did it."
"This thing is amazing and works in a way unimaginable, and there is no explanation, clearly it must be designed."
"A scientist is trying to explain how something works. He is wrong and ruining the mystery of everything."
 
zack didn't you know the world is 6000 years old despite all the evidence saying otherwise

checkmate science

- posted from my blackberry that i got on christmas from a relative
 
The german cosmologist Christof Wetterich proposes a promising alternative that has no inherent flaws, according to theoreticians:

Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding
Paper

Basically he proposes the universe is not expanding, instead a so-called "Cosmon field" leads to all elementary particles increasing in mass over time. This explains the red-shift of far-away galaxies: we observe the light that has been emitted by them billions of years ago, when they still had lower masses and thus emitted in lower frequencies. Sounds very interesting and shows that alternatives to big bang should always be pursuited. And by alternatives i mean reasonable alternatives.

I think a part of my response in the previous thread is useful here:
In general, popular science isn't very good in expressing how we are pretty certain about some things, while some others are more working hypotheses that we hope are in the right general direction but will probably be modified, and some others are just batpoop insane ideas (looking at you string theory).
 
Back
Top Bottom