Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.

The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 403 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
The universes expansion accelleration solved.
by Marchimedes
05/14/20 07:25 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
Marchimedes 4
Topic Options
#15266 - 09/07/06 03:41 PM Big Bang a bust?
Zionec Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 09/07/06
Posts: 2
I know I've had my personal idea about the Big Bang theory ever since I first heard it in school, and I often wonder if anyone else finds it as silly as I do.

The idea of a "Big Bang" as the origin of all matter and energy in the entire universe just seems ridiculous to me. I understand why the theory came about, the apparent expanding motion of the universe, the existence of a uniform cosmic microwave background, etc. But I think there could be another reason for all these things that makes much more sense.

Today I read the article on this site "Big Bang Bruhaha Brewing" about the lack of consistent microwave shadows behind galatic clusters, and how this is essentially throwing a monkeywrench into the Big Bang theory. I thought, finally, scientists may be finding the theory is not all it's cracked up to be.

I don't claim to be all-knowing about universal science, but I do try to keep informed because I'm greatly intrigued by the topic. I may be wrong, but I'd like to voice my idea about the universe, and see what others think.

I think the universe is like a big ocean, that ebbs and flows in waves. Currently, we're on an outward wave, which is why the universe appears to be expanding. Maybe in a few million, billion, or trillion years, we may be pulled into a "rip tide" of sorts, where the universe will appear to contract. As far as the story I read today about the uniform cosmic microwave background, why can't it be uniform simply because our universal ocean is saturated with microwaves, the way our earthen oceans are saturated with salt? It would explain why the "shadows" aren't consistent... the microwaves might be temporarily disturbed by something, but eventually regain equilibrium (again, think salt in the ocean.) I've had other supportive arguments in the past, but at the moment they slip my mind.

Just a thought...

#15267 - 09/17/06 03:00 AM Re: Big Bang a bust?
trilobyte Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/12/06
Posts: 179
Where did the stuff from the "BB" come from?

#15268 - 09/28/06 03:48 PM Re: Big Bang a bust?
Zionec Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 09/07/06
Posts: 2
Which "stuff" do you mean? The idea of the BB theory, or the matter of the universe? The idea comes from trying to explain various data, but I personally think the BB is the wrong explanation for it... there's more than one way to get the same answers.
If you mean the matter that exists in the universe, well, the BB theory doesn't explain where it all comes from either, just that it was at some point in time very condensed.
I think that all the "stuff" in the universe has simply always existed, always has, always will. It may change on a regular basis, but there never was nor will there ever be actual "nothingness." We like to think that everything has a beginning and an end, as that's how things "appear" to be on Earth. But if you think about it, nothing is actually created. Everything that is born or grown is just a reorganization of particular proteins readily available in the world around us, proteins that have always been around. And different proteins are reorganizations of atoms, and different atoms are reoganizations of protons, neutrons, and electrons, etc. Everything is just a reorganization of something else. That's what I think the universe as a whole is. Nothing is really "new" or "created", just reorganized. The universe didn't come from anywhere or anything. It has always just "been," and will always continue to "be."

#15269 - 09/28/06 05:09 PM Re: Big Bang a bust?
DA Morgan Offline

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Sorry to say Zionec and TB that if you wish to claim the Big Bang with Inflation theory is incorrect you are going to be left with a rather substantial problem.

That being the amount of deuterium and tritium created in the universe. Other than a toss of the dice solution do you have an explanation for their observed relative abundances?

It will be fascinating to review your math.
DA Morgan

#15270 - 09/29/06 10:22 PM Re: Big Bang a bust?
Alnitak Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 12
Loc: South Africa
Z, to say that "all the stuff in the universe has simply always existed" is EXACTLY the foundation for folklore stories throughout history (also refer the issues surrounding the arguments for/against Genesis on this forum) because the facts (as we NOW know) were beyond comprehension then. So they created shortcus (fables) to deal with it. But that's what makes science great - seeking to uncover, rationalise, grasp & understand - and then apply & manipulate (though not always to the good of all mankind). I cannot even begin to agree with the 'always there' notion - it's too easy a way out to (probably) THE most perplexing of mysteries. But of course they said man could/would never fly either. Yea right - they believed it then. Today even the moon landing is a "forgotten" accomplishment. They once also said that a self-starter motor for an automobile was a technical impossibility - they didn't fully understand electricity then. We may not fully grasp all of creation now - and probably won't in our lifetimes - but the day will come (geez, I sound like a doomsday prophet) when all the Lego blocks will fit into place and - if you & I could be there to witness it - we'd say: "oh, so THAT's what happened, so THIS is how it all works, so THESE are the answers!" There must be a quantifiable explanation to creation and our existence - I can't agree that it simply 'was always there'. (Anyway, that's just my opinion.) And then when we find the answers we'll be asking the next question - where the preceding "stage" came from... but that's another story altogether, and science will cross that bridge when it gets there. W.r.t. your 'ebb and flow' thoughts maybe you'd like to search 'The Big Crush' on the net.


Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.