What instruments were used to prove big bang?

Answer 1

Edwin Hubble, using the Hooker telescope at Mount Wilson, is credited with the discovery that the distances to far away galaxies are generally proportional to their redshifts (as in the Doppler effect); an idea which was originally predicted by Lemaître in 1927. Hubble's observation was taken to indicate that all very distant galaxies and clusters have an apparent velocity directly away from our vantage point: the farther away, the higher the apparent velocity.

The discovery and mapping of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) via WMAP mission has been interpreted as being left over from the Big Bang. It provides support for the hypothesis of a hot dense state at the beginning and also provided measurements to explain that galactic clusters are still moving away from each other at an ever increasing acceleration. WMAP's measurements played the key role in establishing the current Standard Model of Cosmology: the Lambda-CDM model. In the Lambda-CDM model of the observable universe, the age of the observable universe is 13.772 ± 0.059 billion years.

Note: Although cosmological redshift at first appears to be a similar effect to the more familiar Doppler shift, there is a distinction. In Doppler Shift, the wavelength of the emitted radiation depends on the motion of the object at the instant the photons are emitted. If the object is travelling towards us, the wavelength is shifted towards the blue end of the spectrum, if the object is travelling away from us, the wavelength is shifted towards the red end. In cosmological redshift, the wavelength at which the radiation is originally emitted is lengthened as it travels through (expanding) space. Cosmological redshift results from the expansion of space itself and not from the motion of an individual body.

======================================

Real scientists do not "gather evidence in support of" any theory. The

technical term for that kind of thing is "cherry-picking". Real scientists

build a theory to explain the evidence that they have already gathered,

and then test the theory to see whether it holds water.

Answer 2

Two recent tools were the COBE satellite and the improved WMAP satellite. These satellites confirmed the age of the universe to be 13.7 billion years old.

==========================

Real scientists do not "gather evidence in support of" any theory. The

technical term for that kind of thing is "cherry-picking". Real scientists

build a theory to explain the evidence that they have already gathered,

and then test the theory to see whether it holds water.

Answer 3

If you browse around this category, you will find several similar questions

with replies that answer your query.

====================================

Real scientists do not "gather evidence in support of" any theory. The

technical term for that kind of thing is "cherry-picking". Real scientists

build a theory to explain the evidence that they have already gathered,

and then test the theory to see whether it holds water. The easiest,

fastest way to make sure that you are regarded as a wingnut by real

scientists is to adopt or invent a theory, and then spend your time

trying to prove it.

Answer 4

Telescopes, spectroscopes, computers, theorectical concepts, mathematical proofs, etc.

Edwin Hubble used a telescope to make his greatest discovery; i.e. in 1929, Dr. Hubble

determined that the farther a galaxy is from Earth, the faster it appears to move away.

This notion of an "expanding" universe formed the basis of the Big Bang theory, which

states that the universe began with an intense burst of energy at a single moment in

time - and has been expanding ever since.

A spectroscope is an instrument that can be used to observe the frequency (or

wavelength) of characteristic spectral lines to see how far the lines were shifted

(red shift or blue shift) from their usual position. All galaxies outside our local

galactic cluster produce light that is red-shifted; and the greater the distance

between us and these outside galaxies, the greater the red shift. That the size

of the red shift depends on the distance is considered isotropic (or the same in

all directions), meaning the distance between our local galactic cluster and all

other galactic clusters is increasing at the same ratio based on distance from us.

These distant galactic clusters, demonstrating red shift, are supportive evidence

that these outside galaxies are moving further apart consistent with the Big Bang

Theory.

The 9 year mapping of the CMBR barrier via the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy

Probe (WMAP) is suggested of what has been left over from the Big Bang and the

confirmation of the predicted Planck epoch. Interpretations of this discovery

provided substantial confirmation of the general CMB predictions: the radiation was

found to be consistent with an almost perfect black body spectrum in all

directions; this spectrum has been redshifted by the expansion of the universe,

and today corresponds to approximately 2.725 K. The interpretations of the Cosmic

Microwave backgroun Radiation (CMBR) supports much of the current work in

cosmology, in context with the Big Bang, to include reconciling observations with

the basic theory, confirming our understanding of the physics for the early Universe.

==================================

Other point of view: It must be mentioned that the question is exactly backwards.

Real scientists don't spend their time looking for evidence to support theories.

That's not how science works. Real scientists spend their time looking closely

at Nature to see what's there, proposing a theory to explain what they see,

and testing the theory to find out whether it holds water. The fastest way

to assure that your science peers view you as a wingnut is to adopt or invent

a theory and then spend your time trying to prove it.

Answer 5

Primarily, radio telescopes. Some optical telescopes also play a role. And computers; DOZENS of the biggest computers in the world.

Remember this always; we're just BEGINNING to understand - or to THINK we understand - what happened in the formation of the universe 13.5 billion years ago. 99% of what we "know" is guess or conjecture, based on the slightest traces of actual information.

Answer 6

Telescopes and spectroscopes. Exactly what kind of telescopes, and how the spectroscopes are used, is left as an exercise for the reader in the interest of not doing all of your homework.

Answer 7

There are no instruments that could either prove or disprove the theory of the Big Bang.

The "Big Bang" is a hypothesis about how the universe formed. It is only one of many such hypotheses. The Big Bang hypothesis is preferable to the others, however, because this one actually explains some of the astronomical oddities that scientists see in the skies.

Arno Penzias and Jerome Wilson were scientists who were trying to fix some anomalous static in their microwave receivers. But they were unable to get rid of the static, which seemed to be coming equally from every direction.

However, microwave background noise coming from every direction is one of the things that the "Big Bang" theory had predicted, so this was seen as a point of evidence to support the theory.

Which is how science works; scientists gather evidence, make a hypothesis to explain the evidence and to predict what else ought to be seen, and then look for those "other" data points to see if they are true. Hypotheses that do not explain the evidence or which do not suggest "testable" experiments are discarded.

Answer 8

Well one tool is that we know that the universe is expanding so that at one point that it was very small.

Answer 9

1) Telescopes; optical and radio. 2) Particle accelerators.