0
It is thought that only energy in the form of the superforce existed when the Big Bang began. The four fundamental forces in the universe, the strong and weak interactions (strong and weak nuclear forces), the electromagnetic force and gravity, were all "combined" into one force carrier, which we term the superforce. The energy density at the time of the Big Bang was almost unimaginably high. Matter could not exist under these circumstances; it (matter) simply could not form from so much energy in such a small volume of spacetime.
Answer: There was No Big Bang!
The assumption of a small volume of spacetime at the "Big Bang" presumes the Big Bang. If the "Big Bang didn't happen", then no small space volume. Then no super-physics "inflation" needs to happen. "Inflation" presumes Space just exapanded out of "Nothing"! Space is not "Nothing", space has resistance to electromagnetic transmission, z Ohms. Z is the ratio of Quantum Magnetic Charge W Webers and Quantum Electric Charge C Coulombs. These same Quantum factors define Planck's Constant h = WC ; W = 500 E-18 Volt seconds and C = 4/3 x 2 E-18 Coulombs. The Electromagnetic Energy and forces before "Inflation" were transmitted through the "medium" of z and z must have been created from nothing to fill the "Infaltion" Space.
Assuming Pre-Big Bang was all energy then the pressure would be P = DE = E2/zc, energy per unit volume, what ever the "small volume". If energy is not created or destroyed then with c still a constant then E and z must change with the Inflation volume increase. Certainly z must expand into the Inflation space to carry the electromagnetic energy into the inflation space, is this not 'matter" under Big Bang "circumstances"? How does the energy move into the Inflation space without z?
Does The Big Bang maintain Energy Conservation? Conservation of Energy exists with Matter and Energy co-existing and interchanging. matter turning to energy E=mc2 and vice versa. The probability that all the matter transformed into energy at a point in time (before the Big Bang) is possible but not probable. It is more possible and probable that everything was matter before the Big Bang. The most probable situation is the Universe has always had matter and energy and there never was a Big bang.
The Big Bang is a Creation Theory of Origins of the Universe, less scientific than the Biblical story. The Biblical Story at least posits a Creator in the Creation Story.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoNot in our Solar System
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What celestical body is at the center of your solar system?
As proposed by the Heliocentric Theory, the Sun is the center of the Solar System.
'Big Bang'- Is it scientifically proven?
== == Much of the material below is really opinion and/or discussion. See the related question 'Is scientific knowledge proven knowledge?' for some basic ideas around the concept of 'proven' knowledge. To me the theory is wrong, because the universe wasn't created by being blown up! If so what was every thing inside of??== == The big bang theory is of course a theory; it is the opinion of several scientists who are interpreting a certain set of astronomical data. == == There is a great deal of supporting evidence. The direction is irresistably towards the acceptance of the Big Bang theory.The Big Bang is finding more scientists in disagreement because the evidence is turning against it. Like many old paradigms, it still has its zealous adherents. But more scientists (not only creation scientists but secular cosmologists as well) are seeing data which does not fit it well. So, the direction in science is not towards the Big Bang but away from it - or at least, there is an acknowledgment that it doesn't fit some of the latest data. Of course the failure of the Big Bang to explain all the data will not lead to a rush toward creationism or intelligent design. The Big Bang theory itself will be drastically revised or it will be abandoned in favor of another theory which also fits with the long-age evolutionary paradigm. The strength of theories is not in their being proven correct. The best theories turn mysteries into problems. [Read Montague: Your Brain Is (almost) Perfect]. Problems can be approached, taken apart, reasoned and challenged. There is a way to envision our observations of the universe in such a way that they make sense. If it is not the Big Bang, it will be another theory that comes along some day. Theories come and go; it is the nature of science and it is its strength. Alternately, and without appealing to creationism or intelligent design, there are serious logical and philosophical reasons to doubt that any theory is or can ever be proven. But it is unmistakable that progress is made over time. So the heuristic that we know as science does work in that sense. If I had the need for surgical removal of a tumor I would accept the end-product of modern science, and I would not choose to go back to the Bronze Age to be treated by the elders. ** See the related question on proven knowledge.
What are the major factors that rule out the co-formation theory for the Moon-Earth system?
Each body has a different density and a different chemical composition
What is the most widely accepted idea about the origin of the moon?
The moon resulted when a large body struck Earth.
What instruments were used to prove big bang?
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.
Are the people of earth going to die because of the big bang?
the "big bang" theory, is a theory as to how the universe was created from the explosion of a single, very large, very dense, body of matter. so in "theory" the people or earth only exist because of the big bang
What are the ratings and certificates for Body Bang - 2007 V?
Body Bang - 2007 V is rated/received certificates of: USA:PG-13
Which statement describes a scientific theory?
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.
How does cmb support the big bang theory?
In 1946, George Gamow noted that, if the Big Bang had happened as Georges LeMaitre had hypothesized, our planet would be receiving isotropic microwave radiation with a spectrum like that of black body radiation from a 5 K source. Later refinements have shown that it would resemlbe BBR from a 2.7 K source. What we see is exactly as predicted. No other cosmologizl hypothesis can explain this CMBR except to say, "It's just there and I have no explanation for it."
Why was otto frank kept alive?
He could not choose what happened to him, his body was strong enough to withhold the nazis power and smart enough to outsmart them.
Who will reach first a dead body or an alive person when thrown from a mountain?
an alive body
What should have the big bang theory left behind?
If there were a Big Bang about thirteen billion years ago, it should have left behind a cosmic microwave background radiation with a black-body spectrum, as well as a Universe with specific ratios of hydrogen to helium to deuterium. Our Universe has both of these, almost exactly as predicted by such a Big Bang. Propenents of all other hypotheses about our Universe are required to state, "I have no idea why this is so. It just is and I have no explanation for it."
What is the smallest part of the body that is alive?
The cell, is the smallest part of the body that is said to be alive.
Why is the big bang theory is doubtful?
The Big Bang theory is just that, a theory. Hence, the Big Bang theory. It has not been proven any more than the creation theory has. We have no irrefutable proof that it ever happened. This is what makes the theory so exciting as an inspiration for other work. The quest is for evidence that supports or refutes the theory as we understand it; that is how science works. Sometimes refuting evidence is found when it was not being actively sought, causing crises in the scientific community. Technically speaking, creationism cannot be classed as a science theory. Scientific theories must, in principle, be able to be refuted by some experimental or observational means. This doesn't mean that all theories must be refuted. But there must be some methodology or framework that could in principle lead to a refutation, if the theory is in fact not true. Related to this is the fact that for adherents of creationism, creation is the one and only option; in principle, it is denied from the start that there could even possibly be a valid refutation of what is assumed to be true based on faith.ADDITIONAL EDIT: I want to point out a flaw in this answer. The word theory has a very different meaning to scientists. Theory means in the scientific world: A model that is repeatably supported by evidence and fully explains all known phenomena. A theory is not just a series of lgoical guesses, this is a hypothesis, a theory is the pinnicle of scientific creadibility. The big bang theory is supported by multiple feilds of science and there is no expereimental data of any kind to suggest it is flawed. There is in fact a large amount in accordance with it. This does not mean it is infallible, theories are often revised in the light of new data. However, theory means it is very very well founded, creationism is not a theory under the scientific meaning of the word. It is a belief.
How do asteroids travel?
What caused space-time to begin with a Big-Bang?
well scientist think that the 4 fundamental forces of nature that all co-existed to getter before the big-bang began to dislodge from each other and that`s what started the big bang simply because it couldn't hold it self together and exploded from an infinte small point to all what it is today. but this i a theory nobody knows for sure and if some body does let me know
Is the digestive system alive?
Well, if your body is alive, all organs and tissues are alive. However, separate from the body, the digestive system would not function. Therefore, it cannot be said that the digestive system is "alive" apart from its functioning within the body.
