Two kinds of spectra are evidence supporting Big Bang Cosmology.
1) The light coming from distant galaxies is all red-shifted, and the size of the red shift is proportional to the distance between us and the galaxy. This means that space between us and all far-away galaxies is expanding.
2) The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation is that of a black-body of temperature 2.7K. This is ridiculously easy to explain with Big Bang Cosmology, impossible to explain with any other model.
It is important evidence of the Big Bang.
It is quite clear, from observations, that the Universe is expanding, and that it started from a very hot and very dense start, currently called the "Big Bang". It is not quite clear where the energy came from; there are several speculations about this, but there is not much evidence about what happened before the Big Bang - or whether there even was a "before".
The 'big bang' theory.
There isn't any real empirical evidence for the Big Bang. However, there are lots of stray facts and some interpretations of possibilities that seem to indicate that something like a "big bang" may have occurred. But the big bang isn't a "fact"; it happened, or PROBABLY happened, about 14 billion years ago, and nobody was around to take video of it. There are a great number of knowns that sort-of correlate with the big bang hypothesis, and a fair number of knowns that run counter to it. Anybody who thinks that the Big Bang is some sort of Absolute Truth is likely to be severely disappointed when new facts come to light that cause the concept to be revised a little - or a lot! Al Gore was an idiot; the "science" is NEVER "settled", and anybody who claims that "the science is settled" knows nothing about science. The future will be filled with wonders that we can hardly guess at now.
The Big Bang Theory is set in Pasadena California.
The spectrum of galaxies, including the distribution of their light, shows evidence of the expansion of the universe, as predicted by the Big Bang theory. The redshift of galaxy spectra indicates that galaxies are moving away from us, suggesting that the universe is expanding. This cosmic expansion provides crucial support for the Big Bang model of the universe's origin.
The main evidence for the Big Bang Theory is the Red Shift. Basically, the wavelength of the light is stretched, so the light is seen as 'shifted' towards the red part of the spectrum. This proves that an object is moving away. When astronomers looks at the electromagnetic spectrum in the stars, they see a red shift. Many take this as proof of the Big Bang Theory because it shows that the stars and planets are still moving away from each other, spreading out as they have been since the Big Bang itself. Answer2: The redshift is not evidence of the Big Bang. The redshift is indicator of the "Dark Energy", cmV = cP, the Momentum energy and the centrifugal force, cDel.P = cp/r cos(P) where cos(P) = v/c = z the redshift..
The existence, isotropy, and spectrum of the cosmic microwave background radiation (cmbr) is extremely easy to explain if Big Bang Cosmology is true; it is impossible to reasonably explain even its existence with any alternate cosmological hypothesis.
no the no. of stars in the milky way is not the evidence in support of the big bang cosmology.
The red shift and the cosmic microwave background radiation was the evidence used to develop the big bang theory.
yes it will happen again after the big crunch then of course, the big munch..... At present there is no evidence that another Big Bang will occur.
Some questions about the Big Bang theory and its implications for the origin of the universe include: What caused the Big Bang? How did the universe evolve after the Big Bang? What evidence supports the Big Bang theory? What are the implications of the Big Bang for our understanding of the universe's beginning and future?
No, it's the other way round. The Big Bang is responsible for the redshift.
If an isotropic microwave radiation, with a spectrum identical to that of a 2.7 K blackbody, did not exist, then Big Bang Cosmology would be pretty much refuted. But it DOES exist, and it's nature is pretty much exactly as predicted by BBC. It, like all other observational evidence, supports BBC and refutes its alternatives.
He doesn't
The pieces floating throughout the universe that are chunks of iron and and nickle and other pieces of rocks and metals and also the various gases floating around the universe were created from the big bang The spectrum and the isotopic nature of the cosmic microwave background radiation match perfectly with the prediction of the Big Bang Theory. The respective percentages of our Universe consisting of hydrogen, helium and lithium match quite well with the predictions of the Big Bang.
edwin hubble