Several undeniable facts about our Universe are very easy to explain if Big Bang Cosmology is (basically) true, and impossible to explain with alternate hypotheses -- other than to say, "We see these things and have no explanation for them, they're just THERE." Amongst these observational facts are:
1) Hubble Expansion of space.
2) Presence, spectrum, and isotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation.
3) Ratio of hydrogen to helium in all parts of our Universe.
4) Ratio of long-life isotopes to their decay products showing none older than about ten billion years.
5) No white dwarf stars being seen older than ten billion years.
6) Quasars being seen far away from us, but not close to us.
Basically, the evidence for Big Bang Cosmology is as strong as the evidence for a heliocentric solar system.
Read more: What_do_scientists_believe_provide_evidence_for_the_big_bang_theory
It depends, because some might say 'scientists'. But not all scientists believe in this theory. Also, there are those who believe in a similar idea to the Big Bang, but it is not refered to as 'The Big Band Theory.'
Scientists believe that several key pieces of evidence support the Big Bang theory, including the observed expansion of the universe, cosmic microwave background radiation, and the abundance of light elements like hydrogen and helium. The redshift of distant galaxies indicates that the universe is expanding, while the cosmic microwave background radiation is thought to be the afterglow of the initial explosion. Additionally, the proportions of light elements align with predictions made by Big Bang nucleosynthesis. Together, these observations provide strong support for the theory.
I believe most scientists would agree that this is not currently known. Some, however, would say that there was no "before" - that time itself started with the Big Bang.
Opponents of the global warming theory may believe that the Earth's climate changes are natural and not primarily influenced by human activities. They may also argue that the scientific evidence supporting global warming is inconclusive or exaggerated, and that policies to address climate change could have negative economic impacts.
Galileo and Copernicus were two of the scientists to disprove Ptolemy's geocentric theory of the universe. The Ptolemaic theory stated that the center was earth.
The Big Bang Theory
sikhs do believe in the big bang theory. it was written in the guru granth sahib ji before scientists found out.
by a theory of the BIG BANG explosion and the HELIOCENTRIC theory,that until now is being believe
No, most scientists still believe in it, if that's what you mean.
gravity slab pull
Scientists believe in the theory of universal common ancestry because of evidence like the genetic code shared by all living organisms, similarities in biochemical processes, and the fossil record showing the progression of life forms over time. This theory provides a coherent explanation for the diversity and unity of life on Earth.
Yes, scientists still believe in the cell theory today because it is a well-established and widely accepted principle in biology. The cell theory states that all living organisms are composed of cells, and all cells come from pre-existing cells through cell division.
It depends, because some might say 'scientists'. But not all scientists believe in this theory. Also, there are those who believe in a similar idea to the Big Bang, but it is not refered to as 'The Big Band Theory.'
Scientists believe that the scientific theory is the best way to solve the problem statement. just write ideas about scientific theory.
because he was a fat battyboy
Scientists believe that the plates are moving due to the evidence of seafloor spreading at mid-ocean ridges and the distribution of earthquakes along plate boundaries. Additionally, the study of paleomagnetism provides further support for the theory of plate tectonics.
Before the cell theory it was pre-renaissance. The renaissance was the boom of art and science. So, before the cell theory was religion.