Cosmology

Far denser -- almost infinitely more dense -- than it is today.

It is a mistake to say that the BB claims that our entire Universe was once the size of a proton. That statement only applies to what is now the VISIBLE universe -- that small sub-set of our Universe that we can now see. While this 93 billion light year diameter ball is pretty large, it is impossible to determine how much more of our Universe is out there, beyond our present ability to see -- the total amount could be infinite. Thus, instead of saying our entire Universe was much SMALLER than it is today, it is more correct to say it was much DENSER.

Actually it isn't. Or at least, not everybody is convinced. It has several large loopholes; for example:* The cosmological argument assumes that everything must have a cause; therefore, it says, the Universe must have a cause. But if you assume that there is a God who created the Universe, this God (applying the same argument) must itself have a cause.

* Even if we assume that something created the Universe, the cosmological argument doesn't allow you to make any conclusions about the identity of the creator... or creators. There might be a single God, many gods, or we might (for example) be part of a computer simulation on a "higher level"; and the "cause" might not even be an intelligent being, but random chance.

It is called the celestial sphere and it has coordinates like latitude and longitude. The simplest coordinates are elevation and azimuth, and there is another popular tilted coordinated system with its polar axis parallel to the Earth's axis. In this system the coordinates are the declination and the hour-angle.

A fixed star keeps the same declination all the time and its hour-angle advances by 360 degrees every 23hr 56 min as the Earth rotates on its axis.

You may want to check the Wikipedia article on the Big Bang, or science videos on YouTube, for more details; but briefly, the evidence is as follows:* According to calculations based on General Relativity, the Universe can't remain static for long - it must needs expand or contract eventually.

* Similarly, the Second Law of Thermodynamics doesn't allow a static Universe. Entropy increases; there are irreversible processes.

* The redshift of distant galaxies. The only reasonable explanation of this redshift is that the galaxies are moving away from us. This is related to,but not exactly the same, as the Doppler effect.

* The mix of elements and isotopes in the current stage of the Universe closely matches theoretical calculations based on the Big Bang.

* The cosmic microwave background radiation closely matches that which is expected from the Big Bang model. It is a remnant of the time when the Universe cooled below about 3000 K.

COBE or the Cosmic Background Explorer is a satellite which is dedicated to cosmology. It was aimed at investigating cosmic background microwave radiation and help to improve our general understanding of the universe.

All the time. That is the meaning of continuous. However this theory was refuted when the 3K background radiation was detected, confirming the big bang.

Of coarse you can because zanmato can kill any creature insantly if you pay the right amount

Only black holes and subatomic particles remain. The universe has expanded so much that these individual particles may be separated from each other by truly enormous distances. Black holes themselves are now evaporating by Hawking radiation.

A redshift occurs when the wavelengths increase in objects by light or electromagnetic radiation levels in an object. In cosmological redshift also has to do with light; however, instead of an increase in wavelengths, there is an expansion of the universe.

no

The evidence that we live in an expanding, and not a static,Universe is as solid as the evidence that we live in on a round, and not a flat,planet. Gravity is the only force we know of that could slow down "Hubble" Expansion but, for many decades, we were unable to calculate how rapidly this slow-down of Hubble Expansion was occurring. It was QUITE a shock when we found that, over time, the rate of expansion was INCREASING over time. Again, this fact is as irrefutable as the fact thatour Earth is going around our Sun.

Since we "define" dark energy as "whatever it is that is causing the rate of Hubble Expansion to increase over time," the fact that the rate is increasing is all the support that is needed.

We do not actually know what will or could happen.

The concept of heaven varies across different religions and belief systems. In many religious traditions, heaven is considered a realm outside of the physical universe, beyond earthly time and space. It is often described as a spiritual realm where souls dwell in harmony with a divine presence.

Something called "dark energy" which provides almost 70% of the total energy in the observable universe and is causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate (instead of decelerate as expected in the basic big bang model of the universe).

Dark matter in the halo of the Milky Way is mostly thought to be in the form of non-baryonic particles, such as Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) or Axions. These particles do not interact with electromagnetic forces and are thus difficult to detect directly. Other possibilities include primordial black holes or exotic compact objects.

There is no such thing as a "hypernova". Making up words does not make something real.

We do not know what dark energy is, so we can only theorize about its sources. However, if dark energy were much stronger than current observations estimate, life would not be possible. Therefore, we can say dark energy is weak in our Universe, because our Universe is capable of supporting life.

This phenomenon is called red shift.

The universe did not exist before the Big Bang. There was nothing there. It can be hard to grasp for young minds.

Some objects that are not permanent in the universe include comets, which have highly elliptical orbits and can leave the solar system, and supernovae, which are massive explosions that mark the end of a star's life. Additionally, transient phenomena like gamma-ray bursts and gravitational waves do not have a long-lasting presence in the universe.

Those are two completely unrelated concepts.

Quite simply, the universe consists of everything we know. There are no proven thories of so-called "extrauniversal" matter at this time so everything we know as fact, is contained within the universe and is apart of the universe itself. Theoretically, knowing of anything extrauniversal would require that the observer also exist outside of the universe, just like how it is impossible for humans to properly perceive anything that exists in 4 spacial dimensions and just like how humans only see in 2 dimensions (If humans perceived in 3 dimensions, you would see the back of everything as well as the front at the same time).

So as far as factual evidence goes, the universe consists of everything.

It's not certain that there is an answer to this question. The big bang was the beginning of the universe... not stars and planets and stuff. but of the universe itself. The very question of what was "before" may well be meaningless.

Better depth perception.