the big bang theory is *just* a theory

[Tortington]

it was said on another thread that there is 'evidence'

I don't believe that god said 'let there be light' and all that malarky either.

but p[eople seem to spout that everything was created becuase of a big bang.

and i can't see ...if there was an exploson of this magnitude how there would be evidence to prove that it happened.

so, big bang theorists. without typing a thesis - or telling me to read a 'dawkins' book or some such - can you in lay mans terms explain where the evidence is for this theory.

i shall bump at lunch time when i have chance

big bang - first there was nothing, but a slow glowing dream

that would be flash bang surely?

Message withdrawn

Amee you sound brainwashed taking in riddles trying to be profound. Its boring - can't you actually say anything interesting?

maybe chitty chitty as well

Pruners.. lots of people have that problem when they encounter physics ..you have to look at your dcs year 2 work and move forward with them until they hit A level where BBT is on the syllabus!!

Pruners - space, time and matter were not produced at the same time, as far as I can recall.

There is evidence of Big Bang. It is called "cosmic microwave background radiation" and was discovered in early 1960s.

The agnostic that I am, I have to point out that Big Bang can very well be the Creation talked about in the Bible & the Quran.

Custy -

Try these:

steady state theory

cyclic universe

non standard cosmology

as the main alternative theories to BBT (without resorting to religion! )

I think faith (or lack of!) is a very personal subject which we cannot and should not try to force on others. It's something we simply have to make true for ourselves. (or perhaps simply not think about, to stop inverse brain implosion ALA pruners )

Agree with Pruners' point about evolving theory, and it illustrates exactly what I find so annoying about "just a theory" merchants (I don't think custardo really is one, I think she likes to provoke debate - which is fine). There is no "just" about being a theory. It's very rare for a theory to be totally disproved in one fell swoop. It's more usual for it to be tweaked and refined and added to over the years as more research is done. Exactly as it should be.

UQD - a theory is just a theory because nothing can be proved beyond doubt. I think the word theory has the connotation of being immutable. This is why I prefer the use of model. Models/theories are simply the best fit explanation of observation and experimental results.

Message withdrawn

"'Theory' though does not suggest immutability, that's what the word 'theorem' is for! "

Pruners - I agree. But "Theory" is hindered by misleading baggage (think of famous theories) and some people (including scientists) fail to see the distinction between theory and immutable fact. Obvious though the difference may seem to you, I hear/read this mistake very often. Most popular science writers will make the distinction early in their writing because they are aware of the confusion amongst lay readers.

You're not alone, I'm hazy on BBT too, well, physics in general if I'm honest. As much as I read about it, I just can't take it in.

Sorry for digression op.

Before BB, nothing, not even time - proven through scientific fact, only spiritual world. Point of big bang, start of time and matter. Scientific fact. Universe expanding, Scientific fact. 'Expanding like clouds and smoke' holy verse.e.h nebulae

'Heavens violently torn from the earth' holy verses...BB...divine scource. How could Jesus, Muhammad and Moses kow this, thousends of years ago?

'Knowledge upon knowledge leads to the one' holy verse....so many new levels within the atom being discovered, even leading scientists are now exhausted and claiming intelligent design! Fact. google it!

How is it that even the the delicate and complex, but 'simple' amoeba, or bacterium is arranged so beautifully with a purpose, and above all, what is the fabric that makes them move? All this from BB? or the all knowing, the all wise, the intelligent designer who is beyond our limited imagination.

Evolution is a step change process, no evidence of linear. Scientific fact. (Harunyahyah.com - leading scientist).

Intelligent thought provoking feedback would be appreciated... we are all mature 'students'.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

"even leading scientists are now exhausted and claiming intelligent design! Fact. google it!"

I would like to know who those leading scientists are. Because all the ones I know about still support evolution and the big bang rather than intelligent design, though there are plenty who are Christian and would say evolution/Big Bang with God behind it.

He does sound like a very interesting person. But it is clear even from his own account that he decided Darwinism was wrong for religious and philosophical reasons, then decided to argue against it scientifically. Nowhere does it say anything about scientific research for his opinion to be based on.

sorry, that should be 'about him having done any scientific research on which to base his opinion.'

Having Googled this name, I now see he is no other than Adnan Oktar - definitely not a scientist, but a pathetic weirdo who writes conspiracy books about Jews and Freemasons, Holocaust denial, and related topics of great 'scientific' interest including Creation.

Oh and last year, he was sentenced to several years in prison (again) for creating a criminal organization that used pretty young girls to attract wealthy young men into his cultish organization.

"Leading scientist", indeed

The problem with Googling on an insufficient knowledge base is that you can't tell fact from rubbish.

I wonder what his work 'Judaism and Freemasonry' is all about

Message withdrawn

I'm quite taken with "Fact! Google it" - as if googling automatically returns facts...