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

I have a real problem with this idea that everything is so complex (e.g th amoeba) it must have therefore been creted by someone..it only takes the next steip..who created the someone..and their idea of creationalism seems completely daft. How can God and creationalism be a MORE ovious answer - its even weired in lots of ways..so what was god doing before he created the universe, maybe it was just his GCSE science project???

Always fun speculating about things that by
their very nature we can never know at the limits of our comprehension ( at least for thickos like me).
Various theories for the existence of an universe:

The absurd universe
Our universe just happens to be the way it is.

The unique universe
There is a deep underlying unity in physics which necessitates the universe being the way it is. Some Theory of Everything will explain why the various features of the Universe must have exactly the values that we see.

The multiverse
Multiple Universes exist, having all possible combinations of characteristics, and we inevitably find ourselves within a Universe that allows us to exist.

Creationism
A creator designed the Universe with the purpose of supporting complexity and the emergence of Intelligence.

The life principle
There is an underlying principle that constrains the universe to evolve towards life and mind.

The self-explaining universe
A closed explanatory or causal loop: "perhaps only universes with a capacity for consciousness can exist." This is Wheeler's Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP).

The fake universe
We live inside a virtual reality simulation.

quite like the multiverse myself ,endless possiblities for the imagination.

interregun people need certainty in their lives though. They feel the need to pick one, and defend it to the hilt. All else is just to scary.

"Fact! Google it!" sounds like something Chris Morris would have come up with had "The Day Today" been produced in the Internet age. Together with a big thumping red "ink-stamp" of FACT across the screen.

Let's face it: "Highly debatable piece of selective evidence produced by someone with an agenda! Google it!" doesn't have the same ring...

mrsfreud, some people!

this is all getting a bit high brow for me, however, i have found out that theories are the predominant explaination of the time - until something better comes along.

there are other theories out there, its not limited to two.

bb isn't a 'fact' neither is any other explaination, but i tend to read and see and hear in day to day life that it is, becuase of the confusion of lay people mentioned earlier.

so, it is just a theory - like any other - and there are others its just that not a lot of people hear about them - in laymans terms.

no?

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Theories aren't necessarily superseded quite like that, custy - it's not so much "the earth is flat - oh, no, it's round", but rather the refinement of existing theories, and the removal of elements of them. As I understand it the BB theory best fits the evidence we have at the moment, so it's the best theory we have, not just one amongst equals.

The Big Bang term was actually coined by Fred Hoyle as a slightly perjorative term
because at the time he championed the steady state theory which has fallen out of favour
as more evidence has emerged for the BB.

custardo - No, Big Bang is not "just a theory". It is as close to fact as you can get without being completely sure (i.e. by testing & observing it), with all evidence verifying it, and no other theory even pretending to explain the birth of our universe.

The most important thing about a theory is not whether it's proven fact or not (it's not, we know that) but how effective it is at predicting things.

You need to assume that the theory is correct, so logically it leads to A,B and C. Then you do an experiment to check out A,B and C. if they are all shown to be true then the theory is made a little bit stronger.

If instead you find A', B' and C', then you go back to the drawing board and relook at the theory.
If you find X, Y and Z then you chuckout the theory and start again...

With the BB and evolution they are great at predicting where you will find things therefore they are at the forefront of all such theories.

... a thought.... perhaps, amidst all these beautiful ideas, what i cant get my head around is finding SCIENTIFIC accuracies in holy books on the three fetal stages in the womb (Ref. Dr Maurice Bucaille, world leading french Gynacologist. 'the soul is blown into the fetus at six weeks'. also Dr Steve Ray,Oxford Uni confirms "all organs are formed and at this time the heart is switched on in the fetus at this time". Other scientific facts of holy books, "world is round, swims in orbits" wasnt this just discovered in the past 200 years. chapter 57 in the Quran is titled 'IRON', how is this also the atomic number of iron in modern chemisty. 'between the two oceans there is a barrier' oceanographers have found this recently between the Atlantic and mediterranean sea, thousends of feet down (salt and sweet water do not mix at these pressures. a fine example of scientific facts confirming holy verses deliverd thousends of years ago, just a TIP of the iceberg... science.... vehicle of discovery? Holy quran verse, challenges 'all of mankind to change any one verse' no scholar has done this to date... in ever museum it is the same as it were 1400 years ago because 'we have appointed angels as protectors'. George bernard shaw tried, plus arabic scholars amongast many other famous names. "Algebra", "trigonometry", arabic words. a bit of history is missing perhaps. Just find this facinating as its based on science. Tere comes a time that we must even accept 'the most certainty in life is death'... biggest wisdom and more wonderfully, 'there is no compulsion in religion'. This gives peaceful debate

Message withdrawn

LOL Pruners:"Amee, you sound very confused"

Understatement of the year.

Natural selection satisfies Occam's Razor better than any of the other theories.

Message withdrawn

With all due respect Hoochie you seem to
be making the BB and the existence of God an either/or question which I don't think it is.
There seem to me to be only three possible states for the existence of our universe

1 It had a starting point (the bb theory)
2 It has always existed (the steady state theory)
3 It is in a loop. it exists. it is destroyed
it starts again(combination of 1, 2 as above)

Holding any of the above positions, seems to me to say nothing or otherwise about the existence of a God.

Aimee - Sorry to rain on your parade but the heart of a fetus starts beating at five weeks, not six.

Bucaille is not a "world famous gynecologist". The only thing he is (slightly) famous for is his book where he totally disses of the Bible and praises the Quran for scientific accuracy.

I think Amee's history is as shaky as her science - world is round only discovered in last 200 years?

Message withdrawn