Big bang questions.

[nigelH]

Originally Posted by MATTBIN

Depending on which/whose theory you believe of course

Well currently there's only one that predicts a universe much like we see so we're stuck with that one until somebody comes up with better.
It did have a problem with 'inflation' at one point but that seems to have been pretty much worked out now.

Hence all the kerfufle to measure background radiation and ultra distant x-ray sources to fine tune the model.

Of course there is always the danger of finding a big model breaker but that's physics.

[Spacehopper]

What I want to know is if nothing existed before the big bang, what went bang and what did it go bang in? Answers on a postcard please.

Gareth

[Capt Morgan]

Originally Posted by me!

if you shind a torch in these circumstances you would not be able to see any better than befor as the light would barley leave the torch the speed of light is fixed no matter what to answere your question no

And your eyes would water at that speed

[Lazlo]

Originally Posted by Finless

Doesn't that imply that we/our bit of space and time has been moving faster than the speed of light?

Yes, it does, and it's a bit of a problem.

It's number 2 in a New Scientist list of "13 things that do not make sense".

13 things that do not make sense - space - 19 March 2005 - New Scientist

Originally Posted by Finless

About the only answer I can think of was that the creation of the universe did not just occur at one finite point in time and space?

One way of looking at it is that everywhere is the centre of the universe, or rather that there is no centre. Actually it turns out to be a meaningless question. The universe was very small when it began. Very, VERY small. There was no "point" in <insert meaningless term here> within which it started.

[purple vonny]

I listened to the same programme and was fascinated. I know naff all about black holes, and big bangs, even though I've ploughed the "A Brief History of Time". But I found it interesting that a woman on the prog had travelled to Canada to see a new supernova that was created during the stone age and is now visible because the light from it has now travelled this far.

That is simply mind boggling. Not to most maybe, but it is to my little boggle-able mind.

Also it was amazing that something had taken longer to arrive than my Ebay parcel which I am still waiting for.

[Tunicates]

Originally Posted by Lazlo

Yes, it does, and it's a bit of a problem.

It's number 2 in a New Scientist list of "13 things that do not make sense".

13 things that do not make sense - space - 19 March 2005 - New Scientist

There is the obvious notion that as things in the universe are not evenly distributed then it is likely that the fabric that 'space' exists in is also not evenly distributed. Then the 'constant' speed of light could actually be faster or slower in different bits of space. Of course from any vantage point it will seem to be constant, but not actually so?

When scientists say that something doesnt make sense what they mean is "what we beleive to be true now is totally wrong."

[Lazlo]

Originally Posted by Tunicates

When scientists say that something doesnt make sense what they mean is "what we beleive to be true now is totally wrong."

Absolutely.

[liamm]

Originally Posted by Spacehopper

What I want to know is if nothing existed before the big bang, what went bang and what did it go bang in? Answers on a postcard please.

Gareth

One of the problems here is the church, as most of the major funding that paid for the research that went into the big band originated from or is influenced by the church. The religious leaders were happy with the big bang as it follows creationism - ie a moment before which nothing existed and after which the universe gradually formed into what we have today. They disagree on time scales but are otherwise compatible.

The church does / or did get upset if you try to look beyond the big bang and so for a long time money wasnt easily available for this.

The big bang theory originated from Lemaitres description of an expanding universe. If it is now expanding then it must have once been smaller - extrapolate this far enough then the universe was once infinitely small (singularity) - and if it continues to expand then eventually the rate of expansion will reduce as the energy gets dispersed. Eventually...... gravity may pull it all back in as a big crunch. The suggestion is that it might be cyclical expand, contract, expand, contract ect.

what interests me is where the universe is expanding into ..... what is the nothing beyond the edge of the universe.

anyway, now that i've proved how dull i am i'm off to get tanks filled.