What is Big Bang? What was the beginning of universe?

Question

What is Big Bang? What was the beginning of universe?

Answer 1

The theory of the big bang is believed by many, because it makes sense that if the universe is expanding otuwards then it must mean that in the past, it was much much smaller, all the way towards the point where the entire universe can fit on the tip of a pin.



The big bang is a theory that the universe was so tiny that it couldn't even be seen by the naked eye billions upon billions of years ago, until something happened to make it explode outwards with great speed and unimaginable energy, no one knows what sparked the big bang, but the most logical answer to me would be that a creator or god did this. Because things tend to remain the way they are unless acted upon. Nothing + little tiny sized universe = little tiny sized universe, so something sparked it, but we don't know what, and i doubt we will ever know for sure.

Answer 2

1.

Nobody knows how the universe started, it because no one knows that there's theory's about God and other things

2.

One of the hardest things to comprehend and reconcile in cosmology is the 'free lunch' factor - how it comes to pass that the universe can get something for nothing; how it can go from not existing, to existing; how matter or energy can come into being from it's former non-existing state

So where did matter come from?

3.

I think god created the universe.

some people say no! god doesn't exist! - they believe in the big bang theory.

but why couldn't god have created the universe using a big bang?

i would imagine that someone so powerful and so big would create everything with a 'big bang'. don't you?

4.

The Big Bang is the most popular scientific theory concerning the birth of the universe we know and live in. It basically states that all matter and energy came in to existance from nothingness and from a single point

5.

The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the universe that is best supported by all lines of scientific evidence and observation



My opinion.



Have physicists found the God?



Yes. They have.

Is this “ Jesus who is God creator of 100 billion galaxies”.

NO.

“ The Catholic Church, which put Galileo under house arrest for daring

to say that Earth orbits the sun, isn't known for easily accepting new

scientific ideas. So it came as a surprise when Pope Pius XII declared

his approval in 1951 of a brand new cosmological theory—the Big Bang. “



The Catholic Church then adopted the theory of — the Big Bang .

Strange that the Catholic Church should adopt a Physics theory

....but it was basing its Scientific Beliefs and Religious Beliefs

there was now a split between Religion and Science

which started from Galileo's Trial, and which has never been healed.



http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/

by Michael D. Lemonick, Illustrations by Moonrunner Design

published online February 5, 2004



My opinion.

===============.

1.

Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter

(all elementary particles and all quarks and

their girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks,

all kinds of waves: electromagnetic, gravitational,

muons… gluons field ….. etc.) – was assembled in a “single point”.

It is interesting to think about what had surrounded the “single point”.

The answer is :

EMPTINESS- NOTHING….!!!

Ok!

But why does everyone speak about EMPTINESS- NOTHING in

common phrases rather than in specific, concrete terms?

I wonder why nobody has written down this EMPTINESS- NOTHING in

the form of a physical formula ? You see, every schoolboy knows that

is possible to express the EMPTINESS- NOTHING condition

by the formula T=0K.

* * *

Once there was a “Big Bang”.

But in what space had the Big Bang taken place

and in what space was the matter of the Big Bang distributed?

Not in T=0K?

It is clear, that there is only EMPTINESS, NOTHING, in T=0K.

Now consider that the Universe, as an absolute frame of reference is

in a condition of T = 2,7K (rests relic radiation of the Big Bang ).

But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change

and its temperature will decrease.

What temperature can this radiation reach?

Not T=0K?

Hence, if we go into the past or into the present or into the future,

we can not escape from EMPTINESS- NOTHING T=0K.

2.

Detected material mass of the matter in the Universe is so small

(the average density of all substance in the Universe is

approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that the gravitation law

doesn't work. The cosmological constant in Universe is zero.

The Newton/ Einstein's gravitation laws are correct only

in the local parts of Vacuum. The Universe / Vacuum is endless.

And when this Infinity comes nobody knows what to do

with the infinity. Our tiny minds cannot get a handle on its size,

so we try to give it shapes and boundaries, all of which is folly.

Therefore was invented "dark matter" and another abstract,

ineffective objects.

But to our happiness the Infinite Vacuum has one physical

parameter- the temperature. The temperature of the Infinite

Vacuum is concrete, real fact. It is T=0K. Therefore it is

possible and necessary to begin to think from T=0K.

3.

About the theory of the “Big Bang” is written the thick (very thick) books.

But anywhere do not write about the reason of the “Big Bang”.

Anybody does not know it.

I know.

The action, when the God compresses all Universe

into his palm, we have named " a singular point".

And action, when the God opens his palm,

we have named the "Big Bang".

============ ==============.

Is it good proof of God existing?

Is it good explanation “ how the universe started” ?

=====================.

Answer 3

The Big Bang is the most popular scientific theory concerning the birth of the universe we know and live in. It basically states that all matter and energy came in to existance from nothingness and from a single point and has been accelerating outwards ever since. Current estimates suggest that the universe is 156 billion light-years in diameter and climbing.

Answer 4

The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the universe that is best supported by all lines of scientific evidence and observation. The essential idea is that the universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past and continues to expand to this day. Georges Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, although he called it his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'. The framework for the model relies on Albert Einstein's General Relativity as formulated by Alexander Friedmann. After Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929 that the distances to far away galaxies were generally proportional to their redshifts, this observation was taken to indicate that all very distant galaxies and clusters have an apparent velocity directly away from our vantage point. The farther away, the higher the apparent velocity.[1] If the distance between galaxy clusters is increasing today, everything must have been closer together in the past. This idea has been considered in detail back in time to extreme densities and temperatures, and large particle accelerators have been built to experiment on and test such conditions, resulting in significant confirmation of the theory. But these accelerators can only probe so far into such high energy regimes. Without any evidence associated with the earliest instant of the expansion, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition, rather explaining the general evolution of the universe since that instant. The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.



Fred Hoyle is credited with coining the phrase 'Big Bang' during a 1949 radio broadcast, as a derisive reference to a theory he did not subscribe to.[2] Hoyle later helped considerably in the effort to figure out the nuclear pathway for building certain heavier elements from lighter ones. After the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964, and especially when its collective frequencies sketched out a blackbody curve, most scientists were fairly convinced by the evidence that some Big Bang scenario must have occurred.



The Big Bang theory developed from observations of the structure of the universe and from theoretical considerations. In 1912 Vesto Slipher measured the first Doppler shift of a "spiral nebula" (spiral nebula is the obsolete term for spiral galaxies), and soon discovered that almost all such nebulae were receding from Earth. He did not grasp the cosmological implications of this fact, and indeed at the time it was highly controversial whether or not these nebulae were "island universes" outside our Milky Way.[3] Ten years later, Alexander Friedmann, a Russian cosmologist and mathematician, derived the Friedmann equations from Albert Einstein's equations of general relativity, showing that the universe might be expanding in contrast to the static universe model advocated by Einstein.[4] In 1924, Edwin Hubble's measurement of the great distance to the nearest spiral nebulae showed that these systems were indeed other galaxies. Independently deriving Friedmann's equations in 1927, Georges Lemaître, a Belgian physicist and Roman Catholic priest, predicted that the recession of the nebulae was due to the expansion of the universe.[5]



In 1931 Lemaître went further and suggested that the evident expansion in forward time required that the universe contracted backwards in time, and would continue to do so until it could contract no further, bringing all the mass of the universe into a single point, a "primeval atom", at a point in time before which time and space did not exist. As such, at this point, the fabric of time and space had not yet come into existence. This perhaps echoed previous speculations about the cosmic egg origin of the universe.[6]



Starting in 1924, Hubble painstakingly developed a series of distance indicators, the forerunner of the cosmic distance ladder, using the 100-inch (2,500 mm) Hooker telescope at Mount Wilson Observatory. This allowed him to estimate distances to galaxies whose redshifts had already been measured, mostly by Slipher. In 1929, Hubble discovered a correlation between distance and recession velocity—now known as Hubble's law.[1][7] Lemaître had already shown that this was expected, given the Cosmological Principle.[8]





Artist's depiction of the WMAP satellite gathering data to help scientists understand the Big Bang.During the 1930s other ideas were proposed as non-standard cosmologies to explain Hubble's observations, including the Milne model,[9] the oscillatory universe (originally suggested by Friedmann, but advocated by Einstein and Richard Tolman)[10] and Frit

Answer 5

BIGBANG is a theory to explain how the universe started. Just like a theory before that the Earth is FLAT and the sun and other stars revolved around the Earth(world) that cause the night and day and Plato's mathematics proved it.

Answer 6

i think god created the universe.

some people say no! god doesn't exist! - they believe in the big bang theory.

but why couldn't god have created the universe using a big bang?

i would imagine that someone so powerful and so big would create everything with a 'big bang'. don't you?

as for evolution...

why couldn't god create the world with a big bang, have creatures evolve.

the bible says god created everything in 7 days.

if many things in the bible are metaphorical, why can't that be?

maybe it was just divided up into 7 sections?



well, that's just my outlook on things...







god bless,

i hope this helped!









p.s. there is a movie called indesribable, by louie giglio that confirms what i said...

you might wanna buy it!

also there are heaps of clips on youtube, but search for louie giglio.

Answer 7

The big bang is a theory about the creation of everything. it is believed to have occurred when a positron and another particle collided, creating the start of a huge expanding bubble, that travels at the speed of light outward infinitely, creating as it goes.

Answer 8

the big bang was the beginning of our solar system and the planets near our sun,..,





i guess it was approx 4.5 billion years ago..





however i am sure there are other planets in other galaxies that may be older than 10 or even 30 billion of years..

Answer 9

Nobody knows how the universe started, it because no one knows that there's theory's about God and other things

Answer 10

One of the hardest things to comprehend and reconcile in cosmology is the 'free lunch' factor - how it comes to pass that the universe can get something for nothing; how it can go from not existing, to existing; how matter or energy can come into being from it's former non-existing state. To be fair though, cosmology is not the only worldview suffering from this dilemma. Any account of supernatural creation, also leaves the existence of it's creator unexplained. Even then, it has resorted to the assumption that supernatural powers exist and natural laws are subject to inexplicable violations.





For any sensible secular attempt to explain the origins of the cosmos, we must proceed from what is known and seek to explain what is unknown without ceding to assumptions or contradictions. A good starting point is to observe that the universe does indeed exist. If it didn't we wouldn't be here contemplating it. It then follows that something had to begin existing or else we must assume that something existed for an eternity into the past. [The assumption that there can be no physical reality extending into the indefinite past may be a human bias based in our innately illogical wiring.]



The eternity idea, when applied to cosmological science, seems to be irreconcilable with direct evidence. The universe does appear to have a finite beginning in the past. This so called 'Big Bang' is much more subtle than our intuitive imaginations tend to picture it. It is not simply matter exploding into a preexisting void.



The big bang was actually predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity, in which time and space are aspects of the same thing 'spacetime'. The implications of this are less intuitive than most people realize. To have an appreciation of cause and effect, so that we can say "this was caused by that" we also rely on a concept of linear time, because each effect must be preceded by a previous cause. The perfectly sensible question of "but what caused that?", ultimately leading to the current question regarding the cause of all the matter in the universe, relies on the assumption that time existed before that matter. OK, it did, but the matter is only a manifestation of energy (again according with relativity), but that just pushes the question back to "where did the energy come from?" What is needed is a primal cause of all causes. Unless time itself breaks down and the concepts of 'before' and 'after' become meaningless.



When cosmologists say that the universe is expanding, they do not mean that the galaxies are rushing into a preexisting void. What they mean is that spacetime itself is expanding and increasing the relative distance between galaxies like raisins in an expanding raisin loaf. The implications of relativity for the big bang, is that time and space are properties of the universe that themselves began with the big bang. In conceptual thought and natural language this is hard to intuitively describe and comprehend, but in the language of mathematics, it seems the natural and inevitable consequence of the known evidence.





If the universe is expanding this way, then by running the clock backwards and inquiring into past epochs, we must conclude that the universe becomes smaller and smaller as we look further and further into the past. This is not hard to do in cosmology incidentally, because light travels at a finite speed and what we see from distant objects is delayed by the traveling time for light (approx. 300,000 km/sec).



The further away the object, the more ancient the light is that we are presently receiving from it. We are actually looking back through time as we look out through space.



Traversing the eons back through 13.7 billion years we come to a point where time and space cease to exist. Running the clock forward again we pass through a moment at the beginning of time where the universe is no bigger than an atom. At this point in history or prior, time and space become indistinct and it gets worse. Below the Plank constants, the entire universe is subject to quantum fluctuation. Quantum mechanics is another area that is full of counter intuitive but mathematically beautiful ideas.



So where did matter come from? It came from a free exchange with energy for particles. But as for the ultimate cause of all causes, we must assume that something was permitted to begin existing without cause, otherwise nothing could begin existing in the first place and at the first time. In this view, causality itself, was also born in the big bang. Without spacetime it is meaningless to speak about prior causes, because without spacetime, no linear progression of time from the past into the future is possible. It may be desirable to explain where this matter manifesting energy came from, but the question assumes that it is sensible and meaningful to ask a question about causality, in a situation where no prior causes are possible.



A relatavistic metaphor for this, honoring spacetime, is