Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: The Big Bang

  1. #1 The Big Bang 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    56
    Hello people,

    I am giving a presentation to some people in my school this Thursday. I am however, starting to have a few issues.
    The primary one being, that I always thought that the big bang started out as an infinitely small point with infinite mass, But reading online I have found that some people believe their was in fact an infinite amount of energy and such. So Which one is it?
    Also, for my points Ive got,
    Cosmic Background radiation,
    Red shift expansion,
    what other Ideas do you think I could add?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    NC USA
    Posts
    488
    From my humble point of view, I think this is a trivial point that is best avoided. You might say something like, "All the matter and energy of our present universe was concentrated in this one small point..."

    The rest of your presentation depends on your purpose, be it didactic or entertaining. It also depends heavily on your audience's age and prior knowledge of this event. You neglected to tell us.

    I can only advise you to have a good response already prepared when you are challenged by one of the creationists in the audience.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    56
    Well lucky for me, it is split into two parts. I'm doing the big bang, my friend is doing creationism. Were discussing the possible origins of the universe, from religious points ofview and scientific. As its for a years 8-9 philosophy club. Their knowledge want be a great deal, so I'm gonna aim mainly for entertainment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Ben; As I understand BBT, the singularity is not currently defined. How it got there when or how it was generated into forming a universe. Currently the theory does indicate space, time and all things were part of this unit. The Red Shifts and Cosmic Background radiation are said to prove or back up the possibility the possibility.

    I find it interesting, you and your friend are not challenged by some form of a Steady State Theory. This simply is that the Universe has always existed and will no doubt always will exist.

    You might find it interesting to google BBT or at least check out Wikipedia on the subject. Back in the 6th or 7th Century, the idea from a Catholic Conference, was the Universe just popped up. No reason or time was declared. Then about 1927, a Catholic Priest, who was into physics as well, came up with a theory, that was later called Big Bang Theory. If I getting across the idea, BBT is itself based on some theological background, I have made my point.

    Creationist, as I understand it have more to do with *Mankind's* existence than the Universe (opposing Darwinism). There are a few die hards, that think the Universe and mankind were created 6,000 years ago, but there is very little support.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Why? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5
    This may be slightly off topic, but not much...

    The one question regarding the Big Bang that both philosophers and scientist share is "Why?" (although for different reasons). But it is a very interesting point.

    Why did the Universe "bang?" This theoretical singularity was just sitting there (wherever "there" was), minding its own business, in a state of perfection, containing all the energy of the Universe, when BANG! It exploded. Or expanded. Why? What caused the Universe to suddenly "decide" to stop being a singularity and become a universe? And why then, at that moment? Why not 10 minutes earlier, or a million years later? What event made the singularity sit up and become active, so to speak?

    How long was the singularity in existence before it banged? A nanosecond? A nothingth? A billion billion eons?

    Boggles the mind, don't it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: Why? 
    Forum Professor sunshinewarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,525
    Quote Originally Posted by madscientist
    This may be slightly off topic, but not much...

    The one question regarding the Big Bang that both philosophers and scientist share is "Why?" (although for different reasons). But it is a very interesting point.

    Why did the Universe "bang?" This theoretical singularity was just sitting there (wherever "there" was), minding its own business, in a state of perfection, containing all the energy of the Universe, when BANG! It exploded. Or expanded. Why? What caused the Universe to suddenly "decide" to stop being a singularity and become a universe? And why then, at that moment? Why not 10 minutes earlier, or a million years later? What event made the singularity sit up and become active, so to speak?

    How long was the singularity in existence before it banged? A nanosecond? A nothingth? A billion billion eons?

    Boggles the mind, don't it?
    Don't know any 'why' answers, and would advise not looking for teleological ones.

    Scientist's however, tend to say that time did not exist prior to the Big Bang, so there is no point in speculating 'howlong' the singularity lasted.

    Certainly there are aspects to the Big Bang that seem puzzling, and philosophically thorny. But the universe's decision-making is not amongst them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: Why? 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by madscientist
    This may be slightly off topic, but not much...

    The one question regarding the Big Bang that both philosophers and scientist share is "Why?" (although for different reasons). But it is a very interesting point.

    Why did the Universe "bang?" This theoretical singularity was just sitting there (wherever "there" was), minding its own business, in a state of perfection, containing all the energy of the Universe, when BANG! It exploded. Or expanded. Why? What caused the Universe to suddenly "decide" to stop being a singularity and become a universe? And why then, at that moment? Why not 10 minutes earlier, or a million years later? What event made the singularity sit up and become active, so to speak?

    How long was the singularity in existence before it banged? A nanosecond? A nothingth? A billion billion eons?

    Boggles the mind, don't it?
    Many explanations in science, are meant to explain what is known. What leads up to this may not be known or hypothetical explanations offered.
    Human existence, a good example. We exist, but how, when, where and why seem to be persistent questions. (Darwinism vs. Creationism) or (Evolution vs. Intelligent Design)

    We know the Universe exist, we have a rough idea how it operates and seem to need a reason/cause/why for its existence. This need and truly its a need, begs questions which confuse the best of the researchers. The questions you ask, are an attempt to understand BBT, which may not EVER have realistic answers. In fact, though my opinion, the BBT itself is unrealistic.

    Big Bang, advocates feel the singularity always existed and in whichever state that was. A plasma state, sub-atomic particles or what have you. They seem to agree expansion (not an explosion or bang) began based the time line of the current known universe. Originally this was around 4 billion years ago, but with new telescope technology and space observatories, this has grown to 14.2 billion years ago. NASA will be sending up their *James Webb* Observatory scheduled for 2013 and most expect the known universe to be many more years.

    Remember, BBT according to those that promote the idea, nothing existed prior to the expansion, other than the singularity (so called "nothingness"). This means our concept of time, physics, matter, not even space itself. This infers what was prior to expansion, was not subject to anything we could/should understand. This alone, tells me there is an intended purpose to leave that possible explanation to some form of faith.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •