-
It is a theory. It has not been proven. I heard of a 3-d mapping effort for known galaxys. Their preliminary results showed a structure somewhat like that of the membranes of a sponge. There were areas of void and areas that were more populated.
The trouble with the Big Bang theory is that you would have to see more than we can see from here. It is like standing with your nose to a wall and trying to describe the rest of the city.
The trouble with the Big Bang theory is that you would have to see more than we can see from here. It is like standing with your nose to a wall and trying to describe the rest of the city.
-
The Big Bang theory is a model that describes the behavior of a universe where the energy content remains constant, and where the energy density decreases as space expands.
When we apply this model to our universe, it is "darn close".
IF (a big if) the Big Bang theory is true, then there was NO explosion.
The fact that the energy density decreases as space expands has been proven. The "result" of this is that the universe was a lot hotter in the past than it is now, and that has been demonstrated by the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (it gives concrete evidence that the universe was once hotter than 4000 K or roughly 6700F).
When we use the theory backwards (going back in time to see what the universe COULD have looked like in the past), we come to a time when the energy density was so high that we no longer understand how things work. This moment is called the Planck Time.
IF the theory is correct, then the energy density was so high that only pure energy could exist (no forces, no matter). As the density of the energy decreased after that moment (as space expanded), then matter could finally form.
IF that is true, then the "primordial matter" would have formed in a very specific ratio (75% hydrogen, 25% helium and a pinch of other elements such as lithium beryllium and boron, not much more). The rest of the elements would have formed much later inside stars.
Sure enough, when we "look" at clouds of primordial gas (far from stars), we find the exact ratio that the theory says we should find. That too is evidence that the model works very well in explaining how our universe could work.
When we apply this model to our universe, it is "darn close".
IF (a big if) the Big Bang theory is true, then there was NO explosion.
The fact that the energy density decreases as space expands has been proven. The "result" of this is that the universe was a lot hotter in the past than it is now, and that has been demonstrated by the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (it gives concrete evidence that the universe was once hotter than 4000 K or roughly 6700F).
When we use the theory backwards (going back in time to see what the universe COULD have looked like in the past), we come to a time when the energy density was so high that we no longer understand how things work. This moment is called the Planck Time.
IF the theory is correct, then the energy density was so high that only pure energy could exist (no forces, no matter). As the density of the energy decreased after that moment (as space expanded), then matter could finally form.
IF that is true, then the "primordial matter" would have formed in a very specific ratio (75% hydrogen, 25% helium and a pinch of other elements such as lithium beryllium and boron, not much more). The rest of the elements would have formed much later inside stars.
Sure enough, when we "look" at clouds of primordial gas (far from stars), we find the exact ratio that the theory says we should find. That too is evidence that the model works very well in explaining how our universe could work.
keywords: been,proven,the,big,theory,bang,Has,Has the big bang theory been proven