/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14829501
I told you for years that it was bs from purely theoretic point of view. You're welcome.

>>14829501
There is no evidence for big bang, just cosmic background radiation. Maybe that got BTFO aswell.

>>14829501
It's the chorizo thing all over again, scientists made a joke and retards took it seriously. All journalists should be executed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7lxzS6K9PU

>>14829501
Depends on what you mean by big bang. A small (hot & dense) region of space expanded into our visible universe. That much is true. There isn't evidence for a singularity.

>>14829501
The universe is ageless and eternal
Big Big enthusiasts are retarded to think everything is bound to have a "beginning", it's simply beyond the grasp of normie minds

>>14829617
>That much is true.
I dare you to try and prove it now.

>>14829501
its true, the big bang is fake

>>14829654
The evidence is the CMB. Before that is extrapolation.

>>14829681
CMB is the heat signature of our galaxy's dark matter halo, it is not a cosmological radiation source

>>14829727
Link to the paper that shows this?

>>14829681
>>14829733
So you're just a parrot, who cannot prove anything in his own words. You do not belong in science with such mentality, but your kind makes up the majority of modern science, alas.

>>14829733
how does a publication prove anything in the context of the replication crisis?
if the majority of publications are false, then being published should discredit an idea.
please familiarize yourself with at least the broad details of the replication criss
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
publications can't be taken at face value, anyone who does that is ignoring reality. ignoring reality is fundamentally anti-science.

Big Bang was always bullshit the notion this vast existence began only 14.3 billion years ago seemed insane to me.

>>14829617
>That much is true.
Proofs?

>>14829970
ppl get taught as kids
>in the begining god created the universe
then later on they stop believing in god and think they're clever for having seen through a lie, but they're never able to shake the idea that the universe was created.

So is the universe infinite and eternal without muh redshift cope?

>>14830007
>the universe was always there
>no, the universe was created by god
>who created god?
>god was always there
which god anyway?

>>14830068
>muh who created God
>muh which God
We got a genius child here!

>>14830074
and how would an adult answer these childish question?

>>14829727
it wouldn't be so evenly distributed then. but it does look like a heat signature of anything and everything after enough red shifting. the argument that it's from a big bang only come from a desire to make it fit. it can fit just as well an infinite universe model.

>>14829908
Good, now your ass cancer has no cure because someone faked the research.

>>14830106
Why would I try an explain something you clearly don't want to understand? It would be like teaching a stone to do math. A pointless exercise in futility.

>>14829501
Reality > the imagination of a few arrogant men who dared to pretend to understand the laws of this world. The thirst for knowledge is a sin, just like the lust for power and the desire for money.

>>14830126
or you just can't

>>14830138
Ok, if that makes you feel better about yourself.

>>14830134
>>14830142
don't you special folk have a special board for your special needs? like /pol or /b?

>>14830146
>muh /pol/
It reveals itself.

>>14830134
Indeed reality is stranger than fiction because fiction is limited by our brains but reality has no limitations.

>>14830152
>reality has no limitations.
go on, break the lightspeed limit

>>14830007
I got taught the big bang and as an "alternative" the creation myth, always seemed funny to me.

>>14830158
Gravity already does.

>>14829617
>that much is true
t. Reddit. Open the Bible KJV.

>>14830663
there's no word that can describe how stupid you are

>>14829561
>scientists made a joke and retards took it seriously.
A tale as old as time.

>>14829501
Not saying the big ban is wrong but doesn't the jwst pic prove that it happened a lot longer ago than we thought?

If there are fully formed galaxies 13.4+ billion lightyears out, that must mean that those and the earliest or furthest galaxies there are.

Either that or there is something that caused those galaxies to form much faster than all the others we know of.

They don't fit in with the time scales we know other galaxies took to form.

Something with the whole theory and our understanding of the formation of galaxies is fundamentally wrong.

>>14830767
>those and the earliest
*those aren't the earliest

>>14830767
Their likely path will be to modify galaxy formation models rather than cosmology.

>>14829733
Yeah let me get my spaceship with warpdrive

Why do people think we can predict how the universe was 10 billion years ago? How is that just not totally absurd on its face?

>>14830767
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL6-x0modwY

>>14830839
It all comes down to
>My model works at the solar system scale, that means it also works at the galaxies and universe scales

>>14829628
How do you solve Olbers' paradox?

>>14831084
The further the star is, the more matter is between it and observer. Also the sky does shine in the clear night. Only not always in the spectre you're used to.

>>14831100
>The further the star is, the more matter is between it and observer.
So you can't even be bothered to read the wikipedia page. Got it.

>>14831184
I prefer to speak what I think, not what somebody else wrote. I thought you could read wiki without my help, but maybe I thought wrong. Debate m, faggot. Do an attempt to do it in your own words.