big bang theory

[Anonymous No.5696696]

How did something come from nothing? I don't understand. I believe nothing remains nothing and doesn't become something.

[Anonymous No.5696698]

>>5696696

nothing from nothing leaves nothing
you gotta have something
if you wanna be with me

[Anonymous No.5696703]

>>5696696
>nothing

Common misconception. Even in the vacuum of space, there still exists something.

Look up non-zero energy.

[Anonymous No.5696705]

from simple wiki for a simpleton:

The Big Bang is the name of a scientific theory that explains how the Universe started, and then made the groups of stars (called galaxies) we see today.

In the Big Bang theory, the universe began as very hot, small, and dense, with no stars, atoms, form, or structure (called a "singularity"). Then about 14 billion years ago,[1] space expanded very quickly (thus the name "Big Bang"), resulting in the formation of atoms, which eventually lead to the creation of stars and galaxies. The universe is still expanding today, but getting colder as well.

As a whole, space is growing and the temperature is falling as time passes. Cosmology is the name given to how the universe began and how it has developed. Scientists that study cosmology agree the Big Bang theory matches what they have observed so far.[1]

Fred Hoyle called the theory the "Big Bang" on his radio show. He did not believe the Big Bang was correct. Scientists who did not agree with him thought the name was funny and decided to use it. Since then, Fred Hoyle's reasons for not agreeing with the theory have been proven wrong.[2]

Scientists base the Big Bang theory on many different observations. The most important is the redshift of very far away galaxies. Redshift is the Doppler Effect occurring in light. When an object moves away from earth, it looks reddish because the movement stretches the wavelength. The reddish color occurs because red is the lowest wavelength on the visible spectrum. The more redshift there is, the faster the object is moving away. By measuring the redshift, scientists proved that the universe is expanding and can even work out how fast the object is moving. With precise observation and measurements, scientists believe that universe was a singularity approximately 13.7 billion years ago. Because most things become colder as they expand, the universe is assumed to have been very hot when it started.[3]

[Anonymous No.5696707]

Other observations that support the Big Bang theory are the amounts of chemical elements in the universe. Amounts of hydrogen, helium, and lithium seem to agree with the theory of the Big Bang. Scientists also have found "cosmic microwaves background radiation". This radiation is known as radio waves, and they are everywhere in the universe. Even so, it is now very weak and cold, but a long time ago it was very strong and very hot.[1]

The Big Bang might also have been the beginning of time. If the Big Bang was the beginning of time, then there was no universe before the Big Bang, since there was no concept of "before" without time. Other ideas state that the Big Bang was not the beginning of time 13.7 billion years ago. Instead, some believe that there was a different universe before and it may have been very different from the one we know today.[3]

The Big Bang is based on Scientific Theory. Certain religious groups reject the Big Bang Theory on grounds that it conflicts with their teachings. The Big Bang Theory is not a religious teaching. It is based on observations of the universe, and is an attempt at explaining them without religious undertones.

Georges Lemaitre, who originally came up with this theory, was a priest, and there are many religious groups who do accept the Big Bang Theory, as it doesn't (in itself) conflict with being religious.

[Anonymous No.5696709]

>>5696698
wow this is a pretty good generic response for this kind of post, I'm writing it down

[Anonymous No.5696714]

There is a recent book about this very topic. OP should read it.

[Anonymous No.5696721]

>>5696696
>implying that the laws of physics were even close to being similar to the laws we have now

[Anonymous No.5696722]

>>5696696

nothing is something, therefore according to the common strawman of "something from nothing" we have "something from something"

there's nothing wrong explaining modern cosmology as it already has been

tl:dr: nothingness doesn't exist

[Anonymous No.5696729]

>>5696710

[Anonymous No.5696739]

Hey guys, i love both math and cs and i'm thinking about going to grad school and do research on theoretical computer science. What are the best schools in the UK (in the US would be lovely too) for that? Also, what major topic should i start focusing, i'm thinking about cryptography or maybe quantum computation.

[Anonymous No.5696743]

bitch botch fAFgouhizsjkdb√flsjhk´≈∆≤dfm b sejkgdfhc

[Anonymous No.5696751]

>>5696696
>How did something come from nothing?
Why do you assume that everything must have a beginning?
What if some things are just true. What if those things are never not true? Why would something that is just true need to be false before it's only true?

[Anonymous No.5696759]

If god created the universe, who created god?

Not trolling, I'm legitimately interested how creationists explain that.

[Anonymous No.5696768]

>>5696759
Creationists believe that a higher power is not bound to physics and logic and is truly infinite, a concept which we will never be able to comprehend.

[Anonymous No.5696771]

>>5696759

If I remember correctly I think they believe God created himself. Somehow.

[Anonymous No.5696788]

>>5696768

but there's nothing in logic or physics saying that things in the universe can't be infinite

[Anonymous No.5696803]

OH MY ARCEUS. But different philosophies believe in different things. I consider myself a Theisist, I believe in a god but i do not believe that god can be defined. As in a mysterious force that does what it does. Prior to the Big Bang scientists believe there was nothing, others believe that "God" (in a Christian/Catholic manner) created himself and the universe. It is hard to tell what really happened since no one was there. Ironically, when it comes to the Big Bang scientist say "You just have to accept that there was nothing there before", i.e. it is blind faith in something we cannot prove or disprove.

[Anonymous No.5696819]

>I believe nothing remains nothing and doesn't become something.

There will always be nothing, but that doesn't mean nothing gave birth to something. There just was something, and nothing sat along side it minding it's own business like it always does. There is no explanation.

[Anonymous No.5696837]

>>5696696

>implying that there was nothing before everything and the universe is not a periodically expanding/collapsing structure

[Anonymous No.5696839]

>>5696837
Baseless claim

[Anonymous No.5696847]

>>5696837
>the universe is a periodically expanding/collapsing structure

Even if it is that hardly excludes nothing. Nothing doesn't exist...so it has to exist. Unless you are just talking about empty darkness, which is different than nothing.

[Anonymous No.5696850]

>>5696839

Just like the opposite.

[Anonymous No.5696863]

There is no "something" or "nothing".
It's anti-matter the nothing of matter-something? It doesn't matter to your monkey brain everything would look unusual.

[Anonymous No.5696882]

>>5696788

[Anonymous No.5696886]

Here's the problem of the expanding/contracting theories of the universe:
Time could not have existed before the big bang. There was simply no way that a universe could have time to contract because time did not exist.

[Anonymous No.5696893]

>>5696703

>relating the current state of the universe to the singularity
>science

pick one

you basically imply that something must have come into existence without time existing (time starts with the BB)

[Anonymous No.5696898]

>>5696707

certain people, not necessarily religious, reject the idea of the BBT simply because it's so weak (albeit the best science has atm). if a theory involves another universe to exist prior to our universe you end up with a chain of never-ending antecedent universes which is religion/faith involving in and of itself

[Anonymous No.5696919]

>>5696714

Only a complete retard thinks this book actually explains anything.
See NYtimes article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0

[Anonymous No.5696922]

If you believe in the big bang theory, you believe that the universe originated from a single event. Therefore the universe is finite. If this is true then the amount of energy is also finite. Excluding Dark Energy. The law of conservation of Energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Therefore it is both finite in the sense that no more energy will ever be created and also infinite.in the sense that it has always been and always will be.
I just made sweet love to your brain.

[Anonymous No.5696953]

"Before the big bang" there was an infinite sea of pure chaos in the form of random quantum fluctuations. Time, space and mass/energy had absolutely no meaning until inflation began.
It was an inevitable eventuality or God mad it happen. We'll never know. =P

[Anonymous No.5696957]

>>5696919
>Reading the NY Times.
Are you fucking serious?

[Anonymous No.5696978]

>>5696957
It's a guest article by David Albert, a professor of philosophy, not some bullshit science journalism. It's actually a good review.