Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"

Hugh Gibbons (hgibbons@hoshi.Colorado.EDU)
12 Apr 1995 03:49:44 GMT

Arun Gupta ( wrote:
> The three pieces of evidence that theories alternate to the Big
> Bang have trouble coping with are :

> 1. Redshifts of galaxies increases with their distance.

This is commonly explained as evidence *for* there having
been a big bang. If an explosion occurs, then each of the
chunks sees all other chunks receding at a speed that's
proportional to the distance.

Astronomers rely on red-shift as their way of estimating the distances
of distant (far outside our galaxy) objects, because they now assume
that there was a big bang.

What is the most distant object whose distance was measured *other*
than by red-shift?