Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"
Victor Debattista (firstname.lastname@example.org)
6 May 1995 18:57:04 -0400
email@example.com (Chris Degnen) writes:
>DrDarkMatter at <firstname.lastname@example.org> (A Service Organization) wrote:
>|> >>To assert that such an explosion JUST HAPPENED out of nothing defies
>|> >>everything we know about explosions. And catastrophes.
>Yeah, I reckon there was something (else) before the Big Bang which provided
>a context for it to happen in, possibly even caused it. In which case that
>something has to be added to the paradigm of the 'known universe', and then
>the Big Bang wasn't the beginning of 'everything'.
>Science can't even prove nothing.
I am certainly out of my field here, but as I understand some of the current
high energy physics/cosmology reasoning, the big bang is the source of space-
time. Thinking of the big bang as an explosion is not quite right. If you
think that way, you are falling into the trap that Fred Hoyle (Sir Fred)
set up for the theory that challenged his steady state theory. If I were
you, I wouldn't worry too much about this subject, it'll be plenty of time
before physicists can say anything meaningful about this early epoch.
Anyway, this is completely the wrong place to be having this discussion.