Can Big Bang be wrong totally?

[InvestigateTruth]

I came across this article today

The Big Bang never happened but fusion will

A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him

"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."


In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.


What do you think?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He's not the first to claim such, and he probably won't be the last.

 

[icehorse]

I came across this article today
The Big Bang never happened but fusion will
A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him
"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."
In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.
What do you think?

That's what's great about the scientific process. It's not about anyone's ego, it's about evidence. So if Lerner's theory has good evidence to support it, then hooray, we're one step closer to understanding the universe.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

He's not the first to claim such, and he probably won't be the last.

Does that mean Big Bang could possibly be totally wrong? Is it truly debatable?

 

[Thief]

I came across this article today

The Big Bang never happened but fusion will

A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him

"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."


In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.


What do you think?

if you take all of the motion we see.....and reverse it
it all goes back to a singularity

and for the universe to be as we see it now
BANG

and the rotation is the evidence of God
the rotation needed to be in play BEFORE the expansion began

that would be the pinch and snap of God's Fingers

 

[Thief]

It's not about anyone's ego, it's about evidence.

kinda hard to say.....I AM!

without something to show for it

note previous post

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Does that mean Big Bang could possibly be totally wrong? Is it truly debatable?

Nothing in science is 100%. Everything we know may he wrong. But that's how science functions. It's designed to show us where we are wrong.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Nothing in science is 100%. Everything we know may he wrong. But that's how science functions. It's designed to show us where we are wrong.

True, but with regards to Big Bang, all I have been hearing from everyone, was, overall it is proved to be true, and will only evolve.
But this guy says, it could be completely wrong and a totally different theory could replace it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

True, but with regards to Big Bang, all I hear from everyone, was, overall it is proved to be true, and will only evolve.
But this guy says, it could be completely wrong and a totally different theory replace it.

Science doesn't prove things. Only math proves things. It does very much appear the Big Bang happened, but anyone who says science proved it is wrong.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

True, but with regards to Big Bang, all I have been hearing from everyone, was, overall it is proved to be true, and will only evolve.
But this guy says, it could be completely wrong and a totally different theory could replace it.

Depends who you mean by 'everyone'.
But long story short, it's the most commonly accepted scientific explanation at this time.

Phlogiston theory stood for approximately 100 years before being proven completely wrong, by more advanced scientific knowledge (specifically around the discovery of nitrogen). It happens.
Whereas Newtonian physics has also been proven wrong, but still holds utility, and so is still used in certain cases (depending on velocities in particular).

 

[Ponder This]

I came across this article today

The Big Bang never happened but fusion will

A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him

"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."


In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.


What do you think?

I think the whole dark matter hypothesis is questionable. That doesn't mean it's wrong, of course, but I do agree it should raise some alarm bells.

I think it's fine for science to question it's hypotheses, such as the Big Bang, because things that that are accepted as scientifically true often prove to not be true. That's just how science operates: Trial and Error. It tries and most of the time it's wrong, but eventually it gets close enough to be useful.

Of course, if the Big Bang is not true, then an alternative must be suitably developed before it can be accepted as scientific theory.

 

[sun rise]

Does that mean Big Bang could possibly be totally wrong? Is it truly debatable?

Not to me. There's too much evidence.

 

[Nimos]

I came across this article today

The Big Bang never happened but fusion will

A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him

"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."


In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.


What do you think?

Interesting read and personally I have no issue with there being a debate about whether it is true or not. I have always found the big bang as strange as God

It will probably be difficult to test unless we can improve our measuring tools/method a great deal so we can get more precise data.

Whether it proves that the big bang is wrong or not, I think is to early to say and obviously I know way to little about it. But again, the scientists that knows more about it ought to take it serious, if there are so many things that doesn't fit as he claimed. I mean it's not the first time we have been wrong about stuff in the Universe

 

[Heyo]

I came across this article today

The Big Bang never happened but fusion will

A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him

"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."


In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.


What do you think?

From the article I can't get enough information to say if Lerner's hypothesis holds water but it isn't that easy as he makes it to discard the Big Bang theory. There are irregularities but many predictions have come true and confirmed the BBT.
What can be said about the BBT is that the first 380,000 years are basically mathematical conjecture. We just can't see behind the CBR (yet).

 

[stvdv]

But this guy says, it could be completely wrong and a totally different theory could replace it.

Some guys make claims, knowing it will give them lots of "likes" (read $$$) and put them on the map; even if it is short lived
Hence I rather stick with Wisdom of the Saints and Sages; I trust those much more

As to Big Bang ... I find it more useful to research "Who Am I"
IF one does not even know the answer to "Who Am I"
One's Big Bang theory probably is off too

 

[Regiomontanus]

I came across this article today

The Big Bang never happened but fusion will

A scientist by the name Eric Lerner, basically says, we are in the crisis is cosmology, and the Big Bang is basically contradicting many evidences.

I quote him

"So what I’m saying is that the crisis in cosmology has reached a point where the alternative to the Big Bang is, quite simply, no Big Bang – no Bang at all."


In this article he explains with simple language some of the evidences that scientifically contradicts with Big Bang.


What do you think?

Yes, it could be and, IMHO, some details likely are (much work being done to do away with the notion of inflation).

Lerner is considered a bit of a crank BTW.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But this guy says, it could be completely wrong and a totally different theory could replace it.

Many people have wrong conception of science. If new evidence found contradicts Big Bang, then science will abandon it. For the present, it stands. However, a difference of opinion is no problem.

I have always found the big bang as strange as God.

Yeah, till we do not find 'what was' before inflation, till this singularity problem is solved?

 

[exchemist]

Does that mean Big Bang could possibly be totally wrong? Is it truly debatable?

Of course it's debatable. There is quite good evidence for the Big Bang model, but if someone can come forward with an alternative model that accounts for the same observations and can explain others besides, then it will replace the Big Bang model. However from what I read, Lerner's model doesn't really do that.

From his potted biography, Lerner seems to be a contrarian by temperament - politically as well as scientifically. Such people have their uses. But, as a non-expert, I'm sticking with the Big Bang for now, like just about everyone else who knows more about it than I do.

 

[exchemist]

True, but with regards to Big Bang, all I have been hearing from everyone, was, overall it is proved to be true, and will only evolve.
But this guy says, it could be completely wrong and a totally different theory could replace it.

Who have you been hearing that from? Not scientists, I imagine, since no theory in science is ever "proved to be true".

 

[Revoltingest]

Does that mean Big Bang could possibly be totally wrong? Is it truly debatable?

It's only a theory that explains observations.
With new observations, the theory will be
expanded upon, changed, or even replaced.
This wouldn't be a "crisis"...it would be very
very exciting.