Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Subduction Zone]

"The Big Bang is a model for how the universe developed, once it had started"

So do you agree there was a "start" before expansion?

You are still trying to black and white the situation.

And do you realize that if time had a start when our universe stated that then the universe would have been here forever? It would have existed for a limited amount of time but that would still be "forever".

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Read my post. I said that though you can always ask more questions, a given model of science may not provide answers to everything you might like to know.

Fair enough, thank you exchemist.

 

[exchemist]

So something always existed??

Its either something always existed or absolutely nothing existed?

Then we have to ask if something always existed, without time or space, how did it exist and what did it exist in?

Carry on, you are free to speculate. But do not expect science to join you on your metaphysical quest.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I don't believe in a god . Thats my point.. What is the difference?

Well both of the scenarios could apply to existence with or without any God(s), but how would we know? Apart from our preferential beliefs. I don't know why it is so important to so many as to how existence began or didn't, given we are unlikely to know about such things, if ever, and they don't really contribute much to human life - apart from speculation.

 

[exchemist]

"The Big Bang is a model for how the universe developed, once it had started"

So do you agree there was a "start" before expansion?

Yet again, you are demanding certainty inappropriately. As I've already said a couples of times, the Big Bang is a model that, apart from successfully accounting for observations, suggests there was a start to the universe, in the form of a so-called singularity.

I notice you cut the word "suggests" when you quote-mined my previous reply on this. Why did you do that? Are you incapable of understanding nuance?

 

[metis]

The Big Bang was not likely a "bang" as we would know it but a dramatic expansion of the universe for unknown reason(s). An estimate is that prior to the BB, our universe probably was no larger than a current atom.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The Big Bang was not likely a "bang" as we would know it but a dramatic expansion of the universe for unknown reason(s). An estimate is that prior to the BB, our universe probably was no larger than a current atom.

And what was outside of it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

And what was outside of it?

There may not have been an outside.

The Big Bang was not an explosion. The Big Bang was an incredibly rapid expansion of space. The universe is still expanding. That means that the further away a star is from us the more rapidly it is going away. There are stars so far away from us that the distance between us is increasing faster than the speed of light. We will never see those stars as a result.
They are not moving at the speed of light. It is space itself that is growing.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

There may not have been an outside.

The Big Bang was not an explosion. The Big Bang was an incredibly rapid expansion of space. The universe is still expanding. That means that the further away a star is from us the more rapidly it is going away. There are stars so far away from us that the distance between us is increasing faster than the speed of light. We will never see those stars as a result.
They are not moving at the speed of light. It is space itself that is growing.

I understand the bb expansion theory, but the reality may be much different. Universal space may be infinite, and our BB universe just one of many in time and space. What we know as dark energy or perhaps a form of, may be omnipresent throughout infinite space.

Who is to say there is not a multiverse? Reality is not opinion, it is not theory, it is what it is, contemporary science can theorize whatever, and grow in understanding as one generation passes to another, not a problem.

Perhaps I'm just ahead of the curve?

 

[Astrophile]

That means that the further away a star is from us the more rapidly it is going away. There are stars so far away from us that the distance between us is increasing faster than the speed of light. We will never see those stars as a result.
They are not moving at the speed of light. It is space itself that is growing.

It would be better to say 'a galaxy' or 'galaxies' rather than 'a star' or 'stars'. The stars in our own Galaxy are not receding from us as a result of the expansion of the Universe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It would be better to say 'a galaxy' or 'galaxies' rather than 'a star' or 'stars'. The stars in our own Galaxy are not receding from us as a result of the expansion of the Universe.

True, but I was trying to keep it simple. Sometimes when people consider galaxies they remember that they are orbiting, though those velocities are rather minor compared to the apparent velocity caused by expansion of space. I know that at the distances where one is looking at galaxies moving away from us enough to be red shifted we are not going to see individual stars, except for the occasional Standard Candle. I was applying the KISS standard to myself in responding.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It would be better to say 'a galaxy' or 'galaxies' rather than 'a star' or 'stars'. The stars in our own Galaxy are not receding from us as a result of the expansion of the Universe.

So a number of questions if I may?
What is happening to the dark energy of the inter-galactic space as it expands, is it getting less dense as it fills more space, or what?
What is the process dark energy is experiencing in intra-galactic space where there is no expansion due to gravity restraints, but the expansion cause, whatever it is, is present and active?

 

[Boris Norris]

You're asking me what I think? I think God made the universe because He wanted to.

Not impossible but highly unlikely.theres no evidence a god was involved. No evidence, no god.

I don't know what the future will bring in reference to life beyond the earth as we know it, but I do know that the heavens are awesome to look at, and some people do enjoy analyzing them. Frankly though, I think scientists and others should concentrate on fixing up the earth, but that won't happen for a while. which I believe will happen. As for instance, I was learning that there is a certain type of spider alive only very high up in the Himalayas. It is fantastic that they live there and nowhere else. Life here on earth can be fantastic.

 

[YoursTrue]

Not impossible but highly unlikely.theres no evidence a god was involved. No evidence, no god.

OK, we differ in our perspectives.

 

[YoursTrue]

And what was outside of it?

Oh boy, I'll bet even Hawking would like that question...

 

[Boris Norris]

OK, we differ in our perspectives.

Not really. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
A perspective as you say implies you have had a vision. I very much doubt that unless you have proof. Take your time. I'll wait.

 

[Astrophile]

So a number of questions if I may?
What is happening to the dark energy of the inter-galactic space as it expands, is it getting less dense as it fills more space, or what?
What is the process dark energy is experiencing in intra-galactic space where there is no expansion due to gravity restraints, but the expansion cause, whatever it is, is present and active?

That's difficult, and I don't really know. I think that the present idea is that as the universe expands, the contribution of dark energy to the universe's mass-energy content will increase, but I don't know whether the density of dark energy will decrease or remain constant. See Dark energy - Wikipedia for more information.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

That's difficult, and I don't really know. I think that the present idea is that as the universe expands, the contribution of dark energy to the universe's mass-energy content will increase, but I don't know whether the density of dark energy will decrease or remain constant. See Dark energy - Wikipedia for more information.

Thanks.
So what is the cause of the expansion?
And if dark energy contribution increases as the universal expansion continues, where is it coming from? Does universal expansion result in increasing mass?
Is universal expansion steady or accelerating?
It seems to me that the original creative BB process is an ongoing process?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks.
So what is the cause of the expansion?
And if dark energy contribution increases as the universal expansion continues, where is it coming from? Does universal expansion result in increasing mass?
Is universal expansion steady or accelerating?
It seems to me that the original creative BB process is an ongoing process?

The expansion is an ongoing process. Why or how the expansion works is not understood yet. But it has been measured.

 

[YoursTrue]

Not really. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
A perspective as you say implies you have had a vision. I very much doubt that unless you have proof. Take your time. I'll wait.

Did Hawking have evidence to base his theory that the universe didn't need anything but gravity to start it? I am reading another book by scientists and it's interesting but there is evidence without them realizing it backing up the Bible's take on things.