Back to Home

Blackholes2 Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes II | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: Rationalizing The Big Bang Theory

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by yelmalio/">yelmalio on January 7, 2000 15:20:37 UTC

Big Bang Theory Suggest our Universe exist after a explosion a very Big Bang. Everything is receding away from the explosion. But Can Big explosion create Space?

That is currently what is thought.

Remember that Big Bang cosmology is a description of what happened after the Bang. Not the cause of it or what happened before it.

Physicists on the whole do not dealing with infinities, they break too many known rules, so having space exist before the Bang leads to space existing for an infinite time. This is ruled out as a matter of aesthetics.

Or what before the Big Explosion was there Space? Please No 'Empty Box theory' explanation here.

As I say, this is not thought to be the case. Look at it this way. IF space existed before the bang you have to explain what space is, how big was it and how long does had it, will it, last for. If space existed before the Bang then you can assume it is infinite in size. You can assume its finite in size but you then have to explain why it was there in the first place. You also have to explain how long it has lasted for (empty space that is). Why? If space is finite (in time or space) you have to explain what created space that later creates the big bang. It is therefore necessary to assume space is infinite before the Big bang was created.

You know have a bigger problem in fact. If space was infinite and the Big Bang happened why wasn't it an Infinitely Big Bang. That is even harder to explain than the current theory, if you think about it. So lets assume you have a finite Big bang in Infinite space. Woops, Infinities are large, you have as many Finite Bangs as you want in an Infinite space - an infinite number of them.

With an Infinite number of Finite Big bangs going on you immediately hit Olbers Paradox, but on a bigger scale. The night sky would be blindingly bright from all the Big Bangs going on around you.

Its easier and more sensible to asume the Big Bang created Spacetime and everything else to stop bumping into these silly infinities.

Apologies if that reads badly. I'll explain better if you need me to.

Consider the perspective Big Bang explosion took place then everything should be receding even now.Which is true since everything is moving and receding. But now note that everything in universe has unique shape thats most commonly elliptical and flat in big sense why is that, is there some other force which are acting for these to happen.

I am not sure that the most common shape is flat and elliptical. Stars are generally oblate spheroids - squashed balls. Galaxies are either Elliptical or Spiral. Elliptical galaxies are really just bigger oblate spheroids. Spiral Galaxies are shaped more like flat and elliptical, but Spirals vary between the Grand Design Sa shapes to very irregular Sc galaxies. Why you get the two basic shapes is a matter still open to debate AFAIK.

Lin-Shu Density wave theory largely explains the shapes of Spirals but I am not aware of, or have forgotten, any models for Elliptical shape and formation.

So only a fraction of observed structures are flat and elliptical - the Sc galaxies.

Gravity and conservation of momentum explains the shape of anything else.

In a explosion most matter will be found on outer rim : of the explosion or on the brim concentric circles of huge shock waves . Then considering this idealogy is there more matter in outer rim of the uinverse.

This is where things get hairy. The Universe has no edge or outer rim. Its a closed, boundless geometry.

To understand that requires you to visualise a 4 dimensional hyper-sphere. I can't do it and I suspect you can't either. Look around some of the excellent Cosmology web pages for more details. Specifically look at Ned Wrights Cosmology Tutorial and John Baez Mathematical Finds for the day.

An example of a closed, boundless surface is the surface of a ball. Its closed (doe snot extend to infinity) but has no distinct edge to it, no boundary. Scale that into 4 dimensions and you have the Universe.

Some people would have you believe the Universe has 11 or possibly 27 dimensions. They may be right (and who am I to argue with Drs. Green and Kaku) but 4 dimensions is what we deal with.

But as far we look into universe we find everything is well distrubuted or is it isn't.

The bummer is, the Universe seems to have structure. Great walls of Galaxies megaparsecs large have been found. Large voids between galactic clusters have been observed.

One of the wackier prediction of Inflationary Cosmology is that our light Horizon ~ 15 Billion Years, is only a tiny fraction of the real size of the Universe. On larger scales the Universe should have no structure.

Yelmalio - Oh! Donuts!

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins