How can one accept the Big Bang Theory when there was nothing? Nothing to explode?
440137
Repeat after me:\n\n"There is no explosion in the Big Bang theory, only expansion."\n\nThe name "Big Bang" was actually originated by opponents of the theory, and unfortunate name as the theory involves no "bang" at all.
798075
You're absolutely right, and the Big Bang has a remarkable way of not violating that law.\n\nExpirements have been done lately that prove that a particle, such as an electron, can be spontaneously created along with an anti-electron, or a positron. In the universe, both particles exist, both have mass, but should they colide, they would colapse into nothing-ness again. \n\nThe Big Bang could have been exactly such an event, but on a macro, or very large scale. Matter and anti-matter exist, and both might make up our universe. That satisfies the law of conservation of mass, as everything particle in the universe has an anti-particle. The net energy and net mass is zero.
343027
Yup - its the Big Bang alright. But I think i wwill agree with Stephen Hawking on this one .. Whilst God is not necessary to explain the Big Bang, all the theories break down prior to the first fraction of a second. I guess until with have the GUT (Grand Unified Theory) we cannot reject the idea of a higher power kciking it all off.\n\nI will ask this though.. if it was a creator or an Energy (that was already there) - Who created the creator?\n\nIan
941884
It's a big mystery. I have read that initially, at the onset of the Big Bang, all the matter of the universe existed as a singularity that was infinitely dense and it, suddenly, expanded several times the speed of light. Once the expansion, or explosion, occurred the mass was no longer homogenous, but was clumped together, which can explain the formation of the planets, stars, etc. It's funny that all the big brains of the scientific community can tell you what happened .1, .01, .001 seconds (and so on) after the big bang, but none of them can tell you what occured the half second before.
990294
The scientific theory is that the Universe started as a fluctuation of the vacuum. Such vacuum fluctuations make appear a small amount of energy, for a small time. This phenomenon is responsible for the existence of forces, that hold the Universe and matter together.\n\nNormally the bigger the energy fluctuation, the smaller the time it is in existence.\n\nNot so the Big Bang. That was a HUGE fluctuation. So big that a lot of energy came to appearance in the form of mass, elementary particles. These particles started expanding, before the vacuum could reclaim the energy.\n\nAnd it is still expanding today. 14 billion years later.\n\nThe Big Bang theory itself, doesn't say anything about the *cause* of the explosion. It describes only how the Universe evolved after the explosion took place.\n\nNow for some speculation. Is our Universe the only one? Maybe not. The Big Bang was one big fluctuation, maybe other smaller or bigger, take place all the time.\nBut most of these fluctuations will produce Universes in which conditions are just not suitable for life.\nThe Universe we observe is by necessity one in which the conditions are just right for us to have evolved into Homo Sapiens capable of asking philosophical questions.
588112
Just check this link and go thru the following article also\n\nhttp://www.big-bang-theory.com/\n\nBig Bang Theory - The Premise\nThe Big Bang theory is an effort to explain what happened at the very beginning of our universe. Discoveries in astronomy and physics have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that our universe did in fact have a beginning. Prior to that moment there was nothing; during and after that moment there was something: our universe. The big bang theory is an effort to explain what happened during and after that moment. \n\nAccording to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know. \n\nAfter its initial appearance, it apparently inflated (the "Big Bang"), expanded and cooled, going from very, very small and very, very hot, to the size and temperature of our current universe. It continues to expand and cool to this day and we are inside of it: incredible creatures living on a unique planet, circling a beautiful star clustered together with several hundred billion other stars in a galaxy soaring through the cosmos, all of which is inside of an expanding universe that began as an infinitesimal singularity which appeared out of nowhere for reasons unknown. This is the Big Bang theory. \n\nBig Bang Theory - Common Misconceptions\nThere are many misconceptions surrounding the Big Bang theory. For example, we tend to imagine a giant explosion. Experts however say that there was no explosion; there was (and continues to be) an expansion. Rather than imagining a balloon popping and releasing its contents, imagine a balloon expanding: an infinitesimally small balloon expanding to the size of our current universe. \n\nAnother misconception is that we tend to image the singularity as a little fireball appearing somewhere in space. According to the many experts however, space didn't exist prior to the Big Bang. Back in the late '60s and early '70s, when men first walked upon the moon, "three British astrophysicists, Steven Hawking, George Ellis, and Roger Penrose turned their attention to the Theory of Relativity and its implications regarding our notions of time. In 1968 and 1970, they published papers in which they extended Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to include measurements of time and space.1, 2 According to their calculations, time and space had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy."3 The singularity didn't appear in space; rather, space began inside of the singularity. Prior to the singularity, nothing existed, not space, time, matter, or energy - nothing. So where and in what did the singularity appear if not in space? We don't know. We don't know where it came from, why it's here, or even where it is. All we really know is that we are inside of it and at one time it didn't exist and neither did we. \n\nBig Bang Theory - Evidence for the Theory\nWhat are the major evidences which support the Big Bang theory? \n\nFirst of all, we are reasonably certain that the universe had a beginning. \nSecond, galaxies appear to be moving away from us at speeds proportional to their distance. This is called "Hubble's Law,"
1106396
err the big bang was not really a a collision of matter. All mass and energy in the universe existed at a sigularity, or a dimensionless point. The Big Bang simply expanded and inflated it.
936861
1. before the Big Bang there was nobody anywhere to observe anything\n2. A qauzilionth of a second after the Big Bang, the Universe had already more or less the present size. The entire Universe that is, the visual Universe is always bending into itself (proved by Einstein is his 'Cosmological Considerations on the Special Theory')
505719
Cheerleader101,\n    Let us go on a bit on the scientific track.  Have you heard about the famous 'Big Bang Theory'?  It says that the Universe was in the beginning a condensed mass which shrank and shrank inwards.  When it could now shrink any more becoming a condensed mass of great pressure, it burst and thus ever expanding Universe was created. This explosion of immeasurable magnitude is called by the scietists who formulated this theory as Big Bang.  \n    Let us now go on the track of Ancient Vedic Wisdom propagated by the Rishis(Indian Saints) of india.  About 4000BC, in the Upanishads, Rishis wrote:  "Asade Vedamagra. Thad Aseeth. Thadandam Niravarthathaya. Thad Visphotayatha. Rajatham cha Suvarnam Abhavath." This is Sanskrit which means :In the Beginning there was mothing.  From nothing existence was born.  And it became a round mass and it began to shrink.  Then when it could not shrink anymore, it exploded" .  This is the simple and plain meaning.  Great amount of explanations and details lie behind these utterances of Rishis.\n    I will write about this in detail later!\n         Mukundan Pallipravan
998293
i'll try to explain it in layman's term as much as i can, the universe does not have a fix boundary according to the big bang theory because it is continously expanding.  we can never reach this boundary since we have to travel faster than the speed of light in order to reach it.  in other words we will never know when the universe ends since there is not enough mass at this point to bring it to a crunch as matter equals gravity.  some mass is missing to bring this collapse it is at a point where there is just about enought mass to keep it expanding and to keep it from collapsing.  plus it is multidimensional and we are only 3 dimensional creatures therefore no matter what we do we can never fathom it as we are limited by our senses.  hope this helps...
126342
There is hard, physical evidence that the Big Bang happened. There is NO hard, physical evidence that the god of the Bible existed, exists, or will ever exist.\n\nBUT..! Belief in a supreme being of some kind is a logical belief that can exist right along with the Big Bang. Most physicists and cosmologists agree that there are no physical (as in physics)constraints that can disallow a Big Bang. Something from nothing happens constantly in the vacuum of space!!!!! At sizes smaller than a proton, so-called virtual particles pop into existence all the time. Quantum physics has shown that at these infinitesimal sizes immense amounts of energy exist which can easily "produce" new matter from nothing. The bottom line is that these physical laws exist, and the next question any reasonable person would ask is who or what made these laws, the same physical rules that make a Big Bang possible?
75867
According to the Big Bang Theory, time started during the Big Bang, and since there was no time before the big bang, there is no such thing as "before the big bang".
8125
The big Bang theory is when two big things bang together and create a mess of things.  Sort of like when Roseanne Bar and Tom Arnold got together.
394306
There is no answer to this question within the context of which it is asked.  The theory that the universe is finite but boundaryless is groundless at best having been built from many accepted, yet untried, pre-existing theories of the universe.  \n\nThis theory should be more approprately viewed as the culmination of everything we do not know about the universe, and is tied entirely to a singular perspective. Yet it is accepted as fact by many within the scientific community and elsewhere.\n\nBased on our current technological capabilities and observations of the universe we have no business asking science this type of question.  In turn it is irresponsible of science to supply any type of response with conviction and confidence.  \n\nTheories such as this one are no different than the assertions of any religion;  they require an enormous amount of faith to be accepted.\n\nBottom line:  your guess is just as good as anyone's.
29022
Accually, indepandent,the big bang theroy would work if two things.it had proof and it accually explained were matter came from.what was there before the bang that caused the bang?the universe expanding thing isnt even prooven.But if u read the Bible, it says that God made everything.EVERYTHING. INCLUDING TIME and SPACE.God was and is not bound to time.know y? because He made it.our mind cant comprehend it,and thats no surprise.\nanywho, the big bang theroy does not support the beginning of the universe because the bang was caused by something.\n\nP.S.about evolution--it is allready disprooved by simply the second law of thermodynamics.nothing gets from bad to good, like life forms(ape like to human).it all just gets worse.and it has.
846148
From what I have read, what happened before the big bang has no effect on the universe and therefore can not be theorized about.\n\nOr, as Stephen Hawking said in "A Briefer History of Time"\n\n"All our theories of cosmology are formulated on the assumption that space_time is smooth and nearly flat. That means that all our theories break down at the big bang: a space_time with infinite curvature can hardly be called nearly flat! Thus even if there were events before the big bang, we could not use them to determine what would happen afterward, because predictability would have broken down at the big bang.\n\nCorrespondingly, if, as is the case, we know only what has happened since the big bang, we cannot determine what happened beforehand. As far as we are concerned, events before the big bang can have no consequences and so should not form part of a scientific model of the universe. We should therefore cut them out of the model and say that the big bang was the beginning of time. This means that questions such as who set up the conditions for the big bang are not questions that science addresses."
373295
This is probably more a philosophical question than scientific one, as it is (currently) impossible to prove.  The answer, then, is a matter of faith.  If you are religious, and believe in an eternal God, then there has always been something, but not the present universe (which, by definition, would have to exists "in" God, as that being is without boundaries and could not be contained).\n\nIf you are not religion-bound, then you can argue either point.  The Big Bang theory only speaks about what happened after the inception of the universe, not what was present before.