How is it possible for the Big Bang to come from nowhere? Did it just explode for now reason?
436669
The argument is as logical for a big band happening "from nothing" as a God to exist "from nothing".\n\nI personally don't have a problem with there always having been matter in the universe and the big bang being more or less spontaneous.
500585
current consensus is that it was the result of the big bang. No one knows what caused the big bang but the evidence seems rather conclusive. \n\nOne might say God caused the big bang but no one knows the mechanism that he used.
847665
In my point of view, the Big Bang is incorrect solely from the wording of the title of the theory. A Bang implies an explosion which has to have an epicenter of sorts and an explosion as implied with enough power to spread the universe over billions of years, gravity or not, is mathematically improbable, because the force needed to spread the universe would have eradicated the universe. Thus, a trough effect will have to take place with anti gravity of unimaginable power to start the big crunch. The entire theory is based on the assumption that the universe of finite space and finite time. If Space time is in fact infinite as assumed by many, than the theory is off, but could be construed as a continuing cycle. If the big bang happens, then the big crunch, and then the big bang and so on is in fact a continuous cycle, than the big bang can in fact be correct.
258481
The Big Bang almost CERTAINLY occurred. The cosmic microwave background radiation, expansion of galaxies, and isotropy of the background radiation throughout the universe all seem to indicated that the Big Bang really did occur. The cosmic microwave background radiation is usually the strongest piece of evidence presented by scientists to "prove" the Big Bang. Other than the Big Bang theory there are no really acceptable theories other than those which rely on the metaphysical or religious. For a thorough explanation of why the Big Bang almost certainly did occur, see the following link.
1067093
Order doesn't come out of chaos. In other words, a big chaotic bang didn't create the complex human being and the world with all its amazing attributes. So, we know something created us. Either an "accident" (the big bang) or an intentional act by someone/something ("Creator"). And honestly, which makes more sense? I find it irrational to believe that an explosion of gases in outerspace could produce human beings and animals and even something like a snowflake.
976621
In a word, no.\nWhen you look that far away, you are looking back into time to the beginning of the universe.\nBut if the universe did originate from the big bang, i.e, a point source singularity, then all of the observable universe that far away was one point (or relatively close to it)!  So what would it really mean for the big bang to have come from a certain direction?  It came from all directions!\nObservations made that far away are made in the infra-red and microwave also.  It forms the 2.7°K background radiation.  This background radiation is not uniform, but it is also not as polarized as you may think. It does form the dipole anisotropy, but is not in general due to the big bang.\nSee:\nhttp://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101Flucts.html
1108644
this is actually a common misconception about the big bang.  the big bang theory says that spacetime itself originated in that event.  the big bang theory is supported by evidence very well.  no other theory or hypothesis is.\n\nread these:\nhttp://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147\nhttp://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html
1047002
Why is it hard for people to believe that someone bigger than us created a masterpiece? This all leads into the question, Is there a God? If the big bang theory was true, what caused the big bang? I don't see things just happening all around me for no reason. When you plant a seed it grows. But you have to plant the seed first. \nBabies don't just happen. They have to be conceived. The point I'm trying to make is that if we have to react in order to get a reaction, why would it be any different from the beginning? Someone HAD to create us or nothing would be possible.
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.
602699
where did the first energy came from, to produce the BIG BANG. Becaseu there is that law, that there is no perpetum mobile, meaning, that everything needs the first impulse of energy. further, energy can be exchanged and such, but not produced from nothing. so how could the big bang happen out of nothing.
831523
When there was nothing there was probably no light. My favourite theory (because I can undestand it) is that "nothing" is actually a "quantum foam" of matter and anti-matter popping in and out of existence continually. So 0=+1-1. There is experimental evidence for the existence of this quantum foam. Before the big bang the universe would have been an infinite "nothing" of quantum foam. However, each of these tiny matter/anti-matter formation/anihilation events would produce a tiny gravitational wave. Over (infinite) time these gravitational waves could grow by constructive interference until a huge gravitational wave (rather like the occasional huge freak waves in our oceans) produced the special conditions required to trigger the big bang and caused a huge separation of matter and anti-matter. So the "spark" was simply a result of random noise eventually building to the point to set things off.\n\nI have a personal theory that the "virtual" gravity caused by the quantum foam might explain the missing dark matter and/or dark energy in our universe.
169798
With only your vague description to go on and a year you arent sure of, it is very hard to ansswer your question, but I assure you, you did not see the "biggest explosion since big bang".\n\nPerhaps it was a meteor exploding in the atmosphere?
313486
your answer is in \nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
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?
801365
Technically it would probably be wrong to say the original matter in the universe was smaller than a grain of sand. The big band is the start of the universe, according to scientists. It's the start of the 4 dimensions(3 dimensions of space and one dimension of time). It's the beginning of all matter and energy. What was there before the big bang? Nothing(if you don't believe in God). So what was it that exploded in the big bang? It couldn't have been the grain of sand sized speck of matter because all matter was a result or bi-product of the big bang. Whatever exploded had to be there before the explosion but matter didn't exist before the explosion. It was a bi-product of the explosion. So, what exploded? Nothing exploded. That, in essense, is what the big bang theory says.........nothing exploded and in the process everything was created. Everything was created out of nothing.\n  You might say "but don't christians believe everything was created out of nothing". Yes. I (as a christian) believe that God created the whole universe out of nothing. He literally spoke it into existence. God said "let there be light and there was light" or so it says in Genesis chapter 1. You say "then what's the difference"? The difference is that the atheists is saying that everything came from nothing and no one since he doesn't believe in a supreme being. Christians believe that everything came from nothing but NOT from no one. There was a God there to make it happen.\n  I guess another problem I have with the big bang is that you have unbelievable order and design coming from an explosion.\nExplode a grenade sometime and when all of the metal pieces fall back to the ground, see it you have a rolex watch lying there.
608005
The universe does NOT have a center. The main reason lots of people think that it must have one is because they think of the Big Bang as an explosion. It wasn't! An explosion happens inside something else, and there's no evidence whatsoever that our universe is inside anything.\n\nStart with an infinite absolute void--no matter, no energy, no space, no time, absolutely nothing. Then, somehow, the Big Bang event occurs. Only then did space come into existence. We can then say that the Big Bang happened everywhere at once. To claim otherwise we'd have to assume that there was some other "where" before the Big Bang.\n\nA geometric form without a center isn't hard to imagine. Think of the SURFACE of a perfect sphere. Where's its center? Of course, there isn't any.\n\nThe fancy words for these things that are so hard to comprehend are 'homogeneous' and 'isotropic.' The first word describes something that is everywhere the same. The latter word means that no matter where you are within that something it looks the same in all directions.
571217
You misunderstand the Big Bang theory. The universe did not start from a big ball of matter. For the first 10-34 seconds we simply don't have the physcis figured out as to what happened. There are many conjectures, though.\n\nThe first difficulty is that General Relativity predicts something called a singularity at the Big Bang. A singularity is something like what you see at the north pole. There is no 'north of the north pole' simply because the coordinate system can't be extended that way. Under General Relativity, there is no 'before the Big Bang' because thw time coordinate cannot be extended past that point. Remember that time itself is part of the structure of the universe, so time began when the universe did (in this view).\n\nAnother view is obtained through quantum mechanics. We know that modern vacuums are never completely empty. They are a blur of particles apperaring and disappearing all the time. The state of having absolutely nothing is actually a very high energy state. When that state decayed into a lower energy state, that provided the energy that subsequently became the matter we see around us. In this scenario, the singularity predicted by relativity is blurred out by the quantum effects, but the net result is that all the matter literally came out of a vacuum. This is possible without violating conservation of energy because the vacuum state 'befroe the Big Bang' had a higher energy than all the matter we see around us.\n\nAnother possibility is a 'bouncing universe' where the universe goes through cycles of collapse and expansion. The collapse before the current cycle provided the energy for the current one. There are modifications to this where 'universes' bud off of the vacuums of other ones.\n\nAll of this is highly speculative. However, we do know that a Big Bang is how things got started about 13.7 billion years ago. We see the afterglow of the hot, dense time at the beginning all around us in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CBE).