Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

The Big Bang?

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 7:35am

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,853 posts

Knight

okay then how did life start? did it get its own big bang a mixture of elements that created a single celled organism? that cant be so. if there was a cell it would have to be during the beginning(the big bang) during the heated phase

Abiogenesis. No, since when does the cell have to be present in TBBT?

because if different bodies are being flung out by this expansion from the cosmic soup. causing all obits before the expansion to fall apart due to the new found acceleration there should be bodies orbiting one source at different angles(not distances i still dont know where you got that one) meaning that disk shape solar sytems, universes, etc. could happen but should be a rare occurrence  due to the fact that the angles have to be pretty close to each different body

It's not flung out. They coalesce and form into cosmic bodies in the aftermath.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 10:09am

partydevil

partydevil

5,091 posts

As for the rate it's expanding, that is actually increasing thanks to Dark Energy.

they got proof for dark energy now? that test few year ago was deemed false, right?

I include Pluto and always will)

Eris, our 10th planet ;)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/Eris_Orbit.svg/644px-Eris_Orbit.svg.png

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 10:12am

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,853 posts

Knight

Meh, it's a dwarf planet.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 10:23am

partydevil

partydevil

5,091 posts

Meh, it's a dwarf planet.

if we count pluto, we have to count eris. it has 27% more mass then pluto and comes as close as neptune to our sun.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 10:24am

partydevil

partydevil

5,091 posts

scrap that last part. it does not.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 10:37am

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,853 posts

Knight

Well, we don't count Pluto anymore, or those dwarves we know beyond Pluto.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 5:49pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,667 posts

Knight

they got proof for dark energy now? that test few year ago was deemed false, right?

it's all indirect observation unfortunately. It's required for the observed models of the universe to exist. It's relation to redshift (our observing that the universe expansion is increasing) is probable our best observation for it's existence. Some argue that it's our only true piece of evidence. The formation of stars, galaxies and such would indicate there is a lot more stuff out there that we aren't directly detecting.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 6:58pm

Getoffmydangle

Getoffmydangle

148 posts

Wow, Magegraywolf, if you are not a teacher you may have missed your calling... keep up the good work!

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 7:29pm

handlerfan

handlerfan

192 posts

I choose to present an alternative.
There was no Big Bang. There were simple life forms created in the primeval broth which grew more complex and developed brains that got more complex until from the primates emerged an animal that could look around this world and wonder how did all this come about. Then came the Big Bang Theory.

 

Posted Jan 3, '13 at 8:28pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,667 posts

Knight

I choose to present an alternative.
There was no Big Bang. There were simple life forms created in the primeval broth which grew more complex and developed brains that got more complex until from the primates emerged an animal that could look around this world and wonder how did all this come about. Then came the Big Bang Theory.

How is this an alternative to anything? If you want an alternative to the Big Bang you need to come up with something that fits the evidence that we observe for the Big Bang. There are alternatives to the Big Bang model, however the Big Bang model currently fits the observed evidence the best. That's why it's the most accepted model. Science isn't just pulling things out our *****.

 
Reply to The Big Bang?

You must be logged in to post a reply!