Is the Big Bang theory flawed?

  • Thread starter Relena
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Big bang
In summary: In short, the BB theory assumes that the universe was always infinite in size but not always as dense and hot as it is today.In summary, the big bang theory suggests that the universe began from a hot and dense point approximately 13.7 billion years ago. It also assumes that the universe is symmetrical, but there are many observed asymmetries. While the theory is well-founded and supported by evidence, it is possible that it could be proven wrong or have some specific parts that are incorrect. If this were to happen, the theory would be revised or replaced with a better fitting model. However, currently there is no alternate model that better explains all the observed data.
  • #1
Relena
52
0
Can the "big bang" be wrong?

The bing bang theory simply states that there was a point at which the time limit of all frames tends to zero ,then it exploded (I think) and the universe was created. then it is supposed that the total summation of forces , energy and matter distributions (just all physical quantities) be perfectly symmetric .

So why isn't the universe perfectly symmetric? What's wrong with my assumption?

And what would happen if it was proved that the bing bang was a mistake?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2


Relena said:
The bing bang theory simply states that there was a point at which the time limit of all frames tends to zero ,then it exploded (I think)

There was no explosion.

Relena said:
and the universe was created. then it is supposed that the total summation of forces , energy and matter distributions (just all physical quantities) be perfectly symmetric .

So why isn't the universe perfectly symmetric? What's wrong with my assumption?

There are plenty of asymmetries. Decoupling of the forces, Matter/Anti-Matter asymmetry (One billion and one matter particles for every billion anti-matter particles), energy density (Variations in about one part in a hundred thousand after inflation), time asymmetry. Why do you have the idea that it has to be perfectly symmetric?

Relena said:
And what would happen if it was proved that the bing bang was a mistake?
Do you mean that there is a slight mistake with the current model? Then the change is incorporated and the model is improved. Or do you mean that the big-bang didn't occur and there was no start to the universe 13.7 billion years ago from a hot dense point? Well this is sort of like asking "What would happen if evolution was proved wrong?" or "What would happen if the periodicity in chemistry was proved wrong?". In any case, the respective fields would be completely turned over, but the the theories are so well founded that this is hard for me to imagine.
 
  • #3


Well, the universe may not be perfectly symmetrical (homogeneous is a better word), but it is homogeneous to an extremely high degree - about 99.999%. Here's a recent thread on that subject: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=238736

As to your question in the title: the Big Bang can certainly be wrong, but with so much evidence for it, the likelyhood of it being completely wrong is pretty small. But it is very likely that some specific parts of the theory are wrong.
 
  • #4


Of course the big bang theory could be wrong. It's merely the best fit to date. You need only propose a model that better fits observational evidence.
 
  • #5


nicksauce said:
Do you mean that there is a slight mistake with the current model? Then the change is incorporated and the model is improved. Or do you mean that the big-bang didn't occur and there was no start to the universe 13.7 billion years ago from a hot dense point? Well this is sort of like asking "What would happen if evolution was proved wrong?" or "What would happen if the periodicity in chemistry was proved wrong?". In any case, the respective fields would be completely turned over, but the the theories are so well founded that this is hard for me to imagine.

And, what if the universe is non-homogenous at the largest scales and displays a fractal matter distribution? Can you imagine that?

Is it as much a death blow to the Big Bang as pundits claim, if the latest results are upheld? If so, what next? Talk about a 'crisis in cosmology'... ;o]

"Umm, yeah, our model just blew up," *blank look* "we've got nothing..."

Kidding, mostly. Except that it's such a serious question.

<unsuitable links removed by cristo>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6


You have culled nothing of importance, merely hints of discordant observations. If you have a better model in mind, please share.
 
  • #7


Chronos said:
You have culled nothing of importance, merely hints of discordant observations. If you have a better model in mind, please share.
Worse, mgmirkin's sources are not even papers or conference proceedings!

You may wish to take some time to understand what PF is, mgmirkin, and how it works; 'science by press release' or 'science by cherry-picking popsci magazine articles' doesn't quite cut it.

ETA: worse squared ... mgmirkin, you do realize, don't you, that pulsars models and how individual stars form (for example) have essentially no connection with LCDM cosmological models?
 
Last edited:
  • #8


nicksauce said:
Or do you mean that the big-bang didn't occur and there was no start to the universe 13.7 billion years ago from a hot dense point?

With all respect but the universe did not "start" 13.7 billion year ago, which does not mean that the BB theory is wrong, only your description of it. However small, the (observable) universe was never the size of a point.
 

1. Is the big bang theory a proven fact or just a theory?

The big bang theory is currently the most widely accepted scientific explanation for the origin of the universe. While it is supported by a vast amount of evidence, including the cosmic microwave background radiation and the observed expansion of the universe, it is still considered a theory and subject to ongoing research and refinement.

2. What evidence supports the big bang theory?

Some of the key pieces of evidence that support the big bang theory include the cosmic microwave background radiation, the abundance of light elements in the universe, and the observed expansion of the universe. These observations are consistent with the idea that the universe began in a hot, dense state and has been expanding and cooling ever since.

3. Are there any alternative theories to the big bang?

While the big bang theory is the most widely accepted explanation for the origin of the universe, there are alternative theories that have been proposed. These include the steady state theory, which suggests that the universe has always existed in a constant state, and the oscillating universe theory, which proposes that the universe goes through cycles of expansion and contraction.

4. Could the big bang theory be proven wrong in the future?

Science is a constantly evolving field, and it is always possible that new evidence or discoveries could challenge or even disprove currently accepted theories. However, the big bang theory has withstood decades of scrutiny and continues to be supported by a vast amount of evidence, making it highly unlikely that it will be completely proven wrong in the future.

5. Does the big bang theory conflict with religious beliefs?

The big bang theory is a scientific explanation for the origin of the universe and does not necessarily conflict with religious beliefs. Many people of various faiths have found ways to reconcile the scientific understanding of the big bang with their religious beliefs. Ultimately, the relationship between science and religion is a complex and personal one that varies from individual to individual.

Similar threads

Replies
33
Views
1K
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
43
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
56
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top