Big bang, schmig bang: everything's just shrinking

  • Thread starter Namloh2000
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Big bang
In summary: Universe expanding and matter shrinking are two ways of looking at the same thing. Consider that our unit of distance is a matter of definition. We define the meter based upon how far light travels in a certain fraction of a second. If the universe were shrinking, then the distance between two points would decrease as time went on. Conversely, if the universe were expanding, the distance between two points would increase as time went on.
  • #36
Jack Martinelli said:
How about gravity? It's an observable & BB theory doesn't account for it. :wink:

If recession is accelerating, is it constant, increasing, or decreasing? How does this answer impact the age of the universe? Or CMBR?

Because there are some serious open questions related to BBT, I'm hesitant to say that such a thing actuall happened.

If it were the only drinking hole in town. That's where you'd find me. I'm a little pickier with my science.

All observations? How about the relative masses of the elementary particles?
DrChinese addressed your points well, I feel. However, I'd like to expand on one point: the scope, or domain, of a scientific theory.

In economics, there's a thing called the theory of comparative advantage, and it's pretty good in its domain of applicability (industries which countries engaged in free trade should concentrate on in order to maximise the economic benefits to each country). However, it's useless for accounting for the photosynthetic pathways in plants, or the spectrum of hydrogen. And biologists, physicists and economists are quite relaxed about this.

Similarly, in physics there's a thing called general relativity (GR), and it's pretty good in its domain. ... you get the picture I'm sure.

So, wrt the Big Bang theories (there's more than one), its domain of applicability is the large-scale structure (and some small scale structure) and evolution of the universe, at least from the time of radiation-(ordinary) matter decoupling if not from ~Planck time.

Then there's how 'fundamental' a theory is. Crudely, ecology is 'just' biology, which in turn is 'just' chemistry, ... until you get to GR and the QM/QFT/SM (Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Field Theory, the Standard Model); these two are the most fundamental theories we have. And, as has been noted many times in PF, there are regimes in which predictions of each are in serious conflict. The BBT is 'just' a theory built on GR and the SM, it does not supercede either, nor does it set out to. Some of its predictions may turn out to be very good tests of either GR or the SM ... let's see. Some of its components have strange new things - dark energy for example - but they are not things which 'overthrow' GR or the SM.

Your question about 'recession' is a good one; I'll address it in another post.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #37
Jack Martinelli said:
I'm a little pickier with my science.
So what do you pick as an alternative?
 
  • #38
How does big bang theory not account for gravity? it comes from what could be seen as a theory of gravity (GR) and gravity plays key roles in nearly all of it's equations.
 
  • #39
russ_watters said:
So what do you pick as an alternative?

Nothing yet.

Until someone derives the 26(http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/constants.html) fundamental constants from a fundamental idea, I won't accept anything.

The fundamentally correct idea, I think is: For every change there is an equal but opposite change.
 
  • #40
Jack Martinelli said:
The fundamentally correct idea, I think is: For every change there is an equal but opposite change.
Why a binary world? Why not "for every change there are 10100 equal and opposite changes"? :wink:
 
  • #41
Nereid said:
Why a binary world? Why not "for every change there are 10100 equal and opposite changes"? :wink:

Its not symetric. I don't know that the universe is actually symetric, but I think its a pretty good guess.
 
  • #42
jcsd said:
How does big bang theory not account for gravity? it comes from what could be seen as a theory of gravity (GR) and gravity plays key roles in nearly all of it's equations.

Well, the obvious answer to that is that GR essentially preceded the modern theory of the Big Bang. It is not dependent on it any way. Rather, the BB leads to predicted evolution of the universe according to GR. GR could be valid and the BB not be, because of the independence of the two.

Yet they both fit neatly with observations.
 
  • #43
Severian596 said:
The type of red**** that cosmologists observe affects every star/galaxy outside our own...every one.
I just realized I said red**** instead of redshift...oh **** I did it again.


Okay, am i looking for redshift or redgarbage?!..Cosmology is so confusing!
 
  • #44
This is a six year old thread.
 
<h2>1. What is the "Big Bang" theory?</h2><p>The Big Bang theory is a scientific explanation for the origin and evolution of the universe. It states that approximately 13.8 billion years ago, all matter and energy in the universe was compressed into an incredibly small, dense point called a singularity. This singularity then expanded rapidly, creating the universe as we know it today.</p><h2>2. How does the "Big Bang" theory relate to the idea of everything shrinking?</h2><p>The "Big Bang" theory and the idea of everything shrinking are two separate concepts. The "Big Bang" theory explains the expansion of the universe from a singularity, while the idea of everything shrinking suggests that the universe is actually getting smaller. There is no scientific evidence to support the idea of everything shrinking.</p><h2>3. What evidence supports the "Big Bang" theory?</h2><p>There are several lines of evidence that support the "Big Bang" theory, including the cosmic microwave background radiation, the abundance of light elements in the universe, and the observed expansion of the universe. Additionally, the theory is supported by mathematical models and observations of distant galaxies.</p><h2>4. Are there any alternative theories to the "Big Bang" theory?</h2><p>Yes, there are alternative theories to the "Big Bang" theory, such as the steady state theory and the oscillating universe theory. However, these theories have been largely discredited due to lack of evidence and inconsistencies with scientific observations.</p><h2>5. How does the "Big Bang" theory impact our understanding of the universe?</h2><p>The "Big Bang" theory has greatly impacted our understanding of the universe and has led to many advancements in cosmology and astrophysics. It has helped explain the formation of galaxies, stars, and planets, and has provided a framework for understanding the evolution of the universe. Additionally, the theory has inspired further research and exploration into the mysteries of the universe.</p>

1. What is the "Big Bang" theory?

The Big Bang theory is a scientific explanation for the origin and evolution of the universe. It states that approximately 13.8 billion years ago, all matter and energy in the universe was compressed into an incredibly small, dense point called a singularity. This singularity then expanded rapidly, creating the universe as we know it today.

2. How does the "Big Bang" theory relate to the idea of everything shrinking?

The "Big Bang" theory and the idea of everything shrinking are two separate concepts. The "Big Bang" theory explains the expansion of the universe from a singularity, while the idea of everything shrinking suggests that the universe is actually getting smaller. There is no scientific evidence to support the idea of everything shrinking.

3. What evidence supports the "Big Bang" theory?

There are several lines of evidence that support the "Big Bang" theory, including the cosmic microwave background radiation, the abundance of light elements in the universe, and the observed expansion of the universe. Additionally, the theory is supported by mathematical models and observations of distant galaxies.

4. Are there any alternative theories to the "Big Bang" theory?

Yes, there are alternative theories to the "Big Bang" theory, such as the steady state theory and the oscillating universe theory. However, these theories have been largely discredited due to lack of evidence and inconsistencies with scientific observations.

5. How does the "Big Bang" theory impact our understanding of the universe?

The "Big Bang" theory has greatly impacted our understanding of the universe and has led to many advancements in cosmology and astrophysics. It has helped explain the formation of galaxies, stars, and planets, and has provided a framework for understanding the evolution of the universe. Additionally, the theory has inspired further research and exploration into the mysteries of the universe.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
898
  • Cosmology
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
738
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top