COBE satelite strongest evidence of the big bang ?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the implications of the COBE satellite data for the Big Bang theory versus alternative models, particularly the steady-state theory. Participants explore whether the evidence from COBE's measurements of cosmic background radiation supports the Big Bang theory or if it leaves room for other interpretations regarding the universe's existence and the nature of time.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether the COBE satellite data definitively proves the Big Bang theory or supports the idea that the universe has always existed.
  • One participant notes that research groups pursuing steady-state alternatives shifted their focus after the COBE data was released, suggesting a significant impact on the scientific community's stance.
  • Another participant mentions that more recent satellites, such as Planck, have provided higher resolution measurements consistent with the Big Bang scenario, implying ongoing support for this model.
  • There is a discussion about the limitations of satellite launches and the necessity for improved technology to achieve more accurate measurements.
  • One participant argues that the fluctuations in background radiation observed by COBE align with expectations from the Big Bang model, indicating that both the main signal and the noise are consistent with this theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of COBE data, with some suggesting it strongly supports the Big Bang theory while others raise questions about its definitive proof and the validity of alternative models. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the extent to which COBE data influences belief in the Big Bang versus other theories.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the evolving nature of evidence in cosmology, with references to older data from COBE and newer findings from Planck and WMAP. There are indications of assumptions regarding the interpretation of background radiation and its implications for cosmological models.

land_of_ice
Messages
136
Reaction score
0
So now, do big most bang beleivers and non beleivers think the COBE satelite really proves one way or another the validity of the big bang theory as opposed to the theory that the universe has always existed and that time is a man made concept? Essentially, Is the argument swayed one way or another based on the evidence of the back ground radiation of the COBE satelite ?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Let me put it this way: The few research groups that were still pursuing alternative steady-state alternatives to Big Bang "switched teams" after seeing the data from COBE.

Also, the data from COBE is nearly 20 years old. More recent satellites (e.g Planck) have performed measurements with much higher resolution; all the data is -not surprisingly- consistent with the Big Bang scenario.
 
f95toli said:
Let me put it this way: The few research groups that were still pursuing alternative steady-state alternatives to Big Bang "switched teams" after seeing the data from COBE.

Also, the data from COBE is nearly 20 years old. More recent satellites (e.g Planck) have performed measurements with much higher resolution; all the data is -not surprisingly- consistent with the Big Bang scenario.

There is newer research? Other than Planck or is that the only one? How is it consistent with the big bang?
 
Well, before Planck there was WMAP (around 2002 or so). But we are talking about satellites here, it is not like we can afford to launch that many of them.
Besides, the only real reason to launch a new satellite is because the technology has improved to a point where one can perform measurements that are significantly more accurate/sensitive than previous measurements.

The data is consistent with Big Bang because the fluctuations in the background radiation seen by COBE are exactly what you would expect from looking at the large scale structure of the universe today (some 13.8 billion years after Big Bang).
It has long been been generally accepted that the background radiation is a remnant of Big Bang, what COBE showed was that not only the "main signal" (the temperature) but also the "noise" are consistent with Big Bang.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Does the Cosmological Principle in any way underpin Big Bang Theory?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
High School Big Crunch, Big Bang and information loss
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
Undergrad Is the Big Bang Actually a White Hole?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
Undergrad What evidence supports the validity of the Big Bang theory?
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
16K
Graduate Evidence that time and space began at the instant of the big
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad Penrose's Latest Paper on CCC: Evidence or Wishful Thinking?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
9K
Undergrad DDO 68: A Young Galaxy Supporting the Steady State Theory
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
High School Do we still live in a Big Bang Singularity?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Undergrad Big Bang timing: according to what frame of reference?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Undergrad What Evidence Exists for the Universe Before the Cosmic Microwave Background?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K