raptors11 said:
|
In science a theory is as high an accolade an idea can achieve (at least in modern science, where the level of law is almost impossible to reach now). It requires volumes of evidence that had gone through rigorous peer review to support it and the support from thousands of scientists.
And to say there is no evidence for the big bang seems like a confusing and wrong claim to me. There is tonnes of evidence that the big bang theory was developed from. When we monitor other galaxies we can measures their rate of acceleration and direction from the shift in the apparent frequency of light (as with the doppler effect) and we find one thing, everything is moving away from each other and us. The only way this can be possible is for the Universe to be expanding. We've measured the rate of expansion and if we extrapolate the data backwards we find that at some point 13.7 billion years ago everything had to be part of a singularity before it exapanded. We call the moment of expansion from this singularity the big bang (it's just a catchy title, it was more of an expansion as opposed to explosion).
I can go on all day providing microwave background maps and analysing the abundance of Hydrogen, but I've got stuff to do. I just feel compelled to argue posts like these as I just love physics too much
. Sorry.







