By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
FaRmLaNd on 20 July 2011
Edit Thread
Dr.Grass said:
FaRmLaNd said:
The big bang isn't a who. With that minor quibble aside, I certainly think the big bang is the most credible explanation that currently exists. Its actually supported by data!


There are too many people spewing their hateful comments here to reply to them all so I'll just comment on your rather neutral and common viewpoint...

As possibly the ONLY real physicist/mathematician on this site I have to tell you that:

1) The big-bang theory arose out of necessety, NOT BECAUSE IT WAS SUPPORTED BY DATA. The red-shift observed in light is NOT fully understood.

2) There are unsolvable problems in the model including; Singularity, origin of "Lumpiness", high-energy interactions etc.

3) THERE IS NO THEORY OF THE NUCLEUS. Read those words. There exists NO theory for the interaction between sub-nuclear particles. Models are built with data. We know next to nothing.

4) Modern Cosmology has WAY more assumptions and approximations than any of you seem to believe. The current model of the universe is certainly on shaky ground, and while it may prove to represent reality to some extent, it is not taken very seriously by many of the world's biggest brains.

So in short, STOP believing everything you see on BBC just because its made by someone with a PhD, and for heaven's sake LEAVE people alone who believe in a divine creator - ESPECIALLY if they aren't fanatic.

Taking all of your points at face value, which is something I must since I'm no physicist. I simply said most credible currently and supported by data. That statement still stands, regardless of how shaky it may or may not be. I don't expect science to understand everything and I have no problems with details and theories changing over time, science is self correcting for a reason.

This is important due to the fact that this thread contrasts something that has some data to back it up even if as you say our understanding is very incomplete,tentative and subject to change with something that has absoutely no data to back it up and poor arguments irrespective of the lack of data.

This is a thread that contrasts God with the Big Bang, arguments are going to happen and offense will be taken. So what?