| o_O.Q said: i'm not even saying that i think the theory is wrong or whatever, i just wouldn't put it on the same level as gravity since there's less evidence we deal with directly |
I see what you're saying. Since we directly experience gravity it seems so intuitive that what goes up must come down. But we run into indirect measurements when we attempt to quantitatively describe gravity. We're not actually measuring the acceleration of an object toward the earth; we're usually measuring the time it takes for an item to hit the ground from a certain distance. This requires rulers, stopwatches, and mathematics. Then we can go back "in time" and show that at a specific point, say 1 meter from the ground, the object had a velocity of x and an acceleration of y. I know that the Big Bang theory is much less intuitive, but the same process occurs. We're still using mathematics, but this time our apparatus is an antenna or telescope. And similarly, we can use the model to extrapolate what happened in the past.
