Started By
Message
re: Do you accept the notion of the Big Bang as the origin of our universe?
Posted on 1/6/18 at 7:06 pm to Paul B Ammer
Posted on 1/6/18 at 7:06 pm to Paul B Ammer
quote:
I think you misspoke slightly. You would never actually be able to see the BB itself. For some undetermined amount of time after the BB the entire universe was opaque. It was a sea of individual atoms that were still superheated but did not emit light in the former of photons.
Semantics, I suppose. The goal is to see as close to the point of origin as possible. Just being able to look back to the first light will add validity to the BBT.
At the point of origin, even atoms couldn't form. There was a just plasma soup that was so hot that even the forces of the Standard Model were unified.
quote:
Scientists have pretty much confirmed the BB with the discovery of Cosmic Background Radiation which -simply put- is the leftover heat from the BB.
But of course this isn't the only evidence. I posted this earlier in the thread.
2
Posted on 1/6/18 at 7:20 pm to Kentucker
When I got to college (yes I am aware it was a long time ago) 3 things changed most of what I though and still think about today
Lobachevskian Geometry
Gravity Waves
Entropy and Thermodynamics
Big Bang theory is easy to accept but seems less discussion on how it will all end. Seems I once read we spend more to operate a local fast food joint than we do to look for objects that will create an ELE.
Lobachevskian Geometry
Gravity Waves
Entropy and Thermodynamics
Big Bang theory is easy to accept but seems less discussion on how it will all end. Seems I once read we spend more to operate a local fast food joint than we do to look for objects that will create an ELE.
Posted on 1/6/18 at 9:58 pm to Kentucker
Kentucker (or anyone else) do you have any thoughts on the following:
I have no problem accepting two up quarks and one down quark forming a proton given the conditions immediately after the BB. However, I have trouble seeing how an equivalent number of neutrons could form given that the two negatively charged down particles that (along with an up particle) compose it would be more likely to repulse themselves than unite.
It seems to me that you would have a universe with more stand-alone protons than protons that have combined with neutrons. Yet we only see proton neutron pairs or extra neutrons attached. Where did all the protons go?
I have no problem accepting two up quarks and one down quark forming a proton given the conditions immediately after the BB. However, I have trouble seeing how an equivalent number of neutrons could form given that the two negatively charged down particles that (along with an up particle) compose it would be more likely to repulse themselves than unite.
It seems to me that you would have a universe with more stand-alone protons than protons that have combined with neutrons. Yet we only see proton neutron pairs or extra neutrons attached. Where did all the protons go?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News