#### smsngklnci

are these answers Absolutely correct?physicists don't believe in the Big Bang and the singularity.don't believe in God.where did the universe come from?

#### Woody

As we have said before:
All Science (especially physics) is based on the current best guess.
The choice of which is "Best" is based on which best matches what we observe.
However the whole point of science is that all ideas are up for modification
(if and when a "better" idea comes along).

Thus it is considered proper scientific thinking to retain a certain amount of doubt about all current models.
Also any holes in the current models are where advances (and thus entry into the physics hall of fame) are likely.

There are recognized issues with the Big-Bang model as it currently stands
and physicists are constantly poking at these holes.

Last edited:
topsquark

#### benit13

Not quite.

Firstly, the reply states "The premise is true, there never was a Big Bang like science says it did", but then goes on to say "There is an origin of the universe, there must be, starting of course with nothing and then expanding". These are contradictory statements because the whole point of the big bang theory is to explain the expansion. Any theory that attempts to explain the rapid inflation of the very early universe is usually referred to as a 'big bang theory' because that's the key characteristic.

Just for the record, there has existed alternative cosmological models of the early universe that include expansion but do not have a big bang. However, those were discarded a long time ago because they do not match observations, like the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation or the Doppler imaging studies.

Secondly, the reply states that the factors that made this happen are "Just a few fundamental laws of nature and the properties of a perfect vacuum". However, cosmogenesis, which is the term ascribed to the processes occurring at the very earliest moment of the big bang, is almost completely unknown. At those earliest times, the laws of physics break down. Also, the Lambda Cold Dark Matter model ($$\displaystyle \Lambda$$-CDM), which is considered by many to be the best big bang theory in the literature, is not constructed from just a few fundamental laws and the properties of a vacuum.

However, the reply states that "this doesn't mean that the universe is eternal. Nor does it mean there is a god". That's correct. The big bang theory does not say anything about the fate of the universe or about god(s) or other religious entities.

---

A nice way to think of cosmology is this... it's a bit like crime-scene investigation.

In crime scene investigation, a bunch of events happened in the past (a crime), which yields a set of clues (a dead body, a wallet lying on the ground, footprints, DNA samples, fingerprints, etc.) and by studying those clues, it's possible to try and predict what happened. Eventually, through following up leads, not only can the detectives figure out what happened, but also identify the perpetrator so they can be caught.

In cosmology, "cosmogenesis" is a bit like the crime and the "big bang" is a bit like everything that happened after the crime, like expansion, cooling, matter-radiation decoupling, etc. Observations, like the CMB radiation studies, spectrometry of very old stars, distance measurements of very distant objects, population studies of very distant objects and mappings of very large-scale structures, are the clues.

However, whenever there is a crime scene, there is always a big possibility that the person died by accident. Only by investigation can one come to the conclusion that there might be a perpetrator. The same is true in cosmology; we know virtually nothing about cosmogenesis so nobody can definitely state whether there was a creator or not. Anyone who does is either speculating or lying.

Many people turn to cosmology to try to find proof of god. However, there is no scientific definition of god and cosmology concerns itself only with the laws of physics. I think if you're trying to look for proof of god, you're going to be very, very disappointed.

Last edited:

#### neila9876

"...physicists don't believe in the Big Bang and the singularity"
........................................
This old pig wonder who can on behalf of physicists?

#### smsngklnci

Not quite.

Firstly, the reply states "The premise is true, there never was a Big Bang like science says it did", but then goes on to say "There is an origin of the universe, there must be, starting of course with nothing and then expanding". These are contradictory statements because the whole point of the big bang theory is to explain the expansion. Any theory that attempts to explain the rapid inflation of the very early universe is usually referred to as a 'big bang theory' because that's the key characteristic.

Just for the record, there has existed alternative cosmological models of the early universe that include expansion but do not have a big bang. However, those were discarded a long time ago because they do not match observations, like the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation or the Doppler imaging studies.

Secondly, the reply states that the factors that made this happen are "Just a few fundamental laws of nature and the properties of a perfect vacuum". However, cosmogenesis, which is the term ascribed to the processes occurring at the very earliest moment of the big bang, is almost completely unknown. At those earliest times, the laws of physics break down. Also, the Lambda Cold Dark Matter model ($$\displaystyle \Lambda$$-CDM), which is considered by many to be the best big bang theory in the literature, is not constructed from just a few fundamental laws and the properties of a vacuum.

However, the reply states that "this doesn't mean that the universe is eternal. Nor does it mean there is a god". That's correct. The big bang theory does not say anything about the fate of the universe or about god(s) or other religious entities.

---

A nice way to think of cosmology is this... it's a bit like crime-scene investigation.

In crime scene investigation, a bunch of events happened in the past (a crime), which yields a set of clues (a dead body, a wallet lying on the ground, footprints, DNA samples, fingerprints, etc.) and by studying those clues, it's possible to try and predict what happened. Eventually, through following up leads, not only can the detectives figure out what happened, but also identify the perpetrator so they can be caught.

In cosmology, "cosmogenesis" is a bit like the crime and the "big bang" is a bit like everything that happened after the crime, like expansion, cooling, matter-radiation decoupling, etc. Observations, like the CMB radiation studies, spectrometry of very old stars, distance measurements of very distant objects, population studies of very distant objects and mappings of very large-scale structures, are the clues.

However, whenever there is a crime scene, there is always a big possibility that the person died by accident. Only by investigation can one come to the conclusion that there might be a perpetrator. The same is true in cosmology; we know virtually nothing about cosmogenesis so nobody can definitely state whether there was a creator or not. Anyone who does is either speculating or lying.

Many people turn to cosmology to try to find proof of god. However, there is no scientific definition of god and cosmology concerns itself only with the laws of physics. I think if you're trying to look for proof of god, you're going to be very, very disappointed.
this guy doesn't believe in anything.don't believe in God.he doesn't believe in the Big Bang.he doesn't believe in singularity.what they say is true, do you think?

#### smsngklnci

Not quite.

Firstly, the reply states "The premise is true, there never was a Big Bang like science says it did", but then goes on to say "There is an origin of the universe, there must be, starting of course with nothing and then expanding". These are contradictory statements because the whole point of the big bang theory is to explain the expansion. Any theory that attempts to explain the rapid inflation of the very early universe is usually referred to as a 'big bang theory' because that's the key characteristic.

Just for the record, there has existed alternative cosmological models of the early universe that include expansion but do not have a big bang. However, those were discarded a long time ago because they do not match observations, like the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation or the Doppler imaging studies.

Secondly, the reply states that the factors that made this happen are "Just a few fundamental laws of nature and the properties of a perfect vacuum". However, cosmogenesis, which is the term ascribed to the processes occurring at the very earliest moment of the big bang, is almost completely unknown. At those earliest times, the laws of physics break down. Also, the Lambda Cold Dark Matter model ($$\displaystyle \Lambda$$-CDM), which is considered by many to be the best big bang theory in the literature, is not constructed from just a few fundamental laws and the properties of a vacuum.

However, the reply states that "this doesn't mean that the universe is eternal. Nor does it mean there is a god". That's correct. The big bang theory does not say anything about the fate of the universe or about god(s) or other religious entities.

---

A nice way to think of cosmology is this... it's a bit like crime-scene investigation.

In crime scene investigation, a bunch of events happened in the past (a crime), which yields a set of clues (a dead body, a wallet lying on the ground, footprints, DNA samples, fingerprints, etc.) and by studying those clues, it's possible to try and predict what happened. Eventually, through following up leads, not only can the detectives figure out what happened, but also identify the perpetrator so they can be caught.

In cosmology, "cosmogenesis" is a bit like the crime and the "big bang" is a bit like everything that happened after the crime, like expansion, cooling, matter-radiation decoupling, etc. Observations, like the CMB radiation studies, spectrometry of very old stars, distance measurements of very distant objects, population studies of very distant objects and mappings of very large-scale structures, are the clues.

However, whenever there is a crime scene, there is always a big possibility that the person died by accident. Only by investigation can one come to the conclusion that there might be a perpetrator. The same is true in cosmology; we know virtually nothing about cosmogenesis so nobody can definitely state whether there was a creator or not. Anyone who does is either speculating or lying.

Many people turn to cosmology to try to find proof of god. However, there is no scientific definition of god and cosmology concerns itself only with the laws of physics. I think if you're trying to look for proof of god, you're going to be very, very disappointed.
doesn't explain where the universe came from.is there a God?

#### benit13

this guy doesn't believe in anything.don't believe in God.he doesn't believe in the Big Bang.he doesn't believe in singularity.what they say is true, do you think?
People can believe whatever they want.

However, out of the three things stated above (god, big bang and singularity), only the big bang has existing, verified models. So, if that particular individual doesn't believe in the big bang, then that requires a denial of the existing evidence that supports the big bang theory.

As for the other things? Meh.

doesn't explain where the universe came from.is there a God?
Like I said earlier, cosmogenesis is unknown.

Physics is not a discipline that can tell you whether or not there is a god.

topsquark

#### smsngklnci

People can believe whatever they want.

However, out of the three things stated above (god, big bang and singularity), only the big bang has existing, verified models. So, if that particular individual doesn't believe in the big bang, then that requires a denial of the existing evidence that supports the big bang theory.

As for the other things? Meh.

Like I said earlier, cosmogenesis is unknown.

Physics is not a discipline that can tell you whether or not there is a god.
if the Big Bang didn't happen, how did the universe come into being?

#### topsquark

Forum Staff
if the Big Bang didn't happen, how did the universe come into being?
The answer is quite simply that we don't know. Many subscribe to the BB theory but there is a persistant alternative called "steady state" theory that posits that the Universe has always existed. Personally I don't think it's workable but it's lasted (in one form or another) for the last 60 years.

Odds are that we are never going to have absolute proof of how the Universe came to be. We might have a good theory come along (such as the BB for the moment) but I doubt we'll ever have actual direct proof.

-Dan

#### smsngklnci

The answer is quite simply that we don't know. Many subscribe to the BB theory but there is a persistant alternative called "steady state" theory that posits that the Universe has always existed. Personally I don't think it's workable but it's lasted (in one form or another) for the last 60 years.

Odds are that we are never going to have absolute proof of how the Universe came to be. We might have a good theory come along (such as the BB for the moment) but I doubt we'll ever have actual direct proof.

-Dan
there's something I don't understand.the man doesn't believe in God.no big bang, he says.he says there are no multiverse.how is this happening?isn't that contradictory?