ixcuincle Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I accept whatever Michio Kaku tells me about the Big Bang Theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Oh lord, all the TV snobs are out. Now all of you are going to say you only watch Discovery, History and National Geographic channels because everything else is crap. (which is probably a lie). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Oh lord, all the TV snobs are out. Now all of you are going to say you only watch Discovery, History and National Geographic channels because everything else is crap. (which is probably a lie). I watch those things and the crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan07 Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 Check this out if you don't know much about the BBT (not the TV show) lol Big Bang Theory For Beginners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I watch those things and the crap. So do I and that was my point. I'll find things on those channels, I like the investigation shows, some of the military shows, but I also like sitcoms and dramas on network TV along with things on the History, Nat Geo and Discovery. I watched a documentary where they followed some Lion cubs until they were old enough to hunt and how the parents showed them how. I watched a show on Grizzlies before that. But I like Big Bang Theory also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Not a big fan of History. Discovery is okay but overrated. At least they didn't sell out and create a bunch of reality TV shows which have nothing to do with the channel title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I don't know.. I've been thinking about this question this afternoon, and the truth is i don't think i care. Here we are, and that's good enough for me. It really doesn't matter to me if it was a Big Bang or a Tiny Toot, however it happened, whatever it was that did happen, it happened and here I am. And, coincidentally, here's a whole bunch of other people, too. :ciao: So I figure I should just be as decent person as i can be given circumstances, and follow my destiny to wherever it goes. How it all came to be is an interesting question, but knowing exactly what it was is not really necessary to me, because i think it is something that is impossible to definitively prove. i've read that the residual vibrations of it can still be 'heard' at one particular frequency, and that's fine. Let's say someone does prove that a major explosion happened and all the matter that was shot out at the speed of infinitum and voila, eventually it's what we inhabit. Then the argument shifts to what caused it. And if someone proves that, then it becomes what caused the cause and so on and so on. I have to think finally knowing the answer would be pretty disappointing. It's probably nothing much. A neutrino farted or something. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 That's actually only one of many theories now. Check out the multi-verse theory to make your head explode.Also, I have no idea which of these theories are more commonly accepted now. All I know is that there are a lot of theories, and I don't know which one happened. There are a few very interesting cyclical universe theories out there. The Ekpyrotic model is based on string/m theory and is really fun to read and think about. http://wwwphy.princeton.edu/~steinh/npr/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 i've read that the residual vibrations of it can still be 'heard' at one particular frequency, and that's fine. Let's say someone does prove that a major explosion happened and all the matter that was shot out at the speed of infinitum and voila, eventually it's what we inhabit. Then the argument shifts to what caused it. And if someone proves that, then it becomes what caused the cause and so on and so on.But it's not just a philosophical question. The Big Bang is a physical phenomenon and understanding it can answer many scientific questions. Whether it happened and how it happened can tell us a lot about the structure of the universe and the behavior of fundamental particles. Somewhere down the line, that could lead to technologies that give us efficient renewable energy or enable interstellar space travel. And then whether we accept the Big Bang theory should really start to matter for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 But it's not just a philosophical question. The Big Bang is a physical phenomenon and understanding it can answer many scientific questions. Whether it happened and how it happened can tell us a lot about the structure of the universe and the behavior of fundamental particles. Somewhere down the line, that could lead to technologies that give us efficient renewable energy or enable interstellar space travel. And then whether we accept the Big Bang theory should really start to matter for everyone. That's cool. Have at it ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I've always thought that if the the universe is expanding (from the Big Bang), and so many objects littered through it produce gravity from their own mass, then eventually all matter in the universe will collide, coalesce, and condense at a single point. Then the Big Bang happens again. This process is repeated infinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I've always thought that if the the universe is expanding (from the Big Bang), and so many objects littered through it produce gravity from their own mass, then eventually all matter in the universe will collide, coalesce, and condense at a single point. Then the Big Bang happens again. This process is repeated infinitely. That was one of the primary theories for some time but now that we've noticed stuff actually expanding away from us faster it isn't nearly as prevalent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I haven't bothered looking into the evidence for myself and I don't know that I'd understand it if I did, so I'll just defer to the experts, who, at this time, seem to support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 That was one of the primary theories for some time but now that we've noticed stuff actually expanding away from us faster it isn't nearly as prevalent. Hmm, so it's expanding at an accelerating rate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 ~Big Bang fix'd :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Hmm, so it's expanding at an accelerating rate?The 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics: In 1998, cosmology was shaken at its foundations as two research teams presented their findings. Headed by Saul Perlmutter, one of the teams had set to work in 1988. Brian Schmidt headed another team, launched at the end of 1994, where Adam Riess was to play a crucial role.The research teams raced to map the Universe by locating the most distant supernovae. More sophisticated telescopes on the ground and in space, as well as more powerful computers and new digital imaging sensors (CCD, Nobel Prize in Physics in 2009), opened the possibility in the 1990s to add more pieces to the cosmological puzzle. The teams used a particular kind of supernova, called type Ia supernova. It is an explosion of an old compact star that is as heavy as the Sun but as small as the Earth. A single such supernova can emit as much light as a whole galaxy. All in all, the two research teams found over 50 distant supernovae whose light was weaker than expected - this was a sign that the expansion of the Universe was accelerating. The potential pitfalls had been numerous, and the scientists found reassurance in the fact that both groups had reached the same astonishing conclusion. For almost a century, the Universe has been known to be expanding as a consequence of the Big Bang about 14 billion years ago. However, the discovery that this expansion is accelerating is astounding. If the expansion will continue to speed up the Universe will end in ice. The acceleration is thought to be driven by dark energy, but what that dark energy is remains an enigma - perhaps the greatest in physics today. What is known is that dark energy constitutes about three quarters of the Universe. Therefore the findings of the 2011 Nobel Laureates in Physics have helped to unveil a Universe that to a large extent is unknown to science. And everything is possible again. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/press.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Where's Neil Degrasse Tyson? I voted yes, because I watch all that stuff. Now, to satisfy the PK in me, I like to think it's because God said "Bang!" OTOH, I also agree with Bang. We're here, doin what we gotta do. And we're Redskins fans. Hail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Thanks DjTj. I've heard of dark energy but I didn't know it was primarily involved with the expansion of the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I accept the BBT as the best explanation for the expansion of the universe. I understand the limits of my feeble little mind when it comes to things like this, so I have to rely on people far smarter than me to explain them. (And there's NO shortage of such people.) But the BBT, IMHO, doesn't address the big question. Where'd that original ball of everything come from? ---------- Post added June-26th-2012 at 07:20 PM ---------- If the expansion will continue to speed up the Universe will end in ice. What? Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 BBT Clip That always got me too. I mean, how could you ever know? Then again we seem to be okay with losing a bunch of skin cells... and for that matter how many of our original electrons do you think we still have? Theoretically everything seems to check out, but I'd definitely be squeamish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pskins Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 There is far too much evidence supporting the big bang theory than that which rejects it. Just as Einstein's theory of general relativity was first greeted with healthy skepticism, so is this theory. I believe, like relativity, it will ultimately be proven correct. And as always, BAZINGA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 But it's not just a philosophical question. The Big Bang is a physical phenomenon and understanding it can answer many scientific questions. Whether it happened and how it happened can tell us a lot about the structure of the universe and the behavior of fundamental particles. Somewhere down the line, that could lead to technologies that give us efficient renewable energy or enable interstellar space travel. And then whether we accept the Big Bang theory should really start to matter for everyone. Maybe and maybe not. Let me play devil's advocate on this one. Consider the case of a black hole, laws of physics basically seem to indicate that we can never know what goes on inside of a black hole, it is a part of the universe which is causally inaccessible from our own ( or vice versa really, the arrow of time only flows into black holes and never out ). So is the question of what happens inside of a black hole may really just be philosophy, if it is a question that science can never answer by it's very own law. How does this relate to BBT? Well, once you get down to the smallest scales at the highest energy levels, in the ultra mega microseconds that are really epsilon away from zero, what happens if length and time don't make any sense? This is not altogether implausible. Nobody saw the uncertainty principle coming, at small enough scales momentum and position stop being seperate quantities, when you wrap that up into a quantum theory of geometry, it may be impossible for us to wrap our heads around the problem. And worst of all, this assumes we can even do experiments at these scales. Do you know how much energy it would take to probe the physics of interactions that are happening at energy scales similar to the big bang? ( answer, you'd basically ned another big bang ) We're struggling with the current price of gasoline. So if you were to place a bet on understanding the singularity at the center of the big bang or human extinction coming first, I think I know whic side I would be on..... assuming I could ever collect..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan07 Posted June 27, 2012 Author Share Posted June 27, 2012 So am i the only one that is on the side that believes that before the big bang, nothing existed? As in time as we know it was non existent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 So am i the only one that is on the side that believes that before the big bang, nothing existed? As in time as we know it was non existent? Are you suggesting that matter/energy don't exist w/o time as we know it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 So am i the only one that is on the side that believes that before the big bang, nothing existed? As in time as we know it was non existent? Forgive me for not following along, but it sounds like this is your argument: Nothing existed, then nothing exploded into everything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.