PDA

View Full Version : Big Bang theory disproved by new study?



98cwitr
August 21st, 2010, 05:53 PM
Discuss
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25492/

Ctrl-Alt-F1
August 21st, 2010, 05:57 PM
Bleh, all that theoretical stuff bores me.

kamaboko
August 21st, 2010, 06:02 PM
I'd say the only way to know with 100% certainty is one had to be there when it happened. Until then, they can postulate all they want.

NCLI
August 21st, 2010, 06:07 PM
That would solve the entire problem of "what came before the big bang," which many religious people have used to argue that there must be a god. If the universe is simply something that can be proven to have always been here, that argument will be void.

Very exciting research, I hope it turns out to be real!!!!

I'd say the only way to know with 100% certainty is one had to be there when it happened. Until then, they can postulate all they want.
Not true. If the predictions made using this theory are 100% accurate, and the unknowns currently plaguing it can be resolved, we will have certainty without having been there.

phrostbyte
August 21st, 2010, 06:33 PM
The article doesn't say much, but you can't really have a real replacement for the Big Bang theory without explaining the origin of the cosmic background radiation.

chris200x9
August 21st, 2010, 06:34 PM
Not true. If the predictions made using this theory are 100% accurate, and the unknowns currently plaguing it can be resolved, we will have certainty without having been there.

What? A finite amount of arguments being disproved by a theory prooves the theory? Sounds like *** logics at it's finest.

Madspyman
August 21st, 2010, 06:47 PM
I prefer the string/M theory solution to all this. Its fun to think the universe may exist on a massive brane of energy, floating around in a even greater space, surrounded by other branes of energy that hold other universes within.

DoktorSeven
August 21st, 2010, 07:31 PM
Wow, that is very close to what I've always believed, especially the part about the universe always existing. It would dismiss the problem of "where did all that matter come from" and such, and it just puts forth the elegant idea that it's always been there, and the reason is because it doesn't not exist.

I love thinking about this stuff.

AlphaLexman
August 21st, 2010, 07:38 PM
Does this mean the TV show (US) is being cancelled? ;)

sydbat
August 21st, 2010, 07:53 PM
I'd say the only way to know with 100% certainty is one had to be there when it happened. Until then, they can postulate all they want.QFT.

What I find humorous is that people take scientific theory as fact.

AlphaLexman
August 21st, 2010, 08:00 PM
What I find humorous is that people take scientific theory as fact.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

sydbat
August 21st, 2010, 08:14 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theoryUmmm...it's still theory.

And as new empirical facts are discovered, those theories change. It is the nature of science. Nothing is (or should be) sacred. Everything is in a constant state of flux (some, obviously, more than others).

At least that's what my science degree and background tell me.):P

Madspyman
August 21st, 2010, 08:42 PM
Ummm...it's still theory.

And as new empirical facts are discovered, those theories change. It is the nature of science. Nothing is (or should be) sacred. Everything is in a constant state of flux (some, obviously, more than others).

At least that's what my science degree and background tell me.):P

True, Pluto's not a planet and apparently the triceratops doesn't exist anymore. That would have sounded crazy if I said it 20 years ago.

bigsmitty64
August 21st, 2010, 09:25 PM
Does this mean the TV show (US) is being cancelled? ;)
NOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! BAZINGA...:p

Calash
August 21st, 2010, 09:30 PM
The article doesn't say much, but you can't really have a real replacement for the Big Bang theory without explaining the origin of the cosmic background radiation.

True, but it does explain the acceleration of the expansion that we have been observing over the past several years.

From the bits that are posted in the article it is a good first step and I would be interested in seeing how it develops.

lisati
August 21st, 2010, 09:35 PM
I'm pretty sure that if we were to find a working Tardis or something else of that nature, we'll be able to collect evidence that could potentially be used to help answer some of the questions.

Then again, for all we know, it could possibly open up the door for more arguments and tensions between the different camps.

In the mean time, we'll have to make do with our choice(s) of working hypotheses, which, if we're smart, we'll review and adjust as new evidence and insights come in.

V for Vincent
August 21st, 2010, 09:52 PM
That would solve the entire problem of "what came before the big bang," which many religious people have used to argue that there must be a god. If the universe is simply something that can be proven to have always been here, that argument will be void.


Physics, true or false, will never be an argument in any religious discussion. I don't mean that negatively or positively towards religion - just an observation.

JDShu
August 21st, 2010, 11:03 PM
Title is a little misleading. Its an alternative theory to the big bang, not a study that disproves it.

NCLI
August 21st, 2010, 11:12 PM
What? A finite amount of arguments being disproved by a theory prooves the theory? Sounds like *** logics at it's finest.
It's not about disproving arguments, it's about making accurate predictions about how the universe will behave that can be observed in real life. That is what makes an hypothesis, which is what this is now, into a theory, which is as close as we get to a "fact."

Ummm...it's still theory.

And as new empirical facts are discovered, those theories change. It is the nature of science. Nothing is (or should be) sacred. Everything is in a constant state of flux (some, obviously, more than others).

At least that's what my science degree and background tell me.):P
Definitely, but it is also undoubtedly true that at some point, if we keep looking, we will find the real answer to all questions which it is possible to answer.

However, while the Big Bang theory is fairly well supported, it still has several holes. We've been trying to explain these holes for years now, but until we do, it's not really a solid theory, as opposed to evolution, gravity, etc.

Physics, true or false, will never be an argument in any religious discussion. I don't mean that negatively or positively towards religion - just an observation.
I've argued with enough religious people who've used physics in their arguments to say that is at least part of their denialism.

Anyway, I shouldn't have brought up religion, let's drop the subject.

NightwishFan
August 21st, 2010, 11:37 PM
Cosmic Background Radiation already sold me.

Ric_NYC
August 21st, 2010, 11:45 PM
I never believed in that theory!

I also don't believe in "Creationism"!




http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/8693/creationism1smlf.jpg

^^
:lolflag:

kamaboko
August 22nd, 2010, 12:59 AM
Not true. If the predictions made using this theory are 100% accurate.

The operative word here is "IF". That's a long way from 100% accurate.

nrs
August 22nd, 2010, 12:59 AM
QFT.

What I find humorous is that people take scientific theory as fact.
You know how I know you're a creationist?

chris200x9
August 22nd, 2010, 01:25 AM
It's not about disproving arguments, it's about making accurate predictions about how the universe will behave that can be observed in real life. That is what makes an hypothesis, which is what this is now, into a theory, which is as close as we get to a "fact."

not what you said before, you did not say then that's what probably happened. You said then we will know 100%.

WalmartSniperLX
August 22nd, 2010, 02:46 AM
Modern cosmology follows the models created by theoretical-physicists who may or may not be real scientists. A scientist has to hypothesis, as well as create working models. Mathematics alone are NOT accurate models when they are created to prove nothing but theory. One can manipulate a formula to prove any theory.

Nikola Tesla had a different approach on cosmology and had his own theories based on his electrical experiments but he was ignored by the world just as he didn't get much credit for any of his patents, experiments, and inventions. Mathematics, without physical experimentation, is a tool that can prove anything to be true. When theories are compiled and invented to prove other preexisting theories correct, then one can be inquisitive about the very foundation to our understanding of the universe. So with all that being said, I take all theories with a grain of salt even if they're very interesting :) Nice find

Edit: "..mathematics [without physical experimentation] is a tool that can prove anything to be true."

NightwishFan
August 22nd, 2010, 03:01 AM
Modern cosmology follows the models created by theoretical-physicists who may or may not be real scientists. A scientist has to hypothesis, as well as create working models. Mathematics alone are NOT accurate models when they are created to prove nothing but theory. One can manipulate a formula to prove any theory.

Nikola Tesla had a different approach on cosmology and had his own theories based on his electrical experiments but he was ignored by the world just as he didn't get much credit for any of his patents, experiments, and inventions. Mathematics is a tool that can prove anything to be true. When theories are compiled and invented to prove other preexisting theories correct, then one can be inquisitive about the very foundation to our understanding of the universe. So with all that being said, I take all theories with a grain of salt even if they're very interesting :) Nice find

Anyone who quotes Nikola Tesla is someone who has more credibility in my book.

73ckn797
August 22nd, 2010, 03:15 AM
Seems that whatever may be theorized is still just a theory. To disprove the Big Bang only begs the question of beginnings and pushes back further to find a first cause. IMO.

It has been said that "He has also put eternity in their hearts,but man cannot discover the work God has done from beginning to end."

Lightstar
August 22nd, 2010, 03:26 AM
Big bang theory never made sense ever since it came into play.

mmix
August 22nd, 2010, 03:28 AM
i like his idea.


Shu's idea is that time and space are not independent entities but can be converted back and forth between each other. In his formulation of the geometry of spacetime, the speed of light is simply the conversion factor between the two. Similarly, mass and length are interchangeable in a relationship in which the conversion factor depends on both the gravitational constant G and the speed of light, neither of which need be constant.

Austin25
August 22nd, 2010, 04:28 AM
I'm just going to let them figure it out.

lisati
August 22nd, 2010, 04:36 AM
Yup, coming up with a satisfactory notion of "first cause" is a bit of a challenge. Perhaps the idea that space and time are not just curved but absolutely bent might prove to be a useful stepping stone to a workable solution.

Zorgoth
August 22nd, 2010, 04:56 AM
Honestly, like most modern cosmological theories, it sounds to me like a mathematical toy invented to try to explain something we do not understand. If it can't explain the cosmic microwave background, it is definitely a toy. If it does, then perhaps it could be more interesting, but I would be astonished if it did - in a steady state universe (well, this isn't precisely steady state as previously envisioned, but is similar and has no beginning) I would expect background radiation to be essentially random as it would be "processed" by the universe for an infinite amount of time - the cosmic microwave background is all about the same frequency - how could this "remain" the case after an *infinite* amount of time?

Also, how does this theory take into account the second law of thermodynamics? If entropy is always increasing and time has been going f it did - in a steady state universe (well, this isn't precisely steady on forever, than how do we have all of this blatant order around us? The current theories are clearly incomplete, but I would be surprised if anyone managed to do enough explanation to make this one or any one that does not have a "beginning" of the universe of some kind a real contender,

On the other hand, I am in a sense talking through my hat as while I understand the mathematics and some of the physics behind this I am not a cosmologist. But I also suspect that few in this thread are :D.

sudoer541
August 22nd, 2010, 05:01 AM
Science always changes...

Here my new theory... we all came from dinosaurs (grandpa?)!!!

The earth was a tiny little particle the it turned into a snowball and it grew over the years...and it keeps growing while the moon is shrinking.
The sun broke into 200 suns that were eaten by the black hole and the hole exploded. Only one of them survived. The sun was in danger of cooling off but, the earth came closer to the sun and it powered the sun with its gasses.
Planet earth started warming off and some frozen fossils became alive.
The fossils turned into dinosaurs.
Dinosaurs lived on the earth and some of them migrated to Mars and they evolved into aliens.
The other dinosaurs on planet earth turned into big dinosaurs. The big dinosaurs became dragons and then turned into monkeys and the monkeys turned into a fish. The fish turned into a shark and the it turned into crocodile, the crocodile was split in half and they turned into Avatar-like species. The Avatar like species turned into cave men-like-humans. The cavemen- like - humans were like giants and they were wiped out of the face of the earth by a meteorite.
One of the survived, he was injured badly and he was bleeding.
His blood (DNA) touched a rock got mixed with the rock's DNA, and the rock started changing shapes.
The other dinosaurs who went to Mars came back as evoled aliens and they helped the rock to turn into a human being by mixing their DNA with the injured man's DNA on the rock.
The man died and Trillions of years passed by and the rock was evolving.
The rock broke in half by a meteorite and it became a living being. 60 Trillion years passed and the man had a partner (the other half of the rock) and they started having children.
Thier children became hunters and they lived somewhere in Africa.
The children grew up and they became men. They married their sisters (since there were no other human beings at that time) and their babies turned into an evolved variants of their parents. The aliens came in and they got married (theoretically) and then human kind was taken to the next level. 1000000 trillions of years passed by and the Africans invented the wheel and they started farming. The Africans wondered what could be outside of their village. They Built a huge bridge that stretched from Africa all the way to the Middle East, all the way to Europe and finally all the way to the Americas.
The People from Africa traveled all around the world and they started changing and evolving. The Babylonians came into the scene and they built a hanging garden. The garden was destroyed by a meteorite when it hit the City of Babylon. Babylon was destroyed. The Europeans started traveling to the five continents and they started building a tower to reach the skies so they could built bridges on them. The Europeans build their towers and they discovered North America (it was discovered by Christophorus Columbus trillions of years later). The Northen Americans evolved and they invented writing as a way to keep track of their stock while they were farming. Later a small particle came from Mars and it slowly turned into a creature. The creature started evolving and it multiplied. The creature started changing shapes and forms and it turned into different kinds of animals. Later, the black hole spit out the remaining suns and they wre all attracted to the sun we have today. When all the suns merged into one (the one we have today) the climate started changing (global warming...or as some people call it Hell on earth). Global warming killed tons of unique animal types as well as other human types.
Global warming was responsible of melting the ice on the arctic and it caused a flood that destroyed Atlantis. Atlantis was a big empire that stretched all the way from North America to south America. They also reached Africa and the Middle East, but they were defeated by the Persians. The Greeks invented Astrology and the stars started falling to earth that killed all of the dinosaurs who had not evolved into humans. Billions of years later Christophorus Columbus traveled all the way from western Spain into the East Coast of the US. The land was empty so CC was getting hungry. The aliens from Mars came to give him some food but he went against them (because he was scared) and they injured him. His blood (DNA) touch one of the aliens and the alien started evolving.
The alien became a man and a woman. The man and the woman created their own planet with their super computers running AlienOS (the planet is known as Nuburi) to the ancient Americans and everything started from there.

You know the story from this point on.




... Confused?
We all came from Yoshies!!!:p):P

WalmartSniperLX
August 22nd, 2010, 05:46 AM
Science always changes...

Here my new theory... we all came from dinosaurs (grandpa?)!!!

The earth was a tiny little particle the it turned into a snowball and it grew over the years...and it keeps growing while the moon is shrinking.
The sun broke into 200 suns that were eaten by the black hole and the hole exploded. Only one of them survived. The sun was in danger of cooling off but, the earth came closer to the sun and it powered the sun with its gasses.
Planet earth started warming off and some frozen fossils became alive.
The fossils turned into dinosaurs.
Dinosaurs lived on the earth and some of them migrated to Mars and they evolved into aliens.
The other dinosaurs on planet earth turned into big dinosaurs. The big dinosaurs became dragons and then turned into monkeys and the monkeys turned into a fish. The fish turned into a shark and the it turned into crocodile, the crocodile was split in half and they turned into Avatar-like species. The Avatar like species turned into cave men-like-humans. The cavemen- like - humans were like giants and they were wiped out of the face of the earth by a meteorite.
One of the survived, he was injured badly and he was bleeding.
His blood (DNA) touched a rock got mixed with the rock's DNA, and the rock started changing shapes.
The other dinosaurs who went to Mars came back as evoled aliens and they helped the rock to turn into a human being by mixing their DNA with the injured man's DNA on the rock.
The man died and Trillions of years passed by and the rock was evolving.
The rock broke in half by a meteorite and it became a living being. 60 Trillion years passed and the man had a partner (the other half of the rock) and they started having children.
Thier children became hunters and they lived somewhere in Africa.
The children grew up and they became men. They married their sisters (since there were no other human beings at that time) and their babies turned into an evolved variants of their parents. The aliens came in and they got married (theoretically) and then human kind was taken to the next level. 1000000 trillions of years passed by and the Africans invented the wheel and they started farming. The Africans wondered what could be outside of their village. They Built a huge bridge that stretched from Africa all the way to the Middle East, all the way to Europe and finally all the way to the Americas.
The People from Africa traveled all around the world and they started changing and evolving. The Babylonians came into the scene and they built a hanging garden. The garden was destroyed by a meteorite when it hit the City of Babylon. Babylon was destroyed. The Europeans started traveling to the five continents and they started building a tower to reach the skies so they could built bridges on them. The Europeans build their towers and they discovered North America (it was discovered by Christophorus Columbus trillions of years later). The Northen Americans evolved and they invented writing as a way to keep track of their stock while they were farming. Later a small particle came from Mars and it slowly turned into a creature. The creature started evolving and it multiplied. The creature started changing shapes and forms and it turned into different kinds of animals. Later, the black hole spit out the remaining suns and they wre all attracted to the sun we have today. When all the suns merged into one (the one we have today) the climate started changing (global warming...or as some people call it Hell on earth). Global warming killed tons of unique animal types as well as other human types.
Global warming was responsible of melting the ice on the arctic and it caused a flood that destroyed Atlantis. Atlantis was a big empire that stretched all the way from North America to south America. They also reached Africa and the Middle East, but they were defeated by the Persians. The Greeks invented Astrology and the stars started falling to earth that killed all of the dinosaurs who had not evolved into humans. Billions of years later Christophorus Columbus traveled all the way from western Spain into the East Coast of the US. The land was empty so CC was getting hungry. The aliens from Mars came to give him some food but he went against them (because he was scared) and they injured him. His blood (DNA) touch one of the aliens and the alien started evolving.
The alien became a man and a woman. The man and the woman created their own planet with their super computers running AlienOS (the planet is known as Nuburi) to the ancient Americans and everything started from there.

You know the story from this point on.




... Confused?
We all came from Yoshies!!!:p):P

Most complete theory ever! :p

drawkcab
August 22nd, 2010, 06:07 AM
You all are making a mountain out of a molehill. The article does not say that Shu's theory is logically incompatible with CMB. It says, "How [CMB] might arise in Shu's cosmology isn't yet clear."

If the universe has been an ongoing series of big bangs and big crunches, it's entirely conceivable that the CMB would at least be compatible with his theory.

Zorgoth
August 22nd, 2010, 04:10 PM
You all are making a mountain out of a molehill. The article does not say that Shu's theory is logically incompatible with CMB. It says, "How [CMB] might arise in Shu's cosmology isn't yet clear."

If the universe has been an ongoing series of big bangs and big crunches, it's entirely conceivable that the CMB would at least be compatible with his theory.

Shu's universe is not a series of big bangs and big crunches, just periods of expansion and defalation - a singularity in Shu's universe is impossible, hence the title of this thread. Which methinks goes nowhere in explaining the CMB's uniformity of frequency or the fact that there is any semblance of order in the universe. I can believe that entropy could be "reset" by a collapse to a singularity, but not by anything less drastic.

If this universe is to make any sense, entropy must be handled correctly according to the second law of thermodynamics, and before the theory can explain that (and the CMB), it is not really a contender.

drawkcab
August 22nd, 2010, 05:32 PM
Shu's universe is not a series of big bangs and big crunches, just periods of expansion and defalation - a singularity in Shu's universe is impossible, hence the title of this thread. Which methinks goes nowhere in explaining the CMB's uniformity of frequency or the fact that there is any semblance of order in the universe. I can believe that entropy could be "reset" by a collapse to a singularity, but not by anything less drastic.

If this universe is to make any sense, entropy must be handled correctly according to the second law of thermodynamics, and before the theory can explain that (and the CMB), it is not really a contender.

Oh, I missed the part about there being no singularities. That is pretty bizarre in and of itself. And if can be no big crunch then, yeah, I see what you're saying.

sudoer541
August 22nd, 2010, 05:58 PM
Most complete theory ever! :p


mmmm lets call it "The Sudoer's theory of evolution" but we have to cover up all the contradictions I made LOL!!!:lolflag:

keep the cash coming!!!:lolflag:):P

CarpKing
August 22nd, 2010, 06:52 PM
Ummm...it's still theory.

And as new empirical facts are discovered, those theories change. It is the nature of science. Nothing is (or should be) sacred. Everything is in a constant state of flux (some, obviously, more than others).

At least that's what my science degree and background tell me.):P

True, but that's no reason to denigrate existing theories. Typically they are the closest things to facts that we have. It does seem like the word "theory" in physics implies much less certainty than in, say, biology or chemistry. But generally, theories should be taken as fact until they appear to be wrong.