What are the current flaws in the big bang theory?

What are the current flaws in the big bang theory?? I am just wondering this because there are so many arguments, with string theory, Nassim Harameins theories, MWI theory. Are there any flaws in the big bang theory that would make it seem that it is not the correct theory??

I'd say Redshift. Redshift has been interpreted to represent distance and velocity. Because redshift "shows" that everything is moving away from everything else, the cause is presumed to be a big explosion. This is supported by background radiation, which is presumed to be the echo of the big bang.

However, there are many examples where the standard interpretation of redshift is in doubt. For example, objects displaying very different redshifts being connected by a tunnel of gas.

The discoverer of Redshift (Hubble) warned against a misinterpretation of redshift, and his student did a lot of work attacking the standard interpretation of redshift, and was shut out for his efforts.

reply to post by Maddogkull


I am a huge fan of the big bang theory. However, the biggest difficulty with it is that it says that the initial state of the universe was a singularity. A singularity by definition has values of infinity for some of its physical properties, in other words physics breaks down and cannot explain it. This means that we don't know what the thing that went bang was actually like, and we have no way of knowing where it came from or what came before that, if anything. Despite this uncomfortable bit, there is better evidence by far for the big bang than for any competing theory.

Biggest flaw in the BIg Bang theory is this simple equation 0=1

where 0 equal nothing and the one is equal to something......

Originally posted by loner007
Biggest flaw in the BIg Bang theory is this simple equation 0=1

where 0 equal nothing and the one is equal to something......

The intuition that something cannot come from nothing may or may not be correct, and is hardly evidence that the big bang did not occur.

Reply to post by Maddogkull

The fact that none of it's predictions for observation have been observed? And when the contrary observation come they bend it so they can keep the mythical start point?
"There should be differing background radiatio


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Reply to post by Maddogkull

The fact that none of it's predictions for observation have been observed? And when the contrary observation come they bend it so they can keep the mythical start point?
"There should be differing background radiation tempratures."
"There isn't it's uniform."
Thus hyper-inflation was born to protect and adapt a starting point theory that was proven wrong.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Yes, I'd agree with that. There is more evidence for the big bang theory than any other theory because the theory is adapted to fit new data. Epicycles, effectively.

I think dark matter is part of this. It is needed to explain the supposed expansion of the universe (i.e. the interpretation of redshift) which may be wrong to begin with.

I imagine it's very hard for a young scientist to get advancement if his work does not follow the big bang theory.

reply to post by rizla


If the scientist in question has good evidence, they'll get all the funding they need

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by rizla

 

If the scientist in question has good evidence, they'll get all the funding they need

Halton Arp, one of Hubble's proteges and a critic of the current interpretation of redshift had his telescope time cut because of the nature of his research.

Perhaps you'd like to answer some of my other points. I don't claim to be a professional astronomer, but it does appear that the big bang theory has some holes in it, holes which are being conveniently ignored.

Reply to post by davesidious

And optimism makes the right things happen.......


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by OnceReturned


Well that's the real and VERY LARGE flaw in the big bang theory. What came before. The Big Bang theory does not address what came before the Bang, at least not in any meaningful way. To say that the Big Bang theory explains how our universe was formed is flawed thinking. The questions of what came before are what is important.

Reply to post by rizla

Of course. We as humans tend to shun people who disagree with us. I don't see why people expect science to magically be different despite the fact that all scientists are human first and foremost.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

God created man with limitations... understanding how the universe formed or what was "before" the "bang"... how nothing created infinity....... I think this subject is just one that we cant understand the answer... being human of course... we want to know even more ... if you know you cant know.. lol

reply to post by Xagathorn


yes but then in summary how does science explain how we were created or what we came from? The big bang theory is just one process and not the beginning.

Why not look at hard evidence?

NGC 4319 and Markarian 205 - Why Hide a Cosmic Bridge?

In 1971 with the 5 meter telescope on Mt. Palomar a luminous bridge was discovered between the low redshift galaxy NGC 4319 and the much higher redshift quasar, Markarian 205. Because this contradicted the assumption that redshift was invariably a measure of velocity and distance, it invalidated the hypothesis of an expanding universe. Conventional astronomers fiercely resisted this evidence but as it accumulated for this and numerous other similar examples the results were increasingly suppressed and ignored.

The biggest flaw is known as the “Horizon Problem”.

I actually solved this issue 2 years ago and sent the solution to some notable physicist like Michio Kaku and João Magueijo, then to nobodies in universities and got the same response – NOTHING!

Why? Basically because these so-called scientist are so arrogant and fearful of being shown up that they would rather bury a new, more plausible theory then to admit they were wrong or too stupid to think of it first.

For the record, I solved the Horizon Problem, Dark Matter (how it came about, what it is etc.) and the “Theory of Everything” (TOE).

Kaku has actually dedicated the best part of his career trying to come up with the TOE.

I found the one flaw that all of them had missed that would resolve the TOE. But you guessed it – they didn’t come up with it so they don’t want to know about it.

So is there any physicist or cosmologist out there that wants to become famous for publishing the answers to these so called riddles?

I am seriously considering just handing it all over to someone willing to publish it because I have lost complete faith in the scientific community.


[edit on 7/2/10 by WorldObserver]

Originally posted by WorldObserver
The biggest flaw is known as the “Horizon Problem”.

I actually solved this issue 2 years ago and sent the solution to some notable physicist like Michio Kaku and João Magueijo, then to nobodies in universities and got the same response – NOTHING!

Why? Basically because these so-called scientist are so arrogant and fearful of being shown up that they would rather bury a new, more plausible theory then to admit they were wrong or too stupid to think of it first.

For the record, I solved the Horizon Problem, Dark Matter (how it came about, what it is etc.) and the “Theory of Everything” (TOE).

Kaku has actually dedicated the best part of his career trying to come up with the TOE.

I found the one flaw that all of them had missed that would resolve the TOE. But you guessed it – they didn’t come up with it so they don’t want to know about it.

So is there any physicist or cosmologist out there that wants to become famous for publishing the answers to these so called riddles?

I am seriously considering just handing it all over to someone willing to publish it because I have lost complete faith in the scientific community.

[edit on 7/2/10 by WorldObserver]

What is your solution to the "horizon problem," and do you have any scientific credentials?

Horizon Problem

Inflationary theory allows for a solution to the problem (along with several others such as the flatness problem) by positing a short 10 − 32 second period of exponential expansion (dubbed "inflation") within the first minute or so of the history of the universe. During inflation, the universe would have increased in size by an enormous factor.

Sounds like an epicycle. i.e. making stuff up in order to match a theory to observation.

[edit on 7-2-2010 by rizla]

LHC Big Bang Questions
The LHC is asking some Big Questions about the universe we live in
How did our universe come to be the way it is?

The Universe started with a Big Bang – but we don’t fully understand how or why it developed the way it did. The LHC will let us see how matter behaved a tiny fraction of a second after the Big Bang. Researchers have some ideas of what to expect – but also expect the unexpected!

What kind of Universe do we live in?

Many physicists think the Universe has more dimensions than the four (space and time) we are aware of. Will the LHC bring us evidence of new dimensions?

Gravity does not fit comfortably into the current descriptions of forces used by physicists. It is also very much weaker than the other forces. One explanation for this may be that our Universe is part of a larger multi dimensional reality and that gravity can leak into other dimensions, making it appear weaker. The LHC may allow us to see evidence of these extra dimensions - for example, the production of mini-black holes which blink into and out of existence in a tiny fraction of a second.

What happened in the Big Bang?

What was the Universe made of before the matter we see around us formed? The LHC will recreate, on a microscale, conditions that existed during the first billionth of a second of the Big Bang.

At the earliest moments of the Big Bang, the Universe consisted of a searingly hot soup of fundamental particles - quarks, leptons and the force carriers. As the Universe cooled to 1000 billion degrees, the quarks and gluons (carriers of the strong force) combined into composite particles like protons and neutrons. The LHC will collide lead nuclei so that they release their constituent quarks in a fleeting ‘Little Bang’. This will take us back to the time before these particles formed, re-creating the conditions early in the evolution of the universe, when quarks and gluons were free to mix without combining. The debris detected will provide important information about this very early state of matter.

Where is the antimatter?
The Big Bang created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, but we only see matter now. What happened to the antimatter?

Every fundamental matter particle has an antimatter partner with equal but opposite properties such as electric charge (for example, the negative electron has a positive antimatter partner called the positron). Equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created in the Big Bang, but antimatter then disappeared. So what happened to it? Experiments have already shown that some matter particles decay at different rates from their anti-particles, which could explain this. One of the LHC experiments will study these subtle differences between matter and antimatter particles.

Why do particles have mass?

Why do some particles have mass while others don’t? What makes this difference? If the LHC reveal particles predicted by theory it will help us understand this.

Particles of light (known as photons) have no mass. Matter particles (such as electrons and quarks) do – and we’re not sure why. British physicist, Peter Higgs, proposed the existence of a field (the Higg’s Field), which pervades the entire Universe and interacts with some particles and this gives them mass. If the theory is right then the field should reveal itself as a particle (the Higg’s particle). The Higg’s particle is too heavy to be made in existing accelerators, but the high energies of the LHC should enable us to produce and detect it.

What is our Universe made of?

Ninety-six percent of our Universe is missing! Much of the missing matter is stuff researchers have called ‘dark matter’. Can the LHC find out what it is made of?

The theory of ‘supersymmetry’ suggests that all known particles have, as yet undetected, ‘superpartners’. If they exist, the LHC should find them. These - cont.

www.lhc.ac.uk...

[edit on 7-2-2010 by deadforce]

Dark Matter and Daek Energy are also problems with Big Bang Theory As well as the misinterpretation of redshift.

Originally posted by rizla

Sounds like an epicycle. i.e. making stuff up in order to match a theory to observation.

This is ecactly what Big Bang theorists have been doing for decades.

[edit on 7-2-2010 by Sarkron]