“Smoking gun” proof of the Big Bang unveiled by cosmologists

GreetingsEarthlings · 2014-03-17T22:46:20Z

Vyralize: "A group of scientists studying the beginning of our universe have announced their findings- unprecedented new evidence of the rapid expansion of space."

- Comments (47)

Expand all

Speed-Racer3690d ago

And people still say the world was created in 7 days...pfff

Reply Agree 14 Disagree 14

SPAM Inappropriate

mushroomwig3689d ago

I thought it was 6 and God rested on the 7th?

Reply Agree 12 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

cyclindk3689d ago (Edited 3689d ago )

He was referring to another non-Judeochristian religion, presumption much?

In this religion, the gods work on weekends, makes a few less Hitlers in the world.

Agree 1 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

SilentNegotiator3689d ago (Edited 3689d ago )

Quick! Make this about disrespecting other people's beliefs as quickly as possible! Otherwise we might get some positive discussion about the topic itself on this comment section!

Reply Agree 18 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

shazui_203689d ago

People can believe in whatever they want in the complete absence of fact and reason, that is up to them.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 4

SPAM Inappropriate

3689d ago

Replies(6)

cell9893689d ago

The Big Bang is about the Universe not the world dumb@$$

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 6

SPAM Inappropriate

Speed-Racer3689d ago

Don't you think the world was created as a result of the big bang, as just one of the many planets eventually forming their structures after the mass expulsion of material? The way you're making it sound is that Earth and the universe were formed in two independent spaces.

Agree 2 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

cell9893689d ago

no but definitely at different times

Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Audiggity3688d ago

Please enlighten us cell...

Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Tsuru3688d ago (Edited 3688d ago )

What is a day? A day is not constant in the universe. We base a day based on our spin of the earth. A 24 hour cycle. Before earth was created there was no concept of time. So it actually it should be read that it took god the amount of time as 7 days. But on day 1 he created the sky. Couldnt the sky be the universe? On day 1 he started the big bang. But hey.. believe what you want. I choose to believe science and a tad bit of the unknown/god/diety or whatever it could be that started it all.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 3

SPAM Inappropriate

Speed-Racer3688d ago

The sky as we know it is due to the fact that there are atmosphere various gases surrounding our planet. Colors like red and yellow have long wavelengths and filter through these gas particles easily while shorter blue wavelengths get absorbed and then reflected in various directions, giving that blue illusion. As for how our planet was formed, maybe the order may be right but everything came about over thousands of years. The weaker species died out while the stronger ones lives to see a new day and reproduce, thus supporting a more evolutionary theory.

As for the big bang and how Earth itself was formed, I'm too lazy to explain, so here's a nice summary of events http://www.universetoday.co...

Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3688d ago

zoks3103689d ago

That actually never happened.

Reply Agree 4 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

RE_L_MAYER3689d ago

we actually still in big explosion but since we are so small time draaags

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Stakalee3689d ago

So they can find this out, but can't find a plane???. Anyone that believes this is as dumb as their parents.

Reply Agree 12 Disagree 11

SPAM Inappropriate

shazui_203689d ago (Edited 3689d ago )

We've discovered but 6% of the world's oceans. Finding a plane in it, especially given the area of sea it could be in, is like finding a grain of sand in an olympic-sized swimming pool. There's a reason it took 2 years to find one when this happened before.

@SilentNegotiator:

Of course not, however we are talking about searching at least 300Km^2 of Ocean. That's before taking into account the reports that it could've travelled up to an additional 1600Km beyond it's last confirmed radar sighting. Please try to realise the volume of water that encompasses.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 6

SPAM Inappropriate

SilentNegotiator3689d ago

Except they don't have to search the entire ocean.

Agree 4 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

maniacmayhem3689d ago

And the volume of water on this planet is larger than the Universe??

Especially when planes have tracking devices. radar, GPS and other mechanical knicks knacks that are suppose to track them.

Agree 3 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

360ICE3688d ago

Really hopeless comparison. Just because something seems unintuitive doesn't make it not true. The practice of reading samples of cosmic background radiation (which is everywhere in the Universe) is quite different from finding a plane that could be anywhere within an area the size of Australia.

Having said that, it is quite extraordinary that the plane could "vanish" like that.

Reply Agree 3 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

KwietStorm_BLM3688d ago

Lol

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Audiggity3688d ago

The issue is you are comparing apples to oranges. Evidence of things occurring in the universe throughout time is similar to us observing that there IS water on the Earth.

We're not diving into these deep origins and gravitational waves first hand. We can't even fathom the methods required to leave our own galaxy.

Finding the missing plane would be a more appropriate comparison to something like finding a habitable planet in another galaxy's goldilocks zone. It can be done, but, there's a LOT to look through before you find it.

Besides. Planets orbit in somewhat predictable paths... planes that change course after transponders are turned off, while still flying and were potentially hijacked and flown/landed somewhere else underneath active radar pings add a few kinks to the equation.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3688d ago

CLOUD19833689d ago

So who still believe that God create everything? :P

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 14

SPAM Inappropriate

RE_L_MAYER3689d ago

oh...you one of those people...ok

Reply Agree 9 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

dc13689d ago

What within the post proves otherwise?
Just curious (no need to throw insults here).

Does this finding/new understanding (taken for what it is) prove that 'something' can come from 'nothing'?

That there was nothing (No source material, no matter, nothing, before the big bang) and that an explosion spontaneously appeared with so much complexity that when the right micro settings existed, complex organisms began to sprout from a rock that was perfectly aligned/distanced from a sphere of ionized gas (sun)?

For me; This neither proves that the big bang occurred without cause nor disproves that a higher being initiated 'something' from 'nothing'; again..if we are to take the post for what it proclaims.

What are your thoughts?

Reply Agree 6 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

Ve_Chuy3689d ago

Who created god?

Agree 2 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

CLOUD19833689d ago (Edited 3689d ago )

My thoughts is that religions & the existence of God (any God) is something humans create because they wanted to feel that some divine being is somewhere out there & watch out for them that when the time comes it will punish all the bad people & send them to hell & reward all the good ones by send them to heaven what a pile of crap seriously those stories is for little kids.

Also another reason religions exist is because many years ago it was the easiest way to control stupid people how many wars we have in the name of god? thousands of years pass & we still have people that die in the name of religion & god & they accept that if that's not stupid what is it?

In the end what I believe is that there is no God there is nothing like a divine being that create everything that's all bullsh1t also there is nothing after death there is no Hell or Heaven there is no Angels or Demons all that is fairy tails now ofc most people won't accept that but w/e they can keep on believing in fairy tails if that's what make them feel better.

Agree 2 Disagree 5

SPAM Inappropriate

dc13689d ago

@cCloud1983
That's cool. But you still didn't answer my question.
Here's another one for you. What is morality? And if it exist (which we know it does..in every nation regardless of region, time or technical prowess, then there has to be a standard. Where did the stars come from?
@Ve_Chuy that's diversion friend :)

Agree 5 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

3689d ago

360ICE3688d ago (Edited 3688d ago )

@dc1
First of all, you start with the premise of there being morality, and say that we know it does exist.

Well, we know people and animals experience impulses of "good" and "bad", but even though some acts are condemned as wrong in every culture on earth, it may very well be that there's simply a strong consensus on which acts are to be considered right or wrong.

An objective standard for right and wrong is not required for us to have a concept of right and wrong.

We have, for instance, evolved to fear and hate murder, because murder is detrimental to our survival as a specie.

In other words, with what I just said, your premise could be false.

2. In spite of that, there probably is reason to accept an objective standard for morality. That standard is the well-being of sentient creatures. Says who? Says the fact that sentient creatures experience states of mind they find either undesirable or desirable. We have, through evolution, received preferences, and acting to satisfy these preferences, in the absence of a higher meaning, can and should be considered an objective basis for morality.

That's my hastily written short-version anyway. Which basically leaves a lot to the imagination. The Moral Landscape is a good place to start as far as reading goes.

@Lolrus
You ending that comment with critique of "surface level argumentation and sweeping generalisations" is ironic.

Your idea of scientism and the role of science might as well have been printed directly from reasonablefaith.org.

Agree 0 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3688d ago

L0L_WUT3689d ago

I do.
but what does all this prove?

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

KwietStorm_BLM3688d ago

I do. Annnnd what now?

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

stuna13688d ago

I do!

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3688d ago

doomtrain3689d ago

so we are finally starting to catch up to the ancient Egyptians and mayan civilizations , great news .

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

SilentNegotiator3689d ago (Edited 3689d ago )

Claims to have figured out what happened in one of first 0.0000000000000000000000000000 0000001 seconds of the universe, can't find a plane. Mankind.

"Why the cosmic microwave background temperature is the same at different spots in the sky would be a mystery if it was not for inflation saying, well, our whole sky came from this tiny region"

Couldn't there be more than one explanation to that? Why does the cause of the varied background radiation have to be tied down to the first Xth of a second?

Too much cosmology these days is about creating theories to justify theories that justify theories.

Reply Agree 8 Disagree 5

SPAM Inappropriate

shazui_203689d ago

That is why there is more than one theory, however this is the generally accepted theory among scientists as it is the one with an overwhelming amount of evidence in favour of it.

This discovery of fluctuations in gravitational waves fits the inflationary characteristic of the big bang theory perfectly, I'm at a loss as to how our pursuit of knowledge of how the universe was created can be contrasted to nations' skills in essentially fishing for a plane in 1.368,569 x10^21 litres of Ocean.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

SilentNegotiator3689d ago (Edited 3689d ago )

I can appreciate that they can only go off of what they have, but if you keep building theories on top of theories, it only takes one misstep to create an entire series of inaccuracies.

@cell989

Unfortunately true. It's all about getting grants, publications, etc so a lot of people make bold claims way before they should.

Agree 1 Disagree 2

SPAM Inappropriate

cell9893689d ago

remember these guys get their money by coming up with new theories to spin it around one way or another ever since they hit that proverbial "theory" brick wall. If they dont come up with new ways to give life to their theories they get no money

Reply Agree 4 Disagree 4

SPAM Inappropriate

cyclindk3689d ago

What makes them believe this isn't a "localized" event? That we just HAPPEN to be close enough to the point of "creation" that we can even OBSERVE evidence, to me, is beyond flimsy.

In all its vastness, we here on Earth just happen to have ring-side seats to the rubbernecking event of the eon?

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 3

SPAM Inappropriate

windblowsagain3688d ago

Actually most scientists believe that there was no big bang.

Getting something from nothing i think the term was.

I'm not a believer in god, no proof whatsoever.

But the number given by scientists about the age of the universe is wrong as well.

Theories change as you get new information.

Man created GOD, because the sky viewed all over the world
at night you could see this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...

In alot developed cities/countries, you can barely see the stars due to light pollution. But when you can see the sky the way it's meant to be seen. As thousands of years ago. Man could only think of one thing. GOD.

As for religions. Most people just know a few. But religions went on long before Judaism, Christianity, islam.

But much was taken from Judaism, by Christianity, Islam.

So.

GOD IS MAN MADE. But nobody knows if a higher order of beings created the universe and man.

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 1

SPAM Inappropriate

AceofStaves3688d ago

I'm always puzzled by those who see the Big Bang as proof of the existence of some form of Creator/Creators using some form of the Kalam cosmological argument. It's entirely possible that Time didn't exist before the 'bang' moment. Therefore, there was no 'prior' for a Creator to exist in, and it was natural forces that came together to form this universe at this moment.

Stars form. They burn. Then, they burn out. New stars form, and so on. This cycle of creation and destruction would repeat whether or not our own planet formed and whether or not we came into being (evolved or were created, depending on your viewpoint).

That's one of the things I like most about cosmology. It really drives home the insignificance of things on the cosmic scale.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate