Thorham Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Maybe we are talking slightly at cross purposes here. Probably. Rather, I am trying to make a distinction between the (arguably incorrect) use of the term "big bang" to refer to a one-off event which is popularly described as an explosion or creation of the universe, versus the use of "big bang" to refer to the way the universe evolves over time. Most lay people probably refer to the one-off event, while physicists and learned people probably refer to the evolution of the universe. Hence the confusion. I agree that is a perfectly valid question and an active area of research. So, ultimately, you are right: it is just a matter of words. I just happen to think the common use of the words "big bang" is, or can be, very misleading. It certainly is misleading. You've seen the effects in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Most lay people probably refer to the one-off event, while physicists and learned people probably refer to the evolution of the universe. Hence the confusion. And there isn't really any good reason to think there was any such event. Hence even more confusion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 And there isn't really any good reason to think there was any such event. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Why not? To avoid going round in circles, what do you think such an event could be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 To avoid going round in circles, what do you think such an event could be? Something that was caused by something else perhaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Something that was caused by something else perhaps. But are you thinking of the start of expansion, or a change from a collapsing to an expanding universe? Or something else? To my mind, these are just stages or changes in the evolution of the universe rather than the unique "creation" event many people seem to use "big bang" to refer to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 But are you thinking of the start of expansion, or a change from a collapsing to an expanding universe? Or something else? Start of expansion (if it did start at some point). To my mind, these are just stages or changes in the evolution of the universe rather than the unique "creation" event many people seem to use "big bang" to refer to. To me an event is just something that happens that's noteworthy such as those changes in evolution (hypothetical one: collapse -> expansion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 How about this: Because the big bang theory doesn't work, there is no big bang. Instead there's expansion. Now you can ask what came before expansion, and the answer has to be that that is unknown right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACG52 Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 The BB is expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 The BB is expansion. I'm don't want to call it that anymore because: 1. The theory fails at a certain point. 2. It wasn't big. 3. It wasn't a bang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 1. The theory fails at a certain point. Most theories do. 2. It wasn't big. It is the whole universe! 3. It wasn't a bang. True. I'm don't want to call it that anymore because: You could call it the Lambda-CDM model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 (edited) It is the whole universe! That just means it has a large mass, not that it was large volume wise (is volume the right word?). You could call it the Lambda-CDM model. That certainly sounds better than big bang. Edited October 12, 2015 by Thorham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 That just means it has a large mass, not that it was large volume wise (is volume the right word?). True. But the "big bang" is still continuing and I think the universe would be considered quite large, by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorham Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 True. But the "big bang" is still continuing and I think the universe would be considered quite large, by now. Yeah, it's large now, but I wrote that it wasn't large, not that it isn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 You got me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now