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.

 

 

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!

And there isn't really any good reason to think there was any such event.

 

Why not?

 

Why not?

 

To avoid going round in circles, what do you think such an event could be?

To avoid going round in circles, what do you think such an event could be?

 

Something that was caused by something else perhaps.

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.

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).

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.

The BB is expansion.

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.

 

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.

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, 201510 yr by Thorham

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.

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

You got me!