frame
Howdy Debater!
Sign In Register


Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What went Bang!

Opening Argument

If you are a Big Bang theorist. Please can you explain to me. What actually went bang and why?
Understanding the reality of everything. Relies on solving the "something from nothing" conundrum.
If there was a big bang, something must have gone bang.
Therefore the big bang theory begins with something. Just like every other related theory.
And this includes the God theory. So don't even go there!
Wolfgang666SilverishGoldNova

Status: Open Debate

Arguments

  • I'm not an expert on this and don't really have an opinion but I can explain to you strict Big Bang theorist's point of view.

    Essentially what is said is that the universe expanded from the most dense, high-pressure singularity in the universe. A singularity is the center of a black hole, with a gravitational pull so strong that light can not escape; so much matter gravitates towards that center that the smaller it is, the more mass it contains.

    One version of the theory states that the universe was born out of a cycle: it expands from a singularity, then billions of years later, contracts back into that singularity until nothing exists except that impossibly tiny, infinitely dense point. This is called the cyclic model. As for what was within that point, it was elementary particles: the absolute most basic structures that would later form the entire universe. Under such extreme conditions, the point burst forth at speeds faster than light.

    Personally, I'm not sure. There is not much debate over what happened at the beginning of the universe, it's more of many scientists pitching all of their ideas to find out exactly what happened. But I do think it's indisputable that there was some sort of inflation; there might not be enough evidence for cyclism (although it's a really neat theory) but there is resounding evidence for inflation, such as the existence of cosmic background radiation, gravitational waves, etc that is supported by virtually every astrophysicist. I'd love to go more in-depth about that if you want.

    Some people even cite God as creating the point that expanded, and then making it expand.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    Definition of pseudoscience 

    a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Definition of the scientific method 

    a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
    melanielust
    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @Erfisflat
    I see what you're getting at, but we're talking about only the theory here.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    @Erfisflat
    I see what you're getting at, but we're talking about only the theory here.
    Is it?
    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    I've not seen a good refutation for "the earth is flat" so to me, big bangism is a religion. Trash.
    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    @melanielust
    Sorry, I must have misread that, I thought it said "the only theory"
    melanielust
    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @Erfisflat
    Lol that's alright, I was a little confused!!
  • Ok. So the "Big Bang" is a viable theory.
    But only with regard to the formation of the universe from an already existent point of dense matter.
    That is to say, there was already something.
    So as I thought, the B.B theory in no way attempts to overcome the something from nothing conundrum.
    Are there any viable theories out there, that can offer some sort of explanation?
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
    I'm not an expert on this and don't really have an opinion but I can explain to you strict Big Bang theorist's point of view.



    One version of the theory states that the universe was born out of a cycle: it expands from a singularity, then billions of years later, contracts back into that singularity until nothing exists except that impossibly tiny, infinitely dense point. This is called the cyclic model. As for what was within that point, it was elementary particles: the absolute most basic structures that would later form the entire universe. Under such extreme conditions, the point burst forth at speeds faster than light.

    Personally, I'm not sure. There is not much debate over what happened at the beginning of the universe, it's more of many scientists pitching all of their ideas to find out exactly what happened. But I do think it's indisputable that there was some sort of inflation; there might not be enough evidence for cyclism (although it's a really neat theory) but there is resounding evidence for inflation, such as the existence of cosmic background radiation, gravitational waves, etc that is supported by virtually every astrophysicist. I'd love to go more in-depth about that if you want.

    Some people even cite God as creating the point that expanded, and then making it expand.
    Essentially what is said is that the universe expanded from the most dense, high-pressure singularity in the universe. A singularity is the center of a black hole, with a gravitational pull so strong that light can not escape; so much matter gravitates towards that center that the smaller it is, the more mass it contains.

    When has any scientist observe a "singularity of a black hole"? Do you mean like the "twinkle, twinkle little star" and they say: "There, .. another singularity, we have proven the Big-Bang!"
    Strong Gravitation? I thought the BB created gravity? Or was it that gravity created mass, which acted upon itself till it Big-Banged which caused a vacuum that expanded really, really fast creating quantum particles that eventually created suns and planets that created gravity, but not like the gravity that expands vacuum. This type of gravity goes out in nothing till it finds a vacuum, and WHAM, expands it with a Bang, .. a Big-Bang, .. may George Lemaitre rest in peace with the mother-of-god.

    Besides, they claim they see black holes in their universe, .. fine, that's IN the universe! Now has any scientist observed a black hole outside the universe that went Bang creating an expanding vacuum?

    "extreme conditions", .. where, outside the universe? Has any scientist ever actually observed "extreme conditions" that caused a Big-Bang that created a universe, .. any universe?
    If so, where were they observing these "extreme conditions" from? Or In?

    Look at all the science fiction movies, isn't it amazing how NASA discoveries follow the movies?

    "Personally, I'm not sure. There is not much debate over what happened at the beginning of the universe, it's more of many scientists pitching all of their ideas to find out exactly what happened. But I do think it's indisputable that there was some sort of inflation; there might not be enough evidence for cyclism (although it's a really neat theory) but there is resounding evidence for inflation, such as the existence of cosmic background radiation, gravitational waves, etc that is supported by virtually every astrophysicist. I'd love to go more in-depth about that if you want."

    What is the "indisputable evidence" you see of an Inflation? Is it that because it looks like some stars are moving apart? Don't worry, in a month they'll do that again, just as thousands of miles of ice melts every year, and freezes again.
    So if they want to push for an Ice Age, they show documentaries of water freezing, .. thousands of miles of water freezing. If they want to push the Global Warming, they show the ice melting.
    I remember living in St. Claire Shores Mich. and watched the whole Lake St. Clair freeze over one winter. Would of make a perfect "Another Ice Age is upon us" Doomsday documentary.

    My personal favorite is: "Top NASA Scientists have determined that we only have another 4 billion years before our sun  burns out, sucking in our entire solar system!" .. boy, I couldn't sleep for months after reading that, counting the days before Doomsday.
    Erfisflat
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
    Ok. So the "Big Bang" is a viable theory.
    But only with regard to the formation of the universe from an already existent point of dense matter.
    That is to say, there was already something.
    So as I thought, the B.B theory in no way attempts to overcome the something from nothing conundrum.
    Are there any viable theories out there, that can offer some sort of explanation?

     Yes there is one, the way I understood is that first there was the 'nothing'.
    From this nothing, .. the best that all the brilliant sci-fientific minds could come up with, .. is that an unknown quantum alien force that goes by the name "gravity" fluctuated out, .. shapeshifting itself as both a creating, and a destructive force that can miraculously expand a vacuum-space, in which through chaos claims it created the stars and planets, and all the different life on them.

    As for God, .. we have a message from the Alien that shape-shifted into a 70's answering machine, and has taken over the human body of one called Stephen Hawking's whom the alien answering machine has now kept alive for many, many years who today is nothing but a lump of meat that it drags around in a wheelchair, its tentacles twitching the poor mans cheeks, has spoken:

    "There is no God, no one created the universe, and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realization, there is probably no Heaven, and no afterlife either, .."

    The Alien is taking this poor man all over the world to spread its diseased message, and oh yes, spraying deadly chem-trails over all the cities as it goes. So far no scientist has been able to remove this E.T. from Mr. Hawking's body!

    Warning, what you're about to see is very disturbing, especially when we see that no new attempts have been made to separate the alien from the mans body! Notice at time 1:04 the poor mans terrified look as if screaming: "Help me, please help me!"


    ErfisflatSuperSith89melanielustJuicyMelonTech
  • @Evidence
    Not addressing your first points because I made it clear that I'm not an expert and therefore don't have a solid opinion on the singularity part. You could always research it and figure out how they know - it's not nearly as simple as you assume.

    The evidence that the universe is expanding is indeed indisputable. It has nothing to do with looking at the sky and watching the stars move apart - that's too local for the scale we're dealing with here. In the early 1900s, Edwin Hubble was studying the velocities of galaxies and found that the farther the distance, the faster it was moving away from us, and that all galaxies were moving away from us. Instead of finding what he expected - random galactic movements - this proved that galaxies were always at a stable position, but the universe was expanding, and therefore they had those velocities. These calculations have been repeated time and time again, and even in the modern day Hubble's evidence still holds true. We can study the velocities and movements of galaxies based off of their redshift. The Doppler effect is very common in every day life, and thus is noticeably radically exaggerated in space.

    I think I've touched upon this in previous debates, but you don't need to see something to believe it one one condition, that condition being that based off of solid, reliable calculations and observations, one can extrapolate data to create models of history. That's why I'm open-minded to many versions of the Big Bang theory.
    Erfisflat
  • m_abusteitm_abusteit 97 Pts
    edited June 22
    The singularity rapidly expanded in the big bang. The singularity is all of matter and energy which are not created because of the first law of thermodynamics , says matter and energy can not be created nor destroyed which means most likely eternal. The higgs boson particle which is part of the singularity broke the symmetry of the singularity and caused the explosion. Check out michio kaku's video "what put the bang in big bang". Why does nothing have to exist? Can nothing exist? Even if your god existed before the big bang, did he exist timelessly or eternally? If he existed timelessly, he cant exist because without time, god could not exist .... not even for one second. If he existed eternally in the past that must mean he existed for an infinite sequence of events in the past due to past- infinity which is also impossible and ridiculous due to infinite regress.
    ErfisflatmelanielustEvidence
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
    @Evidence
    Not addressing your first points because I made it clear that I'm not an expert and therefore don't have a solid opinion on the singularity part. You could always research it and figure out how they know - it's not nearly as simple as you assume.

    The evidence that the universe is expanding is indeed indisputable. It has nothing to do with looking at the sky and watching the stars move apart - that's too local for the scale we're dealing with here. In the early 1900s, Edwin Hubble was studying the velocities of galaxies and found that the farther the distance, the faster it was moving away from us, and that all galaxies were moving away from us. Instead of finding what he expected - random galactic movements - this proved that galaxies were always at a stable position, but the universe was expanding, and therefore they had those velocities. These calculations have been repeated time and time again, and even in the modern day Hubble's evidence still holds true. We can study the velocities and movements of galaxies based off of their redshift. The Doppler effect is very common in every day life, and thus is noticeably radically exaggerated in space.

    I think I've touched upon this in previous debates, but you don't need to see something to believe it one one condition, that condition being that based off of solid, reliable calculations and observations, one can extrapolate data to create models of history. That's why I'm open-minded to many versions of the Big Bang theory.
    Thank you Melanie, .. you said:
    "Not addressing your first points because I made it clear that I'm not an expert and therefore don't have a solid opinion on the singularity part. You could always research it and figure out how they know - it's not nearly as simple as you assume."

    You sure sound like an expert on everything after the Big-Bang in nothing! So what's so hard in understanding that "some quantum magical particle popped out of, and into nothing, got denser because of gravity till it reached 66.6 gazillion degrees and exploded with a Big Bang creating an expanding vacuum that can, through chaos mutate huge rocks that sweat oceans of salty water, which gravity, .. the same gravity that is expanding this Big-Banged Vacuum, holds to this spinning big rock that not a drop is sucked into the space-vacuum for 4.2 billion years. See, there, .. "singularity" in one simple paragraph.

    Melanie: "The evidence that the universe is expanding is indeed indisputable."

    Yes, the evidence that the universe is expanding is just as indisputable as J. M. Barrie's claim that Peter Pan can fly with the help of a little Pixy-dust sprinkled on himself.

    Only problem here is that neither the 'universe' nor 'Peter Pan' really exists.

    Melanie: "Edwin Hubble was studying the velocities of galaxies"
    .. is like saying: "Captain Hook was studying the daily habits of Tinkerbell" and the rest of what you said just follows the BB-Fairytale.

    Melanie: "The Doppler effect is very common in every day life, and thus is noticeably radically exaggerated in space."
     So the effects of sound traveling through air, is radically exaggerated in your space vacuum? OK, .. if you say so!? I guess explosions are exaggerated in space also, since the first sound that his holiness George Lemaitre heard was a Big-Bang!?

    Melanie: ".. that condition being that based off of solid, reliable calculations and observations, one can extrapolate data to create models of history."

    Like this, right?



    After their spacewalk (didn't suit this time, I guess too many leaks in the scuba-space suits), the Italian Astronaut is going to make some reliable calculations on observations he made in the pool, which will be based on the imaginary Star-Wars space. Bubbles will be assessed as 'expanding galaxies' lol.

    You know what ticks me off? Look at the size of that pool, and the billions of dollars it took to build it, and maintain it, while the other half (non-German) half of the world is starving, and the common folk like me can't even afford a tiny pool for the kids in my back yard to cool off in from this 115 degree AZ heat. Well, I guess life will be much better once humanity is shipped off to Mars. Here is a clip of those chosen (selections) to go to Mars, all non-Germans:


    In the audience is the Germans, laughing and cheering, .. and of course worshipping their master:


    PowerPikachu21Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    @Evidence big bangism, evolution, gravity, it's all pseudoscience. None of us will ever get to test any of it, but they accept it like it's gospel truth.
    PowerPikachu21m_abusteitEvidence
    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @Erfisflat Gravity doesn't exist? Then I'll just jump out my window and fly! Here we go!
    m_abusteitErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
  • @PowerPikachu21 It's a bird!  It's a plane!  No, it's- *SPLAT* - well nevermind...
    m_abusteitPowerPikachu21
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
     @ m_abusteit  The singularity rapidly expanded in the big bang. The sinfularity is all of matter and energy ehich are not created because the first law of thermodynamicd. The higgs boson particle which us part of the singularity broke the symmetry of the singularity and caused the explosion. Check out michio kaku's video "what put the bang in big bang". Why does nothing have to exist? Can nothing exist? Even if your god existed before the big bang, did he exist timelessly or eternally? If he existed timelessly he cant exist because without time, god could not exist .... not eveb for one second. If he existed eternally in the past that must mean he existed for an infinite sequence of events in the past due to past- infinity which is also impossible and ridicolous due to infinite regress. - See more at: http://debateisland.com/discussion/971/what-went-bang#sthash.bgHxuiil.dpuf

    So why was "all of matter and energy" at a singularity? Why couldn't all that matter and energy stay in it's actual (present) form? Has ANY scientist EVER observed such enormous energy getting denser and hotter to make the claim that this imaginary universe of theirs, which they include Gods creation Earth, .. must have been in that same state? What I mean is, .. if BB-Evolutionists keep claiming that the earth did not need a Creator, that their universe "may have always existed", then why the BB story? Has any scientist seen a large amount of matter or mass clump together? Ah, never mind, black holes, right? Yes, they observe black holes all the time since they are everywhere in BB-vacuum space/Universe.
    I mean how could you even talk about science fiction as if it was real observable science?
    In sci-fi, a Klingon ship could come out of cloaking at any time, then jump in a wormhole and attack us from behind from a parallel universe.

    As for Michio Kaku, to go for scientific information to him about our earth is like asking about the existence of our Infinite Creator from the Pope! What you'll get is a lot of religious preaching that has nothing to do with our reality. He, like Richard Dawkins is a science fiction Preacher.

    m_abusteit: "Even if your god existed before the big bang, did he exist timelessly or eternally?"

    There is a HUGE difference between Eternal, and eternally/eternity just as there is between Infinite and infinity.

    God is our Infinite and Eternal Creator, He does not live for an eternity, nor does He go on infinitely, He IS Infinite, which is by reason also Eternal. Now His created/begotten Son Word does live eternally, and will go on infinitely, or as long as God his/our Creator wishes it.

    So both scientifically, and philosophically Infinite and Eternal conscious Mind God makes perfect sense, and answers all our questions since we were created in His image, all we have to do is observe ourselves.

    m_abusteit: "infinity which is also impossible and ridiculous due to infinite regress."

    To claim infinity created all this IS ridiculous "because of infinite regress" as you said, and I agree. This is why it is so important to understand the distinction between infinity and Infinite.
    Infinity is for the created existence, but Infinite is the Creator of all things created.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    edited June 22 Premium Member
    @Erfisflat Gravity doesn't exist?then I'll just jump out my window and fly! Here we go!
    Yuck, yuck. Maybe you're not familiar with the definition of gravity. 
    the force that attracts a body toward the center of the earth, or toward any other physical body having mass. For most purposes Newton's laws of gravity apply, with minor modifications to take the general theory of relativity into account.


    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • There was no actual bang.
    There are two working hypothesist when it comes to the big bang.

    1. Matter poured in from a forth dimensional space inflating our reality like a balloon.

    2. Space started out as a vacuum and it collapsed in on itself causing a cosmic fluctuations of energy and the energy from that event converted into matter.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    There was no actual bang.
    There are two working hypothesist when it comes to the big bang.

    1. Matter poured in from a forth dimensional space inflating our reality like a balloon.

    2. Space started out as a vacuum and it collapsed in on itself causing a cosmic fluctuations of energy and the energy from that event converted into matter.
    Love those crazy pseudoscientific belief systems!
    Evidence
    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @Erfisflat
    You are one of the most insane people I have to ever known and you are questioning my sanity?

    Lol
    Someone call the guys in the white coats.
  • @Erfisflat
    What is your working hypothesis on where all this came to from, oh wise king of the nut househouse?
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 462 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    @Erfisflat
    What is your working hypothesis on where all this came to from, oh wise king of the nut househouse?
    I have personally verified that any measurable amount of water always has a flat surface, so I haves deduced from that observation that the earth is flat. No scientific experiment has ever proved the earth to be in motion, so from these observations, the big bangism fairy tale is out. Logically these observations also lead me to conclude that we are the center of the "universe" if you can call it that. 

    "Don't just teach your children to read, teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." George Carlin 

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @Erfisflat many of your arguments are simply dismissing something as pseudoscience. Tell me how the world was created in your eyes. 
  • have you ever heard of the moon landing in 1969? It clearly shows an image of a circular earth. Thousands of studies, Stephen hawking, all these things disprove you and your conspiracies. Quantum physics, normal physics, Any of this ring a bell?
  • I don't like to label people. 
    But certain people are simply, antagonists.

    All I was curious about was, what In relation to the big bang theory, went bang?
    Something must have gone bang, as nothing doesn't go bang.
    Therefore as I see it, the big bang is a fundamentally flawed theory, as something must already have been in existence.
    In order to understand the existence of everything, we must first solve the something from nothing conundrum.
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
    @Erfisflat many of your arguments are simply dismissing something as pseudoscience. Tell me how the world was created in your eyes. 

    @JuicyMelonTech it was created very thoughtfully to accommodate for us humans to have as much fun as possible, as evidenced by scientific observation.
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
    @Erfisflat
    You are one of the most insane people I have to ever known and you are questioning my sanity?

    Lol
    Someone call the guys in the white coats.

    White coats, you mean like the Pope? Not only a white coat, but sometimes he wears a nurses hat too,

    https://www.kenyans.co.ke/news/interesting-facts-pope-francis-dressing

    someone should tell him that's out of style!
  • EvidenceEvidence 118 Pts
    Erfisflat said:
    @Erfisflat Gravity doesn't exist?then I'll just jump out my window and fly! Here we go!
    Yuck, yuck. Maybe you're not familiar with the definition of gravity. 
    the force that attracts a body toward the center of the earth, or toward any other physical body having mass. For most purposes Newton's laws of gravity apply, with minor modifications to take the general theory of relativity into account.



    Yeah, that would be Gravity, isn't that why we can all drive up on the tunnel ceiling when going through a big mountain?

    I know, on my next physical I'm checking my weight in the Goddard Tunnel, it'll be like if I was walking on the moon! lol, .. gravity, the child that Mother Nature and Father Time never had.

    For the fun of it, I just Googled: "How much does gravity weigh?" and believe it or not, here are the answers.

    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080109102905AAJ7jRv

    I like Dan Hubers answer: "It weighs 18 grams, did it with a scale myself"  lol
  • SilverishGoldNovaSilverishGoldNova 513 PtsPremium Member
    Premium Member
    A magic singularity that suddenly bursted for no reason
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

Debate Anything on DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2017 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch