• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Big Bang Cosmology

ldmitruk

Active Member
arg-fallbackName="ldmitruk"/>
Hi @AronRa,

I watch your video on Diss the Disker last night and I enjoyed your take down of Nathan Thompson, what an arsehole.

One thing you said peaked my curiosity, and that was your comment regarding Big Band Bang Cosmology. Your grasp of the science of evolution is very excellent and I really surprised me, and other viewers I imagine, to hear you say you had issues with the theory. I'm interested in hearing what your objections to it are.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
On a more serious note, one of the key 'problems' is that the initial expansion was faster than the speed of light which would mean that relativity 'evolved' sometime later in the early expansion. Another perhaps more pressing problem is that the presence of dark matter / dark energy follows as a result of the model, but no one can bloody find the stuff. Finally, according to most measurements, the universe's expansion is still accelerating, which thereby causes a cascade of problems with regard to the fundamental geometry of the universe such as the apparent necessity of thereby considering the universe flat, which in turn means we need to understand why it has not yet after billions of years reached either heat death isotropy or big crunch gravitationally directed collapse.

It's still the only serious game in town, but there's a lot more to learn and I think most astrophysicists and cosmologists expect a unifying theory that will supersede any current inflationary model.
 
arg-fallbackName="We are Borg"/>
What I understand of the Big Bang is that when the universe expanded it was faster then the speed of light. But there was no laws broken, how can this be. Well space it self expanded in a medium what we know nothing about, read what’s Beyond the universe because its outside our universe it does not have to obey the laws of fysiek we know. Its very counterintuitive but when you grasp it, it will make sense.

If you want good explanation goto https://www.youtube.com/c/DrBecky/video search expansion
 
arg-fallbackName="Dragan Glas"/>
Greetings,

Nice to see you again, Hack.:)

There was a recent paper suggesting that, rather than dark energy, all one needs is a force associated with dark matter, thus reducing the number of entities to explain the universe from three (matter+dark matter+dark energy) to two (matter+dark matter).

Kindest regards,

James
 
arg-fallbackName="Deleted member 619"/>
Hey, brother, Good to see you too. nice to see the lights on here.

Ad for the paper...

Oooh, shiny!

I'll grab myself a copy of the full paper when I have a minute. I'll be interested to see how they deal with baryon acoustic oscillations in the CMBR, which has been the Achilles heel of pretty much every alternative to the LCDM model. Thanks for that, and really nice to be back.
 
Back
Top