Does the Large-Scale Structure of the Universe Nix Big Bang Theory?

[Liffrea]

Few theories qualify for Nobel laureate Niels Bohr's famous question than the current Big Bang Theory of the origin of the Universe: "We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."

There is a growing body of data and theory which question whether the Universe may have begun with a Big Bang 13.75 billion years ago. Several leading cosmologists, such as Sean Carroll of CalTech and Neil Turok of Cambridge University challenge the prevailing model of a "Big Bang" and believe that in the future we will only look back in wonder at how anyone could have believed in a creation event which was refuted by so much evidence.

The origin of the Big Bang, that is, the state of "existence" which resulted in a Big Bang, is a mathematically obscure state - a "singularity" of zero volume that contained infinite density and infinite energy. Why this singularity existed, how it originated, and why it exploded, has led many scientists to question and challenge the very foundations of the Big Bang theory.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/05/the-big-bang-theory-fact-or-fiction-many-experts-say-fiction.html

[anonymaus]

Well, they wouldn't be very good scientists if they didn't study and question their own beliefs and conclusions. So good for them.

[SuuT]

Random thoughts:

Although I cannot find it at the moment, there is new information on behalf of physics out there concerning the allowance of matter from nothing ... I call Bullshit.


Science needs to stop attempting to cram everything into temporal simplicites such as "THE BEGINNING" of the universe, and "THE END" of the universe: Sometimes elegance is very complex.

[Vulpix]

Although the "Big Bang" is often presented as if it is proven fact, there is a wealth of data, including recent revelations of the several space probes and findings in fundamental physics, which possibly tell a different story.

Yet we seem to hear very little of the contrarian evidence and point of view...


Random thoughts:

Although I cannot find it at the moment, there is new information on behalf of physics out there concerning the allowance of matter from nothing ... I call Bullshit.


Science needs to stop attempting to cram everything into temporal simplicites such as "THE BEGINNING" of the universe, and "THE END" of the universe: Sometimes elegance is very complex.

Interestingly, the originator of the Big Bang theory was a Roman Catholic priest:


In the 1920s and 1930s almost every major cosmologist preferred an eternal steady state Universe, and several complained that the beginning of time implied by the Big Bang imported religious concepts into physics; this objection was later repeated by supporters of the steady state theory. This perception was enhanced by the fact that the originator of the Big Bang theory, Monsignor Georges Lemaître, was a Roman Catholic priest. Pope Pius XII, declared at the November 22, 1951 opening meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that the Big Bang theory accorded with the Catholic concept of creation.

[Radojica]

I am wondering something. If the Universe is old around 14 billion of years and we are able to see the objects (quasars) almost at the edge of the Universe, some 13 billion light years away, is it possible that with some stronger telescope we will be able to see the very Big Bang itself like some bright light or something knowing that astronomy is something like time traveling, if it is true that the Universe started that way and if it is true that the Universe is old that much?