Help !! Doubts about Big Bang

[jonb]

Doubt, is the right place to be.

[Polaris]

1) Big Bang requires 3 hypothetical entities, cosmic inflation, dark matter, and dark energy, to make it match observations.

No, big bang does not require any of those three things. Big bang simply need the universe to be seen expanding, that's it. If the universe so happen to not have symptomes of inflation, dark matter, and dark energy, it would still have more than enough to support the big bang.

It's like the hypothesis of "you have driven a car" does not require the additional hypothesis "your car had alloy wheels, convertible tops, and a Ford badge" to be true. The latter are refinement of the base hypothesis. But there is enough support for the base hypothesis to be taken to fundamentally true even if the refinement turnout to be flawed.

---

Big Bang Theory requires acceptance of super-inflation, which breaks the Theory of Relativity in that the universe expanded significantly faster than the speed of light.

Please shut up. It is tiring to see you make a fool of yourself time and time again.

Are you fucking retarded?

[Creed of Heresy]

Lol the christian asking other people if they're retarded. Hilarious...

[downbeatplumb]

Big Bang Theory requires acceptance of super-inflation, which breaks the Theory of Relativity in that the universe expanded significantly faster than the speed of light.

No.

Relativity applies to motion of objects within spacetime, not expansion of spacetime.

It's why Warp drive is favoured by Sci-fi writers. It is a viable way to travel faster than light.

http://www.space.com/17628-warp-drive-po...light.html

[Whateverist]

Lol the christian asking other people if they're retarded. Hilarious...

Not really. Christians can be jerks too.

[jonb]

Science is all about doubt
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00..._Big_Bang/

[IATIA]

Big Bang Theory requires acceptance of super-inflation, which breaks the Theory of Relativity in that the universe expanded significantly faster than the speed of light.

The speed of light through space was 'c'.
The universe did not expand faster than 'c'.
Space-time expanded which accounts for the 'anomalies'.
Everything is 'ruled' by space-time.
Space-time is still expanding.

[jonb]

I want to highlight out a misnomer that I have come across a few times. It is often caused by the presence of christards, and a normal rational person is suckered into their way of thinking.
Science is a means of asking questions. We look for inconsistencies, and in the light of that refine the questions. It is not about dogma. when arguing with a cristard a scientific approach tends to give its adherent a better connection to reality than an untested assertion in an old book. Consequently we point to this or that bit of information that is not consistent with their dogma and the christard jumps through all sorts of tautologies, trying to show their dogma is in some way related to our experience of the world.
There is a problem though, and that is in the argument being two sided, those with a scientific approach can tend to see their current state of knowledge as proven fact and treat it as dogma. When that happens in a way the christards have won they have reduced the argument to one assertion verse another. In doing that they are killing science. Science was not disproved when Newton posited gravity as a driving force of the solar system. Nor did science die when relativity further refined our questions. Science will not die if this or that theory is proven or dis-proven, or further refined. In fact that is the life blood of science, it is why the greatest prizes are for those that overturn what we thought was solid structure.