"Science of the Big Bang" Rough Draft and Secondary Draft
December 6, 2016 at 1:31 am
(This post was last modified: December 6, 2016 at 1:37 am by RiddledWithFear.
Edit Reason: messup
)
So this is the rough draft for the thread I had suggested I make a day or two ago:
Before I start, I wish to clarify terms that I can be misinterpreted.
-Scientific Theory: A scientific theory is much different than a regular theory. A scientific theory a tested, proven, peer-reviewed explanation of something scientific, such as the Theory of Germs, the Theory of General Relativity, and of course, the Theory of Evolution.
-Theory (general use): A theory in general use can be almost correlated with that of a scientific hypothesis. It's something unproven, but it's an idea.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the 200,000 years we have been on this Earth, we have wondered, "How was the universe created? What was the cause?" Well, finally, we have the answer to this question, at least mostly.
Let's start off with the clarification of some misconceptions. The Big Bang shouldn't be thought of as an explosion but an inflation, or expansion. In order to understand this, we must picture a balloon. Picture a very small, un-blown up balloon. Now imagine that balloon being blown up to it's usual size. Well, imagine it doesn't stop there. Imagine it happens to continue expanding, and expanding. It doesn't seem to stop. Imagine this, instead of an explosion. Now, onto the explanation.
Before we explain in-depth the science-y science of the Big Bang Theory, we must understand its origins. The Big Bang Theory was formed by a Belgian priest Georges Lemaître in the 1920s. He first theorized that the universe had been formed by a single, primordial atom. Later on, such a theory was later widely boosted when Edwin Hubble had seen that the universe was expanding, and speeding away from us. The theory also had been supported by the discovery of cosmic microwave radiation, that is, a small, very faint glow of light that fills the entire universe, which was found by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. However, the theory of inflation, that is, the scientific theory that states that there was an expansion of space in the universe, was invented in the 1980s, which correlates with the original Big Bang theory.
Now that we've got that out of they way, we may move on to the true science of the Big Bang. Picture this: you are in...nothingness. Pretty difficult, right? We usually picture blackness, which by itself in something. I mean, the very sentence contradicts itself. I'm in nothingness? That means there is something. That's the problem. The human mind cannot fully understand nothingness, no matter how hard we try, no matter what we think of. The only way to understand nothingness, really, is to die. Stick with me here. Well, now, picture an infinitely small, infinitely heated something, so small that we could not possibly comprehend it. This is called a singularity. You might have heard the term before for the things that are, theoretically, at the center of Black Holes- a thing that has compressed itself so much, that it has become something that holds an infinite amount of energy. Well, this singularity, in a way, defies the laws of physics, because it was not formed in space, but space was formed in it. Now, obviously, this sounds like the whole theory is dis-proven, but bear with me hear. We have to remember to step out of experiences that are not our own. We cannot fully comprehend the concept of nothingness, but we can sure know that when there is nothing, there certainly is nothing, that means nothing. No concept of time, no cause and effect, and no laws of...anything, really. There was nothing before the singularity. Not a thing.
Now, picture this singularity rapidly expanding, becoming less condense and much, much wider than before. This expansion is widely deemed as the cosmic inflation, as mentioned earlier. Many ask, "How does this happen?" Good question. We don't know. Nevertheless, there are hard-working, highly-educated, highly-experienced scientists that are working on this question. So we can't know everything. Does this change anything about the validity of this theory? Absolutely not. It simply prompts a question that needs answering, and hopefully will be answered soon enough. However, if your thirst for knowledge is not quenched, there are plenty of theories on how this singularity expanded.
Now, this mega-expansion left behind, besides time-space, obviously, by the work of quantum fluctuation, that is, the temporary change of the amount of energy that is in a point in space, the first subatomic particles, an area of molecular structure that something can, indeed, be created out of nothing, were left. The seeds of complex structures are formed. However, these particles are not allowed to further this construction and formation of complex structures because the universe was still in a very early, and very, very heated. Thus, simple atoms could not be created and form together. About 400,000 years after the big bang, light began to be there, and after millions of years, once the Earth startled to cool, simple atoms were formed, and started to create more complex structure. For example, hydrogen atoms bonded to create stars (very large and unstable stars, but that's not relevant to the topic). Eventually, everything in space and on Earth and all of the other planets in our solar system and in the whole cosmos were created, as well as complex living organisms, most likely through a process called abiogenesis.
For 200,000 years humans have been searching for the answer to the formation of the universe. We have now achieved such knowledge, or at least, the best possible solution to such a query.
Sources:
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/sc...e-article/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...ic-microw/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation
http://www.space.com/25126-big-bang-theory.html
http://www.big-bang-theory.com/
Sources:
However, I then realized that some of the information was inaccurate, so I made another draft.
So I went ahead and wrote that "Science of the Big Bang" post, and I need to know if this is accurate and holds up to the theory. Thanks in advance.
Before I start, I wish to clarify terms that I can be misinterpreted.
-Scientific Theory: A scientific theory is much different than a regular theory. A scientific theory a tested, proven, peer-reviewed explanation of something scientific, such as the Theory of Germs, the Theory of General Relativity, and of course, the Theory of Evolution.
-Theory (general use): A theory in general use can be almost correlated with that of a scientific hypothesis. It's something unproven, but it's an idea.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the thousands of years we have been on this Earth, we have wondered how we got here. We now have the best possible explanation.
Let's start off with the clarification of some misconceptions. The Big Bang shouldn't be thought of as an explosion but an inflation, or expansion. In order to understand this, we must picture a balloon. Picture a very small, un-blown up balloon. Now imagine that balloon being blown up to it's usual size. Well, imagine it doesn't stop there. Imagine it happens to continue expanding, and expanding. It doesn't seem to stop. Imagine this, instead of an explosion. Now, onto the explanation.
Before we explain in-depth the science-y science of the Big Bang Theory, we must understand its origins. The Big Bang Theory was formed by a Belgian priest Georges Lemaître in the 1920s. He first theorized that the universe had been formed by a single, primordial atom. Later on, such a theory was later widely boosted when Edwin Hubble had seen that the universe was expanding, and speeding away from us. The theory also had been supported by the discovery of cosmic microwave radiation, that is, a small, very faint glow of light that fills the entire universe, which was found by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. However, the theory of inflation, that is, the scientific theory that states that there was an expansion of space in the universe, was invented in the 1980s, which correlates with the original Big Bang theory.
Now that we've got that out of they way, we may move on to the true science of the Big Bang. Picture this: you are in...nothingness. Pretty difficult, right? We usually picture blackness, which by itself in something. I mean, the very sentence contradicts itself. I'm in nothingness? That means there is something. That's the problem. The human mind cannot fully understand nothingness, no matter how hard we try, no matter what we think of. The only way to understand nothingness, really, is to die. Stick with me here. Well, now, picture an infinitely small, infinitely heated something, so small that we could not possibly comprehend it. This is called a singularity. You might have heard the term before for the things that are, theoretically, at the center of Black Holes- a thing that has compressed itself so much, that it has become something that holds an infinite amount of energy. Well, this singularity, in a way, defies the laws of physics, because it was not formed in space, but space was formed in it. Now, obviously, this sounds like the whole theory is dis-proven, but bear with me hear. We have to remember to step out of experiences that are not our own. We cannot fully comprehend the concept of nothingness, but we can sure know that when there is nothing, there certainly is nothing, that means nothing. No concept of time, no cause and effect, and no laws of...anything, really. There was nothing before the singularity. Not a thing.
Now, picture this singularity rapidly expanding (around 10 to the -33 and -32 seconds seconds after the Big Bang), becoming less condense and much, much wider than before. This expansion is widely deemed as the cosmic inflation, as mentioned earlier. Many ask, "How does this happen?" Good question. We don't know. However, a prevailing theory involves the Inflaton, a hypothetical scalar field. The theory works like this:
1. Initially, this field was at a very high-energy state.
2. Through quantum fluctuation, that is, the temporary change of the amount of energetic particles in a point in space, this field went through a sort-of phase transition, where the energy of the Inflaton field is released as matter and radiation.
3. This creates a repulsive force, which then drives the observable universe to expand to 10 to the -50th power meters in radius, in 10 to the -35 seconds.
Now, this mega-expansion left behind the first subatomic particles, and the seeds of complex structures are formed. However, these particles are not allowed to further this construction and formation of complex structures because the universe was still in a very early, and very, very heated. Thus, simple atoms could not be created and form together. About 400,000 years after the big bang, light began to be there, and after millions of years, once the Earth startled to cool, simple atoms were formed, and started to create more complex structure. For example, hydrogen atoms bonded to create stars (very large and unstable stars, but that's not relevant to the topic). Eventually, everything in space and on Earth and all of the other planets in our solar system and in the whole cosmos were created, as well as complex living organisms, most likely through a process called abiogenesis.
For 200,000 years humans have been searching for the answer to the formation of the universe. We have now achieved such knowledge, or at least, the best possible solution to such a query.
Sources:
Big Bang Theory
If anyone could do a peer review of the second draft, I'd be much appreciated.
Before I start, I wish to clarify terms that I can be misinterpreted.
-Scientific Theory: A scientific theory is much different than a regular theory. A scientific theory a tested, proven, peer-reviewed explanation of something scientific, such as the Theory of Germs, the Theory of General Relativity, and of course, the Theory of Evolution.
-Theory (general use): A theory in general use can be almost correlated with that of a scientific hypothesis. It's something unproven, but it's an idea.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the 200,000 years we have been on this Earth, we have wondered, "How was the universe created? What was the cause?" Well, finally, we have the answer to this question, at least mostly.
Let's start off with the clarification of some misconceptions. The Big Bang shouldn't be thought of as an explosion but an inflation, or expansion. In order to understand this, we must picture a balloon. Picture a very small, un-blown up balloon. Now imagine that balloon being blown up to it's usual size. Well, imagine it doesn't stop there. Imagine it happens to continue expanding, and expanding. It doesn't seem to stop. Imagine this, instead of an explosion. Now, onto the explanation.
Before we explain in-depth the science-y science of the Big Bang Theory, we must understand its origins. The Big Bang Theory was formed by a Belgian priest Georges Lemaître in the 1920s. He first theorized that the universe had been formed by a single, primordial atom. Later on, such a theory was later widely boosted when Edwin Hubble had seen that the universe was expanding, and speeding away from us. The theory also had been supported by the discovery of cosmic microwave radiation, that is, a small, very faint glow of light that fills the entire universe, which was found by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. However, the theory of inflation, that is, the scientific theory that states that there was an expansion of space in the universe, was invented in the 1980s, which correlates with the original Big Bang theory.
Now that we've got that out of they way, we may move on to the true science of the Big Bang. Picture this: you are in...nothingness. Pretty difficult, right? We usually picture blackness, which by itself in something. I mean, the very sentence contradicts itself. I'm in nothingness? That means there is something. That's the problem. The human mind cannot fully understand nothingness, no matter how hard we try, no matter what we think of. The only way to understand nothingness, really, is to die. Stick with me here. Well, now, picture an infinitely small, infinitely heated something, so small that we could not possibly comprehend it. This is called a singularity. You might have heard the term before for the things that are, theoretically, at the center of Black Holes- a thing that has compressed itself so much, that it has become something that holds an infinite amount of energy. Well, this singularity, in a way, defies the laws of physics, because it was not formed in space, but space was formed in it. Now, obviously, this sounds like the whole theory is dis-proven, but bear with me hear. We have to remember to step out of experiences that are not our own. We cannot fully comprehend the concept of nothingness, but we can sure know that when there is nothing, there certainly is nothing, that means nothing. No concept of time, no cause and effect, and no laws of...anything, really. There was nothing before the singularity. Not a thing.
Now, picture this singularity rapidly expanding, becoming less condense and much, much wider than before. This expansion is widely deemed as the cosmic inflation, as mentioned earlier. Many ask, "How does this happen?" Good question. We don't know. Nevertheless, there are hard-working, highly-educated, highly-experienced scientists that are working on this question. So we can't know everything. Does this change anything about the validity of this theory? Absolutely not. It simply prompts a question that needs answering, and hopefully will be answered soon enough. However, if your thirst for knowledge is not quenched, there are plenty of theories on how this singularity expanded.
Now, this mega-expansion left behind, besides time-space, obviously, by the work of quantum fluctuation, that is, the temporary change of the amount of energy that is in a point in space, the first subatomic particles, an area of molecular structure that something can, indeed, be created out of nothing, were left. The seeds of complex structures are formed. However, these particles are not allowed to further this construction and formation of complex structures because the universe was still in a very early, and very, very heated. Thus, simple atoms could not be created and form together. About 400,000 years after the big bang, light began to be there, and after millions of years, once the Earth startled to cool, simple atoms were formed, and started to create more complex structure. For example, hydrogen atoms bonded to create stars (very large and unstable stars, but that's not relevant to the topic). Eventually, everything in space and on Earth and all of the other planets in our solar system and in the whole cosmos were created, as well as complex living organisms, most likely through a process called abiogenesis.
For 200,000 years humans have been searching for the answer to the formation of the universe. We have now achieved such knowledge, or at least, the best possible solution to such a query.
Sources:
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/sc...e-article/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...ic-microw/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation
http://www.space.com/25126-big-bang-theory.html
http://www.big-bang-theory.com/
Sources:
However, I then realized that some of the information was inaccurate, so I made another draft.
So I went ahead and wrote that "Science of the Big Bang" post, and I need to know if this is accurate and holds up to the theory. Thanks in advance.
Before I start, I wish to clarify terms that I can be misinterpreted.
-Scientific Theory: A scientific theory is much different than a regular theory. A scientific theory a tested, proven, peer-reviewed explanation of something scientific, such as the Theory of Germs, the Theory of General Relativity, and of course, the Theory of Evolution.
-Theory (general use): A theory in general use can be almost correlated with that of a scientific hypothesis. It's something unproven, but it's an idea.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the thousands of years we have been on this Earth, we have wondered how we got here. We now have the best possible explanation.
Let's start off with the clarification of some misconceptions. The Big Bang shouldn't be thought of as an explosion but an inflation, or expansion. In order to understand this, we must picture a balloon. Picture a very small, un-blown up balloon. Now imagine that balloon being blown up to it's usual size. Well, imagine it doesn't stop there. Imagine it happens to continue expanding, and expanding. It doesn't seem to stop. Imagine this, instead of an explosion. Now, onto the explanation.
Before we explain in-depth the science-y science of the Big Bang Theory, we must understand its origins. The Big Bang Theory was formed by a Belgian priest Georges Lemaître in the 1920s. He first theorized that the universe had been formed by a single, primordial atom. Later on, such a theory was later widely boosted when Edwin Hubble had seen that the universe was expanding, and speeding away from us. The theory also had been supported by the discovery of cosmic microwave radiation, that is, a small, very faint glow of light that fills the entire universe, which was found by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. However, the theory of inflation, that is, the scientific theory that states that there was an expansion of space in the universe, was invented in the 1980s, which correlates with the original Big Bang theory.
Now that we've got that out of they way, we may move on to the true science of the Big Bang. Picture this: you are in...nothingness. Pretty difficult, right? We usually picture blackness, which by itself in something. I mean, the very sentence contradicts itself. I'm in nothingness? That means there is something. That's the problem. The human mind cannot fully understand nothingness, no matter how hard we try, no matter what we think of. The only way to understand nothingness, really, is to die. Stick with me here. Well, now, picture an infinitely small, infinitely heated something, so small that we could not possibly comprehend it. This is called a singularity. You might have heard the term before for the things that are, theoretically, at the center of Black Holes- a thing that has compressed itself so much, that it has become something that holds an infinite amount of energy. Well, this singularity, in a way, defies the laws of physics, because it was not formed in space, but space was formed in it. Now, obviously, this sounds like the whole theory is dis-proven, but bear with me hear. We have to remember to step out of experiences that are not our own. We cannot fully comprehend the concept of nothingness, but we can sure know that when there is nothing, there certainly is nothing, that means nothing. No concept of time, no cause and effect, and no laws of...anything, really. There was nothing before the singularity. Not a thing.
Now, picture this singularity rapidly expanding (around 10 to the -33 and -32 seconds seconds after the Big Bang), becoming less condense and much, much wider than before. This expansion is widely deemed as the cosmic inflation, as mentioned earlier. Many ask, "How does this happen?" Good question. We don't know. However, a prevailing theory involves the Inflaton, a hypothetical scalar field. The theory works like this:
1. Initially, this field was at a very high-energy state.
2. Through quantum fluctuation, that is, the temporary change of the amount of energetic particles in a point in space, this field went through a sort-of phase transition, where the energy of the Inflaton field is released as matter and radiation.
3. This creates a repulsive force, which then drives the observable universe to expand to 10 to the -50th power meters in radius, in 10 to the -35 seconds.
Now, this mega-expansion left behind the first subatomic particles, and the seeds of complex structures are formed. However, these particles are not allowed to further this construction and formation of complex structures because the universe was still in a very early, and very, very heated. Thus, simple atoms could not be created and form together. About 400,000 years after the big bang, light began to be there, and after millions of years, once the Earth startled to cool, simple atoms were formed, and started to create more complex structure. For example, hydrogen atoms bonded to create stars (very large and unstable stars, but that's not relevant to the topic). Eventually, everything in space and on Earth and all of the other planets in our solar system and in the whole cosmos were created, as well as complex living organisms, most likely through a process called abiogenesis.
For 200,000 years humans have been searching for the answer to the formation of the universe. We have now achieved such knowledge, or at least, the best possible solution to such a query.
Sources:
Big Bang Theory
If anyone could do a peer review of the second draft, I'd be much appreciated.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
