Is the current big bang model wrong?

And also there is the fact that what ever direction you look back 13 billion light years the sky is more or less the same. How do you look back in all directions at the same time? When you look back in six directions at the same time are you looking back to a bigger or smaller universe?

wisp,
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Before the BB, spacetime didn’t exist.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
So, if space-time did not exist, why did the BB start at all?

This dubious reasoning is also present in some biblical texts: "Adam and Eve were supernaturally smart, they were flawless, covered with the clothing of the Glory of God, but when they sinned they lost that covering and began to feel naked."

So, if they were flawless, why did they sin?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Is the current model of the BB wrong?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


Suppose we launch a gigantic space telescope and peer into the universe, then the BB predicts we should see a total blackness, i.e., we are looking beyond the latest hubble photo and beyond the expanding wave front. Is the BB theory therefore testable?

As I understand it, the BB model does not necessarily mean that all matter presently visible came out of a single point. Those who work this field have different viewpoints (sometimes more than one so they can go from one to the other to get out of difficulties).

Rather, the BB model is a "set" of ideas with the same theme. The theme is <i> expanding space</i> in which matter is embedded, coupled with a <i>beginning in time</i>. I have seen opinions that the baryon number is fixed or not fixed. Some think that if you were at the Hubble radius you would see the same galaxies from differnt perspectives. Other think that you would see altogether different galaxies, i.e. space is infinite in all directions containing an infinite amount of matter but we see only our neighborhood.

The big bang hypothesis has lots of wiggle room as do all fundamental theories of existence ... including mine ... including Tom's. There will have to be much more evidence gathered and many more decades of thinking and looking before what any reasonable man would call a "proof", favoring one hypothesis over another, is obtained. And ... the general culture will have to grow intellectually in order for a that eventual proof to be accepted into mainstream thinking.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And also there is the fact that whatever direction you look back 13 billion light-years the sky is more or less the same. How do you look back in all directions at the same time? When you look back in six directions at the same time are you looking back to a bigger or smaller universe?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Jim,

This is a good question. If we were on the edge of an expanding universe (3D model) we would see more galaxies in one direction than another. The fact that the universe looks the same in all directions suggests that we are closer to the centre region, otherwise we would see changes and time differences.


wisp

- particles of nothingness

EBTX,
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Rather, the BB model is a "set" of ideas with the same theme. The theme is expanding space in which matter is embedded, coupled with a beginning in time. I have seen opinions that the baryon number is fixed or not fixed. Some think that if you were at the Hubble radius you would see the same galaxies from differnt perspectives. Other think that you would see altogether different galaxies, i.e. space is infinite in all directions containing an infinite amount of matter but we see only our neighborhood.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The hubble telescope shows that a seemingly empty patch of sky to the naked eye contains thousands of galaxies. But can this reasoning not be applied to the latest Hubble Ultra Deep Field? Thus, a seemingly empty patch of the HUDF may well contain thousands of galaxies?

Wisp, There is more to it than just a 3D perspective. The universe is at least 13BLY in size in all directions from here so how can that fact be absorbed by the BB model? The universe is 26BLY from one side to the other even if we are at the center and thats not likely.