Is the current big bang model wrong?

David

Imaging the universe as a hot ball of fire the size of our sun. If we measure the radiation (light) coming from the sun it would plot as a knee shaped curve with a peak temperature of about 6000K (of course the temperature of the big bang ball of fire would be much hotter).
If the sun were to expand to the size of the universe, its temperature would drop to a small fraction above 0K.
This is what happened to the big bang ball of fire, it has spread out over a huge volume and it has cooled to just 3 degrees above absolute zero. What we are seeing is the warmth left over from the big bang explosion, and this radiation appears to be coming from every direction.




wisp

- particles of nothingness

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by wisp</i>
<br />This is what happened to the big bang ball of fire, it has spread out over a huge volume and it has cooled to just 3 degrees above absolute zero. What we are seeing is the warmth left over from the big bang explosion, and this radiation appears to be coming from every direction.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Ok, thanks. That information helps.

But.... we are inside the universe looking out. We are not outside looking in. That “big ball of fire”, would now be the outside “boundary” of the universe, as we are inside looking out, and looking back in time.

We are somewhere inside the universe. The radiation that we see is moving “inward”, not “outward”.

What the Big Bang theory does is present us with basically a big expanding Euclidean sphere, and we are inside the sphere. We aren’t on its “surface”, and we are not “outside” it. We are inside it. That’s apparently why the background radiation is coming to us from all directions.

If we were on the outside looking at the universe as a sphere, from an outside point of view, we would see a round spherical sun-like object.. very large. But we are not on the outside looking at the universe, we are inside looking at it.

Any opinions about that?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Can I ask what a "fractionation line" is?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">If one plots the abundances of two different isotopes of an element such as oxygen against one another, the measures for various rocks from a common source will fall along a line called a "fractionation line". Although all Earth rocks have the same fractionation line, meteorites have different fractionation lines depending on their class or type, which presumably indicates their source. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DAVID</i>
<br />Do any of you happen to know where the cosmic background radiation is coming from? Is this a continuous radiation? If so, what is emitting it?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">In MM, microwave radiation is not from the background, but is a continuous radiation from elysium representing the minimum temperature anything in space can have because of the heat received from distant starlight. Eddington showed in 1926 that this minimum temperature was 3 degrees K.

In the Big Bang, the microwave background is the fireball remnant of the Big Bang itself. Your reasoning presumes that the Big Bang was some sort of an explosion into pre-existing space, which is denied by every knowledgable cosmologist. The Big Bang is an explosion OF space, not INTO space. Galaxies do not move apart. Instead, new space is continually being added between galaxies, which makes the motionless galaxies get farther apart.

Using the expanding balloon analogy, all galaxies and radiation are everywhere on the expanding surface of the balloon. 13.7 billion years of expansion of the surface after the Big Bang, all the radiation arriving at the Earth today can be traced back to a sphere 13.7 billion lightyears in radius, which is where it was first emitted. But every point in space can trace the radiation it is receiving to a different sphere of the same radius. Some distant points in the universe are just now receiving microwave radiation emitted from near our Galaxy soon after the Big Bang. -|Tom|-

[N.B. I'll be away at a conference for the next several days.]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br />
Using the expanding balloon analogy, all galaxies and radiation are everywhere on the expanding surface of the balloon. 13.7 billion years of expansion of the surface after the Big Bang,
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Hi Tom,

When I go out at night and look up, I don’t see any balloon. I don’t see any “surface” of our universe. I see us somewhere inside it, and it looks like the inside of a Euclidean sphere to me, sort of like Lemaitre’s “fireworks” model.

David

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">When I go out at night and look up, I don’t see any balloon. I don’t see any “surface” of our universe. I see us somewhere inside it, and it looks like the inside of a Euclidean sphere to me, sort of like Lemaitre’s “fireworks” model.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

You are thinking of space as being 3 dimensions and time being separate. Tom's right in that most cosmologist support Einstein's views in which space and time are joined (spacetime), and so their model of the big bang must have spacetime expanding outwards. A model showing galaxies being moved away from each other on a ballon's surface is a good analogy.

If you don't buy into this idea then you could stay with your own 3-d model. After all nobody has proven that spacetime exists!




wisp

- particles of nothingness