Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonSamurai
The evidence backing up the big bang theory is pretty scant at best (and can be explained in other ways). Most of it seems to be a lot of postulation. There are also huge problems with it and our other theories, like for example how did the galaxies spread out as far as they did in the time frame that the universe was supposed to come into existence.
As for the existing evidence, my suspicion is that they are measuring signals from the birth of galaxies, not the universe. I really do not think that the universe truly exists in our linear perspective of time. I am also not sure that it has a beginning or an end, in time, or space, or anything.
Plus the theory to me logically does not make sense. In the beginning, there was nothing (not even time or space or anything), then there was some universe creating explosion and the universe went expanding out in all directions from one point, the end.
I am also skeptical of the entropy theory as well, though the logic is more sound at least. I suspect though, that the universe has mechanisms to deal with this, and that the formation of galaxies is cyclical.
But this is pure wild theorizing.
|
You have to realize that human knowledge is always evolving. Religions were early attempts by man to explain his environment.
The Big Bang Theory is the most logical explanation based on our current scientific knowledge, but we could easily be in a situation 50-100 years from now where a better explanation is found.