We have come so far in the last 100 years, and so has our picture of the Universe. From an island galaxy ruled by Newton’s gravity and classical electromagnetism, we’ve come through the discovery of general relativity, the expanding Universe, the need for dark matter, the big bang, the synthesis of all the elements in the Universe, and, for good measure, we walked on the Moon. By the 1970s, we had a fabulous picture of the History of the Universe.

There’s just one (huge) problem: What caused the Big Bang? We know the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics, and we know that the Universe is finite in age, expanding, cooling, and bathed in the afterglow of the Big Bang. As far as we could tell, galaxies and clusters of galaxies looked exactly as they should, and the only cosmological problem left was the one of the dark matter holding clusters and galaxies together.

But a closer look revealed a number of problems. First off, this “leftover glow” from the Big Bang was the same exact temperature everywhere. Why? Why would this be the case? After all, if you look in one direction, you find a temperature of 2.725 Kelvin, and it comes from a distance of around 46 billion light-years away. But in the opposite direction, 46 billion light-years the other way, the temperature is also 2.725 Kelvin. How could this be, if these two things never touched each other? It takes time for temperatures to even out; this is why the people in the back seat of your car always complain about a lack of air conditioning in the summer! Even today, we know that the temperature difference in any two parts of the sky is only a few hundred thousandths of a degree:

So, that’s the first problem. Why is the Universe the same temperature everywhere?

But that’s not the only problem. If you take a look outside, the Earth looks pretty flat to you, doesn’t it. We know it’s a sphere, but the reason it looks flat to us is because we can only see a tiny area of it. What about the Universe? Well, we can imagine three possible “shapes” for the Universe: flat, sphere-like, or saddle-like:

What we observe is not only that the Universe is flat, but it’s so flat that, back in the early stages of the big bang, it had to be flat to 1 part in 10^51! This is so unlikely, it would be like throwing a dart at the entire Earth and hitting the correct atom.

Furthermore, there were other problems as well, such as:

  • What provided the tiny, gravitational imperfections that allowed stars, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies to form?
  • Why, if the Universe was so hot early on, are there no stable relics (like magnetic monopoles, for example) left over? And finally,
  • How did we wind up with a Universe that was hot, dense, and expanding in the first place?

There were a number of very smart people working on these problems, many of whom made great contributions. But it was a (then) young MIT physicist who figured it out:

The theory of Cosmological Inflation was put forth by Alan Guth in late 1979, and by time the paper was published in early 1980, practically every cosmologist on the planet was working on it.

Here’s what Guth’s inflation says. Start with a completely random Universe. Maybe some parts are expanding, maybe some parts are contracting, maybe some parts are hot, maybe some parts are cold. But in one (perhaps miniscule) location, you get the right conditions for inflation. What inflation does is it takes this one tiny region of space, and inflates it, like a high pressure hose inflating an infinitely stretchable balloon. Regardless of what the Universe looked like before inflation, after only a tiny fraction of a second of inflation, the Universe will be stretched flat, will be empty, expanding exponentially fast, and will be unstable.

The exponential expansion solves most of the above problems. Things can be the same temperature everywhere because the tiny region where inflation started — that gives rise to our Universe — could easily have been uniform enough to give us the same temperature everywhere in the Universe. The Universe is flat, because inflation stretched it so that it appears flat. (Take a look at this balloon from the ant’s perspective if you don’t believe it.)

And, the tiny little imperfections that give rise to stars, galaxies, and clusters can be created in a very clever way. Empty space, according to the laws of quantum mechanics, isn’t so empty. Tiny little pairs of particles and antiparticles, waves and anti-waves, are popping in and out of existence all the time. But in an exponentially expanding Universe, the space between them gets stretched so far that they can’t find each other again to annihilate, and this creates slight differences in densities that persist to this day.

But perhaps the most remarkable thing about inflation is that it’s unstable! This exponentially expanding space is full of this mysterious energy, but since E=mc^2, we can use this energy to make matter! And that’s precisely what happens. This unstable energy converts into photons, quarks, electrons, neutrinos, and all the types of matter and antimatter that are physically possible. At the end of Inflation, this gives us a Universe that is:

  1. roughly the same temperature everywhere,
  2. necessarily flat (or indiscernible from flat),
  3. devoid of any crazy stuff that may have existed before inflation,
  4. seeded with tiny differences in densities on all scales, and
  5. hot, dense, full of matter, and expanding!

And that describes the Big Bang, as we need it to be, almost exactly.

Inflation is a rich area, and Alan Guth wasn’t the only one working on it, but he was the first and only one to articulate how inflation solves all of these problems. I’ve had the privilege to meet Alan Guth, and he’s very congenial and humble, if just slightly socially awkward. I’ve also had a chance to meet other important people who’ve worked on inflation, such as Andrei Linde, Alexei Starobinski, and Paul Steinhardt. They’re not humble, and make overt glory-grabs when it comes to taking the credit for inflation. Make no mistake about it: this is Guth’s idea and Guth’s alone. Watson didn’t invent the telephone, Hilbert didn’t invent General Relativity, and for this idea, Guth will surely win a Nobel Prize. It makes me feel dirty to realize that he’s going to wind up sharing it with some of the more political (and less scientifically deserving) people above.

But from me, Alan Guth gets the accolade he deserves: the inventor of inflation, the most important scientist of his decade, and the glory of figuring out what must have caused the Big Bang!

Comments

  1. #1 NewEnglandBob
    July 6, 2009

    1. Where can I get a copy of that terrific poster “History of the Universe”?

    2.

    Start with a completely random Universe. Maybe some parts are expanding, maybe some parts are contracting, maybe some parts are hot, maybe some parts are cold.

    But this says that there was some form of Universe prior to the inflation (which defines the Big Bang). The inflation would wipe out any evidence of what was there before inflation, wouldn’t it? Did time exist before inflation? etc.

  2. #2 Ethan Siegel
    July 6, 2009

    Bob, you have discovered one of the most frustrating problems with inflation. It, by necessity, wipes out any pre-existing information about the Universe before inflation.

    (Paul Steinhardt and others may tell you otherwise, and if they do, they’re wrong.)

    This is why we don’t say the Universe goes back to a singularity, we say it goes back to when it’s 10^-38 seconds old (or so), because we know we don’t have any information to go back further beyond that.

  3. #3 Mu
    July 6, 2009

    So, does inflation “violate” general relativity, or does general relativity not come into play until later in the universe’s history? From the poster, at 10^-34 sec into the age of the universe, the whole thing should be smaller than an electron, with pretty fantastic energy densities. Do we have any idea what form of matter existed at that time?

  4. #4 Drekab
    July 6, 2009

    What are the right conditions for inflation? Was the previous universe destroyed by this inflation or is it just somewhere we can’t get to? Could inflation happen again?

    Mu, general relativity applies to objects, not to space itself as I understand it. The objects in the universe weren’t moving, they were just being streched out.

  5. @Mu: When the universe is that tiny, quantum effects tend to dominate, stuff like string winding energy, vacuum fluctuations, and the like. I don’t claim to understand it myself.

  6. @Drekab: I think I misunderstood what Mu was asking. Your answer is better than mine.

  7. #7 Brando
    July 6, 2009

    I’m curious as to what the hell the mechanism for Inflation is? Some kind of particle or field?

  8. #8 jdhuey
    July 6, 2009

    I’m a bit confused: the universe is about 14 billion years old so how can we look out to distances of 46 billion light years?

  9. #9 auto focus
    July 6, 2009

    What do you mean by the Universe being “flat”? I guess your meaning, obviously, wasn’t a 2D pool-table Universe.

  10. #10 WeAreGeek
    July 7, 2009

    We *know* the universe is finite in age? Wrong! We don’t know anything.

    It’s a bit silly to ask if time existed before or after anything. You see… without time there is no before or after. Likewise, there is nothing “before” or “after” the Big Bang. It just is. Not now, not here… it *is*!

    And no, the universe will never go *back* to a singularity, because it *is* a singularity. Space-time only exists within that singularity. That’s why it’s called a universe, right?

  11. #11 Ketil Tveiten
    July 7, 2009

    A question about the poster: what are the little pac-mans (pac-men?) supposed to represent? And what is “The Desert”?

  12. #12 NewEnglandBob
    July 7, 2009

    Thanks Ethan for answering my #2 question.

    But you didn’t answer #1 – Where can I obtain (buy) that poster?

  13. #13 MadScientist
    July 7, 2009

    So the universe is like a giant balloon? A shell of matter streaking away from a point in space and with swirling bits like a soap bubble? A balloon so large that it appears flat and we can’t see anything when we try to peek to the other side of the balloon?

  14. #14 Mu
    July 7, 2009

    Bunny, that’s the problem with this stuff, there are more people claiming to have spoken to God than there are people who really understand all this. At the end, it comes down who you trust more, and from some of the theoretical physicists I’ve met, mental health, or better, conforming to what is considered “normal”, is NOT a decisive difference between the two groups.
    I need “astrophysics for dummies who get lost at 3rd order tensors”.

  15. #15 sean hogge
    July 7, 2009

    @MadScientist

    If the universe is like a balloon, there is no point it is streaking away from. It’s difficult to grasp, but when you render the universe in two dimensions (such as a balloon), then the “center” of the balloon isn’t part of the universe, so it’s not there to be streaked away from. If the universe is the balloon, you can’t look “up” off of the balloon. You can only look in places there’s balloon material.

    Call it the latex limit. Or the mylar myopia. Depending upon your balloon flavor.

    Basically, you have to remember that if you use the analogy, you can’t address artifacts of the need for the analogy itself (the complication of visualizing simply in three dimensions). Which means to peek “through” the other side of the balloon, we’d have to enter a dimension we can’t see and only exists for us in mathematics.

  16. #16 sean hogge
    July 7, 2009

    @Ketil

    The “desert” refers to the time somewhere between 10^-37 and 10^-11 where the the universe was at an energy level which has no known corresponding particles.

  17. #17 BruceWMorlan
    July 7, 2009

    I thought the “leftover glow” was uniformly NOT the same in all directions in the sense that it shows that the earth/sun/galaxy are moving relative to a frame of reference in which the leftover glow IS uniform. So much for not being able to define a “preferred” frame of reference. The one that see the leftover glow as the same in all directions is unique (“preferred”) when compared to all other non-accelerating frames of reference.

  18. #18 Sili
    July 7, 2009

    Guth reminds me of the tall guy from Little Britain

  19. #19 Ethan Siegel
    July 7, 2009

    This is going to take a lot of explaining to answer all the questions here. I’ll tell you what; let me finish out this series and then I’ll start a new one on how distances work in Cosmology.

  20. #20 jdhuey
    July 7, 2009

    @Ethan

    Thanks, I will look forward to it. Trying to get a handle on the geometry of a dynamic spacetime has baffled me for sometime.

  21. #21 piratebrido
    July 8, 2009

    So the big bang was an inflation? I think my minds being blown, it may take a while to recover…

  22. #22 piratebrido
    July 8, 2009

    Never mind, it occurred after the big bang. Mind is still blown though…

  23. #23 Paulino
    July 9, 2009

    Ethan,

    I really love your series. I was quite blown away by this:

    “Start with a completely random Universe. Maybe some parts are expanding, maybe some parts are contracting, maybe some parts are hot, maybe some parts are cold.”

    Does this means that what we call Universe is just a bubble within a greater ‘whatever'(random Universe) ? Or this ‘whatever’ was obliterated by inflation? Or we’ll never know because it is impossible to observe it because of Inflation?

  24. #24 Ethan Siegel
    July 9, 2009

    Paulino,

    It means that it doesn’t matter what the Universe was like before inflation. All that matters is that one section of it, no matter how small it is and no matter how vast the rest of the Universe is, has the right conditions for inflation.

    But wouldn’t we all like to know what the rest of it looked like? At the moment, we haven’t conceived of a way to figure that out.

  25. #25 the backpacker
    July 10, 2009

    When I was in High School I work for a greenhouse/landscaper. This involved a lot of shoveling and lifting and carrying not a lot of brain power. One of the other kids I worked with was also interested in physics and cosmology and we would read as much as we could get and still understand on the big bang and the nature of the universe. The problem we always ran into was we could not do the math (really I still can’t do the math) and there is just no way, for me anyway, to satisfactorily conceptualize the big bang or the end of a finite universe. It sure made hot summer days of pulling weeds and digging rocks go faster though.

  26. #26 jdhuey
    July 10, 2009

    When we think of space the human mind has some paradoxical limitations: we can’t seem to imagine it as finite (what’s outside of this finite space?) and we can’t seem to imagine it as infinite (it has to end someplace, right?).

  27. #27 Derek
    July 17, 2009

    For those wanting to get a better understanding of the geometry of space while waiting for Ethan’s post, I recommend this.

    It hits on the basics, like how we can talk of distances greater than 14bn light-years.

  28. #28 Mitch
    August 25, 2009

    Hey, im 13. And what gets me is how it all began.
    Its amazing.

  29. #29 BRADSTA
    August 25, 2009

    HI, I GO TO WLSS!!!
    SPACE IS WICKED COZ WE R LEARNING ABOUT IT

  30. #30 Dale Toogood
    October 6, 2009

    Hello, would you be able to give me a tip on what? or who? to research to give me a good head start on trying to understand the universe,big bang, and all the relative components thanks Mr toogood

  31. #31 filo
    November 13, 2009

    Hi Ethan, I don’t know if you answer comments on old blog posts but about the homogeneous temperature problem:

    “Why would this be the case? After all, if you look in one direction, you find a temperature of 2.725 Kelvin, and it comes from a distance of around 46 billion light-years away. But in the opposite direction, 46 billion light-years the other way, the temperature is also 2.725 Kelvin.”

    Why is this surprising if electrons recombining with nuclei only happens at that specific temperature? Isn’t it expected?

  32. #32 pE@aCe_loL
    December 17, 2009

    i liKe it…
    what abeautiful universe we have…
    thank goD…

  33. #33 mark
    February 12, 2010

    Truly the big bang theory is just that, a theory. Keep looking for the answer humans because that’s not it. Think about it.

  34. #34 Michael Muise
    March 8, 2010

    The only reason why the “Big Bang” theory persists today is because the science,logic and reasoning behind it works for now as we don’t have anything else to replace it. But its a really a stupid theory if you stop and think about it, think about it for a minute, the universe decided one day to create itself out of “Nothingness” so basically what we are saying is that “Something” came out of “Nothing” no intelligent design, just something out of nothing, hey makes sense to me. And one day the Universe after possibly millions and billions of years in existence because we really don’t know the exact age of the Universe, its still just a guesstimate, after all we’ve only been able to send probes into Interstellar space so far, and we’re basing all of our theories and hypothesis on scientific models conducted in controlled environments that produce controlled results and also images from the Hubble. So one day the Universe by “Accident” (remember – no intelligent design existed anywhere in the Cosmos) says “hey” lets gather up all these gases, dark matter anti-matter,cosmic dust,cosmic particles,dying stars, and everything else that’s floating around up there or was floating around up there millions of years ago and lets take this recipe we have and make some soup and create an explosion. And out of all those weird gases, particles, energy and explosion we’re gonna create “LIFE”! And out of all that soup and explosion came Nuclear weapons, the space shuttle, Molecular Biology,Bio-Physics, Nuclear Science,Astro Physicists, Einstein,Stephen Hawkings, Elemental Physics,Bio-Engineering,Nintendo, popcorn and psychics just to name a few… All that would most definitely have been created by the “Big Bang”. And for sure the Big Bang must’ve been happening all over the Universe producing new life everywhere that had the right recipe, I mean it would a bit incredulous to say that it only happened “Once” in the history of Everything and all that is right? So here we are in the 21st century, in the Aquarian Age, and although we’re still a savage race, we’re still making incredible advances and leaps in Science and Technology, and outside of crop circles, the Grey’s increased UFO sightings around the world, we have still not been in contact,nope they have not called home, oh I mean the other humans and whatever else was created by the “Big Bang” in the other parts of the Universe that are trillions and trillions of light years away. Nope.. No Intelligent design on this planet, don’t stop here, we’re just fallout from a weird isolated explosion that happened when a big pile of nothing came together and produced something.. US! Maybe just maybe the end of the Mayan Calendar on December 21st 2012
    (winter solstice) will be a sign that we’ve run out of either the soup or parts of the recipe and we’ll go out with a bang just like we “supposedly came in. Thanks just an idea to ponder…. Michael

  35. #35 Bjoern
    March 8, 2010

    @Michael Muise:
    First, two suggestions: 1) Read up on the concept of “paragraphs”. 2) Read up on what the Big Bang theory actually says and what the evidence for it is before showing your ignorance to everyone. Start e. g. here:
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html

    But its a really a stupid if you stop and think about it, think about it for a minute, then universe decided one day to create itself out of “Nothingness”…

    Bzzzt! The actual beginning of the universe isn’t part of the Big Bang theory – the theory is about what happened *after* the beginning. But thanks for playing!

    …because we really don’t know the exact age of the Universe, its still just a guesstimate,…

    We know the age with an uncertainty of about 1 percent. That’s much more than a “guesstimate”.

    …after all we’ve only been able to send probes into Interstellar space so far, …

    ??? Err, and what has that to do with knowing the age of the universe?

    …and we’re basing all of our theories and hypothesis on scientific models conducted in controlled environments that produce controlled results

    And what’s wrong with that?

    …and also images from the Hubble.

    You *do* know that we use a lot of other space probes, too, don’t you? E. g. ever heard of WMAP?

    And out of all those weird gases, particles energy and explosion we’re gonna create “LIFE”!

    The appearance of life also is no part of the Big Bang theory. You really have not the faintest clue what you are talking about, do you?

    And for sure the Big Bang must’ve been happening all over the Universe producing new life everywhere that had the right recipe,…

    ??? You *really* have not the fainstest clue what you are talking about, indeed.

    The remainder of your comment is even nuttier; I don’t bother to comment of all that weird stuff. Wake up and get a life!

  36. #36 Michael
    March 8, 2010

    Listen Pal or Pals, if I hadn’t read up on all this stuff before I wouldn’t have even wasted my time here.The String theory, the Singularity etc.. I suggest all you scientific know-it alls who only have Rote compiled in your heads read up on what Intelligent Design has to say about your dumbass theory and that’s all it is (try arguing that point) I am also a gifted psychic and I happen to know first hand that the “Big Bang Theory is an absolute load of bunk,I don’t care what Science “Thinks” it knows” don’t get me started on that, and the ignorant so-called “Academics” who say the laws of the Universe and all the science behind it etc.. has to work this way,because it supports other existing theories and experiments and models and hypothesis. Truly,one can say with confidence that too many of these members of the scientific community have had their narrow -minded heads stuck in some old dusty books for too many hours and too many years. I have friends at M.I.T and Harvard that could make them sweat with your “Big Bang” Theory vs Intelligent Design… Ask yourself how many theories have been disproved because of the advances made in the 21st Century through Scientific Research and advances in technology. Do any of you “so called” Academics even know what Sacred Geometry, The Flower of Life etc.. is let me give you a bit of a reality check, it was around a hell of alot longer than your “Big Bang” Theory, all you can argue is the science behind your theory,which is all it is and that’s all you have, and that my friends is FACT. not much of a basis for an argument I’d say. And in all fairness the exact same can be said for the presence of Intelligent Design, but there sure is a hell of alot more science behind Intelligent Design that makes damn more sense to the average idiot out there than the “Big Bang” I challenge you to take a trip to Peru. Equador, The Amazon’s and participate in a Ayahuasca Ceremony (DMT) and then study the Pineal Gland and go and talk to some renowned psychics,and then tell me after that the “Big Bang” theory makes logical sense, and need I remind you,that one of your famous scientists who won a Nobel Prize for his ground breaking discovery and work with Human DNA Code was on a DMT trip when he discovered it and too bad Edgar Cayce wasn’t still around or David Young you wouldn’t have a leg to stand on believe me. Oh and while you’re at, I suppose Remote Viewing,Bio Dynamics,Energy healing all came out of the “Big Bang” as well eh? You might want to look up Adam on the net while you’re at it, he’s only the most amazing healer in the world and your “brilliant” scientists couldn’t and still can’t and figure out how he does it,I’m talking IVY league Institutions like Harvard, Yale, Stanton,Oxford, etc.. and he’s been studied by everyone in the world in the scientific community and outside of the of scientific community, because it goes against their precious little theories and their laws which they protect like their Grandmothers also came out of the Big Bang theory as well. How many professors have lost their Tenure and careers because they dared to challenge the “Establishment” and go against the scientific community and think outside the box. Can’t you people think for yourselves for once, and step outside of what Mankind thinks he knows? I know, there’s a god chance we’ll blow ourselves upp and eventually destroy the planet if we stay on track we’re on, I suppose that too is something that came out of the “Big Bang”… So, when you die, you will fertilize the earth, come back as a tree, and someone will come in the woods chop you down, put you through a sawmill, mash you into pulp, make paper and print the Sacred Code of Life on it.. Looks like you all have something to look forward to when you hit the “Sod Sandwich” And didn’t the famous Cosmologist and Atheist Carl Sagan convert at the last moment, so much for your scientists and theories. I don’t follow any organized religion etc… but there was a study done, and guess what? Most scientists believe in a God and say there’s tons of proof for the argument of Creation through Intelligent Design. have a nice day…

    So before you show your ignorance, don’t let your egoic mind control the logical portion of your brain, and assume you’re talking to an uneducated person.. I’m not looking for an argument here, because I’m smart enough to know that its an argument that no one will really ever win at least for now. When we pass over, unless you come back as trees as punishment for your ignorance, all will be revealed, ever heard of a NDE? a near death experience? Well I’ve been to the other side a few times, and without actually being clinically dead on the operating table,not to mention the stats on NDE’s reported in Scientific Journals in North America every year.Did you know that Science now fully embraces Psychics and mediums, and are now trying to sue them to benefit science? so trust me I know what I’m talking about. You might also want study Dr.Raymond Moody and Robert Monroe Institute or pick up their books on their ground breaking research and also the subject of Quantum Jumping.. Better get crackin, you have a lot of reading to do… Another good book to read is called “The Fingerprints of the Gods” by Graham Hancock, oh and also read up on Bud Hopkins while you’re at it. Have a nice day…

  37. #37 Michael
    March 8, 2010

    My statement seems to be have typed in disarray, but the point has been made…

  38. #38 Michael
    March 8, 2010

    To really show intelligence is to adopt the thinking of a very famous man, you should know of him – Sir Francis Bacon.

    His very famous quote reads: Do not accept nor reject, but weigh and consider. Think about that before your ego gets the best of you when you respond to my comment(s).

    Michael

  39. #39 Michael
    March 8, 2010

    The truth is out there… And it isn’t behind some huge telescope in space or some lab experiment.. Sure, being able to look into the far reaches of the Cosmos does teach us somethings about the Universe, but we’re only one tiny little planet amidst trillions of galaxies, super galaxies, there could be multiple parallel Universes for all we know that may take years to discover before “THEY” call home to us, which I believe “they’ve been doing for years”.When we can send a human into deep space at the speed of light then maybe these discussions will make more sense and have some merit. When that day comes, maybe we’ll find out everything we thought we knew about the origin of our species and the origin of the Universe was all wrong. And you can’t ignore things you don’t understand, just because it defies or goes against your science and scientific models, that truly is the height of ignorance – Michael

  40. #40 Michael Muise
    March 8, 2010

    I just read a comment by a non-intellectual who is dissecting my comment piece by piece line by line.. You read my statement wrong. I know the Universe is believed to have been around before the ” Big Bang” supposedly happened, what I was referring to was the “Origin of life” if you can read properly, I said and I quote “So one day the Universe by “Accident” (remember – no intelligent design existed anywhere in the Cosmos) says “hey” lets gather up all these gases, dark matter anti-matter,cosmic dust,cosmic particles,dying stars, and everything else that’s floating around up there or was floating around up there millions of years ago and lets take this recipe we have and make some soup and create an explosion. And out of all those weird gases, particles, energy and explosion we’re gonna create “LIFE”! And out of all that soup and explosion came Nuclear weapons, the space shuttle, Molecular Biology,Bio-Physics, Nuclear Science,Astro Physicists, Einstein,Stephen Hawkings, Elemental Physics,Bio-Engineering,Nintendo, popcorn and psychics just to name a few… All that would most definitely have been created by the “Big Bang”. And for sure the Big Bang must’ve been happening all over the Universe producing new life everywhere that had the right recipe, I mean it would a bit incredulous to say that it only happened “Once” in the history of Everything and all that is right?” Learn how to read and retain what you’ve read before opening your mouth to change feet…

  41. #41 Bjoern
    March 8, 2010

    @Michael: So, you still haven’t grasped the idea of paragraphs…? Or are you a different Michael than the Michael Muise who I responded to before? Anyway, you have the same rambling writing style…

    Listen Pal or Pals, if I hadn’t read up on all this stuff before I wouldn’t have even wasted my time here.

    Well, I don’t know what you read, but unfortunately you obviously did not understand much. Take my advice and look at the web page I mentioned.

    I am also a gifted psychic and I happen to know first hand that the “Big Bang Theory is an absolute load of bunk…

    Is this supposed to be a bad joke, or are you *really* that nutty?

    Most of the remainder again isn’t worth any comment. Only some small tidbits:

    And didn’t the famous Cosmologist and Atheist Carl Sagan convert at the last moment,…

    No, he didn’t, and even if he did, it wouldn’t matter at all. Science isn’t based on the word of authorities – as you should know before you go on smearing it.

    Most scientists believe in a God and say there’s tons of proof for the argument of Creation through Intelligent Design. have a nice day…

    Actually, among scientists, there are *far* less believers than among the general public, and almost no scientist (at most about 1 percent – ever heard of Project Steve?) has fallen for the nonsense of Intelligent Design.

    …assume you’re talking to an uneducated person.

    I’m not assuming that – that’s a straightforward conclusion from your incoherent ramblings.

    ever heard of a NDE? a near death experience?

    Yes. That’s an illusion created by a brain which doesn’t get enough oxygen. Look it up – there are several studies which nicely demonstrate that.

    Did you know that Science now fully embraces Psychics and mediums, and are now trying to sue them to benefit science?

    ROTFL! Are you sure you live in the same world as the rest of us?

    Better get crackin, you have a lot of reading to do…

    I was the first one to give you a reading suggestion – have you looked it up in the meantime? You haven’t, right? So why should I bother looking at the trash you recommend?

  42. #42 capsiplex
    March 8, 2010

    I just read a comment by a non-intellectual who is dissecting my comment piece by piece line by line.. You read my statement wrong.

  43. #43 Robin Raybould
    April 7, 2010

    I have tried to read through this thread and i find myself unbalanced in my perception of the over all argument concerning the universe and space time.
    I have not read many thesis or papers concerning these theories, and i would suggest that i also am unqualified to post here, but i have an idea that i believe to hold some bearing here.
    Based on what we understand i feel that perhaps we are looking at this from inside the box. Looking at the greater expance of the universe, i believe the model for its contruct is staring us in the face.
    I would suggest it is not flat, but so large that we neither have the means nor the technology to truly measure with a degree or accuracy due to the simple assumtion of where we are within it, and what we see when we loook out of our window.
    To define this, certain species of fish might say the habitat they live in is purely water, never knowing the water is contained.
    I believe the universe is rotating, not expanding, all the theories suggest expansion but fall short of the basic model, example is, electrons orbit atoms, moon orbits the earth, earth orbits the sun and so on.
    all the bodies of creation follow this same exacting pattern, why would something that works “naturally” be different on such a massive scale?

  44. #44 Bjoern
    April 7, 2010

    @Robin:

    I would suggest it is not flat, but so large that we neither have the means nor the technology to truly measure with a degree or accuracy…

    You are right here – we don’t know if the universe is really flat, because we can’t measure that with enough accuracy. We can only say that it is *very close to* flat – so close that for practically everything, the difference to real flatness is essentially irrelevant.

    I believe the universe is rotating, not expanding, …

    You can believe all you want, but the evidence does not match that idea.

    …the basic model, example is, electrons orbit atoms, moon orbits the earth, earth orbits the sun and so on.
    all the bodies of creation follow this same exacting pattern, why would something that works “naturally” be different on such a massive scale?

    First, rotation (or rather revolution around something) is really abundant in nature, that’s right. But nevertheless, not *all* bodies follow this “pattern”. E. g. simply let something fall down – it won’t rotate in any way, but simply fall down in a straight line. And even one of your own examples is wrong: electrons don’t orbit atoms (or atomic nuclei, as you probably meant) – that is taught in school and in many popular science account, but physicists have known for over 80 years now that this simply model is wrong! Look up some quantum mechanics, e. g. “orbitals”.

  45. #45 Morgan
    April 7, 2010

    I believe the universe is rotating, not expanding, all the theories suggest expansion but fall short of the basic model…

    Theories suggest expansion because the evidence (galactic red shift) points to it. It’s a serious error to ignore the data available and say “things must be happening this way because that’s how they happen elsewhere”, an “as above, so below” notion that prizes abstract aesthetics over the evidence of our senses and instruments.

    What is explained by the notion that the universe is rotating? How do you account for the evidence that suggests the universe is expanding?

  46. #46 robin raybould
    April 8, 2010

    Firstly, thank you for responding to my questions, without the ridicule i have seen in previous posts.
    As for the whole universe expanding / rotating argument i have , my theory is this.

    I have seen the various diagrams and formula pertaining to expansion, and as far as i can see, the my theory is also supported in a sense. What if the point of origin is simply the point at which the orbit goes out of view, as if a car travels down a windey road, the road falls out of view the further the car travels, i would put it to you that we are in such a position within the universe, and however we calculate the expansion theory, what we are really witnessing is the perpetual motion of the orbit or rotation, given that we do not truly know our own position.
    I would also like to say that time is precious, in our life time we will not have moved enough to realise any such theory, expansion or rotation, i see some of the greatest minds in the world have calculated that things are moving away from each other within our universe, but i suggest this is because where we are and what we see related to us and the other objects, stars, and galaxies have not reached the outer or extreme part of the orbital rotation yet. I look forward to your reply, and thank you for spending time helping me realise why i see and what you see are so different. robin.

  47. #47 Ethan Siegel
    April 8, 2010

    Robin,

    The rotating Universe theory is really something that we (cosmologists) took seriously a few decades ago. Alfven (and later developed by Klein) came up with an entire cosmological model known as the plasma Universe based on a large rotational velocity for galaxies just as they have large radial velocities. It’s an interesting model.

    But the big problem with the model is that it doesn’t give you a uniform cosmic microwave background or the observed isotropic X-ray background, which we observe.

    But if you want to read more about it, I suggest picking up P.J.E. Peebles’ “Principles of Physical Cosmology.” He details that — and many other alternative cosmological scenarios — in chapter 7.

    Best,
    Ethan

  48. #48 robin raybould
    April 10, 2010

    Ethan,
    Thank you for your guidance and your patients, i will look at that book and try to broaden my understanding, my intention is to try to understand the truth, not to be sensationalist.

    I have also re thought my aspect view of the cosmos, and i am now looking closer to home for some foundation answers.

    I will be back with more simple questions im sure, many thanks Robin.

  49. #49 marina
    April 14, 2010

    is there a comet or astriod headed toward earth?

  50. #50 robin raybould
    April 15, 2010

    Marina: copied from the doomsday site, site link below this post.
    Here is an excerpt from my upcoming PUBLICATION regarding the major doomsday theories and counter-doomsday theories. I will be releasing Publication 2008 very soon. The excerpt below is a debunking of Asteroid theories set forth by many theorist. Their theory that particular asteroids are a CLEAR threat to the well-being of the human race contradicts recent data. Many sites have been reporting on the recent data by the Center for Astrophysics at Harvard, which gives one the idea that the Asteroid Toutatis is going to be close enough to Earth to cause some global catastrophe on December 12, 2012. Even though I would like to believe this and report it as possible doomsday evidence, I remain objective and examined the data myself. According to the data (which can be found here: (Center for Astrophysics at Harvard), on December 12, 2012 the Asteroid Toutatis will be 0.04633 A.U. away from Earth. Oh my! Only 0.04633 AU! (sarcasm) That seems like such a small number so it must be the doomsday the asteroid. These other sites and doomsday theorists really believe you are unintelligent individuals and use that to feed you false information. We do things differently here at DDIG where we know you are capable and intelligent individuals that deserve non-bias factual information. So back to the information at hand… you might be asking yourself what is an AU? 1 A.U. is the average distance between the center of mass of the Earth and the center of mass of the Sun which comes out to be approximately, 92,955,807 miles or 1.496×10^11meters. Now we can use simple dimensional analysis to see actually how far the Asteroid is from the Earth.

    0.04633 AU x 92955807 mi = 4,306,642 Mi away from the Earth.

    Information courtesy of DoomsDay Information Guide, link below:
    http://ddig.wordpress.com/2008/07/07/asteroid-toutatis-approaches-earth-on-december-12-2012/

  51. #51 ahmed
    May 4, 2010

    all of that was mentioned in Holly Qouran

  52. #52 fariha
    May 10, 2010

    exactkly

  53. #53 hassan nasir
    May 19, 2010

    iam geologist and current working in geological survey of pakistan ,i have keen intrest in scientific field, so i hope u will keep me in touch.
    regards:

    hassan nasir
    assistant director
    gsp.

  54. #54 EGC
    June 24, 2010

    I believe Size is relevent to time , Larger matter in the universe time slows down , small micro time speeds up ,
    T&S=S

  55. #55 charlinenoe
    June 27, 2010

    hello poooooooooooooooooooooooooo

  56. #56 DAVID WHEELER
    July 25, 2010

    Everyone seems to want to know what “was” before the Big Bang! I have a lay man’s simple theory. The Universe has existed before the Big Bang (My theory)(1). Because of gravity, could not that Universe after many, many billions of years collasped into itself through the Mother of all Black Holes?? (THEORY 2) Then just before the “Big Bang” “all” the material that had existed in that “previous Universe” was so condensed that it was then that inflation started as the Big Bang? (THEORY 3)

  57. #57 vic
    July 30, 2010

    I don’t think there is just one way that the universe could be. There are infinite ways that the universe could be. Some people become very certain of one way, but in reality there could be many ways that are relative. Such as, we could be in a density wave of a universe sized spiral arm, and the universe appears to be expanding because we are coming out of that density wave. The universe is likely more than we can see. Also, the microwave background may be almost equal in the part of the universe that we can see, but that does not mean it is equal in parts that may be unseen. For example, the sahara is covered with sand, and, if you had only ever been in the sahara, you might assume the earth is covered in sand. In reality it could go either way. If we were on mars we would be correct but on earth we would be incorrect. There are endless amounts of theories that could be assumed about the universe.

  58. #58 Derek F.
    August 15, 2010

    Big Bangs are happening all the time past and future, dark matter could be the result from decay residue from previous universes evolutions. Layering weaving in all directions in time and space.
    Dark energy would be the by product of constant singular implosions explosions thriving expansion.

  59. #59 Derek F.
    August 15, 2010

    opps forgot to mention preexistence is the skeleton of all matter in the now.

  60. #60 Derek F.
    August 15, 2010

    opps forgot to mention preexistence is the skeleton of all matter in the now.

  61. #61 Derek f.
    August 15, 2010

    cancel number sixty my computer skills are vague.D

  62. #62 mazhar
    August 25, 2010

    ASMK, HI everybody, let me tell you onething
    UNIVERSE the only one GOD i.e, ALLAH made
    mention in QURAN, QURAN is a GOD’S book
    in QURAN 75% talks about science…. ALLAH is saying
    THIS WORLD MADE WITHIN 7 DAYS.

    ALLAH HAS NO FAMILY, NO FRIEND, HE IS ALONE

    BELIVE ISLAM, QURAN AND ALLAH this is true

    AND THE WORLD IS GOING TO BE FINISH AFTER (EISA ALAIHISALAAM) THAT IS IN CHRISTIAN CALL JESUS COME TO WORLD IT IS MENTION IN THE QURAN…BELIEVE IT OR NOT … BUT
    WE MUSLIMS BELIEVE AND FOLLOW ISLAM, QURAN AND PROPHET SAYS…
    MAZHAR

  63. #63 crd2
    August 25, 2010

    @ mazhar:

    Uhhhhh……what? Your in the wrong blog to push religious ideologies. And I hate to break it to you, but it took just a tad longer than 7 days.

  64. #64 crd2
    August 25, 2010

    “Tiny little pairs of particles and antiparticles, waves and anti-waves, are popping in and out of existence all the time. But in an exponentially expanding Universe, the space between them gets stretched so far that they can’t find each other again to annihilate, and this creates slight differences in densities that persist to this day.”

    As space expands and grows increasingly more vast, do more and more particles escape annihilation?

    If so I see 3 possible outcomes. 1) More particles come to exist at a rate that exceeds the expansion of space. (The universe is getting denser.) 2) Space is expanding at a rate that exceeds new particle creation (Space is becoming less dense.) 3) Space is expanding at a rate consistent to the new particle creation (The universe is neither getting more or less dense, but stays consistent)

    Also, this 3rd idea really brings to mind (at least my mind) steady state theory which I understand to be incorrect.

    So whats actually happening here?

  65. #65 Ian
    October 13, 2010

    Honestly to micheals ”theory” on how the gig bang theory is completely wrong and those who supported it like great and brilliant scientist like Albert Einstien and Ethan Hawking. Just to et you all know that there is a little thing called evidence supporting all the small theories inside the big bang. The evidence of creation of the universe is all around space. It is a bit comlpex to understand for alot of poeples little minds that all the things that make up the universe and how it all works. In the end it all wont matter about how our odd existance of anything and everything came to be. But the only way that we are able to figure out the past of how this all began is to investigate the evidence of how the universe is created. You cannot deny the evidence that has already been proven. I suggest you all get a better understanding of the known information that has been proven by the brillian scientists(not idiots). They were the ones who actually were thinking outside the box. Thanks to religion and the belief in gods many simpletins(almost all the poeple in the world) deny a good idea of how it was all created and argue with thier so called ”evidence”(bible maybe). They believe in a greater person or thing that has the power to create evrything. I see ”god” as a way to state everything. Poeple feel that such a inconceivable life that we were put, on how we are living in such a insane existance. How brilliant that is they believe that it must mean that there is a person or thing looking down on us guiding our lives. I find god as a myth the way religous pople define it. Scientist are hear to fit the puzzle peices to the mystery of our existance based on the big bang theory which isnt entirely proven because they must have evidence or proven how each little detail works in the universe. Someday the puzzle will be complete and the big bang thoery will not be known as a ”theory” anymore.

  66. #66 free thinker
    October 17, 2010

    Ok, you so came up with a interesting story tale, where’s the proof, oh, that’s right there is none. hahahahahaahahhaha

    Jesus crucified 200 years ago outside Jerusalem in Israel, Jew history proves your stupid absurd fairy tale false, your savior charles darwin is in hell.

  67. #67 Samuel Justin Montgomery
    October 18, 2010

    wow, this is such a false sight, i’ve seen minor mistakes in calculations before but…. 46 billion light years??? that’s impossible if the universe is only 27 billion light years from one end to the other. Someone needs to smack this guy, fo real.

  68. #68 Science = everything
    October 25, 2010

    Dear free thinker,

    Do you honestly believe that a man named Jesus came into existence 2000 years ago for the sake of all humans believing in Christianity to be allowed into the gates of heaven? You say that the “Big Bang” theory is a “false stupid/absurd fairy tale”, but the fact that a traditional story passed down through a couple millenniums with some sort of emotional/spiritual meaning to everyone’s life is quite closer to that so-called “fictional story.” You see, anybody can announce him/herself to be the savior of all humanity and have it be known for generations to come. If this story were to be true, then where would heaven, purgatory, and hell exist. A lot of idiotic philosophers in the past believed that it would exist in a different dimension, even though it can NOT be proven, yet. Others, such as common believers and/or regular citizens of society think that Heaven is “up” and Hell is “down” from our objective existence. The point is that you shouldn’t jump to conclusions and tell others that they’re wrong when you can’t prove the entirety of the question being dealt with, for the time being. I am, personally, not saying that your belief is wrong, but I am saying that you should contribute your thoughts/theories in a more sophisticated way, rather than acting like an animal being, basing your every meaning/thought, in this case, on instinct and objective locomotion.

  69. #69 doug soucie
    November 10, 2010

    AS FAR AS THE BIG BANG ,HEAVEN ,HELL AND JESUS THEY ALL EXIST AND CAN BE PROVEN TO A POINT . THE BIG BANG 4 STARTERS SOMEONE OF INTELLEGENCS HAD TO MAKE THE UNIVERSE BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS SO PERFECT IN THE WAY A STAR WORKS OR A GALAXY WORKS THEY ARE PERFECT IN THEMSELVES AND ONLY AN INTELIGENT BEING WHO IS ALL KNOWING COULD HAVE POSSIBLE CREATED IT WHETHER IT STARTED FROM NOTHING AND BANG IT BECAME THE UNIVERESE HEAVEN WAS CREATED FOR ANGELS AND US HELL WAS CREATED 4 SATAN N HIS ANGLES SATAN IS GOING TO B THROWN INTO A PIT WHERE EVEN LIGHT CANT ESCAPE SO I WOULD SAY THAT THE ONLY PLACE WHERE LIGHT CANT ESCAPE FROM IS A BLACK HOLE SO THATS WHERE HELL IS AND THERE ARE DIFF LEVELS OF HELL HENCE THE THOUSANDS OF BL HOLES JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD MADE FLESH IF YOU READ THE BIBLE IT ALL MAKES PERFECT SENSE AND IS LOGICAL ALSO THE BIBLE MAKES PROMISES TO THE READER IN THIS LIFE RIGHT NOW AND IF HE DIDNT FUFILL THOSE PROMISES HE WOULD BE A LIAR AND THE BIBLE WOULDNT BE TRUE BUT I KNOW THAT ISNT THE CASE . NOW I CANT PROVE TO YOU OR ANYBODY THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE 100%. BUT IF ONE WANTS TO FIND OUT FOR THEMSELVES ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS ASK JESUS TO SHOW YOU THE TRUTH AND SEEK THE TRUTH BY READING IT FOR YOURSELF. DONT ASK FOR STUPID THINGS LIKE SENDING AN ANGEL TO TALK WITH YOU YOU CANT MAKE GOD A TEST BUT IF YOU SEEK GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART YOU WILL FIND HIM AND YOU WILL FIND AND KNOW THE TRUTH WE DONT HAVE VERY LONG B-4 HE COMES AGAIN I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT FOR GENERATIONS BUT IT IS OUR GENERATION THAT HAS ALL THE TECHNO TO FULLFILL THE THINGS NEEDED LIKE THE MARK OF THE BEAST THAT WAS IMPOSSIBLE 100 YEARS AGO NOW ITS A REALITY IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE YOU CAN BE TRACKED 24-7-365 THEY CAN PUT A CHIP UNDER THE SKIN AND ALL NEWBORNS WILL HAVE THE CHIP WITHOUT PARENTS EVEN KNOWING YOU ARE NOT DEALING WITH HUMANS ANYMORE BUT THE ENEMY OF GOD ITS ALL IN THE BIBLE AND IS TRUE AND GOD WILL PROVE TO ANYONE THAT ASKS WITH A PURE HEART

  70. #70 timberwoof
    November 10, 2010

    Mark and Michael Mise, let me try to address some of your concerns. You are upset about this Big Bang Theory because it seems to make no sense from your perspective. So let me run some things by you and ask you some questions about them.

    Edwin Hubble, the astronomer for whom the Hubble Space Telescope was named, worked in the first part of the 1900s. He measured the distances to galaxies.

    As some background on that, it turns out that a particular type of star, a Cepheid Variable, has a strict relationship between its mass, brightness, and how often it changes its brightness. (We’re lucky that the sun is not a variable star.) It turns out that you can make fairly accurate measurements of the distance to a Cepheid Variable even when it is in a distant galaxy.

    Another important bit is the fact that stars moving away have their spectrums shifted toward the red, the same way that a train whistle sounds lower when the train is zooming away than when it is approaching. It turns out that when you measure the distance of a galaxy through its Cepheid Variable stars, that matches up closely with the red-shift of the light from its stats.

    And then you get two Very Interesting Things. First, the farther away a galaxy is, the faster it is moving away. Second, when you draw a graph of where things were in the past based on that, it looks like all the galaxies were right here about thirteen billion years ago.

    Something happened. That something was named “The Big Bang” as a way to talk about it, and plenty of people smarter than I have studied the problem. Between the various lines of evidence (I only talked about two, the Cepheid Variables and the galactic red shift), a system of thought has been created to explain it. That is the Theory of the Big Bang. The bang—the something that happened—is incontrovertible fact. The how is what they theory tries to explain.

    Maybe you can come up with some other explanation for all the lines of evidence to the Big Bang. I doubt it. But you have to take them into account in any alternative explanation.

  71. #71 Timberwoof
    November 10, 2010

    I had to get off the bus at the park & ride and drive the rest of the way home.

    Michael, I read your post all the way up to “Thanks just an idea to ponder….” The thing is, that’s all you’ve got: an idea.

    The way things work around here is that you gather evidence and take it where it leads you. Saying, “I have no idea how this happened, therefore it must have been some Intelligent Designer” doesn’t cut it. An Intelligent Designer is magical: we don’t know how it works, and we cannot know; we just have to believe. Magical events, or miracles, explain nothing. They cannot be used to make any predictions about what’s going to happen. So a scientific explanation means that magic is off the table. So’s God, an Intelligent Designer, and ancient astronauts. There cannot be any evidence for God, and there has never been any for Ancient Astronauts.

    If you want something that’s “just a theory,” Intelligent Design is it for you. Well, I’m actually wrong; ID is not even a theory. There’s no evidence; just a lot of (faulty) thinking and no predictive power whatsoever. ID is, scientifically speaking, a waste of time.

    You did talk about a lot of things that are sill mysteries, most of them being first-cause kinds of questions. Specifically, what happened before the Big Bang and the question of abiogenesis, were life got its start. We don’t know. People smarter than I are investigating. They are hard problems, but that doesn’t worry me; we humans ave solved a lot of hard problems already. Just saying, ‘wow, what a mess and now we’re here therefore god did it’ does not solve any problems; it does not add to knowledge.

    You’ve complained that there are problems with the Big Bang theory. I’ve presented some of the evidence that leads up to it, and Ethan has written about how it unfolded. Do you have any _evidence_ that this thinking is all wrong?

  72. #72 Questioner
    November 11, 2010

    If the GOD made universe then who made him? :D Or from what is he made of? Electricity, neutrons, atoms…? If you say in any form: the HIGHER…Then from what is made the HIGHER(which made GOD or how would you explain it…i don’t care!) and who made the HIGHER??? Believe in GOD is like to say to amazon rainforest inhabitants there is a chicken which made everything and if you don’t believe it you will be punished…GOD is a synonym to stupidness, not knowing, fear! Such a long time have past and some people are still so stupid to believe in GOD and those who are smarter just get money from those stupid ones by saying that GOD came to them or something like that…It’s called hallucinations and why some people are placed in madhouse when they say i saw GOD and some aren’t??? Some say they talk to GOD and they get money for that, but some just a free ticket to madhouse! Ok lets say the GOD made us, but why people thinks that he gives a damn of us or that he is a good person or what he is and why it’s he? Why not she? It’s a f**king discrimination of women! :) And if you go outside naked you are filthy even in Church?? Adam and Eve were naked too so they were filthy too? And the Bible itself is filthy then cause it has naked woman and man pictured in it! And shouldn’t GOD followers be naked like Adam and Eve? Why do they dress in those filthy clothes they must follow GOD and be the way he made them! There are so many things they can not explain and still there are stupid people who believe in it! If someone would create a small village on some island or somewhere, where only human signs is that village and if one man or woman would say to those people who know nothing but that island or where would you place them, they would believe in anything that is based on fear if he/she is respected there(otherwise they maybe wouldn’t listen or start questioning that what he says faster then they should)! Cause they don’t know nothing! And they start to believe in anything(but time limited(based on how smart the lier is and what he says) for smart ones)! Sorry for my English i am Latvian by the way. If you read this then thanks for reading my bulls**t, but maybe not…It’s up to you(believers) to think about it and start living! This doesn’t mean you can’t go to church to relax or something if you want, it’s just that don’t believe in bulls**t, stop being blind! The good feeling you get at church is adrenalin and/or relaxation it’s not GOD! Cause they want you to feel it, cause then they can easily make you give them all of your property and money!

  73. #73 karthikeyan
    November 18, 2010

    hi to all scientists, your way of approach is wrong. no big ban or small ban, does a bacteria know where they are living(in human body or animal body or a fish body)? where they live is the world for them, they dont know sun,moon,earth,jupiter etc., like wise we live on some thing we call it as earth, scientist say universe is expanding ofcourse bacteria will say human/animal/fish is expanding because human/animal/fish body keeps growing.
    bacteria/virus will not come to know about sun,moon,earth,jupiter like wise we will not come to know where is the universe? who made it?
    thank you !

  74. #74 STEPHEN
    November 19, 2010

    SPACE IS NOTHING IF THERE WAS NO MASS OUR EYES WOULD SEE NOTHING THERE IS NO SHAPE INFINITE…..

  75. #75 Dave
    November 25, 2010

    I am currently reading a book called “The God Theory” It explains that God uses humans to feel all the emotions through us. Can’t say I agree with that but I like reading other peoples point of view on the universe. I’d rather read them than put them down as stupid, even if I don’t agree with them. That being said shouldn’t any discussion about the universe contain some connection or link to our consciousness? If the universe collapses on itself and no one is there to see it ????? We can only go to the furthest regions that our mind will take us. I beleive the universe is too big/complex for us to even get close to wrapping our minds around it no matter how great your imagination is.

  76. #76 sneha
    December 4, 2010

    i was very interested
    to know how this whole thing really works.and very thankful to you for showing me such a wonderful thing and having such a beautiful experience.but i really want to know more about our existing and life on other space and plant.

  77. #77 f4
    December 5, 2010

    naturaly universes have there own residence in space and time,influenced by multie universes decayed partices are stucture, bonding evolutions of new matter and consends of what is to be.

  78. #78 f4
    December 5, 2010

    science needs to explore our new reality.lets keep one foot in the box and two outside.conventuality has boxed great minds, stumping amazing posibilitys.particle anniliation is not cmplete,only blemishing virgin territory a sort of skelital struture allowing charged particles to adhear.since arrivig in all directinons creating new matter iviting universal evolution.

  79. #79 mathew dauth
    December 23, 2010

    is this the only universe? or is our universe just a tiny spot. can space ever end?

  80. #80 #9
    December 28, 2010

    can dark energy be explaind by a rotating universe

  81. #81 #9
    December 28, 2010

    space can only expand with external forces so its still up in the air.

  82. #82 dr george pradhan,mb, ind.
    February 3, 2011

    =my IQ being only 107,i venture where angels fear.i have read, not studied, ancient pre-hindu vedic literature, and feel that you all will benefit by studying seriously on the side these vedic concepts.It all begins with “since no one has seen the divine primordeal energy, the ancient sages/rishis have postulated what has been revealed to their seeking minds over the many ages”.It is all a mystery. like the sq.root of 4 is both plus 2 and minus 2. how come? how may a neutron be nearly nothing? some illusion, some hallucination, some delusion.when there is good there is anti good. light..anti light. there is explanation for the return of the boomerang and the returning flicked card.====even the LHC may show void matter?

  83. #83 ROY GAYLE
    February 3, 2011

    WE GIVE YOU FREE MUSIC OF SPACE.
    OUR MUSIC PAGE IS. ROYGAYLE.SE

  84. #84 Phil
    February 15, 2011

    One thing I can never get my head around is: If the universe is expanding…into what is it expanding?
    Isn’t it a bit of a misnomer to say the universe is expanding?
    By definition, it should be contained?

  85. #85 Hidorat
    February 16, 2011

    Felling fool like a dust when I know all of this. Tks.

    But my life is never flat :)

  86. #86 Taylor Roussel
    March 18, 2011

    Are you really believing this crap, I want to know how billions and billions and billions of stars. Planets, a magnificent solar system/universe with complicated life came out of a star exploding without their being a creator of it. Plus if we have been alive for billions of year then how are we just now being able to build awesome stuff in the past 200 years, shouldn’t we be more advanced. Please answer my question thank you.

  87. #87 Taylor Roussel
    March 18, 2011

    Are you really believing this crap, I want to know how billions and billions and billions of stars. Planets, a magnificent solar system/universe with complicated life came out of a star exploding without their being a creator of it. Plus if we have been alive for billions of year then how are we just now being able to build awesome stuff in the past 200 years, shouldn’t we be more advanced. Please answer my question thank you.

  88. #88 Jamin Welch
    April 18, 2011

    I’m not scared to die. I also resent religion. we would be way more advanced without it.

  89. #89 Phil
    August 15, 2011

    How’s this for an idea?
    Suppose the “red shift” is caused by a layer of inter-galactic dust that filters out the blue wavelengths of the light from the most distant objects…

    No more expanding universe.

    Now we have a neat, self contained, collapsing universe that fits with every other observable object. i.e. everything is falling due to gravity into black holes.

    These black holes eventually will become so massive, that they explode again. A series of never ending “big bangs”…
    the mother of all supernova.

    Everything is cyclic.

  90. #90 Natsaki
    Malaysia
    August 4, 2012

    Actually I’ve always been wondering :
    what is outside the universe?
    I mean,people keeps saying that universe is still expanding and the shape of universe and etc. But what makes it expand and what is out side it ???

  91. #91 ROY GAYLE
    ÖREBRO SWEDEN
    August 27, 2013

    WE SEND YOU FREE SPACE MUSIC

  92. #92 ROY GAYLE
    ÖREBRO SWEDEN
    August 27, 2013

    WE SEND YOU FREE SPACE MUSIC.
    OUR MUSIC PAGE IS.ROYGAYLE.SE

  93. #93 Wow
    August 27, 2013

    “Suppose the “red shift” is caused by a layer of inter-galactic dust that filters out the blue wavelengths of the light from the most distant objects…”

    Refuted by the shift of the absorption specra. Extinction of light doesn’t do that.

    Suppose they had already thought of that possibility, Phil, and looked to see if that were possible and that the only reason why it’s still called “Red Shift” is because the effect is real?

  94. #94 Wow
    August 27, 2013

    “I want to know how billions and billions and billions of stars. Planets, a magnificent solar system/universe with complicated life came out of a star exploding without their being a creator of it.”

    Well I want to know where the creator came from.

    It seems that religion can’t answer that.

Current ye@r *