Here's a really fundamental question, and yet one that I think that most people don't know the answer to:
How do we know that the Big Bang is the right theory of the origin of the Universe?
There are a bunch of alternative theories out there, after all, like Plasma Cosmology, the Steady-State Theory, and Godel's Universe. But the Big Bang Theory explains three things that none of the other model's I've seen do, and they are these three:
- The Hubble Expansion of the Universe. Things that are close to us move away from us with a certain velocity, things that are twice as far move away twice as fast, 10x as far moves away 10x as fast... etc. The Big Bang gives space its initial expansion rate, and predicts that gravity slows it down at the observed rate.
- The Abundance of Light Elements. Why is the Universe 75% Hydrogen and 25% Helium, and much less than 1% everything else? After all, stars typically produce many heavy elements. The Big Bang tells us that The Early Universe, hot and dense, will have a bunch of free neutrons, which can fuse with the protons into Helium nuclei, but very little else. What we observe is an incredible match of theory and observations.
- The Cosmic Background Radiation. If the Universe started off hot and dense, all that energy, all that light, all those photons that were flying around, should still be flying around today. It should all be about the same temperature by today, and that temperature should be around 3 Kelvin. This one really sets the Big Bang apart from other theories; Fred Hoyle said, upon its discovery, "We live in a fog." But it isn't a fog at all, it's a leftover echo from the Big Bang, and it's really hard to predict without one! You can read about the initial discovery here.
And that's the story. And no other theory predicts all of those three things; it's that simple. Come back later this week for follow-ups on each of those three!
- Log in to post comments
More like this
In the 1940s, the Big Bang theory was first conceived and detailed. But, to quote Niels Bohr,
We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct. My own feeling is that it is not crazy enough.
One of the…
By 1948, our view of the Universe had changed drastically from 1909. Instead of space being run by Newton's Gravity, where our Milky Way comprised the entire Universe, we had learned that space and time are governed by Einstein's General Relativity, that our Universe contained at least many…
Recently, a discussion started in one of my comment threads about whether the Big Bang was necessarily valid or not, and whether there were any reasonable alternatives. The answer is that not only is the Big Bang the best theory to explain the start and evolution of the Universe, it's the only one…
This is the second key prediction of the Big Bang: the Universe was, before any stars formed, made up of about 75% Hydrogen and 25% Helium, and much less than 1% of all other elements combined. How does the Big Bang predict this, and how to we observe it?
Well, remember we said the Universe was hot…
This is just half a post.
I think, you should also have mentioned the other theories, which parts they DO and which parts they DON’T explain. And to be fair, you should have mentioned which parts the BB theory does NOT explain, that some of the others do.
That would have made a more informative, and more balanced post.
It would also have made a third semester in cosmology at university.
If you want it that much, the information is available at your local university library.