Article View: sci.physics
Article #16015Re: A second "big bang"
From: George Dishman
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 17:01
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 17:01
27 lines
2759 bytes
2759 bytes
"Mark Folsom" <folsomman@prodigy.com> wrote in message news:v47nmfjb1fhke9@corp.supernews.com... > "Thanatos" <dgahan@europe.com> wrote in message > news:JJQ0a.42784$jM5.108252@newsfeeds.bigpond.com... > > hmmm... > > > > BBT is at best a "best-fit" theory to some early observations, but the way > > it has influenced interpretations of subsequent observations has reduced > > current theory to a tenuous "stack of cards" where the destruction of a > > fundamental idea will bring the whole lot crashing down. > > The basic idea of the big bang seems entirely bullet-proof--a hot, > high-density beginning with subsequent expansion is in perfect accord with a > large number of very careful observations. It's very unlikely to be > overthrown completely, and with good reason. What you say is correct, but there is a popular view that the "Big Bang" is supposed continue that model right back to t=0 and in fact explain what happened at t=0. It is a classic case of thowing the baby out with the bathwater after extrapolating beyond the region of validity. -- George Dishman The arrow of time points in many directions.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<b20oq3$1q4$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mailReferences:
<b1njmo$bsd$1@slb3.atl.mindspring.net> <3E3F6FB9.6020303@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> <xaK%9.26458$ZE1.557225@news1.nokia.com> <3E3F79EB.8F5B1796@nic.or.kr> <JJQ0a.42784$jM5.108252@newsfeeds.bigpond.com> <v47nmfjb1fhke9@corp.supernews.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10384c,830f5d0cde7d55f X-Google-Attributes: gid10384c,public X-Google-Thread: 111645,3df8337c8f392688 X-Google-Attributes: gid111645,public X-Google-Thread: 10b271,3df8337c8f392688 X-Google-Attributes: gid10b271,public X-Google-Thread: f74ae,3df8337c8f392688 X-Google-Attributes: gidf74ae,public X-Google-Thread: 10f545,3df8337c8f392688 X-Google-Attributes: gid10f545,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-07 09:01:56 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail From: "George Dishman" <george@briar.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.physics.relativity,fr.sci.astrophysique,alt.alien.visitors Subject: Re: A second "big bang" Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 17:01:45 -0000 Lines: 29 Message-ID: <b20oq3$1q4$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk> References: <b1njmo$bsd$1@slb3.atl.mindspring.net> <3E3F6FB9.6020303@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> <xaK%9.26458$ZE1.557225@news1.nokia.com> <3E3F79EB.8F5B1796@nic.or.kr> <JJQ0a.42784$jM5.108252@newsfeeds.bigpond.com> <v47nmfjb1fhke9@corp.supernews.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: briar.demon.co.uk X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1044637315 1860 158.152.154.145 (7 Feb 2003 17:01:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 17:01:55 +0000 (UTC) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Priority: 3 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal