Chalnoth
Senior Contributor
The big bang theory has quite a lot of evidence in favor of it, and the evidence linked in this article in no way draws question upon the theory. What it does, in essence, is provides a different theory for the previous conditions of the universe, before the big bang theory is a good description.
Now, I am very skeptical as to the conclusions they stated, as it seems they're talking about a large scale effect, something which is almost certain to be a foreground effect, and even if it is a real pattern on the CMB, the statistics are such that you just can't draw any concrete conclusions anyway. But I will grant that I only read the news release, not the scientific paper associated, as I'm not sure what article they are referring to.
That said, for those here who have been doubting the big bang, here is a short list of some of the evidence in favor of the theory:
1. The CMB. The observed thermal spectrum and uniformity of the CMB is a strong prediction of the big bang theory.
2. Primordial light element abundances. The big bang theory makes a very specific prediction as to the ratio of the light elements produced in the big bang, prior to production in stars, and observations have confirmed this prediction with hydrogen, deuterium, and helium.
3. The expansion of the universe. Both the current rate and the expansion over time is consistent with the big bang theory, and is measured using a large variety of independent techniques that agree.
4. The observed homogeneity and isotropy of the universe.
5. The relationship of the fluctuations in the CMB to nearby large scale structure is consistent with the observed expansion rate.
6. The observed mass of the dark matter and normal matter in galaxies and galaxy clusters is consistent with the amounts predicted from observing the fluctuations in the CMB.
So, yeah, you'd have to be either ignorant of the evidence or completely irrational to say that the big bang theory is completely wrong.
Now, I am very skeptical as to the conclusions they stated, as it seems they're talking about a large scale effect, something which is almost certain to be a foreground effect, and even if it is a real pattern on the CMB, the statistics are such that you just can't draw any concrete conclusions anyway. But I will grant that I only read the news release, not the scientific paper associated, as I'm not sure what article they are referring to.
That said, for those here who have been doubting the big bang, here is a short list of some of the evidence in favor of the theory:
1. The CMB. The observed thermal spectrum and uniformity of the CMB is a strong prediction of the big bang theory.
2. Primordial light element abundances. The big bang theory makes a very specific prediction as to the ratio of the light elements produced in the big bang, prior to production in stars, and observations have confirmed this prediction with hydrogen, deuterium, and helium.
3. The expansion of the universe. Both the current rate and the expansion over time is consistent with the big bang theory, and is measured using a large variety of independent techniques that agree.
4. The observed homogeneity and isotropy of the universe.
5. The relationship of the fluctuations in the CMB to nearby large scale structure is consistent with the observed expansion rate.
6. The observed mass of the dark matter and normal matter in galaxies and galaxy clusters is consistent with the amounts predicted from observing the fluctuations in the CMB.
So, yeah, you'd have to be either ignorant of the evidence or completely irrational to say that the big bang theory is completely wrong.
Upvote
0
