Question How do we know that the universe started with a Big Bang?

[voidpotentialenergy]

I keep on saying.
What events is there for the BB

Could be collision with another BB area, cannibalism of another BB area, to much E in a defined area, gravitational collapse that defeats time/space.

Lots of possible reasons that a BB can happen.

Mater can be created by fluctuations energy balance act until it balances , and fluctuation from nothing with just instability or potential energy of it.

Conservation of energy with no new creation or destruction can simply be that balance of E and not a set law since fluctuation creates and destroys matter/energy all the time.
1 second is a short time for a human but not for fluctuation that happens billions of times in it's balance act.
In our perspective of time it' looks impossible to destroy or create energy but fluctuation says something different about conservation of energy on it's time scale.

No begging and yes begging.
Microwave background points to collision as the process for a BB.
If true that also indicates that our BB area is just 1 of ?

JMO

 

[TheSchnitz]

Because of the quality of the TV show.

 

[Lariliss]

"Astronomers have detected, throughout the universe, two chemical elements that could only have been created during the Big Bang: hydrogen and helium. Furthermore, these elements are observed in just the proportions (roughly 75% hydrogen, 25% helium) predicted to have been produced during the Big Bang. This prediction is based on our well-established understanding of nuclear reactions - independent of Einstein's theory of gravity.
Second, we can actually detect the light leftover from the era of the Big Bang. The blinding light that was present in our region of space has long since traveled off to the far reaches of the universe. But light from distant parts of the universe is just now arriving here at Earth, billions of years after the Big Bang. This light is observed to have all the characteristics expected from the Big Bang scenario and from our understanding of heat and light."

Got this answer from https://lweb.cfa.harvard.edu/seuforum/faq.htm

The Big Bang is currently accepted explanation of the system (the observed Universe) starting point with the observed data mentioned above.
It fits to the observations that scientists have now. It proves existing theories, calculations and predictions.
In 2020 scientists predicted supernova appearance with accuracy within 1 month. Before it was possible to +/- 10 000 years. And still the Big Bang fits.
Data precision is refined all the time. "Any number of experiments cannot prove the theory, but one can discard it."
Big Bang is a start point assumption which drives exploration of physical laws.

 

[Harry Costas]

Hydrogen and Helium are the natural formation from the core of the Sun.
Neutrons released from a confined high electromagnetic condensate release an electron forming a proton that leads to Hydrogen. Fusion of Hydrogen in the solar envelope forms Helium and Fusion of elements form other elements .
On the reverse Photo-disintegration of the elements can form Hydrogen and Helium.
As for the BB
There is no starting point. A starting point implies a start, and origin , a creation.
Matter cannot be created.
Energy and Matter are on the same coin.
You can flip from one to the other.
The BIG Bang Theory has no legs to stand.
Proof is in the putting

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

Hydrogen and Helium are the natural formation from the core of the Sun.
Neutrons released from a confined high electromagnetic condensate release an electron forming a proton that leads to Hydrogen. Fusion of Hydrogen in the solar envelope forms Helium and Fusion of elements form other elements .
On the reverse Photo-disintegration of the elements can form Hydrogen and Helium.
As for the BB
There is no starting point. A starting point implies a start, and origin , a creation.
Matter cannot be created.
Energy and Matter are on the same coin.
You can flip from one to the other.
The BIG Bang Theory has no legs to stand.
Proof is in the putting

All about the E of the universe.
The rest is just formats of it.
Figure how the E got a start and you win the prize

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

Hydrogen and Helium are the natural formation from the core of the Sun.
Neutrons released from a confined high electromagnetic condensate release an electron forming a proton that leads to Hydrogen. Fusion of Hydrogen in the solar envelope forms Helium and Fusion of elements form other elements .
On the reverse Photo-disintegration of the elements can form Hydrogen and Helium.
As for the BB
There is no starting point. A starting point implies a start, and origin , a creation.
Matter cannot be created.
Energy and Matter are on the same coin.
You can flip from one to the other.
The BIG Bang Theory has no legs to stand.
Proof is in the putting

The universe is an unanswerable question of when it started.
Before it started might have been totally nothing and what we see today with all the laws just logical conclusions to a set pattern of creation of mass/energy.
Was nothing even a start or just a step?

For sure all of the laws we have in this universe are set for a reason and them for another reason/property of it.
Probably all very logical steps.

Fun part is trying to guess at the steps from 0 to something.

 

[Catastrophe]

The big bang model ticks a lot of boxes. It will stay as long as it is useful. There is a tiny area (in terms of magnitude - not importance) where physics breaks down because the mathematics parts company with reality. There is room there for models which accept a lot of BBT but don't need the part that has issues with the real world. They don't need the singularity. Not that we are very sure about reality, but we have to get by with what we can observe.

Cat :

 

[Harry Costas]

When did the universe start?
How can something start if its already going?
What boxes are ticked?

 

[Catastrophe]

I am not here to push alternative models to the one I favour. There are some aspects of the BB which seem acceptable. If you want to know about BBT other than singularity it is all out there. I don't like 'creating something out of nothing'. To me, a cyclic model overcomes this. It overcomes the infinite this that and the other nonsense. That seems two pretty big ++ to me.

Cat

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

When did the universe start?
How can something start if its already going?
What boxes are ticked?

If a mechanism exists that nothing was the seed that created everything then no start time exists since before was nothing.
Before is a mute point and after is a mute point.

Logical steps exist for nothing to be a start point to everything.
A chicken from no egg
JMO

 

[Harry Costas]

Where did the nothing come from?
Sounds like the never ending story. The movie

 

[Harry Costas]

Research matter properties, there is a number of places NASA and arXiv and others.
Axion Matter
Parton Matter
Neutron Matter
Understanding the properties will give you a better look at the universe from chaos to simplicity.

 

[Catastrophe]

How do we know that the universe started with a Big Bang?

Some of us do not believe the (imho) ridiculous idea of applying a mathematical fiction (viz., a singularity) to so- called theories (or, as I would venture, failed models). There are equally or more feasible ideas of cyclic systems, which avoid all this nonsense. But, as always, anyone can believe what they wish.

Cat

 

[Harry Costas]

A bit of imagination.
Can anything travel faster than light.
Can we slow down light
Can space expand or contract
Big Bang Theory yes or no
Cyclic universe yes or no
What is the speed of gravity

 

[Catastrophe]

See Post #88.

 

[IG2007]

A bit of imagination.
Can anything travel faster than light.
Can we slow down light
Can space expand or contract
Big Bang Theory yes or no
Cyclic universe yes or no
What is the speed of gravity

No
Yes
Yes
Yes
I don't know; we can never prove it.
Same as Light

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

Where did the nothing come from?
Sounds like the never ending story. The movie

Nothing has no start.
Was lack of anything that occupied infinity.

All we need then is for nothing to have a energy property occupying infinity or an instability of nothing to create the universe.

0/potential energy=fluctuation
fluctuation=energy/matter creation
energy/matter balance= conservation of energy.

3 simple steps from nothing to everything.

JMO

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

No
Yes
Yes
Yes
I don't know; we can never prove it.
Same as Light

Then we have the oddball Gravity and it's ability to communicate location at instant speed.
IMO yes gravity travels at C but only in normal space.
It's instant communication property is telling us something else about the another reality of space we have yet to pin down.

 

[Catastrophe]

How do we know that the Universe started with a Big Bang?

My proposed answer, is that we do not. There are positives to BBT, but there is also the fatal flaw that it breaks down where physics fails in that it, without substantiation, it appears to rely on the mathematical fiction that you can divide things in the real world, by zero. Without this fiction, you would have no singularity with infinite density or temperature - arising out of nothing.

Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

"I do not define time, space, place and motion, as being well known to all. Only I must observe, that the common people conceive these quantities under no other notions but from the relation they bear to sensible objects. And thence arise certain prejudices . . . . . . . . . " Isaac Newton.



Cat

 

[Lariliss]

"I do not define time, space, place and motion, as being well known to all. Only I must observe, that the common people conceive these quantities under no other notions but from the relation they bear to sensible objects. And thence arise certain prejudices . . . . . . . . . " Isaac Newton.



Cat

Exactly, the way for understanding is to learn observations and project them to perception and personal experience.

“The implications for the further reaches of the universe were more surprising than even Einstein ever realized,” physicist Stephen Hawking has written.

General relativity explains how the universe can obey physical laws. It’s necessarily identifying and investigating questions about space and time, existence and reality. And its implications are not limited to esoteric concerns on cosmic scales, it has its down-to-Earth impacts as well.

Without general relativity, for instance, GPS devices would be worthless. Satellite signals designed to keep your car on the right road would be off by miles.

 

[Harry Costas]

If the Big Bang di happen.
Where did it happen?
How old is the Universe?
What is the process from nothing to Now?

 

[Catastrophe]

Someone else should answer that.

Cat

 

[IG2007]

If the Big Bang di happen.
Where did it happen?
How old is the Universe?
What is the process from nothing to Now?

It's not possible to know where it happened as space is expanding in every direction from every place.
It's estimated to be around 13.7 billion years.
I don't really understand this question.

 

[Harry Costas]

I posted this in the other post.
Super clusters of galaxies you can research in arXiv
To give you an idea how big objects can become.
Our local group of galaxies is about 260 that the milky wave is part of and M87 being the center.
Our local group belongs to super cluster.
There are many super clusters.
Don’t let your believe stop you from looking beyond.
13.7 billion years for the age of the universe to create trillions of galaxies is questionable to. Say the least.


[Submitted on 28 Jun 2021 (v1), last revised 1 Aug 2021 (this version, v2)]
The eROSITA Final Equatorial-Depth Survey (eFEDS): Catalog of galaxy clusters and groups
A. Liu, E. Bulbul, V. Ghirardini, T. Liu, M. Klein, N. Clerc, Y. Oezsoy, M. E. Ramos-Ceja, F. Pacaud, J. Comparat, N. Okabe, Y. E. Bahar, V. Biffi, H. Brunner, M. Brueggen, J. Buchner, J. Ider Chitham, I. Chiu, K. Dolag, E. Gatuzz, J. Gonzalez, D. N. Hoang, G. Lamer, A. Merloni, K. Nandra, M. Oguri, N. Ota, P. Predehl, T. H. Reiprich, M. Salvato, T. Schrabback, J. S. Sanders, R. Seppi, Q. Thibaud

The eROSITA Final Equatorial-Depth Survey has been carried out during the PV phase of the SRG/eROSITA telescope and completed in November 2019. This survey is designed to provide the first eROSITA-selected sample of galaxy clusters and groups and to test the predictions for the all-sky survey in the context of cosmological studies with clusters. In the 140 deg2 area covered by eFEDS, 542 candidate clusters and groups are detected as extended X-ray sources, down to a flux of ∼10−14erg/s/cm2 in the soft band (0.5-2 keV) within 1'. In this work, we provide the catalog of candidate galaxy clusters and groups in eFEDS. We perform imaging and spectral analysis on the eFEDS clusters with eROSITA X-ray data, and study the properties of the sample. The clusters are distributed in the redshift range [0.01, 1.3], with the median redshift at 0.35. We obtain the ICM temperature measurement with >2σ c.l. for ∼1/5 (102/542) of the sample. The average temperature of these clusters is ∼2 keV. Radial profiles of flux, luminosity, electron density, and gas mass are measured from the precise modeling of the imaging data. The selection function, the purity and completeness of the catalog are examined and discussed in detail. The contamination fraction is ∼1/5 in this sample, dominated by misidentified point sources. The X-ray Luminosity Function of the clusters agrees well with the results obtained from other recent X-ray surveys. We also find 19 supercluster candidates in eFEDS, most of which are located at redshifts between 0.1 and 0.5. The eFEDS cluster and group catalog provides a benchmark proof-of-concept for the eROSITA All-Sky Survey extended source detection and characterization. We confirm the excellent performance of eROSITA for cluster science and expect no significant deviations from our pre-launch expectations for the final All-Sky Survey.

Comments:	Submitted to A&A for the Special Issue: The Early Data Release of eROSITA and Mikhail Pavlinsky ART-XC on the SRG Mission. 25 pages, 13 figures
Subjects:	Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO)
Cite as:	arXiv:2106.14518 [astro-ph.CO]
	(or arXiv:2106.14518v2 [astro-ph.CO] for this version)