--keya 13:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia\Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.mht The Big Bang is the prevailing cosmological theory of the early development of the universe. Cosmologists use the term Big Bang to refer to the idea that the universe was originally extremely hot and dense at some finite time in the past and has since cooled by expanding to the present diluted state and continues to expand today. The theory is supported by the most comprehensive and accurate explanations from current scientific evidence and observation.
[1]HYPERLINK "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#cite_note-1"[2]
Without any evidence associated with the earliest instant of the expansion, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the Universe since that instant.
The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the Universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.
The Big Bang theory does provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the Universe since that instant.
. . . “general evolution of the Universe” . . .
*Wikipedia\Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.mht
But it's also physically meaningless, in a sense. The present particle horizon is of interest only to us, not to any hypothetical observer at the Big Bang.
The article is being written for us, not for all possible hypothetical observers. The observable universe is what laypeople think of when they hear the term "universe", so references to it are a useful teaching aid. --Christopher Thomas (talk) 04:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
But when referring to the early moments of the Big Bang, the "us" in question doesn't exist to declare what the relevant observable scale is. ScienceApologist (talk) 16:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)* '
"Lemaître went further and suggested that the evident expansion in forward time required that the Universe contracted backwards in time, and would continue to do so until it could contract no further, bringing all the mass of the Universe into a single point, a "primeval atom" where and when the fabric of time and space comes into existence.[16]"
The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling *first minutes of the Universe
Therefore as we see matter as a function of electromagnetic waves (light) as characterized by absorption, reflection, etc.; we don't see, dark matter because the characteristic wavelength of dark matter "Acts as a black body & absorbs radiation in those wavelengths" . . . Higher density particles would produce shorter wavelength => higher frequency.
keya 14:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC) (inertia: resistance to change)
--keya 13:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia\Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.mht The Big Bang is the prevailing cosmological theory of the early development of the universe. Cosmologists use the term Big Bang to refer to the idea that the universe was originally extremely hot and dense at some finite time in the past and has since cooled by expanding to the present diluted state and continues to expand today. The theory is supported by the most comprehensive and accurate explanations from current scientific evidence and observation.
[1]HYPERLINK "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#cite_note-1"[2]
Without any evidence associated with the earliest instant of the expansion, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the Universe since that instant.
The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the Universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.
The Big Bang theory does provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the Universe since that instant.
. . . “general evolution of the Universe” . . .
*Wikipedia\Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.mht
But it's also physically meaningless, in a sense. The present particle horizon is of interest only to us, not to any hypothetical observer at the Big Bang.
The article is being written for us, not for all possible hypothetical observers. The observable universe is what laypeople think of when they hear the term "universe", so references to it are a useful teaching aid. --Christopher Thomas (talk) 04:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
But when referring to the early moments of the Big Bang, the "us" in question doesn't exist to declare what the relevant observable scale is. ScienceApologist (talk) 16:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)* '
"Lemaître went further and suggested that the evident expansion in forward time required that the Universe contracted backwards in time, and would continue to do so until it could contract no further, bringing all the mass of the Universe into a single point, a "primeval atom" where and when the fabric of time and space comes into existence.[16]"
The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling *first minutes of the Universe
Therefore as we see matter as a function of electromagnetic waves (light) as characterized by absorption, reflection, etc.; we don't see, dark matter because the characteristic wavelength of dark matter "Acts as a black body & absorbs radiation in those wavelengths" . . . Higher density particles would produce shorter wavelength => higher frequency.
keya 14:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC) (inertia: resistance to change)