Is anyone familiar with Big Bang Theory?

[Adam West]

I know there has been a lot of advancement in our knowledge of the universe and scientists have been able to show that the universe is expanding.

I'm just curious if anyone knows whether or not scientists have any idea how old our solar system is compared to others if the big bang theory is true....in other words, is our solar system closer to where it is thought to have occurred making it older than others or is further out making it newer?

I really haven't seen it mentioned anywhere and the question has been nagging me for some time now and was hoping someone who is more knowledgeable than me can fill me in.

Thanks

[Mikey]

I was watching a pretty good show about this on, I think History Channel.

It seems the Big Bang Theory is about 85-ish% accepted in the scientific community.

The way they made it sound, our solar system is super young compared to the age of the universe.

The biggest arguement now is whether our universe is ever-expanding .... or will it one day contract and create ANOTHER big bang.

[Adam West]

Interesting....I really haven't kept up with recent view but I know around 20 years ago, the general feeling was that the universe would one day stop expanding and then start to contract.

Another interesting thing I learned...don't know if it is true or not that scientists believe that the universe is expanding at exactly the perfect rate to sustain life on our planet. A little more or a little less and there would be no life on Earth.

[apes3978]

I always thought the Big Bang Theory was a porn movie...

[johnmiic]

I've seen several good specials on History Channel, Science channel, Nat'l Geographic. I've heard many interesting developments in cosmology. I think the Earth is 4 or so billion years old but I am unsure how old the solar system is. Perhaps slightly older than that.

I had heard that the Universe is between 13-18 Billion years old and that there was a discrepancy that previously they could not resolve between mathematical models and the observable universe. Though recently they did resolve that but I haven't kept up on it.

The main theory on solar system formation is called disk accretion,(?). Basically all the gas and debris starts clumping together and rotates forming a star in the center and planets that revolve around it. One special I saw said that computer models show this is a valid theory however they said when they try to model our own solar system they can't get the formation of Uranus and Neptue. It is a mystery to them why this is the case.

Also the prevelant theory about the Earth and Moon is that Earth collided with a wandering planet the size of Mars and after the collision the Earth/Moon system formed. If not for this many scientists have theorized that we might not have life on Earth the way we know it.

For instance Venus is the same size as the Earth but it is life-less. It doesn't seem to have moving tectonic plates and the radar images returned by the Magellan spacecraft years ago don't seem to indicate distinct continents or shorelines. Mars doesn't seem to have these features either. Earth is extremely dynamic in the fact that the continents drift over the surface of the world-albeit slowly. The Moon is unique in it's size compared to Earth and exerts a strong influence on us. No other panet in this solar system has a moon as big by comparison. Some people look at the Earth and Moon as a double-planet arrangement because it's so big. Issac Asimov used to write in his books that the two are so unique that there probably is not another system in the universe that has an Earth/Moon system like ours. I think that is going a bit too far.

I recall hearing about 10 years or more ago that based on observations made by satellites they put into orbit they could tell from the radiation signature that the universe we live in a flat universe. I know that sounds crazy but it may not mean exactly what it seems to be saying. Not like a Flat Earth theory.

The Big Bang theory is a good theory and tho it has its detractors you must understand why it is used. A theory, any theory, must be able to explain what we see around us until a better theory comes along. The reason why it holds is because it is testable and features that are observed in the universe support it. One of it's biggest competitors is String theory. String theory has many elements that seem to explain how the universe works as well.

[AAAAA]

I believe in the Big bang (EXPANSION) and the Big Crunch (RETRACTION),
That Graviational forces of attraction of dust clouds form planets and stars.
and remenber If Juptier was 10 tmes bigger it would have been a star.
and in 3 billion years the milky way galaxy will ram into andromedra Galaxy.
and 4-5 billion year our sun will burn out.
Time to get ready for the ALL NIGHTER

[FullerDawg]

Yea , I believe in the big bang theory. GOD Said "BANG" and it was there. In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth. Thats the way it is for me guys .To many other things to focus on. Please dont be offended thats just how simple it is for me. thanks and God Bless Jerry

[johnmiic]

On the TV show The Universe, I recall seeing an episode where they said that most scientists had accepted that the universe was expanding and would not contract. I think the latest observations from probes & telescopes showed the expansion was in fact increasing. They are not sure why but think the Universe will expand to the point where the distances between starts are so great the night sky would be even darker.

On another episode of that show they said that there are probably 11 dimensions and if 1 or more collide they may create on a big bang-creating a universe. They theorized that was how our universe was created. I think the idea also was that universe and dimension are somewhat different things. You can have many universes but only 11 dimensions throughout space and time.