How loud was the Big Bang?

[Richard Martin]

Since the atmosphere/matter created from the bang would be every changing/spreading apart at a very high rate of speed,

This all depends on whose theory of the Big Bang you subscribe to. There are some that theorize that the Big Bang didn't happen from a central point and expand from there. They think that everything everywhere just flashed into existence at one moment.

 

[BassAndReeds]

This all depends on whose theory of the Big Bang you subscribe to. There are some that theorize that the Big Bang didn't happen from a central point and expand from there. They think that everything everywhere just flashed into existence at one moment.

Ok. But I'm pretty sure the video the OP posted references a Big Bang as a central point event. So I'm using that as my reference of discussion for this thread.

 

[Daniel Piper]

In space no one can hear you bang.

Gold.

 

[mcarp555]

This all depends on whose theory of the Big Bang you subscribe to. There are some that theorize that the Big Bang didn't happen from a central point and expand from there. They think that everything everywhere just flashed into existence at one moment.

There's pretty much only one Big Bang theory; some of the details are still being debated, however. At the time of the beginning of the expansion of the Universe, all of space was the 'same' point. The Universe didn't expand into a pre-existing space; it creates space as it goes (and still does). So every point in space today was where the Big Bang originated. People often assume that this was some sort of 'explosion', but that's very misleading. It was an expansion of space, carrying matter along for the ride. There is no 'edge' to the Universe like you would find in a shock wave from a bomb blast. The BB was nothing like that at all.

 

[Deleted member 165050]

At the time of the Big Bang, there was no such thing as sound.

I think the idea is a bit of a physics joke - they mean frequency rather than sound. And there is no need for anything other than movement of something for there to be a frequency,

 

[Deleted member 165050]

This all depends on whose theory of the Big Bang you subscribe to. There are some that theorize that the Big Bang didn't happen from a central point and expand from there. They think that everything everywhere just flashed into existence at one moment.

That's a weird one, almost as weird as the steady state / infinity theories.

 

[Zooberwerx]

I don't know but you can bet the next universe over was banging on the wall telling 'em to turn down.

Riis

 

[retslock]

There's pretty much only one Big Bang theory; some of the details are still being debated, however. At the time of the beginning of the expansion of the Universe, all of space was the 'same' point. The Universe didn't expand into a pre-existing space; it creates space as it goes (and still does). So every point in space today was where the Big Bang originated. People often assume that this was some sort of 'explosion', but that's very misleading. It was an expansion of space, carrying matter along for the ride. There is no 'edge' to the Universe like you would find in a shock wave from a bomb blast. The BB was nothing like that at all.

Goes where? Creates space from what? This doesn't make sense.
I don't buy "the big bang" theory (it's only a theory and is unproven). I can accept "a big bang", - ours - but I believe there have been and will be multiple big bangs forever. After chatting to an astro physicist I met once, she agreed that muliple big bangs are also a possibility.
The trouble with human thinking is that if we can't measure it - if it goes beyond our capability to measure and record, then it doesn't exist. In the big picture we're insignificant and astoundingly arrogant in thinking that we will ever know the true secrets of the universe.

 

[mcarp555]

Goes where? Creates space from what? This doesn't make sense.
I don't buy "the big bang" theory (it's only a theory and is unproven). I can accept "a big bang", I believe there have been and will be multiple big bangs forever.

A "theory" in scientific terms is not a "guess"; it's the best explanation we have for something based on the available evidence. The theory of gravity or germ theory or music theory are not "unproven" concepts. Your supposition regarding multiple big bangs is a guess, because there is no evidence for it. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but we can't say without some framework to discern if either is more likely than the other.

Our exploration of strange phenomena such as the quantum world show that reality is not required to conform to our ape brains. Not grasping how or why the Universe creates the space it expands into does not mean it's not happening.

 

[Rev. Cornelius]

It didn't happen or I would have heard it.

 

[retslock]

A "theory" in scientific terms is not a "guess"; it's the best explanation we have for something based on the available evidence.

Not grasping how or why the Universe creates the space it expands into does not mean it's not happening.

Nor does it mean it is. Science must be able to measure and record information which is a strength but also a smokescreen. If we can't measure it, it doesn't exist.
I'm not trying to dismiss science at all but theories get changed as we get more evidence.
I'm not looking for an adversarial conversation but I just don't think we can be sure of what's out there beyond our ability to measure.

 

[Microbass]

This thread has made my morning.

And also reinvigorated my mind for theoretical physics. I'll probably get no further work done today.

 

[mcarp555]

Nor does it mean it is. Science must be able to measure and record information which is a strength but also a smokescreen. If we can't measure it, it doesn't exist.
I'm not trying to dismiss science at all but theories get changed as we get more evidence.
I'm not looking for an adversarial conversation but I just don't think we can be sure of what's out there beyond our ability to measure.

And you're right; as we learn more, theories change, or can be discarded in favour of better ones. Newton's theory of gravity has been replaced by Einstein's theory of relativity. One day relativity could be replaced by another theory which manages to incorporate quantum theory. But the Big Bang theory right now explains the available evidence we've obtained so far regarding the start of the Universe. In the early 1960's the only other explanation that was considered was Fred Hoyle's 'Steady-state' explanation. But when the cosmic microwave background radiation was discovered, Hoyle's theory couldn't account for it, but the Big Bang theory (which was actually coined by Hoyle as a putdown) could.

So there is evidence for the Big Bang (and not just the CMBR). It's our best explanation for what we observe. Will we ever know all the details? Maybe not, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

As I said before you edited your post, we don't know if there were multiple big bangs; without evidence, we simply cannot say for sure. This goes for a multiverse as well as a cyclical Universe.

 

[basscapes]

I'm more worried to know if better cables improve the sound of that bang...

 

[Quinn Roberts]

So what separate denominations of the Big Bang Theory are there now?

 

[Wfrance3]

So what separate denominations of the Big Bang Theory are there now?

And if the Bare Naked Ladies write theme music for any of them, will there be contractual ramifications?

 

[40Hz]

It's not something you should be listening to either, bunch of bleedin perverts!!!

Well…you don't really get to pick your perversion if it truly is, by definition, a perversion. It just sort of happens to you ne cest pas?

 

[40Hz]

When it comes to banging it's not so much a matter of space and time. It's more a matter of interest and opportunity.

(I think Steven Hawking said that.)

 

[40Hz]

Not nearly as loud as a Who concert in the 70s

Got that right.

 

[40Hz]

I thought it was all over the news a while back that the "big bang" never happened and had been disproved. Seriously.

I think it's back again. But give it another week and we'll see.

A 'model year' for the current best theory in physics and cosmology is about 72 hours at the rate those lads and ladies are moving. Especially now that there's more and more supercomputers being brought online for them to test their models on.

Mind boggling what that crowd is into.