Is Our Children Learning Part III: The universe began with a huge explosion.

[Demosthenes]

Please answer the following question without looking it up.

The universe began with a large explosion, like that of millions of nuclear bombs. True or false?

[-Spector-]

False, in my beliefs. We are all entitled to our own opinions right? ;)

[Demosthenes]

False, in my beliefs. We are all entitled to our own opinions right? ;)

We're not all entitled to our own facts, however. Whether or not your opinion is correct in this case I'm not posting.

[DaFrigginDoctah]

I will go with True, by reason of ruling out all the other bullshit answers. No scientific explanation as to why I believe this, though.

[Willkillforfood]

Please answer the following question without looking it up.

The universe began with a large explosion, like that of millions of nuclear bombs. True or false?

False. Many more than millions of nuclear bombs. But I put true on there anyways :x.

[Sovereign]

Millions is an understatement :p

True as well.

[Vault Dweller]

Voted true.

Still, why do these seem like trick questions to me?

[Lenny]

I know what you mean, Vaulty. Well, the other two were straightforward, but this one felt like a trick question to me. Maybe we're just finding it hard to believe that the answer most of us know, that seems so simple to us, is the answer he actually wants.

[D3V]

We're not all entitled to our own facts, however. Whether or not your opinion is correct in this case I'm not posting.

So basically you're saying the Big Bang Theory is a fact? I'm sorry MJ, but you're wrong there, it's still a theory. I don't think we'll ever actually know how our universe was created.

[D3V]

Also, I voted true, but I know it's almost unfeasable to have an explosion without the universe being started by an outside force, atleast that's my belief. It's a mixture of religion and science.

[Demosthenes]

So basically you're saying the Big Bang Theory is a fact? I'm sorry MJ, but you're wrong there, it's still a theory.

Oh. My. God.

That has to be the biggest pet peeve of mine. Learn what scientists mean by theory.

Yes, the big bang is a theory. In the same way we have the germ theory of disease. Or the theory of gravity. Or atomic theory. Or the theory of limits (which calculus is based on).

Jesus Christ, I can't understand why people have this intransigent claim that we'll never understand the way the universe started. They know absolutely nothing about modern physics, yet they keep banging their heads on the big bang theory. But just because thousands of lay people keep banging their heads on it ddoesn't mean the theory's going to break. It's solid. Y'all are just going to come back bruised and tattered.

[D3V]

I'm not saying I don't believe it MJ, i'm just saying it's a theory. Yes, this theory is probably the most correct interpretation on how the universe started, but still it's not a proven fact.

[Demosthenes]

It's based off of facts. Theories are a coherent group of propositions that explain the facts. Nothing more, nothing less. There is no implication of certainty or uncertainty in that definition. The theories that don't eventually falter to the facts, and in fact make predictions that are testable, are the ones that last.

But it is simply a fallacy to say that direct observation is the only way to know something. For instance, if a woman was pregnant 200 years ago, you could say that she had sex. In terms that we are speaking, that would be the Sex Theory for pregnancy. You may not have actually seen the copulation, but it doesn't mean that the facts don't support your assertion. And just because our explanation is called a theory, doesn't change the fact that she had sex.

Similarly, we can not go back and see the big bang. However, the facts support the assertion.

[D3V]

I know what you're saying. But even the Theory is flawed, they still can't explain how the universe came about or formed. And now, we apparently have alternate/parallel universes. It's a concept that just makes it easy for us to comprehend, and it is close to fact, but it will never be fact. The theory like you said is the closest representation to what is fact.. I'm just saying it will probably be hundreds of years before the theory is classified as fact or it gets caved in on itself. Right now it's just a theory of what would make sense.

[Demosthenes]

I know what you're saying. But even the Theory is flawed, they still can't explain how the universe came about or formed. And now, we apparently have alternate/parallel universes. It's a concept that just makes it easy for us to comprehend, and it is close to fact, but it will never be fact. The theory like you said is the closest representation to what is fact.. I'm just saying it will probably be hundreds of years before the theory is classified as fact or it gets caved in on itself. Right now it's just a theory of what would make sense.

The theory will never be classified as facts. There isn't some continuum from guess to hypothesis to theory to fact. Theories, though related, are compltely distinct entities from facts. Theories never become facts, no matter how much evidence they have in their favor.

And oh my fucking god, the theory is flawed because it doesn't explain the origin of something? Where have I heard this before? Oh yea, evolution is flawed because it doesn't explain the origin of life!!!!!!! Riiight.

[Willkillforfood]

I know what you're saying. But even the Theory is flawed, they still can't explain how the universe came about or formed. And now, we apparently have alternate/parallel universes. It's a concept that just makes it easy for us to comprehend, and it is close to fact, but it will never be fact. The theory like you said is the closest representation to what is fact.. I'm just saying it will probably be hundreds of years before the theory is classified as fact or it gets caved in on itself. Right now it's just a theory of what would make sense.

The theory is now that there's infinite alternate universes. New universes are born from collisions between universes. Because of the sheer number of universes there could be billions of universes like ours but with very subtle differences. Or we could be somewhat unique ...although the odds are against it :P.

[WetWired]

You don't have to have sex to get pregnant. It's certainly the most likely way, but just because someone is pregnant doesn't mean they had sex.

[Demosthenes]

You don't have to have sex to get pregnant. It's certainly the most likely way, but just because someone is pregnant doesn't mean they had sex.

Fine, bad example. I'm sure you can think of a better one that demonstrates my point.

[D3V]

I'll try and point out my actual point later when I get a chance, it's hard to elaborate while i'm at work.

[WetWired]

No, I think it perfectly demonstrates your point.

[Demosthenes]

No, I think it perfectly demonstrates your point.

It could be better. We could have one with even more certainty.

[WetWired]

It perfectly illustrates the uncertainty in your assertion.

[Demosthenes]

It perfectly illustrates the uncertainty in your assertion.

Right, but the point I was trying to illustrate was that the term theory does not insinuate uncertainty. For instance, the theory of evolution encompasses a number of facts. One of these facts is that we share a common ancestor with other apes. There is absolutely no uncertainty about this. Technicalities in the theory of evolution may be modified, but the overlying structure of the theory will not change. Similarly, the big bang theory is well enough established to assert that new discoveries may modify the technicalities of the theory, but the overall structure of the theory will remain.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2006/08/it_works_bitches.jpg

[D3V]

Right, but the point I was trying to illustrate was that the term theory does not insinuate uncertainty. For instance, the theory of evolution encompasses a number of facts. One of these facts is that we share a common ancestor with other apes. There is absolutely no uncertainty about this.


Those same facts don't apply nearly as relevant with the big bang theory. There however, is uncertainty of how the big bang even started. There are tons and tons of "theories" floating around. Shit, I have a theory that you aren't even black, all fingers would point that you are because you say you are, but nobody really even knows, and until it's proven factually and can be demonstrated as a fact rather than just a theory it'll remain just that, a theory.q

[Demosthenes]

Those same facts don't apply nearly as relevant with the big bang theory.

What?

There however, is uncertainty of how the big bang even started. There are tons and tons of "theories" floating around.

Absolutely. There is no consensus on this, and I have never asserted that there is.

Shit, I have a theory that you aren't even black, all fingers would point that you are because you say you are, but nobody really even knows, and until it's proven factually and can be demonstrated as a fact rather than just a theory it'll remain just that, a theory.q

You're still not understanding what a theory is.

[Willkillforfood]

Most scientists agree with the idea of the big bang. They can use math to look back all the way to a split second after the explosion ...but they have had trouble for a long time figuring out past there.

[D3V]

Okay, WKFF, that's the point i'm trying to get across. Sure, they can go on all day explaining that the mass inside of this specific area came together, and densed up to a ponit, got to a certain point where it couldn't go in anymore, and exploded, and shot peices so far to the point that it formed a universe etc etc.

[Demosthenes]

Okay, WKFF, that's the point i'm trying to get across. Sure, they can go on all day explaining that the mass inside of this specific area came together, and densed up to a ponit, got to a certain point where it couldn't go in anymore, and exploded, and shot peices so far to the point that it formed a universe etc etc.

That's a gross misrepresentation of what the big bang theory says.

[D3V]

Sorry, science doesn't interest me that much. But i'm going to stick with "true"

[Demosthenes]

29% are correct.

[Sovereign]

It's because when you are dealing with a singularity, things get fucked up. It's an object of infinite mass and density.

The current theory that seems to be promenent in all of the shows and books that I've read on the subject all state that the universe formed by the big bang. I want links and proof that someone without a PHD in quantum mechanics could understand stating that this is wrong.

[Draco2003]

Maybe the whole explosion thing is a bit of an over-reaction. Maybe all that happened is the universe fell into this singular point, and then bounced off of itself, and is now on its "bounce", and will probably just go back to its singularity on day in a bajillion years.


By the way, I didn't vote, because I am uncertain where I stand on this.

[D3V]

29% are correct.

That is your theory :haha:

[Demosthenes]

That is your theory :haha:

Psst -- don't use words you don't know the meaning of.

And it is also the currently accepted scientific version of things.

[Atnas]

I voted false. I have no reason for doing so, save that I don't like theories, even though existence is merely a theory in and of itself. : )

[Asamin]

I know what you mean, Vaulty. Well, the other two were straightforward, but this one felt like a trick question to me. Maybe we're just finding it hard to believe that the answer most of us know, that seems so simple to us, is the answer he actually wants.
It is not proven as fact. It is just a theory. That is why it seems like a trick question.

[Demosthenes]

It is not proven as fact. It is just a theory. That is why it seems like a trick question.

Oh. My. God.

[Atnas]

Asamin, when theories are consistent they constitute as a form of fact.

Facts globally accepted by most scientists.

Like the big bang.

Buuuut... I don't believe anything is real so I don't have to believe in anything. : )

[WetWired]

Like Newtonian physics? Look how that turned out.

[Demosthenes]

Like Newtonian physics? Look how that turned out.

First of all, I wouldn't consider Newtonian physics to be altogether incorrect.

I can understand your perspective, though. Nevertheless, being wrong about one thing does not at all imply that you are wrong about something else.

[WetWired]

I'm just illustrating that in the end even laws are just theories. It's always possible you might find hidden components to equations that reveal that you weren't exactly right.

You and your opponents are both right. The big bang theory is past the "theory" stage of the scientific method, but at the same time you can't prove it untill you invent a time machine.

[Atnas]

Even then it could be God fucking with your eyes.

You know?

[Asamin]

It can't be proven. Therefore, it is not fact.

[Atnas]

Nothing is a fact by that logic, Asamin. Nothing.

[Demosthenes]

Tomorrow's post will be titled "Theories, Laws, and Facts."

[Asamin]

Nothing is a fact by that logic, Asamin. Nothing.
This is true. Therefore, everything is theory.