The Big Bang. Most people say it as if it's a given. A fact. But it's really a theory. Science, if it's good science, involves Observation and repeatability. But none of today's scientists, or you or me, were present at creation, or to observe the Big Bang. And we can't recreate it all over again, ourselves. So we don't know. We speculate on how the Universe began.
I seem to remember reading that The Big Bang Theory didn't come along until 1927.
So, what did the general public believe in, say, 1925?
Even after 1927, in the 1950's, there was astronomer Fred Hoyle and his "Steady-state Theory." I think it makes more sense. As far as The Big Bang goes, how did the "beginning ball of stuff" get here? It was always here? What caused it to explode outward? How long was it "just sitting there in space" before it finally went "bang"? The Steady-State idea can also say "all the stuff of the Universe was always here", too, and that as some things unravel or break up, other parts are "jelling", coming together and new stars, planets, solar systems, etc. are being created. To me, that seems simpler and even somewhat easier to believe.
The idea of The Big Bang is widely accepted but I think it often "wins" just because people don't bother to look for other explanations, or better one's. Question authority. What other ideas are there? Fred Hoyle's Steady State is one. Are you aware of any others? Are any of them just as believable, or more so?
#Science #Astronomy #Opinions