The Big Bang - where?

[albatross]

Generally speaking, we now know the approximate size and shape of the known universe, it`s age and the fact that it`s still expanding, etc, but do we have any idea of where the epicentre of the `big bang` was?

Any ideas?

Albatross

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

Here, there and everywhere. Everything came from the big bang and therefore it started everywhere at the same time.

Kaptain Klevtsov

[beamer3.6m]

But if everything came from the big bang the it must have come from somewhere.

There must have been a central point and I would assume that if the universe has expanded outwards since the big bang it would be reasonable to assume that the bang took place in the middle.

Wouldn't it???

[phillc]

Albatross. go to http://curious.astro.cornell.edu Then type Big bang into the search box. Then scroll down you will find the question you are asking about, with a better answer than I could give.

Hope this is of some use.

phillc

[Doc]

Hubble discovered that the galaxies are moving away from us with a velocity proportional to their distance. Every point in the universe is expanding from every other point at a constant rate. There is no expansion from a particular point. We know about this expansion due to the red-shift of galaxies. It is like getting a basketball and asking where on the surface of the basketball the centre is. No point can be defined as the centre.

[narrowbandpaul]

Doc,

thats exactly correct. I was going to say the same thing. Basically we all carry our own universe, 13.6 billion light years across, exactly centrered on us, wherever we go...

[Viking]

What about dark energy and dark matter that make up the majority of the universe. I understand that they are the 'agents' that are causing the universe to expand.

John

[Jeff RV]

But if there was nothingness before the bang and time & space etc didn't exist, there could be nothing to cause the bang in the first place, if anti matter was evident and the cause, wouldn't this need anti space to exist in the first place, how did anti space exist? If you get my meaning!!

Think I've just confused myself more.

Jeff.

[supernova]

I think it all started in the middle

[Jeff RV]

Middle of nothing?

Jeff.

[supernova]

Exactly

[George]

Not being a physisit I find it all mind boggling.

Some of the stuff Ive read does not make sense, ie there's no centre :scratch: simple geometry always finds a centre

Knitting sounds simpler, I'll give it a go :mrgreen:

[ngc2403]

This is going to get some stick, but before jumping on me and betating me with a stick for suggesting that astronomers are wrong, bear in mind that i am doing a course in astronomy and physics so i have heard the big bang no centre story many times before.

This is my idea and it has bugged me for years;

Three people let off rockets A,B and C, and they travel at different speeds:-A @ 5m/s , B @ 10m/s and C @ 15m/s.

if they are released all at the same time what happens?

well ignoring acceleration because the Big Bang was instantaneous, A sees B and C move away from it proportional to their distance.

as does B and C.

Now if you let of nine five rockets A B C D E, at slight angles to each other then even if they are the same speed they all see the other rockets moving away from them at a constant rate proportional to there distance.

if we take the what state are they in after 14billion years and with the launch of countless rockets of different speeds and differnet angle, then what any rocket see around it? well the rocket would see only other rockets with similar speeds and similar angles moving away very slowly and more importantly proportional to there distance.

One problem is that if they all head off very fast then with thespeed of light being fixed there might be problems however that might not be a problem if i use local reference frames.

you know after all that it still makes good sense to me, i didn't break down the way that somethings do when you start to talk about them i only hope you can follow my thinking as i don't explain thing that well sorry for the time that you will now very get back

ally

[winfij]

Now if you let of nine five rockets A B C D E, at slight angles to each other then even if they are the same speed they all see the other rockets moving away from them at a constant rate proportional to there distance.

if we take the what state are they in after 14billion years and with the launch of countless rockets of different speeds and differnet angle, then what any rocket see around it? well the rocket would see only other rockets with similar speeds and similar angles moving away very slowly and more importantly proportional to there distance.

I understood that the distant objects we see in the universe aren't red-shifted because they're moving through space away from each other as such, but because the space between them is expanding thus causing them to appear to be receding.

John

[ngc2403]

you are correct the space between galaxies clusters is expanding but not the space in and around the galaxies because of gavity. they think that Dark energy is the cause of this expantion however my idea explains it without the need to invoke such a strange energy thazt we have never seen or come up with anyway of describing it even on a theoritical level.

the space expanding the causes the red-shift.

personally i don't like that idea one bit it is a bit like four elephants and a turtle

[winfij]

Your idea doesn't explain how one can look in every direction and see objects receding from us though - or are you suggesting that the earth is at the center of the universe....?

[Trevor]

You might find this interesting:

http://www.s8int.com/bigbang5.html

Hilton has been on the Forum in the past.

[ngc2403]

if you replace the rockets with galaxies, then think about the fact that as a galaxies moves though space it's motion is relative to what? other galaxies so all the galaxies we see could be moving away from us but also moving a radial direction form the source of the big bang.

the same happens with the rocket's each can only look at other rockets to see how they are moving and so try to see if it is moving? hence it would see all rockets moving away from it because they have different speeds and or they were launched at a different angle.

There is no way to see the source of the Big Bang due to the Cosmic Microwave Back Ground but if you plot the Hubble constants for galaxies on the sky then a pattern might appear that would be two 'poles' of the same Hubble constant and in between it would be different.

i might try looking for the redshift data to see if there is any change over the sky.

[GazOC]

This dark energy/ matter looks like a convenient fix, they can just put as much as they need wherever they need it to balance the books to fit with whats being observed.

[winfij]

the same happens with the rocket's each can only look at other rockets to see how they are moving and so try to see if it is moving? hence it would see all rockets moving away from it because they have different speeds and or they were launched at a different angle.

Nope - if you think about the motions involved a little more, for all rockets to be moving away from us, we'd have to be in a "special place" - the one thing the theorists are trying to avoid assuming.

[ngc2403]

Show me i don't think that i understand what you mean?

[ngc2403]

You might find this interesting:

http://www.s8int.com/bigbang5.html

Hilton has been on the Forum in the past.

I quick warning about this site i my opinion this site displays theories without facts and although MOND is the subject of research seen by the science world as 'worthy' the other theories are generally not the best to put it lightly. Personally i see the theories at the botton of the page as a slap in the face to science and the research carried out over the last 50 years. their bit on the Microwave Back ground it *%$"%$$%&^$*^%$^&*%$*^ annoying i feel the rage building inside

MOND is a theory based on fitting an equation to points. it doesn't go on to explain the things going on abit like newton and so they're treated with contempt by the astronomy researchers i know.

[Trevor]

More good reading for those cloudy evenings is the “supernovae survey by Saul Perlmutter” and “is newtonian mechanics an advantage or a limitation in astrophysics” by Hilton.

[albatross]

Thank you for all your interesting replies and as I`m only about eighteen months into astronomy, then most of it went over my head! I`ll try reading the websites offered for further enlightenment.

Thanks

Albatross

[Paxo]

Albatross,

If you are looking for a read on the subject, try 'The Universe A Biography' by John Gribbin published by Penguin (ISBN 978-0141021478 ) only £5.99 on Amazon at the moment.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Biography-John-Gribbin/dp/0141021470/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218091271&sr=1-1

"The story begins 14 billion years ago. Somewhere in a vacuum (one school of thought would have it), a quantum ripple upset the apple cart and – BAM! One-ten-thousand-billionth of a second later a ball of pure energy, 10²⁹ degrees Kelvin, begins its inevitable task, as described by the Standard Model of particle physics, of creating the universe. Energy turns into X and Anti-X particles, which become quarks and leptons, which form nuclei – and slowly a balance is achieved between matter and the mysterious dark matter that holds the galaxies in place."

"As Gribbin moves through the history of the universe, there are moments of great excitement and wonder as he explains what scientists think happened 10-13 seconds after the Big Bang and describes how it might all end. Included along the way are: the theory of inflation (which relies on quantum fluctuations during the first moments after time zero to explain the uniformity of the universe and why galaxies exist at all); where our chemical elements came from; how our Solar System was made; and how life on Earth originated about four billion years ago."

The book gets mixed reviews (either 5 star or 1 star withnoyhing in between) but I found simple explanations of difficult concepts.

Hope this helps.

Steve