3 ms·
Crackpot filter. Mine's still on. Some findings are slightly surprising, but none so far have had big enough deltas to call the big bang theory "flawed". There
by lucian1900 14y ago
Crackpot filter. Mine's still on.
Some findings are slightly surprising, but none so far have had big enough deltas to call the big bang theory "flawed". There's way too much data confirming it.
- Craiggybear 14y agoBut, it is flawed -- simply because its so incomplete. There's simply too much we have absolutely no clue about and we have a lot of gaps that don't neatly add up. Our ignorance is vast. This is partly to do with our limited nature. What we don't know about the origin of the universe far outweighs what we think we do. This won't ever stop being the case no matter how clever we may become. Take exoplanets. According to everything we thought we knew about planetary formation by looking at our own solar system led us to believe every other star system that had planets would follow a similar configuration (rocky planets close their parent star gassy giants further away). That turned out to be spectacularly wrong. We've never seen any star systems with planetary distributions even remotely like ours. The formation of galaxies is even more full of contradictory evidence and we only have the sketchiest picture. Modesty is a feature of good scientists. Know-it-all attitudes get us nowhere.
- mhurron 14y agoYou do know that flawed is not a synonym for wrong? You do also have the reading comprehension to see that 'the big bang theory is wrong' and 'there are flaws with our current understanding of the big bang theory' are in no way saying the same thing?