I have an alternative theory to the big bang and the beginning of the universe.
Bear with me here.
I put it to you that the universe did not explode outward from a tiny point - propelled by some inexplicable force. Is it possible that the universe was, in fact, the result of a massive three dimensional tear?
Say, for instance, you stretch out a sheet of black nylon fabric really taught - and then stab it in the center with a scalpel - what happens? the material bursts outward from the middle in every direction, increasing in speed as it goes. It might even leave some particles of detritus behind as it goes.
Now, imagine that happening three dimensionally and on a universal scale.
Is it possible that what we now call the "bang" was in fact the explosive retraction of material being wrenched apart under enormous tension from some outside force?
That we all now survive amongst the gases and dust left behind by the enormous splitting of the fabric outside our realm?
I'm fairly sure there are reasons why this cannot be the case, but i'm not aware of them.
>>9116745
Nobody said BigBang was the beginning of the Universe.
>>9116949
except, you know, science in general.
>>9116968
People say things.
Abstract concepts like science do not say anything.
>>9116971
so you don't believe that physicists agree on the big bang hypothesis...
>>9116968
It's a model from the earliest known periods
>earliest known periods
Absolutely no scientist will say that the Bigbang was the beginning of our Universe.
We don't know how and what was the T0 of our universe and maybe we will never know it.
>>9116983
'The Open Society and Its Enemies' makes none of the claims in that image.