Welp, just can no longer resist, just have to put me two cents in, welcomed or not. Have the need for some abuse, guess so. This is an interesting thread BTW. Does anyone else find it interesting and amusing, how threads evolve and morf accross topics?
Me don't believe in the BBT, but do accept it as the best scientific model available, thus far. As said earlier, it best explains how our observable universe came to the state, we now see it. Am also convinced the universe has been proven to be 'open,' so the Steady State, as well as the Big Crunch, models are just no longer valid. There are some major problems with the BBT, however, monoploes being one. And more interestingly IMO, who or what, turned the BB on in the first place? For the BBT to work, it requires a singularity, a humongous one, to have contained all the matter-engery of the present universe, and this is after the null-out of particle/anti-particle formations, about 90%+(?) of its initial content. Granted, we've been observing for relatively insignificant peroid of time, but for all the Black Holes and SMBH's we've discovered, there is only this one, that appears to have 'burst open,' creating this universe we find ourselves within. Stevie Hawknings suggests BH's can evaporate, but have heard not a hint of how, they might 'explode.' Anyone?
Putting me money on something called the Ekpyrotic Universe model, but it is a gamble. (Silas, you might find this of interest.) Within it, no monopoles are formed, because the extreme heat isn't produced as with the BBT, and no singularity is required. It relies on superstring theory, as yet unproven. Within months, though, experiments at some of the particle accelerators, may begin to produce 'micro-black-holes.' If so, then superstring is valid, and by analyzing the radiation produced as they 'blink' out, we can begin to draw some conclusions about these extra dimensions.
IMHO it is only natural, that theology comes up in most conversations dealing with cosmology. Didn't our first cosmological models come from religion? Would go so far as to suggest, that only within the span of me own short sweet life, cosmology has departed from theology to become a stand alone science. Being something of an ambiguous agnostic, think the suggestion, that one, who believes in the existence of a "god," can't be a scientist, is absurd, just based on the history of science itself. Science confines itself to physical reality, of how's not why's. Science can determine correctness or incorrectness of methods, but has nothing to deal with questions of right and wrong. Science is a sub-set within the body of knowledge. When me stares out into the cosmos, am filled with a sense of wonder, awe, yes, even reverence. If you don't, can't say you are wrong, but you live in a universe, that is smaller than mine. Butt have a good week-end, no matter what...
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: NubiWan on 2001-11-30 18:25 ]</font>
