What is the evidence for the Big Bang?

The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model that explains the early development of the Universe. According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe was once in an extremely hot and dense state which expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion caused the young Universe to cool and resulted in its present continuously expanding state. According to the most recent measurements and observations, this original state existed approximately 13.7 billion years ago, which is considered the age of the Universe and the time the Big Bang occurred. After its initial expansion from a singularity, the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow energy to be converted into various subatomic particles. It would take thousands of years for some of these particles (protons, neutrons, and electrons) to combine and form atoms, the building blocks of matter. The first element produced was hydrogen, along with traces of helium and lithium. Eventually, clouds of hydrogen would coalesce through gravity to form stars, and the heavier elements would be synthesized either within stars or during supernovae.

The Big Bang is a well-tested scientific theory which is widely accepted within the scientific community because it is the most accurate and comprehensive explanation for the full range of phenomena astronomers observe. Since its conception, abundant evidence has arisen to further validate the model. Georges Lemaître first proposed what would become the Big Bang theory in what he called his "hypothesis of the primeval atom." Over time, scientists would build on his initial ideas to form the modern synthesis. The framework for the Big Bang model relies on Albert Einstein's general relativity and on simplifying assumptions (such as homogeneity and isotropy of space). The governing equations had been formulated by Alexander Friedmann. In 1929, Edwin Hubble discovered that the distances to far away galaxies were generally proportional to their redshifts—an idea originally suggested by Lemaître in 1927. Hubble's observation was taken to indicate that all very distant galaxies and clusters have an apparent velocity directly away from our vantage point: the farther away, the higher the apparent velocity.

If the distance between galaxy clusters is increasing today, everything must have been closer together in the past. This idea has been considered in detail back in time to extreme densities and temperatures, and large particle accelerators have been built to experiment on and test such conditions, resulting in significant confirmation of this model. On the other hand, these accelerators have limited capabilities to probe into such high energy regimes. There is little evidence regarding the absolute earliest instant of the expansion. Thus, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe going forward from that point on. The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

Fred Hoyle is credited with coining the term Big Bang during a 1949 radio broadcast. It is popularly reported that Hoyle, who favored an alternative "steady state" cosmological model, intended this to be pejorative, but Hoyle explicitly denied this and said it was just a striking image meant to highlight the difference between the two models. After the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964, and especially when its spectrum (i.e., the amount of radiation measured at each wavelength) was found to match that of thermal radiation from a black body, most scientists were fairly convinced by the evidence that some version of the Big Bang scenario must have occurred.

The Big Bang has not met the requirements to be classified as a scientific Theory due to lack of supporting evidence. In the scientific community a method is used to produce a step-by-step process to explain an observation.

These are the most common steps; Observation, Question, Hypothesis, prediction, experiment, analysis, decision. When an experiment is proven to be 100% reliable it becomes a scientific Law. This method being referred to is known as the Scientific Method. As Antonio Zamora explains ”The scientific method requires that theories be testable. If a theory cannot be tested, it cannot be a scientific theory”.

One might reply to this statement, just because scientist haven’t found proof for the big bang doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

In regards to this logic, if scientists produce documented, testable proof using the accepted scientific method, that the Big Bang is possible, then one can claim the Big Bang to be a scientific Theory.

If the entire universe existed as a point of singularity prior to the big bang, and since matter can be neither created nor destroyed, then all the matter of the universe, and thus, the very fabric and foundations of the universe, existed prior to the big bang.

The theory of the big bang explains nothing, has no basis, and must be rejected.

Now readers will say BB is not bothered as to what happened before BB,it only explains what happened after BB.You are welcome to believe it or reject it.

God has responded 1400 years in the past interior the Holy Quran, financial ruin 21 verse 30 "Did the disbelievers not observe that the heavens and the earth have been closed, then We opened them? And We made out of water each residing factor. could they nonetheless not have faith?" the main significant premise of the large Bang thought is that the universe grow to be as quickly as in an exceptionally warm and dense state that prolonged at as quickly as (a "huge Bang"). This speedy expansion led to the extra youthful universe to relax and led to its recent continually increasing state. huge bang thought grow to be proposed in basic terms some a protracted time in the past, yet Allah has printed the certainty plenty plenty before that.

a) Large-scale homogeneity

b) Hubble diagram

c) Abundances of light elements

d) Existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

e) Fluctuations in the CMBR

f) Large-scale structure of the universe

g) Age of stars

h) Evolution of galaxies

i) Time dilation in supernova brightness curves

j) Tolman tests

k) Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect

l) Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect

m) Dark Matter

n) Dark Energy

z) Consistency

1. All major galactic structures (not solar systems) are receding from Earth;

2. Cosmic microwave background radiation

I refuse to believe that a big nothing came from nothing.

But hey, that's just me.

That there is no better explanation for the CMBR.

I dont believe in it