The Instigator
Heirio
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
EmeraldEye
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The big bang theory

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Heirio
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/16/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,397 times Debate No: 86698
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (81)
Votes (1)

 

Heirio

Pro

In this debate, we will discuss whether or not the Big Bang Theory is true. I will take up the position of Pro and support the Big Bang Theory, whereas the Con will be against it.
EmeraldEye

Con

My claim is that the big bang theory is not real and is just a theory nothing else. The big bang theory states that the universe originated when a single dense point of infinite energy exploded and created what we see in the sky today. But may I ask where that point came from? And how it has infinite energy? You see when you look at the Big Bang theory from the outside it looks like a good answer to one of histories greatest question. But when you look a little deeper most of the theory is either unknown or made up.
Debate Round No. 1
Heirio

Pro

Firstly, you state that it is just a theory. This is a misunderstanding of the word "theory". In science, it does not mean a simple idea, in science, a theory is a well substantiated explanation of some aspect of the universe, something with evidence backing it up.

The Big Bang Theory states that the universe started off in a singularity and was immensely dense, hot and held all the energy in the universe. It is important to note that while this amount of energy was extremely vast, it was not infinite.

We do not currently know where the singularity came from, though that in itself is not evidence against the Big Bang, since we still have large amounts of evidence for it. For example, the red shift. The red shift is evidence of galaxies moving further away from each other. This showed that the universe was expanding. Due to this knowledge, we can infer that once the universe was a lot smaller than it was today. Using complex mathematics, physicists worked out that the universe was once so small that it was in a singularity. They also worked out that the rapid expansion of the universe from that singularity was the big bang.

Very early in its history, the whole Universe was very hot. As it expanded, this heat left behind a sort of "glow" that fills the entire Universe. The Big Bang theory not only predicts that this glow should exist, but that it should be visible as microwaves - part of the Electromagnetic Spectrum. This is the Cosmic Microwave Background which has been accurately measured by orbiting detectors, and is very good evidence that the Big Bang theory is correct.
EmeraldEye

Con

First of all I will like to return to the point you made about the Cosmic Microwave Background. How do you know that your so called "glow" was created by the heat from the Big Bang and not heat from starlight?

You also mentioned the red shift. I believe that the red shift is being caused by the mass of everything is expanding. See scientists measure how far galaxies are away from us by using frequencies of light given off by the atoms of the galaxies. The farther away the galaxy is the more "reddish" the light will become. At least that's true for the Big Bang theory. But when an atom gets bigger it goes to a higher frequency, towards the blue frequency. Since speed is not infinite there is a time lapse from when light from space comes to earth. So we are basically looking back in time. We are looking at the image of galaxies before the time lapse and not what is currently happening. So the data will look more red shifted because you are looking at past data and past frequencies, not current frequencies.
Debate Round No. 2
Heirio

Pro

Firstly on your point about Cosmic Microwave Radiation, I'd like to post a link: http://www.astro.ucla.edu...
I hope it works.

Secondly, correct, we are looking back in time when we look at the galaxies, thus we are looking at past data and past frequencies, not current frequencies. However, to my knowledge, we have no current way to looking at the current frequencies (because of distance). The past is all we have, but they still paint a very clear picture. The Doppler effect states that when something is both moving and gives off waves, the waves in front of it will compress and therefore have a higher frequency. The waves behind it however will expand and have a lower frequency. Because all these galaxies were shown to have red-shifted light, it showed that, via the Doppler effect, that the galaxies were moving away from us.

Also, I'm not sure I follow your point on the mass of everything expanding being the cause for the red shift. Would you mind elaborating on that?
EmeraldEye

Con

I will elaborate on my point of mass expanding. If the masses of large celestial bodies were smaller and now are increasing we would be looking at past data instead of current data. So this data will look more red shifted because of the distance between us and the thing we are looking at.

Also I will point out another reason why the Big Bang theory is false. The first part of the theory breaks a law of science. In the beginning stage in the debate you pointed out that we do not know where the singularity, in which the Big Bang was caused by, came from. My answer to that is that there wasn't one. You stated that the singularity had all the energy in the universe. But this singularity cannot be created because of the law of conservation of energy. So the singularity cannot be made and the whole theory just breaks apart.
Debate Round No. 3
Heirio

Pro

In your first paragraph you don't actually mention how the changing masses of large celestial bodies causes the redshift, which is what you implied earlier. I will use the definition of the Doppler Effect here, since the Red-shift is an example of it (the Doppler effect of light).
"an increase (or decrease) in the frequency of sound, light, or other waves as the source and observer move towards (or away from) each other. The effect causes the sudden change in pitch noticeable in a passing siren, as well as the red shift seen by astronomers."
The source of the waves (the galaxies and stars) has to be moving away from us in order for the red-shift to occur.

On the second paragraph, you state that the theory breaks a law of science, the conservation of energy. The big bang theory never states where the singularity came from. This doesn't mean it came from no where, it means we don't know. The big bang theory would only break this law if it stated that energy was created. However, the theory NEVER states that energy was created. It does not make any implications to such at all.

The singularity existed, but we do not know where it came from. This does not mean it came from nothing. All it means is that we are ignorant of its origins.
EmeraldEye

Con

Since this the last time I will get to talk before the voting starts I will end this heated debate with a bang. So the reason why the single dense point exploded is because the point spun so fast in a friction empty environment. The point went so fast that it eventually exploded. So that would mean that all the planets should be spinning in the same direction. Right? Well sorry to burst your bubble but 2 planets spin backwards: Uranus and Venus. And some moons not only spin backwards they orbit their planet backwards. This is solid proof of the Big Bang theory being wrong.
Debate Round No. 4
81 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by its.chandler 7 months ago
its.chandler
I just read the debate on gay adoption, you are VERY smart (laughing) like you know your stuff. I think that gays have every right to adopt. I don't really care if someone is gay/lesbian/bisexual, it doesn't bother me, but since my mom is christian and all, if I ever told her something like that she would be pisses!!! My sister is bisexual, and my mom hates it! But I don't really care.
Posted by its.chandler 7 months ago
its.chandler
oh okay thanks (laughing) l'm going to find something of yours and comment on it here in a few seconds! Just let me put my pajamas on first (laughing)
Posted by Heirio 7 months ago
Heirio
It's free on kindle.
Posted by its.chandler 7 months ago
its.chandler
Oh okay I was just wondering since you are really into all this evolution and stuff :) I've done some research on him, and I read that his book too!
Posted by Heirio 7 months ago
Heirio
I haven't really looked into Charles. I agree with some of the things he has said about evolution. His book on evolution did make some mistakes, mistakes we have now improved upon.
Posted by its.chandler 7 months ago
its.chandler
Wait! one last question, Do you agree with Charles Darwin?
Posted by its.chandler 7 months ago
its.chandler
OMG haha! okay I'll look all that stuff up! I already read about the red shift like 15 min. ago (laughing) but the rest I will look up I promise! Thanks for the debate, I have a lot to think about and consider on what I believe! Talk to you later! Good luck on your GCSE's!
Posted by Heirio 7 months ago
Heirio
I don't have much time for formal debate; my GCSE's are coming up.

But I'll give you some evidence for the Big Bang theory, as well as evolution.

Big Bang theory:
Red shift
Microwave Background radiation

Evolution:
MRSA
Overbites
The Fossil record
Peppered moths
Posted by its.chandler 7 months ago
its.chandler
Okay I promise I'll look! I'll debate you on something later:))) maybe tonight;) *wink but I have to see what else your interested in, cause so far it seems to be A LOT of evolution stuff----(laughing)
Posted by Heirio 7 months ago
Heirio
Fair enough.

Despite the fact that if you actually take your time to look, you will find evidence for it.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by U.n 9 months ago
U.n
HeirioEmeraldEyeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Only Pro cited a source.