The Instigator
Thisrandomguysaid
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
CreditedThinker
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Where is all the proof of the Big Bang theory

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/24/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 576 times Debate No: 55377
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Thisrandomguysaid

Pro

I just can not see how all of your proof adds up. Let's go back before the Big Bang, this massive ball of stuff could not have been there for however many years and not have run out of power. And let's say it didn't then how did it form and why did it explode. And if so would life have started there or here or is all life eternal, but the only problem is all power in the universe is supposed to end in one googol years, so why didn't the universe end one googol years ago. Don't worry I don't expect you to have all the answers because these are the things scientist still don't know and don't really talk about for no apparent reason, I do think about the other side of the argument it's just that these things really stuck out to me
CreditedThinker

Con

I see you're point Pro, you are a person. And as a person, you want to know answers. That's human, we are curious and want to know things. But you are questioning creation, something that has long been debated and has recently been picked up by scientist in order to find out what happened. "Don't worry I don't expect you to have all the answers because these are the things scientist still don't know and don't really talk about for no apparent reason..." It's not that scientist don't talk about it for no reason, it's just that they don't have anything to talk about. We have much to learn when it comes to the universe and creation for that matter. We are just picking up the stepping stones of the universe's origins and functionality. And as for your statement: "...the only problem is all power in the universe is supposed to end in one googol years, so why didn't the universe end one googol years ago...." I don't know if you meant this number literally, or estimated, or just to mock the real number and question what happens to cause it to end, but science is not technologically advanced enough to gather information about the end nor the beginning of the history of the universe. There are many theories that attempt to explain the origins of the universe. I will get into 3. I would like to bring up the idea of Dark Energy. It is a theoretical explanation for the increasing acceleration of bodies in space. Rather than the gravity on Earth; what goes up continues to go up and at a faster rate as time passes. This is where we ask "What is causing this and why?" and the slightly humorous answer is: we don't know, we just gave it a name. It's weird to discuss about something that is theoretical, but I will try my best to explain how the universe could end because of dark energy. The first being something called "The Big Rip Theory"; it is (in my best explanation) when the universe expands and, with the dark energy theory, basically means that everything will move too fast for gravity to even stick it together. But this isn't the end, since it continues to move accelerate, this means that given enough time, space will move faster then the speed of light. Which means atoms would be effected and disband, and no particle would be able to interact with anything. The second is called the "Heat Death Theory" using entropy for this theory, matter stays but is converted to radiation over time. This means that all planets, suns, and galaxies will convert in time. Black Holes will undergo "Hawking Radiation"; and will evaporate at a estimate of trillions of years. After this, only gas and particles will exist until they get converted: the universe is gone. "entropy is at it's maximum"* However, quantum tunneling can, theoretically, create a new big bang. This could also explain how our universe started (again, theoretically) The third and final reason would be something called the "Big Crunch Theory" in short, dark energy in this scenario would decrease to the point where gravity becomes stronger, pulling the forces back together. Bodies of the universe would smash together, and black holes merging with one another until all black holes come together and form a "mega black hole". This will eventually lead to all things in the universe to be in the black hole until, the black hole devours itself. According to the Big Crunch Theory, this has happened many times before and will continue. Keep in mind that I am no scientist, I probably said something that is wrong, in which I ask any readers to correct me. The thing is that I can't directly tell you how it all makes sense, since the most advanced scientist don't even know parts of the "puzzle"; all we can do is question it. References to the explanations: "Three Ways to Destroy the Universe" by Kurzgesagt and http://en.wikipedia.org...

*Quote goes to Kurzgesagt whom I referenced quite a lot of in his informative video.
Debate Round No. 1
Thisrandomguysaid

Pro

Thisrandomguysaid forfeited this round.
CreditedThinker

Con

CreditedThinker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Thisrandomguysaid

Pro

Thisrandomguysaid forfeited this round.
CreditedThinker

Con

CreditedThinker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Thisrandomguysaid

Pro

Thisrandomguysaid forfeited this round.
CreditedThinker

Con

CreditedThinker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by shenefeltj 2 years ago
shenefeltj
This debate lacks format. Con's repose is difficult to read and does not stay on topic. Pro's topic starts with asking a question about the big bang, but quickly trails off into imagination land.

This could be a good debate, but I don't think we're going to get it from these two. Sorry!
Posted by ArcTImes 3 years ago
ArcTImes
lol, Con didn't talk about the big bang theory. I see the problem tho. Pro's first argument is too abroud and the only thing related to the big bang theory in some way would the "explosion".
He mentioned "before the big bang", life, and what scientist don't know.
No votes have been placed for this debate.