Thread: pulsating universe

That's very wrong... please read about those subjects on Wikipedia or somewhere.

The Big Bang was the expansion of the universe from an infinitely small point. This happened about 14 billion years ago. We know it happened because we look in the sky and can detect that galaxies are all flying away from us.

The Big Crunch is what would happen if gravity is enough to slow these galaxies down and bring them back together.

The Big Bounce theory is that there is an infinite series of Crunches and Bangs.

Originally Posted by Xei

That's very wrong... please read about those subjects on Wikipedia or somewhere.

The Big Bang was the expansion of the universe from an infinitely small point. This happened about 14 billion years ago. We know it happened because we look in the sky and can detect that galaxies are all flying away from us.

The Big Crunch is what would happen if gravity is enough to slow these galaxies down and bring them back together.

The Big Bounce theory is that there is an infinite series of Crunches and Bangs.

first of all, i havent got super telescopic eyes, i cant see that the galaxies are flying away from us. and the way that i described the big bang was mixed up between something i read, and something which someone told me, but what i read is still not quite what you have said there.

and here is a link for big crunch :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch


and i think you are right about the big bounce, i didnt read into it enough, i rushed it.

as for your description of the big bang and the big crunch, i think you are getting mixed up with string theory. (dont ask me too much about it because i only know i few things, and they are probably things i miss heard)

first of all, i havent got super telescopic eyes, i cant see that the galaxies are flying away from us.

That's why we use telescopes. Most galaxies are blue shifted. Look that up on Wikipedia.

and the way that i described the big bang was mixed up between something i read, and something which someone told me, but what i read is still not quite what you have said there.

Then what you read was wrong.

as for your description of the big bang and the big crunch, i think you are getting mixed up with string theory. (dont ask me too much about it because i only know i few things, and they are probably things i miss heard)

String theory has nothing to do with anything I said.

Google for Big Bang and Big Crunch or just look on Wikipedia for goodness sakes; what I said is correct.

did you not look at info i gave you?

and when i said its different from what i read, i meant ive never heard about the flying away galaxies mentioned

the big crunch is the physical taking away of some of the universe, not making everything closer together, and the big bang is the opposite.

No the big crunch is the opposite of the bang. The universe collapsing etc. It's all on the link you posted. Imagine the big bang as a balloon being blown up, and then the big crunch as the balloon being emptied. It's just that the balloon starts and ends as infinitely small.

did you not look at info i gave you?

It confirms what I said; you should read it yourself.

Big crunches do not subtract from the amount of mass or energy in the universe, and big bangs do not make any; they're just compressions and expansions. The sum of the amount of energy and mass in the universe is always the same; you cannot destroy or create these things.