that's alarming. What we must understand about the big bang model is, without any credible alternative, ideas become stagnated. With only one strong theory we might just get it wrong. What then? Where do we go? It's akin to making a wrong turn in a maze. Inevitably all paths after that lead in the wrong direction and you only get farther and farther away from the truth.
But if we were to be generous again, and those opposed to big bang theory, and there is a few in science-who do remain hostile to this philosophy; then we might allow for an explosion to take place. In other words, we could tamper with the evidence to show, that even when a fraudulent avenue is sought, other anomalies still lurk out there.
To do this, produce an explosion, we might say a sense of ubiquity is needed. Or to term it simply pressure, so the reader can understand our thinking more simplistically, pressure might be a more apt explanation. We could deduce a universe of infinite density might bear down on this point, and create such strong forces, that everything in the universe, even though, according to science, the universe still didn't exist, at this time, was able to produce this pressure we just briefly mentioned.
To get around this huge problem, we might argue, the universe we speak of during that period, was no more than a huge vacuum. Although, if we did, we may assume a vacuum is still part of any universal model, and is indeed, still in existence.
But to manipulate the evidence even further, we could support a period, some 15 billion years ago, and suggest all universal pressure created a detonation. That point in our universal history, known to science as a singularity, exploded. But another problem arises.
If we imagine, a universal vacuum, so dense it creates ubiquity, then we must also assume, any explosion would not have the force to actually distribute the contributory matter throughout the universe. And so, even though we went the extra proverbial mile, and provided an ambit for big bang postulation, to facilitate a universe, we still found a problematic approach in its construction: Universal ubiquity would be too strong to allow the said event.
We've now seen a few reasons why a big bang singularity is not likely. We showed consolidation would not happen as there would be no substance for it to consolidate from. That meant we have no opportunity to compose time, no opportunity to produce cause and effect, and no reason to get this show started. Continued
Big Bang Singularity: Essay Paper 1
BB Singularity
Steady State Theory
Big Bang Created the Universe
Physics and the Big Bang
Bible The Book of God
Fusion, Infinitely Hot Universe
Atoms, Neutrons, Elementary Particles
Big Bang Summary