"Astronomers have pushed NASA's Hubble Space Telescope to its limits by finding what is likely to be the most distant object ever seen in the universe. The object's light traveled 13.2 billion years to reach Hubble, roughly 150 million years longer than the previous record holder. The age of the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years."
The next generation of telescopes may be interesting in confirming or refuting Big Bang. There are alternate theories, like the minority who think the universe has simply always existed in various forms but much as it is today.
So if your telescopes get good enough to see further than 14 million light years (more than the supposed age of the universe), you would disprove Big Bang (but not relativity). At the rate of advance in space telescopes, we could do this in a decade or so. After all, Hubble was very limited to begin with.
Falsifiability is an essential element of science. This is likely a way to put Big Bang to the test.
#20. To: Dead Culture Watch, GarySpFc, liberator (#5)
I've recently heard the new theory is that the universe has always existed, is eternal. Its the 'agreed' science of the day, lol.
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."-- Robert Jastrow
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
Even if this were true, I would add to the analogy that it is the scientist that would have, because of his exhaustive research, a full understanding of where the mountain was. It is he who could point it out on a map. The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
Even if this were true, I would add to the analogy that it is the scientist that would have, because of his exhaustive research, a full understanding of where the mountain was. It is he who could point it out on a map. The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
It was meant to be a bit of humor as I see it written.
The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
By the quote they (the theologians) were on top first:) Perhaps they 'hired' a guide who showed them.
