Quote:
Originally posted by mijoon@Jul 23 2003, 12:28 PM
What I am questioning is the reality and nature of the appearant expansion of the Universe . The notion of expansion is mostly derived from the doppler effect exibited by very distant objects . However , these objects are distant , not only in space , but in time as well . The doppler effect may have as much , if not more , to do with their temporal distance than with their spacial distance .
Given that the nature of the space-time continuum is poorly understood , we should not jump to conclusions regarding cosmic expansion .
P.S.
Sorry , treve, to have made assumtions about your belief or non-belief in the Big Bang.
|
I wouldn't say it is conclusive but there is much more evidence for the big bang than the redshift of distance objects. Many observations are consistent with the Big Bang model but none have outright contradicted it. The background radiation prediction (1960s) is good.
A good friend of mine in college (major, physics) didn't believe there was enough evidence for the Big Bang.
There are enough Big Bang heretics out there to keep the fire burning.