Quick question on big bang as expansion of space itself.

[harroxelas]

Hello,

I've seen some scientists say on videos and write in books that big bang was the expansion of space itself. Is there actual evidence to support this? That space expands on a large scale after the big bang is ok but to say that the big bang was the expansion of space itself seems a bit odd to me.

IF the big bang was the expansion of space itself, seems like there's nothing outside the big bang, but we couldn't possibly klnow that!

Well, is there actual evidence to support this?

 

[nismaratwork]

Just look into Metric Expansion and such issues as superluminal galactic recession velocities... this isn't a tough one. You can probably get all you need from wikipedia.

 

[Andrey]

Hello,

I've seen some scientists say on videos and write in books that big bang was the expansion of space itself. Is there actual evidence to support this? That space expands on a large scale after the big bang is ok but to say that the big bang was the expansion of space itself seems a bit odd to me.

IF the big bang was the expansion of space itself, seems like there's nothing outside the big bang, but we couldn't possibly klnow that!

Well, is there actual evidence to support this?

Indeed it is odd...but the only way in which this hypothesis can be maintained is if we take the previous pre-big bang universe and blow it up like a balloon so the space inside the balloon expands.

IF the big bang was the expansion of space itself, seems like there's nothing outside the big bang, but we couldn't possibly klnow that!

That's correct. In fact what exist outside the big-bang is another universe that provided the necessary ingridients for the current big-bang to take place.

 

[Dmitry67]

That's correct. In fact what exist outside the big-bang is another universe that provided the necessary ingridients for the current big-bang to take place.

If you work in Superstring/Multiverse area, shouldn't you mention that it is very hypotetical, and there are also other theories, without 'another universes', and there is no observational evidence to tell one from another? Your post can do more harm than good.

 

[sardar]

Hello,

Thank you for your question. The concept of the big bang as the expansion of space itself is a widely accepted theory in the scientific community. There is ample evidence to support this idea, including observations of the cosmic microwave background radiation, the abundance of light elements in the universe, and the large-scale structure of the universe.

One of the key pieces of evidence for the expansion of space is the redshift of galaxies. This is the observation that distant galaxies appear to be moving away from us, and the farther away they are, the faster they are moving. This is consistent with the idea that space itself is expanding, causing the galaxies to move away from each other.

Additionally, the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is the leftover heat from the early universe, is very uniform in all directions. This suggests that at one point, the entire universe was in a hot, dense state, and has been expanding and cooling ever since.

While we cannot know for certain what existed before the big bang, the evidence strongly supports the idea that space itself expanded during this event. This does not necessarily mean that there was nothing outside of the big bang, but rather that the expansion of space was a fundamental aspect of the event.

I hope this helps to answer your question. The big bang theory is constantly being studied and refined by scientists, but the evidence for the expansion of space remains strong. Thank you for your curiosity and interest in this topic.