You
For all those who appreciate the work that we're doing here on staining for truth
Please hit that subscribe button because we are just getting started
Yeah, but the next question was what are some of the major problems with the Big Bang Theory because I'm sure you hear them all
Yeah, the Big Bang. It's it's it's not really much of a theory
I guess you could call it a model it because it doesn't really make testable predictions about the universe at least that have been
specific and successful
Some people think that the Big Bang predicted the cosmic microwave background
I'll sort of grant that but it wasn't a very specific prediction because the the temperature that it predicted went from
1 degree Kelvin to 50 degree Kelvin's and the true answer of 3 Kelvin's is in the right ballpark
But there was you know, it's it's like predicting that something will happen tomorrow and then something happens tomorrow
You say see that's evidence for my hypothesis. Maybe not so much. It doesn't make specific
Testable predictions that have been vindicated and in fact
It predicted variations in the cosmic microwave background that are orders of magnitude larger than what we actually see
So it didn't even predict the right kind of microwave background. So it doesn't make good successful predictions. It's remarkably complicated in terms of all the
Band-aids they've had to add to it to get it to be consistent at least somewhat with the observable universe like inflation if you've
Heard of inflationary Big Bang. That's a patch to
to try and explain why we don't have
Monopoles and why the universe has a sort of what we call a flat
topology to it
But the Big Bang didn't predict any of those things. So it doesn't mix. It's not a good theory at all
It's at best a hypothesis and in terms of problems
It's got all kinds of problems with it all one that all that
I like to mention just because it's easy to understand
It's called the baryon asymmetry problem or the baryon number problem
And basically the way you remember this is you ask the question. Where's the antimatter?
We can make matter on earth from energy. You can't we can't make matter from nothing only God can do that
but we can take energy energy from a
Collisions of particles at extremely high speeds close to the speed of light in particle accelerators and from that energy we can we can create
New particles, but every time you do that, you also get an anti particle
So if you make an electron, you'll also make a positron an anti electron
Which is the same as electron but the charges the particles are reversed
And so according to the Big Bang the entire universe was originally energy and then as it cooled it became
Some of that energy became matter
But the problem is according to everything we know about physics
You should get an equal amount and exactly equal amount of antimatter
But when we look out into the universe we find it's essentially matter only there's only trace amounts of antimatter anywhere in the universe
and they're always produced locally anyway and almost immediately destroyed because when matter and antimatter touch they they tend to
Annihilate each other and release energy especially in the form of photons
But to the fact that our universe is matter only is
Indicates that it was created not by a natural process
but by a supernatural process because every natural process that converts energy into matter also produces an equal amount of antimatter and
That problem has not been solved in the secular worldview
I mean there are proposals for it
The latest idea is that well every now and then one time out of a quintillion when energy becomes matter
There's no antimatter produced. It's just it's matter only so that they but that hasn't been observed
That's just a rescuing device. It hasn't it's not something that has experimental support. So that's what that's one example
There are many others as a flatness problem and the monopole problem and inflation attempts to solve
At least some of those but it doesn't solve all of them
Dr. Law you're touching on all the best points here. I read about the
Antimatter problem. I believe it was in your taking back astronomy book
So great answer there and you also mentioned inflation is
This their rescue device essentially for what's known as the horizon problem. That's right
the horizon problem is a light travel time problem that the
secular Big Bang as it originally was proposed had and
Basically, the problem is these microwaves which secularists assume are the leftover radiation from the Big Bang?
Well microwaves the frequency of those microwaves tells you something about the temperature of their source and
As I mentioned earlier that microwave background is very uniform. What that means is the source temperature of everything in the universe
was
Originally identical or very nearly
So the fluctuations are very tiny and yet in the Big Bang model when the universe the universe is supposed to have popped into existence
You know
There's a singularity where all of space is contained in a point and then it rapidly expands out like a balloon
The surface of the balloon represents the three dimensions of our space and there should be hot spots and cold spots
That's just due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. You would have to have because of the
This small scale you'd have to have places that are hot places that have a lot of energy places that are cool places that have
Less energy the universe rapidly expands out carrying the hot spots and cold spots far away from each other. But wait a minute
They're all they're all lukewarm now
Okay, all those temperatures have evened out and yet there hasn't been enough time for light to travel and therefore energy to travel
From the hot spot to the cold spot to even out those temperatures, right?
I mean if the hot and cold were in contact with each other
They would eventually come to the same temperature because heat tends to go from hot to cold
That's the second law of thermodynamics. And so you put your ice cube in your hot coffee
Eventually, you'll end up with you know lukewarm coffee. They come to the same temperature, but they have to be in contact
They have to be able to exchange energy and there hasn't been enough time
Even if you give them the thirteen point eight billion years there hasn't been enough time to light for light to travel from that hot
Spot to that cold spot because they could be on opposite sides of the visible universe
And so the inflation is an attempt to solve that problem
Along with the flatness problem and perhaps the multiple problem
But the idea of inflation is that the universe started expanding at what we'll call the slow rate
Although it's actually very fast and then and then it suddenly ballooned out and a much faster rate and then it and then that
Inflation fade that's the inflation phase and then that switched off and it went back to the slow rate again
And so the idea is that the hot spots and cold spots could have evened each other out
Right before this inflation phase pushed them far apart and I'll grant that that could reduce
Maybe even solve the horizon problem
But it just it introduces other problems of its own such as what would cause this
What would cause the universe to suddenly expand at a much greater rate now there are hypotheses as to well
You know some kind of symmetry breaking and the in the laws of physics and then you got to ask
What would it cause it to how would it stop everywhere?
and how would it know to stop everywhere at the same time that is a huge problem because
There are still small temperature differences even today. There are small temperature differences
And so if it's some kind of symmetry breaking you would think it would turn off different places at different times
But it didn't we have kind of a uniform universe
And so that's called the graceful exit problem
so the horizon problem inflation an attempt to solve the horizon problem and
Then the graceful exit problems problem with inflation and some secularists
Reject inflation entirely because they realize it has its own issues and they proposed alternative solutions to the rising problem
But I think inflation is still the most commonly accepted secular solution to a problem
But as I said, it's got problems of its own
Wow great answer so they say we have a light travel time problem when in fact
They're the ones with a massive light travel time problem and then based on what you said in order for them to solve that
Problem it turns into a ripple effect of other hard to solve problems and you pointed out that some
authorities on the subject even reject in inflationary theory for that reason
Yeah, and I'll point out to just in case anybody's wondering yeah the anisotropic synchrony convention solve their horizon problem
the answer is no because they need to get the speed of light both ways to be much faster than it really is because it's
Not just the hot spots here that have to get information have to dump energy the cold spot there
But it's also a hot spot here. It has to dump energy to a cold spot over there
So it has to be faster in both ways and the anisotropic synchrony convention
You can only have like you can only have light instant in one particular direction
Relative to an observer not could be the incoming direction regardless of what that is, right?
So north to south if it's this way and south north of it's that way but you can't have it then
Going out in that same direction. It'd be also instant
So sink rate conventions will not solve the horizon problem
But we have it we have an answer for our starlight problem that is consistent with known physics and the seculars really don't
Wow, that's hot. Yeah, that's awesome. Great point there and a couple questions came in in
Pertaining to that answer. Let me see here
Guys, great questions in the chat. Very lively chat
I'll never be able to get to all these so let me at least pick a couple out super chat here from Jamie Russell
Thank You Jamie
Can you explain how the universe doesn't have a center or could be infinite if we started as a point in Big Bang?
cosmology
yeah, the
Entertaining for the sake of argument the Big Bang idea that the universe started from a point
Which expands like a balloon the the surface of the balloon?
Which is two-dimensional?
Rep is supposed to represent the three-dimensional nature of our universe
You can think about our universe if you if you wish you can think about it being wrapped around a fourth dimension that we can't
Perceive and so just as the surface there's no one point on the surface of a balloon
That is the center right? And so I mean, there's no unique Center
I mean every every ants walking along the balloon every one of them could say I'm in the center
but so, you know soak at every other ant but they're actually on the surface of a of an expanding two-dimensional
structure
Whereas we apparently live in a three-dimensional structure that's expanding
If you want to think of it as being wrapped around a fourth dimension, you can do that
Although it's not really necessary mathematically for that to be the case. So
and
You know, even though I don't believe the universe
Started from a point. I do believe it's expanding. I think there's good evidence for that and the balloon analogy
I think that's that works for a creationist universe, too
it's just God created our balloon with size and then he's blown it up a little bit since then our balloons never a point and
so
If that's the case, then there may be no unique Center to our universe or there could be a center
We don't really know it could be that the galaxies end at some point
It could be that there are a finite number of galaxies in the universe and at some point there aren't any and there's just space
Beyond that it could be the case. It could be that our universe wraps around on itself
We don't really know we don't really know but any of those are possibilities. We're a great answer
yeah, like I said before this is such fascinating stuff and
Let me see here
I'll grab this one. I'll definitely get the super chats guys. So
Jungle jargon for $5 asks could the vacuum of space be causing the redshift
In a sense that's actually the most common view actually because the idea is you know when people think of redshift
They think of a Doppler effect a lot of times, you know
Just just the way the sound of a car's horn changes as it goes past you it it drops
Light will do that to light will shift toward the red
It's much harder to see with light because well for two reasons for one it the speeds just unimaginable
I just so much faster than anything else we experience and secondly our eyes are not analyzers our eyes are synthesizers
We our eyes combine
Wavelengths into a color experience where our ears don't do that. Our ears can separate sounds into different frequencies
So if I if I hit two notes on a piano, you'll hear two notes
But if I shine two colors in a circle, you'll see one color. You'll see that combined
There's a difference there
But with spectroscopes we can measure the the shift of the spectral lines in these galaxies and the farther away galaxies are the more
Redshift that they are and the initial explanation for that was well, they're they're moving away from each other, but
Probably a better explanation is that there you can think of them as being at rest on a universe
That's actually expanding and as the light travels through that
Expanding
Fabric of space it gets stretched out and so it's in the in the most popular view which I think is probably right
That the red shifts are caused not by Doppler shifts
But by expansion of the universe at least on a cosmic scale that the reason the distant galaxies are red shifted is because of the
Stretching of the fabric of space as light travels through them
And so yeah, the vacuum the space probably is what's causing a lot of the red shifts. Although motion will do it, too
Awesome, I appreciate that answer. Dr. Lyle and thanks for the super chat jungle jargon a lot of people enjoying this
Thanks for the conversation very informative. So I've got dr. Lyle's
Website in the description box. So please check that out for more information on this. This has been awesome. Dr. Lyle
You