(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

You 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 You