where did the matter to cause the big bang come from?
403878
That's the problem with the evolutionist's "theory" they say,"It was there and it exploded"No. Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Have u heard of Intelligent design? Yea most of it is "religious" but see, the word "Creation" means the making from nothing" so u can easily say that God created the universe.It's easy to believe since no scientific evidence is needed.If the bang did come about, why do planets spin in opposite directions? Look in the conservation of angular momentum. I'm not trying to make u christian, but i'm glad u see a flaw in,these theories of the bang, no one was around at the time to know, so how could they be right? I'm glad u asked. My name is Tyler from Kearney, Ne E-mail me @ meatballofall@yahoo.com if u have more to ask or want to know more.
571217
You misunderstand the Big Bang theory. The universe did not start from a big ball of matter. For the first 10-34 seconds we simply don't have the physcis figured out as to what happened. There are many conjectures, though.\n\nThe first difficulty is that General Relativity predicts something called a singularity at the Big Bang. A singularity is something like what you see at the north pole. There is no 'north of the north pole' simply because the coordinate system can't be extended that way. Under General Relativity, there is no 'before the Big Bang' because thw time coordinate cannot be extended past that point. Remember that time itself is part of the structure of the universe, so time began when the universe did (in this view).\n\nAnother view is obtained through quantum mechanics. We know that modern vacuums are never completely empty. They are a blur of particles apperaring and disappearing all the time. The state of having absolutely nothing is actually a very high energy state. When that state decayed into a lower energy state, that provided the energy that subsequently became the matter we see around us. In this scenario, the singularity predicted by relativity is blurred out by the quantum effects, but the net result is that all the matter literally came out of a vacuum. This is possible without violating conservation of energy because the vacuum state 'befroe the Big Bang' had a higher energy than all the matter we see around us.\n\nAnother possibility is a 'bouncing universe' where the universe goes through cycles of collapse and expansion. The collapse before the current cycle provided the energy for the current one. There are modifications to this where 'universes' bud off of the vacuums of other ones.\n\nAll of this is highly speculative. However, we do know that a Big Bang is how things got started about 13.7 billion years ago. We see the afterglow of the hot, dense time at the beginning all around us in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CBE).
106760
Science at this point does not know what caused the big bang. Or if there were multiple big bangs. \n\nBy the way, evolution has nothing to do with the big bang,other than they are both governed by natural laws of the universe (some have said these are God's Laws, or Maimonides equated these natural laws with angels, if that makes you feel any better). \n\n\nI have attached a paper on the big bang you might find enlightening.
504420
First, you can safely ignore anybody who talks about "evolution" when talking about the Big Bang theory or the origin of the universe.  Such a person doesn't know the difference between biology and astrophysics, and is thus is not the best person to be asking about science.\n\nSecond, the "atoms and other stuff" didn't "cause" the Big Bang (as you say in your question).  They were created *by* it.\n\nThird, the Big Bang theory proposes that the light elements (hydrogen, helium, and perhaps some lithium) were created in *extremely* high-energy conditions present in the first moments of the universe after the big bang.  The heavier elements were created much later after gravity had coalesced masses of hydrogen into early stars.  The confirmation of these processes keeps mounting as we build bigger particle accelerators that simulate higher and higher energies in the laboratory.  \n\nBut I'm sure you're really asking what happened "before" the big bang to "cause" it.   Scientists barely have ways to even ask this question, as the very nature of "before" breaks down when we're talking about the beginning of time itself.\n\nIn other words, science does not claim to have all the answers ... but that is not to say it has no answers at all.  \n\n--- \nAnd as for Mike B. ... a shining example of the worst of both worlds ... gets his science from the Bible, but not a thing about how to treat people.  It's unlikely he's ever read the Bible, or if he did, he didn't understand a word of it.
835420
When the one location is definable as a mathimatical singularity you'd be surprised what can happen, it has been postulated that the "Big Bang" had more space dimensions then the present universe and if that's the case then it very easily could have been the origin of all matter. How many 2-D circles fit in a sphere? Infinitly many. Same idea.\n\nAnd the "Big Bang" wasn't a cherry-bomb-in-space. There was no space. Thanks to Relitivity we know that Space and Time are consequences of the existance of gravity and quantum mechanical forces which require matter and energy too exist. Trying to use conservation of mass to disprove Big Bang isn't valid, as there was no space or time before the Big Bang so there's nothing to compare it to.\n\nAs for whether or not there's evidence for the Big Bang, I beg to differ. The Cosmic Radiation Background is more then just proof, it's the proverbial smoking gun. I really hope this helps.
828773
The Big Bang occured around 14 billion years ago, the earth didn't come into existence until about 4.6 billion years ago.  The earth did not exist when the Big Bang occurred, therefore the Big Bang could not have destroyed it.  \nThe name "Big Bang" is a misnomer, there wasn't really a "bang", the name comes from a nickname given by supports of the old Steady State Theory, which now has very little to no support.\nThe explosion cooled, allowing the four main forces of the universe (gravitational, the electromagnetic, the strong, and the weak forces) to split apart.  Matter finally arose out of the energy created by the "bang", forming a plasma of quarks, gluons, and leptons.  These finally coalesced into protons and neutrons (via the strong force), finally they formed atoms by uniting with electrons via the electromagnetic force.  \nMatter coalesced via gravity into star and galaxies.  Planets arose from extra material not bound into stars.  \nI think God caused the Big Bang, but he didn't just "bang" it into existence as you put it.  If he did, why did he spend three or four days on one little planet in the entire cosmos, and spend only a single day on the rest of the universe.  I think it is rather illogical.
466312
In 1927, the Belgian Catholic priest Georges Lemaître independently derived the Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker equations from Albert Einstein's equations of general relativity and proposed, on the basis of the recession of spiral nebulae, that the universe began with the "explosion" of a "primeval atom"—what was later called the Big Bang.
1096987
The scientific theory is that the Universe started as a fluctuation of the vacuum. Such vacuum fluctuations make appear a small amount of energy, for a small time. This phenomenon is responsible for the existence of forces, that hold the Universe and matter together.\n\nNormally the bigger the energy fluctuation, the smaller the time it is in existence.\n\nNot so the Big Bang. That was a HUGE fluctuation. So big that a lot of energy came to appearance in the form of mass, elementary particles. These particles started expanding, before the vacuum could reclaim the energy.\n\nAnd it is still expanding today. 14 billion years later.
978879
well... tough question. it is said that the beginning of time was the Big Bang. if the Big Bang was produced in the center of the Universe, there must be the origin of time.
29022
Accually, indepandent,the big bang theroy would work if two things.it had proof and it accually explained were matter came from.what was there before the bang that caused the bang?the universe expanding thing isnt even prooven.But if u read the Bible, it says that God made everything.EVERYTHING. INCLUDING TIME and SPACE.God was and is not bound to time.know y? because He made it.our mind cant comprehend it,and thats no surprise.\nanywho, the big bang theroy does not support the beginning of the universe because the bang was caused by something.\n\nP.S.about evolution--it is allready disprooved by simply the second law of thermodynamics.nothing gets from bad to good, like life forms(ape like to human).it all just gets worse.and it has.
1015241
space-time itself originated in the big bang.  everywhere in the universe was once the big bang, and the whole universe was the big bang.  it is actually a common misconception that the big bang occurred at a specific location.\n\nhttp://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147\nhttp://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html\nhttp://universeadventure.org/
1119481
Wow! You do not ask for much do you...This is a very complicated question to answer...and frankly NO ONEyet fully understands how to answer it. \n\nAccording to Einstein's theory of General Relativity, which is our premier way of explaining how gravity works, there is no formal distinction between the description of what a gravitational field is, and what space-time is.\n\nEssentially, space is what we refer to as 3 of the 4 dimensions to a more comprehensive entity called the space-time continuum, and this continuum is itself just another name for the gravitational field of the universe. If you take away this gravitational field...space-time itself vanishes! \n\nTo ask where space comes from is the same as asking, according to general relativity, where this gravitational field came from originally, and that gets us to asking what were the circumstances that caused the Big Bang itself. We don't really know.
701644
ok..the big bang is not true..the accepted theory is..wen all the elemstns from earth went to outer space and the moon's gravity pulled it ans tthats how the moon was created
1108644
this is actually a common misconception about the big bang.  the big bang theory says that spacetime itself originated in that event.  the big bang theory is supported by evidence very well.  no other theory or hypothesis is.\n\nread these:\nhttp://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147\nhttp://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html
801365
Technically it would probably be wrong to say the original matter in the universe was smaller than a grain of sand. The big band is the start of the universe, according to scientists. It's the start of the 4 dimensions(3 dimensions of space and one dimension of time). It's the beginning of all matter and energy. What was there before the big bang? Nothing(if you don't believe in God). So what was it that exploded in the big bang? It couldn't have been the grain of sand sized speck of matter because all matter was a result or bi-product of the big bang. Whatever exploded had to be there before the explosion but matter didn't exist before the explosion. It was a bi-product of the explosion. So, what exploded? Nothing exploded. That, in essense, is what the big bang theory says.........nothing exploded and in the process everything was created. Everything was created out of nothing.\n  You might say "but don't christians believe everything was created out of nothing". Yes. I (as a christian) believe that God created the whole universe out of nothing. He literally spoke it into existence. God said "let there be light and there was light" or so it says in Genesis chapter 1. You say "then what's the difference"? The difference is that the atheists is saying that everything came from nothing and no one since he doesn't believe in a supreme being. Christians believe that everything came from nothing but NOT from no one. There was a God there to make it happen.\n  I guess another problem I have with the big bang is that you have unbelievable order and design coming from an explosion.\nExplode a grenade sometime and when all of the metal pieces fall back to the ground, see it you have a rolex watch lying there.
541263
The theory of the big bang doesn't explain things before it. But usually it's believed that before the creation of the universe there was energy concentrated or concentrating to the critic point where it blasted and spreaded through universe. The Big Bang theory is'nt the only theory about the creation of the universe, only the most accepted, you could find very interesting and different ideas. I don't like religious answers because their principal argument is faith and since faith can't be proven or refuted, I don't think it can be used as a valid argument, sounds tautologic for me (in logic, tautology is an statement that is ever true).
331026
The Big Bang theory itself, doesn't say anything about the *cause* of the explosion. It describes only how the Universe evolved after the explosion took place.\n\nThe reason is twofold.\nFirst of all, the models physicists use to describe the Universe, like General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics break down in the extreme conditions immediately after the initial explosion. However, they do a very good job in describing the existing data afterwards. And with the recent high precision measurements by satellite of the cosmic background that is very impressive.\n\nThe second reason is that GR and QM are only approximations of the correct theory. In fact they give different answers in the region were they overlap. Fortunately this happens only in extreme conditions, close to black holes for instance. And, you guessed it, in the microseconds after the Big Bang.\n\nConclusion: there is therefore a lot of room left to speculate. Not for the scientists though, because there are no data available for these initial moments of the Universe. No data means, nothing to test theories on.