Even since the Belgian physicist and priest Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory a century ago as an explanation for how our Universe began to exist, many scientists put their faith in it. Furthermore, the majority of astronomers and other scientists from nowadays are relying on the theory.
The Big Bang theory appears to be confirmed by Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity, as well as by the cosmic microwave background radiation that was discovered by the American astronomers Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias in 1964. But are these truly irrefutable pieces of evidence for a Big Bang describing the birth of our Universe? Some scientists are very skeptical, and they have all the right to behave this way.
A Big Bounce instead of a Big Bang?
A team of scientists led by Dr. Abhay Ashtekar from the Penn State University is supporting the idea of a ‘bounce’ describing the Universe’s birth rather than a ‘bang’. Their research was published in Physical Review Letters here: https://journals.aps.org/prl/ .
There are inconsistencies between the Cosmic Microwave Background and the current cosmology model – dark energy, dark matter, the Big Bang, and so on. One of the problems is that the Hubble Constant that describes the expansion rate of the Universe is different if it’s measured according to the Cosmic Microwave Background, compared to when it’s measured from some Cepheid stars.
The scientists involved in the new study relied on the idea that another universe existed before ours. Our Universe could be the outcome of an endless cycle of expansions and collapses.
If it’s true, the previous Universe went through its life, expanding until one point, and then it started to contract back to the singularity from where it came from. In a giant “bounce”, our Universe came into existence.
Dr. Donghui Jeong, who is co-author of the paper and also a professor at Penn State University, admitted that the new theory isn’t exactly 100 percent reliable (but which one is it?):
“It is hard to confirm with 100% confidence, because of the cosmic variance,”
“But, what is intriguing is that including this new possibilities can resolve two issues at the same time: the large-scale power suppression AND small-scale lensing amplitude.”
However, a Big Bounce somehow includes the Big Bang Theory since both hypotheses claim that the Universe was once extremely tiny. But the second theory somehow says that there wasn’t anything before the ‘bang’ itself. While this idea of absolute nothingness doesn’t fit in the human brain, the great scientist Stephen Hawking added some emphasis on why it’s absurd to ask what existed before the Big Bang. He explains that time itself began along with the Big Bang, which means that there wasn’t any time left until that event for anything else to possibly exist.
What the Big Bang claims
To put it in a friendly English, the Big Bang claims that the entire Universe was once smaller than the tip of a needle, being called a singularity. That singularity appeared from nowhere, it was charged with infinite energy for no reason, and it started to expand for who knows why. It may sound ridiculous, but even Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity predicts it. Scientists admit that the theory has its shortcomings, but it’s still the most widespread scientific idea of explaining the birth of our Universe.
Even if the Universe began with a Big Bang or Big Bounce, it’s a huge step for humanity to learn that all of our physical reality itself once had a beginning. Until the Big Bang theory emerged, a lot of people believed that the Universe always existed. But many Christians, on the other hand, knew that it wasn’t true long before scientists discovered it. The Bible reveals to us that the Universe had a beginning from the very first verse: Genesis 1:1.