The Big Bang (Origins)

by dhw, Wednesday, April 28, 2010, 13:13 (5104 days ago) @ dhw

This thread appears to be more of a fizzle than a bang, which surprises me since it's so central to our discussion. I'd drawn attention to an article by the cosmologist John D. Barrow, Professor of Mathematical Sciences at Cambridge University
 
http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/jan-apr09/bigbang/index.html-which deals very lucidly with some of the current theories. What strikes me quite forcibly is that there is absolutely no consensus on anything except the fact that the universe is expanding. "Big Bang" itself could be a complete misnomer, as there may have been no bang, and the argument that the universe sprang from nothing is no less speculative than any other theory.-As physics is a foreign country for me, perhaps someone can tell me why the expansion cannot be caused by an unknown source that continues to produce new energy and matter, which in turn forces old matter further and further apart. Why would this be less feasible than, for instance, a single violent event creating something out of nothing, or an endless process of expansion and contraction?