Many if not all human societies have origin myths and they differ greatly.
Several years ago a San Francisco-born-and-raised woman told me she is a materialist.
An hour ago a woman who was raised a Jehovah Witness and has left that faith told me the Big Bang story grew from a human need for a beginning. I agreed.
Can you wholeheartedly accept that the universe had no beginning, that it has always existed?
Thanks again, Tom. I'll react after going thru the link. Great day.
I've found out you do have a case to defend, Tom. There is evidence the universe doesn't expand at all e.g. http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-universe-not-expanding-01... and yet evidence that it does "5 percent to 9 percent faster than expected" (https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-hubble-finds-unive...). See also attachment.
It's then time for those who can to (dis)prove either.
The journey may be lengthy, but I'm sure the case will be one day closed.
Meanwhile, I'll keep my Cartesian doubt instead of simply "accepting" it does(n't)!
This diagram illustrates two ways to measure how fast the universe is expanding. In the past, distant supernovae, or exploded stars, have been used as "standard candles" to measure distances in the universe, and to determine that its expansion is actually speeding up. The supernovae glow with the same intrinsic brightness, so by measuring how bright they appear on the sky, astronomers can tell how far away they are. This is similar to a standard candle appearing fainter at greater distances (left-hand illustration).
In a new survey from NASA's Galaxy Evolution Explorer and the Anglo-Australian Telescope atop Siding Spring Mountain in Australia, the distances to galaxies were measured using a "standard ruler" (right-hand illustration). This method is based on the preference for pairs of galaxies to be separated by a distance of 490 million light-years today. The separation appears to get smaller as the galaxies move farther away, just like a ruler of fixed length (right-hand illustration).
Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
The fact is there is expansion. Yet, it's the universe expanding the universe. Considering the very definition of "universe" then, Tom wins the case. We need to expand our understanding of the universe--everything! Congratulations Tom.
Because the expansion is not just exponential but also incredibly rapid, “doubling” happens on timescale of around 10^-35 seconds. Meaning, by time 10^-34 seconds have passed, the Universe is around 1000 times its initial size; by time 10^-33 seconds have passed, the Universe is around 10^30 (or 1000^10) times its initial size; by time 10^-32 seconds have passed, the Universe is around 10^300 times its initial size, and so on. Exponential isn’t so powerful because it’s fast; it’s powerful because it’s relentless.
Now, obviously the Universe didn’t continue to expand in this fashion forever, because we’re here, and so inflation had to end, setting up the Big Bang. We can think about inflation as occurring at the top of a very flat hill, like a ball rolling slowly down it. As long as the ball remains near the top of the hill, rolling slowly, inflation continues, and the Universe expands exponentially. Once the ball rolls down into the valley, however, inflation ends, and that rolling behavior causes the energy to dissipate, converting the energy inherent to space itself into matter-and-radiation, taking us from an inflationary state into the hot Big Bang.