The Big Bang is the prevailing cosmological model of the universe's origins. However, some physicists now argue that the Big Bang model leads to too many inconsistencies with empirical evidence. Though cosmologists have made ad-hoc additions to the theory to make the Big Bang fit with our observations, it is time to consider alternatives, including models in which the universe has no beginning.
The current standard model of cosmology (Big Bang or ΛCDM) gives us a representation of a universe whose dynamics is dominated by gravity (Friedmann equations derived from Einstein's general relativity) with a finite lifetime, homogeneity on large scales, expansion and a hot initial state, along with other elements necessary to avoid certain inconsistencies with observations (inflation, non-baryonic dark matter, dark energy, etc). This prevailing cosmological model has countless problems, but it is mainstream, and almost all the scientific and economic efforts of the community of astrophysicists and theoretical physicists dealing with the question are focused on the search for evidence that can confirm it. Other models explaining the cosmos without a Big Bang beginning, without an inflationary period, without energy and dark matter, etc do not receive the same attention. If any of them are correct, the cosmos could be very different from the mainstream version we have been taught as dogma.
Join the conversation