The definition for the Big Bang I took out of page 362 of the HBJ General Science 1989 Edition Textbook.
OK mistake #1 - never get a cosmological definition from a book such as this. I can guess already what it's going to fuck up.
In the realm of the universe nothing really means nothing. Not only would matter and energy disappear, but also space and time. However, physicists theorize that from this state of nothingness the universe began in a gigantic explosion 16.6 billion years ago.
Yep I was right - just knew the word explosion would be in there. Wrong, of course, but expected. The date is wrong but since it's a 1989 reference that is excusable.
Also from the Scientific American May 1984 Edition Page 128.
The observable universe could have formed from an infinitesimal region The entire universe evolved from literally nothing.
Sci Am is not a great source (good for high school essays I guess) but nothing really wrong here. Of course a big red flag for Creationists pops up at the word nothing. They see Jesus disappearing so they tend to panic.
As stated above in the beginning there was nothing than it exploded. Does everybody know what the first law of thermodynamics says? Matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Here matter is definitely being formed from nothing. This is just bad science; even the most basic scientist knows that matter could not have arising from nothing exploding.
OK the meat of the matter. Exploded is a misnomer as hinted at earlier. Yes funnily enough I do know what the 1st law is - and I'll wager you don't. What you needed to say was energy cannot be created or destroyed. But wait - that isn't necessarily true. Don't like this statement do you. In fact you think Eta is full of shit right about now. You see the 1st Law is a consequence of the time translational symmetry of spacetime. This hints at a couple of problems. At the initial Big Bang singularity you don't have this symmetry. In fact in the Universe today on a global scale you also don't have this symmetry. It applies really only to a asymptotically flat spacetime.
So your statement is bad science - which I expect from someone who has never heard of Noether's theorem or anything about General Relativity. I will add though that no one knows what exactly happened at the singularity. Until we have a quantum theory of gravity we wont. Maybe some new form of a conservation law(s) will show themselves but until then it's a guess.
On page 61 of the 1992 Edition Prentice Hall General Science textbook it states.
Most scientists believe that 18 to 20 billion years ago, all the matter in the universe was concentrated into a very dense, very hot region that may have been much smaller than a period on this page. For some unknown reason this region exploded. This explosion is called the Big Bang.
Another terrible source. Dates wrong too. Use of the word explosion. Damn those Nova shows and popular press articles. This should be exorcised!
In this at least there is matter to begin with.
That make you happy. Because it's wrong - just thought I'd let you know that.
On page 69 the book states that as the nebula shrank it spun faster and faster. So this region is spinning. Does everybody know what the law of conservation of angular momentum is? This law states that in a frictionless environment, remember above it said all the matter in the universe was concentrated, if a spinning object brakes up the pieces will spin in the same direction as the original object.
Two planets spin backwards, one spins on its side, and Jupiter has several moons that orbit the planet backwards and spin backwards. Doesn’t this seem just a little strange to you? You may say that maybe something struck the planets to make them spin backwards. Do you know what it would take to reverse the spin of a planet? I think it would leave a dent.
OK this is just crap. For one thing you have gone from bad Big Bang descriptions to something about the nebular hypothesis of star/planet formation. And what is more you didn't even know it. ROTFLMAO - you didn't even know it did you?
The rest is just hogwash. Do you know what the conservation of angular momentum is? There are many methods of transporting and changing angular momentum. It's total conservation not individual pieces. Anyway - this isn't about the Big Bang. You have mistakenly grabbed info about star/planet formation - it's UNRELATED!!!!!!
Evolution is every bit as much as a religion as creation is. When you get right down to it, you must believe something without knowing why it happened. For some unknown reason this region exploded.
By the way the Big Bang and star/planet formation HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH EVOLUTION WHICH IS A BIOLOGY THEORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Has this helped?
™ Version 4.2