The Big Bang Theory is Bad science because it is also Bold and Baseless.
Bold - we have the bravado to claim we understand the universe well enough to describe how it was created.
Baseless - there are far too many unknowns for the theory to be even a rough guess
There is no valid basis for most assumptions.
1. It is impossible to know when it happened.
Cosmologists assume an incorrect conclusion that the universe is expanding. Hubble's Law is a mistake treating absorption lines as actual velocities, so there is no way to know the start time. It is always a guess.
2. It is impossible to know the initial conditions.
Cosmologists talk of starting with a singularity but it is impossible to know anything about what existed at the start time.
To even begin developing a scenario we must know what is present at the beginning.
Any mass at the start could have a temperature > 0K.
That is important for the amount of energy at the start, present with the amount of mass.
There is no basis for determining the amount of mass and energy at the start.
That is required to define how the start must change to become the end.
3. It is impossible to know the final conditions.
Our technology limits the extent of our observable universe.
Approximately 10% of the sky remains difficult to survey as extragalactic objects can be confused with stars in the Milky Way.
As our technology improves we should expect to observe more objects that are too dim right now. The big bang must define how those initial conditions become the final conditions - which are unknown. Therefore the big bang has no valid end goal.
3. How the universe works now is not fully understood.
3a. Cosmologists still cannot explain our universe when dark matter and dark energy are still around as place holders until a real explanation is found.
3b. The theory arose partially to explain the claimed expanding universe.
It is not expanding. These claims of everything moving away from Earth are based on a mistake with redshifts, or a misunderstanding of the Doppler effect.
This mistake is explained by a paper in this site (one of the main 7):
It is impossible for the big bang to create the correct amount of these unknown entities, if they truly exist.
4. It is impossible to know any intermediate conditions.
5. The theory will need a span of time from start to end. We cannot know any intermediate steps.
For example, our universe has a number of intergalactic structures that span billions of light years. It is impossible to know how many years were required for them to form when we don't even know if they formed in place or whether all the pieces moved into their positions along unknown paths.
One current assumption for the big bang sequence involves antimatter.
In our current universe there is no antimatter; only infrequent antiparticles might exist very briefly before they are destroyed by normal particles.
Cosmologists propose the big bang sequence creates both matter and antimatter but the matter wins and the antimatter disappears. To claim this intermediate step actually happened with no observation, the CMB is claimed to be evidence of that annihilation of antimatter, a transient event with no basis for a proposed time in the sequence. However attempts to detect the CMB failed due to incorrect instruments and analysis, or it’s not there.
There is no evidence for any intermediate steps; they are just conjecture.
6. If cosmologists don't know what's in our universe and don't understand how our universe works now they cannot predict how to get there.
The big bang theory is bold and baseless - and is just conjecture, andi also a bad theory, unable to be tested.
created - April 2019
last change - 03/31/2020