this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
143 points (96.7% liked)
science
24115 readers
322 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
dart board;; science bs
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's not the case, it's not a division between "facts and speculation" and that's a very simplified and franky poor way to view scientific models.
We can demonstrate with many different tools and areas of evidence that our universe is expanding as time progresses. Reverse that and at some point everything was close together. That's IT. That's the ENTIRE big-bang model, it just means the whole universe was once hot and dense, and then it wasn't anymore because everything moved apart, and we've seen nothing that contradicts this.
There are many particulars that we haven't figured out, but if the fact that everything was once close together isn't accurate, then we don't have science at all, it would mean we don't actually have tools and methods for creating models. And since we're here using tools and models in application to type words on a screen to each other, I don't think that's the case.
Please take care with the sensational headlines like "MOST DISTANT OBJECT EVER SEEN BREAKS ALL SCIENCE" and that bullshit, it's very hyped up and not at all what it sounds like. We don't know what forces of nature did in that early, hot, dense universe and we don't know all the forces at work today in the expanding universe, that doesn't mean it's "just a theory" and that's not even what the term "theory" means.
As i have said elsewhere, i regret mixing up the terminology, which frankly i am quite embarrassed about.
I am not refuting the knowledge that the universe expands. I was speaking on the common anecdote that “in the beginning there was nothing and then it exploded and thats how the universe began” which is how it was initially explained to me and what the majority of people seem to understand and take for absolute truth.
It's ok, I attack these misconceptions as much for readers and browsers as to clear up anything for the commenters. I don't mean to sound heavy, but too many people leverage common misconceptions into full-on anti-science conspirism.
The people who explain it like this need a good slappin', it's not at all accurate. In fact, it's the opposite of what happened (as far as we know.)
what do you get when you compress an infinite universe? An infinite universe of compressed energy and matter.
The universe was in it's early state, as far as we can surmise, infinite in density and mass, but it wasn't "small" and we have no way to know what came before this state. But the short of it is, everything came into being from a state where everything was super dense and hot, then the space itself got bigger so the hot stuff started moving apart from each other. There was never "nothing" as far as we can tell.