Is The Big Bang Theory Correct Or Wrong?

From where did we originate? This is one of the most fundamental problems in all of human history, and scholars in every field of study, from philosophy and religion to science, have sought to answer it.

The Big Bang idea has become the standard explanation for how the universe began. However, the Big Bang idea has been disproven by several scientists. Since there is no way to go back in time and see the beginning of the universe first-hand, we are left with only hypotheses to explain it. Many people have begun to doubt the veracity of the Big Bang idea since it cannot be shown. But how did the cosmos come to be if it didn't start with an explosion?

The scientific community generally doesn't care about these sorts of issues. The primary justification for this is the abundance of data that is consistent with the Big Bang idea. More and more of this kind of evidence turns up as we continue to probe the depths of space. The red shift provides more support for the Big Bang hypothesis, and the earliest galaxy, GLASS-z13, was recently detected by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope. GLASS-z13 was active just 300 million years after the Big Bang.

And what exactly is this red shift and the proof behind it? Let's simplify the jargon and explain this in layman's terms.

In support of the Big Bang theory

The Big Bang theory proposes that around 13.8 billion years ago, the first star formed as a result of a supernova explosion in a dense structure of gasses and dust, setting off a chain reaction that led to the formation of all the present stars, planets, and galaxies and, in some mysterious way, life as we know it today. The second half of the theory proposes that, like the behaviour of particles in an explosion, the universe has been in motion and expanding outward ever since the explosion took place.

We have now witnessed this with the Hubble and James Webb space telescopes at NASA. The stars and galaxies are always on the move. However, merely seeing their motion does not indicate any kind of outward growth. The red shift is relevant here. The more away a galaxy is, the quicker it is receding from us, and the more red-shifted its light will be. Since larger wavelengths of light, like blue and violet, are dispersed at greater distances, this general finding shows that the farther away a galaxy is, the faster it is travelling.

However, this is not the last piece of proof. Using robust telescopes, we can also observe galaxies that are consistent with the Big Bang model. The great distance between the item and us means that not even the light can travel quickly, thus we are not really seeing back in time. As a result, the photons we use to make the photos are billions of years old. We now know that these galaxies' gaseous components should be very different from those of nearer galaxies. The reason for this is because the gaseous composition of galaxies like GLASS-z13 should be different since the current elements were generated inside the stars and these galaxies have not had as much time to evolve.

Spectroscopic analysis of the light from these galaxies confirmed that they are composed primarily of hydrogen and helium.

Therefore, the Big Bang theory appears to be consistent with observations at this time. This will continue to be the most widely accepted hypothesis in science until an anomaly is discovered that cannot be explained by the Big Bang.