Big Bang theory could be debunked

[Legend]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/large-hadron-collider/11489442/Big-Bang-theory-could-be-debunked-by-Large-Hadron-Collider.html

Basically the Large Hadron Collider is being turned on again for the first time in two years. They've done extensive upgrades and have about double the power for particle smashing.

The first test they're doing, which starts today I think, is aimed at creating black holes and testing rainbow gravity. If rainbow gravity, the theory that gravity varies with wavelength, is proven true, it means the big bang never happened. It was still super dense and hot back then, but not a finite point. Instead it was just a mesh.

The big thing about this potential revelation in my opinion is that it'd show the universe exists forever and had no beginning as far as we can comprehend. Plus it also hopefully kicks dark energy in the butt. That theory is just so frustrating to me. It's literally the modern day equivalent to the aether.

[FLGibsonIII]

Most comments are dismissing it as creationist bias. Can't wait to read the results though. This could be very interesting.

[the-pi-guy]

The big thing about this potential revelation in my opinion is that it'd show the universe exists forever and had no beginning as far as we can comprehend. Plus it also hopefully kicks dark energy in the butt. That theory is just so frustrating to me. It's literally the modern day equivalent to the aether.

This is so true!

[Legend]

Most comments are dismissing it as creationist bias. Can't wait to read the results though. This could be very interesting.

Wow that's horrible and sadly shows just how little people understand science. I literally just went with the first article on Google, but I think we can assume other places are similar.

This has exactly nothing to do with creation and doesn't debunk the aftermath of the big bang. The past 13.798 billion years are unchanged. It's only the earliest 340 thousand years that get reworked if this ends up true.

This is so true!

My high school physics teacher thought that, and the idea has really stuck with me.

[the-pi-guy]

Most comments are dismissing it as creationist bias. Can't wait to read the results though. This could be very interesting.

Side A always thinks that side B is wrong and vice versa.  Fighting rather than considering the other view point. 

My high school physics teacher thought that, and the idea has really stuck with me.

Its hilariously true. 
This doesn't make sense.  How do we explain this?  Invisible stuff that's different from matter makes it happen! 
Sure it might be true, but its never based on evidence, its just trying to use a tarp to cover up gaps in what we know. 

[7H3]

I do not think it is humanly possible to accurately calculate age or time length very far beyond recorded history. The universe could be very young or it could be very old. neither would supplant science or faith. We've been very wrong scientifically in the past with what we thought was true, and new discoveries we always broaden and enlarge our understanding of the universe rather than shrink it down even if it has far reaching affects in other fields. Personal agendas do not mix well with certain scientific disciplines as people may try very hard to prove or disprove religious ideologies which should never be the purpose of scientific study. First priority should be the truth, and then sure put one's commentary on it, but scientific truth should be able to stand on its own merit. It should be judged and weighed based on other scientific merit and used appropriately. Let the theologians and philosophers argue about what it means.

[the-pi-guy]

I do not think it is humanly possible to accurately calculate age or time length very far beyond recorded history. The universe could be very young or it could be very old. neither would supplant science or faith. We've been very wrong scientifically in the past with what we thought was true, and new discoveries we always broaden and enlarge our understanding of the universe rather than shrink it down even if it has far reaching affects in other fields.

We discover more and more every day.  I think it might be possible to accurately calculate the age of the universe. 

Personal agendas do not mix well with certain scientific disciplines as people may try very hard to prove or disprove religious ideologies which should never be the purpose of scientific study. First priority should be the truth, and then sure put one's commentary on it, but scientific truth should be able to stand on its own merit. It should be judged and weighed based on other scientific merit and used appropriately. Let the theologians and philosophers argue about what it means.

Admittingly there are scientists that try to use science to prove one way or the other, I tend to find these are in the minority. 
It's more like the console war, the companies are just going along doing their thing, and then we have people online who seem to act like there's a big war going on. And then we might have one or two bad execs who only manage to fuel the online war, even if by accident. 

[darkknightkryta]

The past 13.798 billion years are unchanged.

Or is it older?  Or younger?  That dang changing cosmological constant!!!  What do you think is causing the universe's expanse to be accelerating?

[Legend]

http://news.sciencemag.org/europe/2015/03/physicists-narrow-electrical-short-large-hadron-collider

[darkknightkryta]

http://news.sciencemag.org/europe/2015/03/physicists-narrow-electrical-short-large-hadron-collider

So the universe's expanse is accelerating due to the Large Hadron Collider having a lose piece of metal?!!!!!!!!

[Legend]

So the universe's expanse is accelerating due to the Large Hadron Collider having a lose piece of metal?!!!!!!!!

On a bumping spree I see.

[darkknightkryta]

On a bumping spree I see.

Still didn't give me a theory!!!!