Perplexing Parameters for the Big Bang
Cosmic evolution has many of the same problems that get biological evolutionists on the prod. The more science and technology develop, the more we learn that naturalistic conjectures don't amount to a hill of beans when examined under the cold, pitiless indifference of facts and logic. So, they try to sew more patches on the quilt of whatever "theory" is under discussion. The patchwork quilt of the Big Bang seriously needs to be discarded.
The Big Bang was (and sometimes still is) referred to as an explosion, but that idea has generally been replaced by inflation. That's because the evidence found didn't support the speculations, so the Big Bang has been tweaked and adjusted with ad hoc assumptions and unprovable guesses; today's Big Bang is not your grandfather's Big Bang.
One part of the Big Bang is Hubble constant, a parameter used to calculate the expansion rate of the universe. This requires a number of assumptions (including that the Big Bang happened in the first place, much the way evolutionists prove evolution by assuming evolution is true). But the Hubble parameter may not be so constant after all, and shows still more problems for the secularist myth of the universe's origin. Not surprising, since the evidence shows that the universe was created and did not come from cosmic hocus pocus.
The Big Bang was (and sometimes still is) referred to as an explosion, but that idea has generally been replaced by inflation. That's because the evidence found didn't support the speculations, so the Big Bang has been tweaked and adjusted with ad hoc assumptions and unprovable guesses; today's Big Bang is not your grandfather's Big Bang.
One part of the Big Bang is Hubble constant, a parameter used to calculate the expansion rate of the universe. This requires a number of assumptions (including that the Big Bang happened in the first place, much the way evolutionists prove evolution by assuming evolution is true). But the Hubble parameter may not be so constant after all, and shows still more problems for the secularist myth of the universe's origin. Not surprising, since the evidence shows that the universe was created and did not come from cosmic hocus pocus.
In modern cosmology, one of the most important numbers is the current value of the so-called "Hubble parameter," also known as the Hubble constant, designated by the symbol H0. This number indicates the apparent expansion rate of the universe, expressed in units of velocity per distance—specifically kilometers per second, per megaparsec (a megaparsec being the distance of about 3.3 million light years). A new study indicates that two different methods of estimating this number yield contradictory results.To read the rest, click on "Big Bang Continues to Self-Destruct". For another interesting article from 2011, see "Discovery Channel program: How the Universe Works — Seems like ‘science’ but really promoting a worldview".
One method is the direct measurement: calculate the distances and presumed velocities of distant objects, which are used to estimate the value of the Hubble constant. For this method to work, a number of assumptions must hold, including the premise that the true, intrinsic brightnesses of these objects are known. Type Ia supernovae, a special classification of exploding stars, are often used as the benchmark "standard candles," since their intrinsic brightnesses are thought to be discernible from the time at which their maximum brightness occurs.