Cos logic is all about practicality of answers but not the unimaginable type, because it seems to people that if something does not happen or they don't see it happening, the things just aren't right. For example, physicist have split into 2 main groups. People like Hawking are theoretical, while the others are those who can make something happen. Theoretical physicists share their views on which how somethings happen but not proven. So, if those physicists who have to prove things right don't see things like what theoretical physicists came up with, they'll say it's unproven and only plausible. Of course, it's natural that you won't believe it until you see it, in real human nature. Another example, like God, most won't see them, but some believe in them, but others are skeptical and doesn't believe there's existence of God cos they can't see one.
Obviously, Nestle had something similar called the "Koko Crunch"! "The best chocolatey cereal!"
Anyway, no humans have seen a Big Bang happening, so how do they know such an event actually happened? That's what I'm thinking. Pardon me for my ignorance :/
You don't necessarily have to witness the event to figure out what probably happened. Let's say there's milk and broken glass on the floor, next to the table; you should be able to figure out what has happened even if you were not there when it happened.
Figuring out the early universe is way more complicated than that, but idea is the same; observe and study the after-effects.
Something has just occured to me about the big bang theory. It's often stated that all the galaxies are moving apart from each other, so does that mean that they know where the point of origin of the big bang was in the cosmos? Have they calculated it?
Strangely despite having an academic background in Physics, this is something I've never found out, (or have and have subsequently forgotten - quite likely).
It's a lot more complicated, because you can recognise what happens when milk is spilt and apply the same lessons, but only Intrepid has been through the creation of the universe before, and he was too busy ranting at the BBC at the time to notice .
I think the question could be rephrased as 'Where are we in relation to the centre of the universe?' as the exact centre would be the centre of the point of expansion.
EDIT: Actually, it;s impossible to know because we can't see the edges of the universe (because it's expanding at the speed of light and the light from the edges hasn't reached us yet). Because we're part of the expansion, no matter where you measure from, it will appear as though *we* are at the centre of the universe, as everything is expanding around us. If that makes sense.