Now Reading: Chai took longer: Why Jayant Vishnu Narlikar questioned the Big Bang theory |
-
01
Chai took longer: Why Jayant Vishnu Narlikar questioned the Big Bang theory |
On Monday, after information broke of the loss of life of famend astrophysicist Jayant Vishnu Narlikar, creator Manu Joseph shared a placing reminiscence. Narlikar, recognized for questioning the Big Bang theory, as soon as instructed him, “Chai took longer.” It was the second-most fascinating tea-related analogy about the universe since Russell’s teapot, which sought to shift the burden of proof from atheists to theists.For Narlikar, it was his manner of claiming that the universe couldn’t have appeared abruptly. The Big Bang theory, he felt, was too sudden, too handy—and too near the concept of a divine creation. He additionally identified that the theory had sturdy help from the Church: in any case, it was first proposed by a Catholic priest, Georges Lemaître, and even endorsed by the Pope.That brief sentence—“Chai took longer”—captured Narlikar’s total method. He didn’t reject mainstream science for the sake of being completely different. He rejected it when it didn’t make sense.
What Is the Big Bang Theory?
The Big Bang theory states that the total universe started round 13.8 billion years in the past from a single level that was extraordinarily scorching and dense. It then exploded outward and has been increasing ever since.Most scientists help this theory as a result of it explains three vital issues:
- Galaxies are transferring away from us – This means the universe is getting larger over time.
- A faint glow fills the sky – Called the
Cosmic Microwave Background , this matches what we’d anticipate if the universe began out extraordinarily scorching. - The components in the universe – Elements like hydrogen and helium exist in quantities that match what the Big Bang would produce.
With such sturdy proof, the Big Bang theory turned the most generally accepted clarification for a way the universe started.
But Narlikar Had Doubts
To Jayant Narlikar, the Big Bang theory had some severe issues:
- It begins with a thriller – It claims every little thing got here from one tiny level the place the legal guidelines of science break down. To Narlikar, that’s not a scientific clarification. That’s simply saying, “We don’t know.”
- It sounds too spiritual – The concept that the universe had a starting, that one thing got here from nothing, reminded him of creation tales from faith. He believed science ought to stay impartial of such notions.
- It needed to be mounted an excessive amount of – Over time, scientists needed to maintain including new concepts—like inflation, a super-fast early enlargement—to elucidate why the universe appears the manner it does. Narlikar noticed these as intelligent patches, not clear explanations.
His Alternative: The Quasi-Steady State Theory
Narlikar labored with British scientist Fred Hoyle to develop a unique theory referred to as Quasi-Steady State Cosmology (QSSC).This mannequin proposed that:
- The universe by no means started—it has all the time existed.
- It expands slowly over time, with new matter created in small bursts (like mini Big Bangs).
- It doesn’t require a singular level the place physics breaks down.
- It doesn’t want any divine power or miracle.
Narlikar additionally had completely different concepts about the glow in the sky (the CMB). He advised it might come from gentle scattered by cosmic mud—not essentially from a single massive explosion.
A Scientist Who Built, Not Just Criticised
Narlikar didn’t merely say “no” to the Big Bang. He provided detailed equations, carried out actual analysis, and developed a full various theory. He believed science ought to all the time entertain competing concepts—as a result of that’s how data grows.Even although his mannequin didn’t substitute the Big Bang, it reminded scientists to not get too comfy. Big questions nonetheless stay:
- What existed earlier than the Big Bang?
- What is the universe actually product of?
- Why will we maintain discovering issues that science didn’t predict?
His Universe Was Slower, Wiser
To Narlikar, the universe wasn’t one thing that all of a sudden appeared out of nowhere. It was one thing that slowly advanced, renewed itself, and adopted the guidelines—no miracles required.His problem to the Big Bang wasn’t about being contrarian. It was about defending the scientific spirit—to doubt, to query, and to all the time ask:What if there’s one other clarification?Sometimes, even the universe must steep just a little.Because chai takes longer.
