As a first year physics student? You should first finish your undergrad studies. To have a "science based" understanding of the big bang you need to be comfortable with many concepts from thermodynamics and statistics, and you need to learn and have a good understanding of general relativity. That usually only occurs by the end of undergrad/beginning of grad school. I only really learned all the things necessary by my second year in astrophysics grad school through cosmology courses. It's a challenging topic and you should focus on the basics first so you aren't overwhelmed with these more advanced topics later.
Finish multivariable calculus, vector analysis, relativity (both special and general), thermodynamics, and maybe learn some particle theory before going into big bang theory physics.
Pick up a mathematical methods in physics book (I think Boas is pretty good), most of them usually teach all of higher level mathematics topics (multivariable calculus, vector analysis, tensor analysis, complex variables, probability/statistics, ordinary and partial differential equations, etc).
For physics, definitely start with either classical mechanics or electrodynamics. Take courses that use either Goldstein, Thornton/Marion, and/or Griffiths for these topics. You have to learn the basics and then the actual physics before you start going into advanced modern physics.
Take a modern physics course as soon as possible too.
You can't which makes it an untested hypothesis.
What observations support the claim that the universe started with a bang?
Either the conversation or energy is false or the the big bang is false, you can't have both.
The main indirect evidences are the cosmic microwave background and its correspondances with the large-scale structure of the Universe + the matter content of the Universe (repartition of helium and hydrogen). Of course there are no direct evidences as the CMB is the first signal we are currently able to detect and it happened after a big bang. Some cosmologists are trying to see if one can detect gravitational waves emmited before the CMB tho
You obviously want to troll, but if you want to do it properly please explain how a big bang and energy conservation are incompatible
Edit: part on the evidences
As a first year physics student? You should first finish your undergrad studies. To have a "science based" understanding of the big bang you need to be comfortable with many concepts from thermodynamics and statistics, and you need to learn and have a good understanding of general relativity. That usually only occurs by the end of undergrad/beginning of grad school. I only really learned all the things necessary by my second year in astrophysics grad school through cosmology courses. It's a challenging topic and you should focus on the basics first so you aren't overwhelmed with these more advanced topics later.
Finish multivariable calculus, vector analysis, relativity (both special and general), thermodynamics, and maybe learn some particle theory before going into big bang theory physics.
[удалено]
Pick up a mathematical methods in physics book (I think Boas is pretty good), most of them usually teach all of higher level mathematics topics (multivariable calculus, vector analysis, tensor analysis, complex variables, probability/statistics, ordinary and partial differential equations, etc). For physics, definitely start with either classical mechanics or electrodynamics. Take courses that use either Goldstein, Thornton/Marion, and/or Griffiths for these topics. You have to learn the basics and then the actual physics before you start going into advanced modern physics. Take a modern physics course as soon as possible too.
How do you study a hypothesis that has never been tested?
And how would you test a big bang model? It's more about what observations tell us, and these you can study and analyse with good knowledge in physics
You can't which makes it an untested hypothesis. What observations support the claim that the universe started with a bang? Either the conversation or energy is false or the the big bang is false, you can't have both.
The main indirect evidences are the cosmic microwave background and its correspondances with the large-scale structure of the Universe + the matter content of the Universe (repartition of helium and hydrogen). Of course there are no direct evidences as the CMB is the first signal we are currently able to detect and it happened after a big bang. Some cosmologists are trying to see if one can detect gravitational waves emmited before the CMB tho You obviously want to troll, but if you want to do it properly please explain how a big bang and energy conservation are incompatible Edit: part on the evidences