Will "The Big Collision" replace "The Big Bang?"

[jab1]

It's a whole 'nother theory for the origin of the universe. (http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/04/13/big.bang.collision/index.html) It's a legitimately scientific theory; among its creators is physicist Paul Steinhardt of Princeton, co-author of the Inflationary Model part of the Big Bang Theory. (This theory says that the early universe expanded very rapidly soon after the Big Bang.) The other three co-creators are Justin Khoury of Princeton, Neil Turok of Cambridge and Burt Ovrut of the University of Pennsylvania.

The Big Collision Theory says that the early universe collided with another universe and this collison caused enrgy to be transferred from that universe to this one. This new theory better explains the following:

1) Why the universe is so homogeneous (why the background radiation looks the same in all directions).

2) The universe's overall smoothness, yet allows for the slight "wrinkles" that encouraged the formation of galaxies.

3) It accounts for the lack of monopoles, super-heavy particles with only one magnetic charge (the great heat of the Big Bang should have produced huge amounts of monopoles, but none has been found; the Big Collision would not have produced so much heat and thus, no monopoles).

Steinhardt says that either theory has an equal chance of being borne out by observation.

[ITR champion]

I think that the Big Bang Theory predicts the existence of uniform background radiation. Part of the Big Bang Theory is that all points in the universe are identical because all matter is moving away from any point. Points on the opposite side of the universe have not had time to communicate with each other in certain reference frames, but they have in others. That's according to my understnading of relativity, maybe I'm wrong.

I'm not qualified to judge the theory as a whole, though. not my area of expertise.

[Phobos]

The Big Collision Theory is so new (at least to the public) that it's hard to compare to the well-established Big Bang Theory. I have only seen that CNN article you cited about the B.C.T. so I'll have to reserve judgement for now. Hopefully, I'll find some technical reviews of it soon.

There is a lot of evidence that supports Big Bang Theory (http://itss.raytheon.com/cafe/qadir/q401.html).

Off the top of my head, one problem with the B.C.T. is that it may be immune to proof because the event occurred before/outside our universe. Or did it? It's unclear, so again, I need to see a technical review of the new theory. The B.B.T. makes no claim about what was before/outside the universe, but instead describes the evolution of the universe since the beginning.