The Big Bang Theory Is Unsound

Thanks for participating in our debate, Pro; I'm ever enriched. *Drops*In case you missed it, here's what Pro missed:1. Cosmic Microwave Background radiation is definitive proof of the big bang, a hot dense state, being the cosmos's origin, and Pro dropped it like a wide receiver without hands.2. The variations in the CMB indicate that this hot dense state expanded to the current size of the universe, and Pro ignored it like a blind person at a silent movie about colors.3. Origin and creation/causation are not the same, because an origin is a point and creation/causation are a series of points, and Pro abandoned it like a crack house in Baltimore.4. The WMAP confirmed the big bang's predictions of nucleosynthesis (production of lithium) given the measured density of ordinary matter as indicated by the diagram of light elements from NASA, and Pro failed to acknowledge it like a Jew on Hitler's birthday.5. Large galactic structures were born of gravity from small fluctuations in density, confirmed by the WMAP, which allots plenty of time (1.2 billion years) for large structures like our galaxy to form, and Pro avoided it like a vegan at a bull roast.So, I extend those particular arguments, and maintain that the Big Bang theory is sound.*Rebuttal*Pro mentions:"Going back to the argument about the Law of Conservation, matter cannot be created or destroyed...the definition of the big bang theory is the rapid expansion of matter...that...marked the origin of the universe."My response:Expansion and creation are incongruous terms, so there's no violation of the 1st law of thermodynamics, according to the definition of the Big Bang.Pro posits:"SO WHERE DID THE MATTER THAT STARTED THE BIG BANG COME FROM. According to this simple logic, the big bang theory is unsound."My response:Well, the Big Bang is the expansion of matter, not the creation of it, so the Big Bang needs not explain "where the matter that started the big bang came from."It needs only to explain an expanding hot dense state, and this has definitively been done, thanks to the WMAP.But I'll quench Pro's thirst for knowledge.*Quantum Fluctuations (QF)*In our universe of space and matter, when you strip "something" of particles, radiation, and energy, you are left with nothing but empty space; this empty space is full of quantum fluctuations.Quantum fluctuations are sub nuclear particles (not actually full particles, which is why some physicists call them "virtual" particles) existing and being annihilated by antiparticles, and the forces between these sub nuclear particles fluctuate along with this existence and annihilation.I have to make this point perfectly clear.These sub nuclear particles fluctuating in and out of existence are what nothing is, and this is always the case.This is what nothing is.http://scholarsresearchlibrary.com...What is nothing?It is a state of fluctuating sub nuclear particles and their forces called quantum fluctuations.That's a great video that explains what nothing is.Quantum fluctuations are as real as microorganisms, and we've demonstrated and measured their effect, in current space, in detail.http://physics.aps.org...However, when there was no universe, there was no space, and instead, like the forces between the sub nuclear particles, space and time fluctuated along with the sub nuclear particles.Without the universe, in a quantum fluctuation, a sub-nuclear particle exists and is simultaneously annihilated by its antiparticle, and this pseudo moment allows for the fluctuated existence/nonexistence of space and time and the forces between the sub-nuclear particles; this was the condition, which was a constant fluctuation of time/space/matter/energy/gravity thanks to QF. These quantum fluctuations, nothing, are such an unstable state that energy is guaranteed to be expressed from them; that expression is called the big bang and is the origin of our universe.From nothing (QF) to something (The Big Bang).Matter is an expression of unstable QF. http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov...Pro continues:"[Con] stated, 'the predicted abundances of [lithium] becomes highly constrained'...constrained means highly restricted- so [Con] agrees with me, and therefore [Con's] 1st Rebuttal Falls."My response:Restricted predictions can still be correct, and this was confirmed by the diagram that Pro dropped.Pro, the WMAP confirmed the predictions of lithium amounts, restricted or otherwise.So, I don't agree with you, Pro...you can't just assert things like that, it's wack.Pro adds on:"The picture you showed was just guesses of the size of the galaxy's. Since we have no ability to time travel, there is no proof of that."My response:This is why dropping the WMAP arguments hurts Pro heavily.Anyone that actually read my round 2 and round 3 arguments, can fully grasp that measuring the CMB with the WMAP allows us to see into the past, a kind of time travel if you will, because we can trace the radiation and inflation back in time. Using this method, we know about how old the universe is and the age of large scale galactic structures.Therefore "the picture," which is a diagram of galaxies' formations from NASA, isn't just guesses; they're realized measurements of the WMAP.Pro asserts:"The probably of this explosion is so low it is almost impossible."My response:The big bang is not an explosion, it's an expansion/inflation, and the "probability" of it being true is extremely high because of the measurements of the CMB indicated by the WMAP.Then Pro attempts the "index card" theory:"Lets say...an airplane overhead Kaufman Stadium...dropped 20,000 note cards. According to the big bang theory it should spell out World Series Champs: 2015! on the baseball diamond...that isn't going to happen...the note cards are going to go everywhere, because of factors such as wind speed and gravity."My response:I fail to see this analogy's relevance, but I'll try to use it to show the error in Pro's logic...So, Pro is equating the 20,000 note cards on the airplane to the hot dense state of the big bang.The big bang is not claiming that the note cards, when dropped, will spell out "World Series Champs," instead, the Big Bang is claiming that the note cards we see on the baseball diamond, in the structure they are laid out currently, are a result of being dropped from the airplane, which at one point had all of the cards densely held together.The big bang is taking into consideration all of the factors like wind speed and gravity, and using those measurements to trace back the falling (expansion) of the note cards (hot dense state).Sorry Pro, you have not "proves all of your opponent's arguments wrong."I reject this resolution, because the Big Bang is clearly sound, and pro has given us no reason to believe otherwise.