Free Documentaries Online

AT DOCUMENTARY-LOG.COM YOU CAN WATCH HUNDREDS OF THE MOST INTERESTING, POPULAR AND FULL-LENGTH DOCUMENTARIES.
NO REGISTRATION OR ANYTHING ELSE IS NEEDED! VISIT US EVERY DAY TO WATCH FREE ONLINE DOCUMENTARIES!

Documentary Updates by Email

    Sign up to get new documentaries to your Email

  • Twitter


  • Recent Comments...

    • The Big Bang

      1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
      Loading ... Loading ...

      This documentary is presented by Professor Jim Al Khalili for the BBC and he goes through the archives of history, delving into the theories and stories the world has created about one of science’s most fascinating subject: The Big Bang. This is the model by which many other cosmological model are based.

      The model stipulates that the Universe is an ever-expanding hot and dense state, that originally existed billions of years ago. In layman’s terms, the model is similar to a balloon that is inflated, with the galaxies as the spots in it.

      The Big Bang is a theory that has been tested over the years, and whilst it remains a theory, it is commonly accepted in the world of Science.

      The documentary is again another experiment to display the Big Bang Model using horn-shaped antennas, U-2 spy planes, satellites and particle accelerators. It is like putting together pieces of the puzzle, which scientists have charted and documented well over the years.

      please share:
      Published on October 25, 2009 · Filed under: Cosmology, Physics

      You may be interested in:

    • radecki

      massive

    • 0zyzzyz0

      When was this released?
      There is one thing that troubled me. Both at the beginning of this documentary and at the end the narrator states, "Before the big bang there was nothing." This is a false (not possibly true) statement. We do not know what there was before the expansion of the singularity into our universe as we percieve it today, but we do know that nothing comes from nothing. From this fundamental understanding we know that consequently the time/space our our universe must have come out of some meta continuum of time/space. An infinite regress of cause and effect is not avoidable. Reality necessarily has to be infinite, and even our universe is but a part of something greater… and that of something greater yet… and that
      dot dot dot

    • Jack Kebek

      What there was before the Big Bang, or outside our Universe, is unprovable by any means : it's out of the Universe. For many years, it was believed by the majority there was only our Universe, just like it was belied there was only one galaxy before Hubble, not the telescope, but the person who it was named after.

      Newer hypothesis, due to the not so old "anthropic principle" interpretations and debates that led to believing that the Universe was created(?) for us to observe it, since the probabilities of "our" universe being as as it is, mainly after measuring the so called "cosmological constant" (a dot followed by 120 zero's and then a 2") are so extremely improbable.

      Add that very very low improbability to a the 20 or so other constants, some to within 1%, and you got yourself a set of inconceivable probabilities.

      Only recently, in 2001 or so, did the concept of a "multiverse" (billions of slightly to extremely different universes) became a real necessity outside quantum physics. It's the only way out of any kind of design, intelligent or dumb.

      Leonard Susskind is the public forerunner of a newer theory of a Multiverse. I watched a few of his lectures over the net and, just today, I got a book he wrote out of my public library : "The cosmic landscape" which I'm eager to read.

      Although, I read about a Multiverse hypothesis in Stephen Hawking's book, "A brief History of Time" back in the early 90's, it's only beginning, with some modifications, to catch on to the majority of cosmologist and astronomers.

      I hope I wasn't to confusing…

    • Sikkan

      Before saying that this or that is unprovable or false, please gain knowledge and experience to rival the scientists working with this everyday, then give your view of it.

    • Jack Kebek

      Geez, seems I was "confusing".

      As stated, I heard, viewed, or read about the Multiverse, or Megaverse for 15 years or so. I also believed in Black Holes for near 20 years before the first one was successfully detected in 1991, because the theory "could not be wrong".

      Anything outside our Universe is "technically unprovable". You cannot poke anything outside our Universe or vice-versa, except perhaps the Human mind with Mathematics as a Tool.

      However, "nothing else", except a Multi or Megaverse can "rationally" explain our own Universe uniqueness.

      Even if unprovable, I will always believe rational Cosmologist, like Leonard Susskind, Stephen Hawking, Alan Guth etc.

      I'm not the one saying it's "technically unprovable", I'm merely repeating what I learned from them.

    • Sikkan

      My apologies.

      All I'm saying is really what you said at the end there. All we can really do is repeat what these scientists have said. To judge or disprove any of it would require us to be experienced scientists ourselves.

    • Jack Kebek

      Sikkan, no apologies were needed, but thanks, they're highly respected.

      As a suggestion, try to find some of the latest public lectures or talks by/with Leonard Susskind via Google video search.

      If you enjoy reading, get a hand on any of his books : "The Black Hole War" and "The Cosmic Landscape" are really worth (Q^Q)'ing :^)

      Have a very nice day

    • Sikkan

      I know who Leonard Susskind is, I haven't studied his work, but I've seen him in a few documentaries. I did watch a lecture on quantum mechanichs (I believe) on youtube. I like him he makes a lot of sense.

      And thanks for the tip, will have a look at those!

    • Aleks

      Very good and easily understandable documentary explaining really well and what the Big Bang theory is about. Including it’s history, strengths and shortomings.