In the previous article, we examined white dwarfs and neutron stars, objects with the mass of a star compressed into a very small volume. Some of these objects could be what remains of a star that has collapsed in on itself. But what happens when mass is compressed into an even smaller volume?
In our previous article, we investigated the standard model (the big bang) on scientific grounds. We found that the big bang is not scientific in the sense that none of its major steps have been verified by the scientific method. However, there are things that are reasonable and true that cannot be verified by science. So we must ask, is the big bang reasonable? Are there good reasons to believe it despite its lack of scientific verification?