Big Bang

  • Thread starter Thread starter Faith1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Faith1960

Guest
This is from an old post that I wanted to revive. I hope it’s okay with the mods. The question is mine.Can anyone help?
It was supposed to be a revolutionary breakthrough: last March, a team of scientists found what are known as primordial gravitational waves, or ancient ripples in space-time that would have been produced just moments after the Big Bang, stunning direct evidence of a theory most scientists already hold true.
Click to expand...
Or had they? On Jan. 30, two teams of scientists — one operating a European Space Agency telescope and the other the team that submitted the original paper — have decided it was all just a mirage kicked up by ordinary space dust in our galaxy, thus debunking what had been one of the biggest discoveries of 2014, according to a report by the Economist.
Click to expand...
Such gravitational waves had long been sought by astronomers, as it would confirm that long-held theory that the universe suddenly expanded rapidly just instants after it exploded into existence, inflating at faster than the speed of light.
Click to expand...
Most scientists hold that it is true based on indirect evidence, but so far, no one had been able to provide hard, direct evidence that this is what happened.
Click to expand...
It explains why the BICEP2 team had been so excited to stumble upon what it though were primordial gravitational waves, which would have been exactly the direct evidence needed. It would have also allowed cosmologist to settle some key questions about inflation theory, as there are differing opinions on the matter within the scientific community.
Click to expand...
However, scientists immediately began to doubt the results soon after the paper was published, as they noted that thin clouds of dust in interstellar space can produce a similar signal. In order to verify that the signal came from primordial gravitational waves, researchers would need to identify and remove such signals from their data, but it appears BICEP2 hadn’t been able to do that, instead relying on the best available maps ofinterstellar dust.
Click to expand...
ESA’s orbiting telescope Planck generated better data that was not available to BICEP2 at the time, and its data was featured in the paper to analyze the results of the paper published last year. The result was that when the dust is removed from the data, the signature disappears, dumping cold water on what had been thought to be an exciting discovery.
Click to expand...
However, it won’t dull scientists’ zeal to keep seeking evidence of the primordial gravitational waves, as they believe they are out there somewhere. More telescopes will continue to hunt for them, and Planck’s abilities could assist in that effort.

If the Big Bang turns out to be untrue ( I recently read an article that said the universe is eternal and has been around forever) what would that do to the faith that God created the universe out of nothing?
Click to expand...
“I can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me.” Philippians 4:13
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Faith1960 said:
If the Big Bang turns out to be untrue ( I recently read an article that said the universe is eternal and has been around forever) what would that do to the faith that God created the universe out of nothing?
“I can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me.” Philippians 4:13
Click to expand...
The known part i.e. the Big Bang hasn’t been proven untrue. In fact evidence pointing to the Bang is as strong as ever. The eternal universe doesn’t work well with the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If the universe has always been eternal the universe would have run out of usable energy by now. Failure to detect primordial gravitational waves proves nothing. These waves could shed some information on the way the Bang unfolded. Was there a rapid inflation of the universe or not . Not that there was no Bang.
 
ericc said:
The known part i.e. the Big Bang hasn’t been proven untrue. In fact evidence pointing to the Bang is as strong as ever. The eternal universe doesn’t work well with the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If the universe has always been eternal the universe would have run out of usable energy by now. Failure to detect primordial gravitational waves proves nothing. These waves could shed some information on the way the Bang unfolded. Was there a rapid inflation of the universe or not . Not that there was no Bang.
Click to expand...
How does one scientifically prove an eternal universe anyway?
 
Faith1960 said:
If the Big Bang turns out to be untrue ( I recently read an article that said the universe is eternal and has been around forever) what would that do to the faith that God created the universe out of nothing?
Click to expand...
The Big Bang theory does not assert that the universe was created “out of nothing.”
 
I’m curious about one thing,

Radio & Gravitational waves , who’s to say that radio telescopes just aren’t big enough ,
What might we pick up on differently if a radio telescope was the size of the diameter of perhaps the size of earths orbit of the sun ,?

Interesting thought ,
 
NASA is working on a new telescope.

Supposed to be able to look way back in time.

JWST.

The present Hubble telescope is 300 miles up in orbit.

The JWST will be 1,000,000 miles up … looks like a tennis court with a three story building on it.

But to get into position, it folds up and then after launch, it will unfold.

jwst.nasa.gov

Google JWST.
 
Faith1960 said:
The scientific evidence isn’t there for an eternal universe?
Click to expand...
I haven’t come across ANY evidence. Theories and models , yes. For example:

phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html
preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2011/10/21/the-eternally-existing-self-reproducing-frequently-puzzling-inflationary-universe/

If you have, please do disclose. As I wrote previously, that would disagree with the 2nd law of thermodynamics. There are some that postulate that the universe will last eternally but had a beginning. Logic says that all usable energy will run out when the hydrogen in the stars are burned out. Hence the material world cannot promise eternal life. sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110822102057.htm This article may help.

Even if there is such a recycling universe that somehow kickstart itself upon its life/death cycle, it would be impossible to retain evidence of a pastlife. Hence, one can propose universes that reincarnate itself and no one will be any smarter.
 
Faith1960 said:
I recently read an article that said the universe is eternal and has been around forever
Click to expand...
How exactly would science “prove” this?

And even if they could somehow “prove” that the universe has been around forever in the sense of earthly time, God’s time is not our time; he may have time schemes that make our forever finite.

Scientific theories and evidence, whether Big Bang or something else, do not in the least detract from or disprove God’s creation. God’s creation is completely separate from any concept of earthly time or earthly science.
 
I wrote this to a couple of my daughters a while ago. Part of it is my view of the Big Bang - which if it did happen the way Scientists believe, is just further evidence of our Creator’s hand.

Part One:

In the instant between nothing and everything is the Big Bang. Imagine all the matter of the universe created at that one instant. The Big Bang theory says at time zero all the matter of the universe existed in an infinitely small, infinitely dense point.

Infinitely small. Think about that. Smaller than a spec of dust. Smaller than an electron. Nothing.

Infinitely dense. All the mass of the universe compressed to that infinitely small volume. Everything.

So in that instant between nothing and everything, God created the heavens and earth. “Let there be light”.

“Before the world began, the Word was there. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was there with God in the beginning. Everything was made through him and nothing was made without him.”

“God does not play dice with the universe.” Albert Einstein

Part Two:

The angel said: “Hail full of Grace”.
"Behold you shall conceive in your womb and shall bring forth a son: and you shall call his name Jesus. He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Most High. "

And in that instant, every living creature stopped, held its breath, and waited for the young woman to respond. Waiting for her fiat - her “Yes”.

In that instant, all the angels in heaven took their eyes off God to behold the young virgin.

Abundant silence.

In that instant, our Mother Mary gave her “Yes”:
“Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Be it done to me in accordance with thy Word.”

In that instant the Word became Flesh.
And in that instant the choirs of angels in heaven rejoiced.

Peace,
John Marie Philomena
 
All that can be saids that we have yet to find incontrovertable proof of exactly how the universe started. It doesn’t change ye fact that we are here now!

We are very inquisitive creatures, if it can be figured out, we will do it! Likewise we are impatient little critters, and have trouble waiting!
 
Edwin Hubble’s discovery of the redshift is proof that the universe is finite. ericc has already well stated that if the universe was infinite, then it would require infinite energy to maintain itself. Since the energy is not infinite (not to mention, that it cannot be infinite), then the universe would have burned itself out long ago and everything would be nothing but darkness.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
How exactly would science “prove” this?

And even if they could somehow “prove” that the universe has been around forever in the sense of earthly time, God’s time is not our time; he may have time schemes that make our forever finite.

Scientific theories and evidence, whether Big Bang or something else, do not in the least detract from or disprove God’s creation. God’s creation is completely separate from any concept of earthly time or earthly science.
Click to expand...
An eternal Universe cannot be proven. All they can really prove is that the universe cannot be reduced to a singularity event. But the idea that there can be an actually infinite past is a philosophical belief that cannot be measured scientifically. The most science can show is that the universe does not a measurable starting point. This of course doesn’t mean that the universe didn’t have a metaphysical beginning.
 
Crusaderbear said:
All that can be saids that we have yet to find incontrovertable proof of exactly how the universe started. It doesn’t change ye fact that we are here now!

We are very inquisitive creatures, if it can be figured out, we will do it! Likewise we are impatient little critters, and have trouble waiting!
Click to expand...
But there is no proof of an eternal universe?
 
Faith1960 said:
I don’t understand. Can you please simplify?
Click to expand...
Universe should have existed at infinite past if it is eternal. How long does it take to reach from infinite past to now? Infinite. So you need an infinite amount of waiting time to reach from infinite past to now. That is logically impossible since you can never reach infinite time by sum of a set of finite time.
 
STT said:
Universe should have existed at infinite past if it is eternal. How long does it take to reach from infinite past to now? Infinite. So you need an infinite amount of waiting time to reach from infinite past to now. That is logically impossible since you can never reach infinite time by sum of a set of finite time.
Click to expand...
So an eternal universe is impossible, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top