The Big Bang Theory

[icxc_nika]

Germs are only a theory?? Poor Semmelweiss. He eventually went insane trying to convince the surgeons to wash their hands before doing surgery, especially when just coming from the morgue. His contemporaries thought it was not only just a theory but a rather dumb one at that. Tiny invisible creatures infecting our patients? Give us a break!

Germs are a fact. Germs causing us to become ill is a theory.
Again, it’s amazing to me that things such as the “big bang” are considered theories.
Most anyone will attest to a cause and effect relationship btw germs and illness / the evidence to support big bang and the age of the universe should not be accorded this sort of scientific certainty.

 

[GottaBeMare]

My speciality isn’t philosphy or astromony, rather the creative arts and animal studies, but I will venture my opinion anyways:

SOMETHING had to cause the Big Bang, and that would be God. Science can argue the universe down to one tiny grain of dust, or one single atom, but where did that grain of dust or atom come from? What caused it to come into being? And that is where God comes in.

To quote one of my all time favorite TV shows and one of the best Catholic characters on TV (IMO), Agent Scully of X-Files fame: “Science tells us how. It doesn’t tell us why.”

bows How’s that for a first post?

 

[icxc_nika]

How is this a joke? Nearly all mainstream scientists agree with the Big Bang Theory.

In todays day and age of science, if you dissent at all from popular opinion you are ostracised from the scientific community.

Science and research depends on money, and the funding for it.

If you are a “rogue” scientist that somehow won’t tow the line on the big bang, you are definetly in danger of losing your job and your peer group.

Current mainstream science, especially in this particular field, has one of the strongest herd mentalities.

So do you believe in a young Earth? Is the Earth only 6,000 years old?

I have no strong opinion on the age of the Earth one way or the other. It is not an issue of salvation, and does not require us to overthink it.

The bottom line is that man is outside and incapable of fully understanding true nature. We can not fully understand or comprehend what God made. To do so would put us on his level.

If science is found to support a God, Jesus, scripture etc.that’s just great. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for them to begin with a more Christian or even diety based platform to begin researching. The fact that most scientists will go to great lengths to disprove a God is proof for a bias, no room for these subjective biases when it comes to people committing their lives in pursuit of objective research.

 

[icxc_nika]

SOMETHING had to cause the Big Bang, and that would be God. Science can argue the universe down to one tiny grain of dust, or one single atom, but where did that grain of dust or atom come from? What caused it to come into being? And that is where God comes in.

Others have already alluded to this, and it’s the most important point.

To rephrase our question in a more pithy manner:

Where did matter come from??

 

[Parrot]

Where did matter come from??

Hey I know that one! Matter (mass or ‘m’) comes from energy (‘e’).

e=mc2 so…

m=e/c2

The square of the speed of light is a really big number. It takes a lot of energy to create a tiny bit of matter so it probably would take some really powerful entity (God) to create all the mass in the Universe and done all at once, it would be quite a bang. Isn’t that why they call it the Big Bang?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Hey I know that one! Matter (mass or ‘m’) comes from energy (‘e’).

e=mc2 so…

m=e/c2

The square of the speed of light is a really big number. It takes a lot of energy to create a tiny bit of matter so it probably would take some really powerful entity (God) to create all the mass in the Universe and done all at once, it would be quite a bang. Isn’t that why they call it the Big Bang?

You are saying that matter came from energy?

Where did the energy come from?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

the evidence to support big bang and the age of the universe should not be accorded this sort of scientific certainty.

They are not. They are within the realm of theoretical science. ‘Sciences’ are within the realm of observational science.

 

[freesoulhope]

Anything!

Any **belief **is based on something apart from pure logic, in my opinion.

:

How can that be when Logic has lead me to think that God exist?

The criteria for what Logic should make of reality varies among different people. Some people assume (because they have been brainwashed) that Logic demands that you must keep God out of the equation; but science has reached a point where all the materialistic probabilities have been used up to a point where they are forced to make irational claims. They where right about evolution, i give them that, but they made a mistake in assuming that evolution could explain reality, and it can’t.The only logical explaination left, is God; or one can choose to be agnostic.

Occams razzor leaves only one logical possibility for the existents of are universe

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Faith can never conflict with reason

 

[mardukm]

The Big Bang theory is certainly a reasonable cosmological theory and in accord with the observable evidence so far. Nothing wrong with the big bang.

However, I think it is a mistake to try to tie it too closely to theology, specifically as a theolgy of creation. While Christians may like to see it as the singularity at the beginning point of creation, that may or may not be true. Also, by seeing it that way, one tends to tie God’s hands too closely to “time.”

God’s power to create ex nihilo would be just as much requred in a steady state universe, since matter, space, and energy do not contain within themselves sufficient reason for their own being.

Time is simply a function of matter and space. Big-bang theorists actually do not count time before the Big-bang. So I don’t think it would “tie God’s hands” in any way.

Marduk

 

[heisenburg]

Wow…

OK… for starters… God can do what ever he wants. period. Why is it such a far flung Idea that God could have created the Big Bang.

There are several key things that have been stated that are absolutely wrong.

1. For the big bang to exist, Time must not be a part of the equation before hand. This is a complete misunderstanding of the problem. It is not that lack of time prior to the BB is required, it is that almost EVERY theory that exists falls apart at the instant of the creation of the singularity. Our current understanding of Physics fails. As a note, there is a similar problem when discussing Black Holes at the singularity level. Our Theories fall apart. Does that mean that a black hole doesn’t exist? Absurd! they do exist. It is our understanding of how they work thats the requires help

As a note, the goal of astrophysicist right now is to get physics to work going throw the singularity, to the other side. There is only one theory currently that currently works.

1. Big bang is at best a hypothesis This is not completely accurate. But it is accurate to say it isn’t a full blown theory either. Evidence though is the Key. There is ample evidence the universe is at a several billion years old, from our perspective… probably in the range of 12.5 billion. Notice I put from our perspective in italics… Time is not as strait forward as everyone assumes… Time dilates, distorts, etc when large masses are near by, and.or if the the object is approaching the speed of light.

it is ENTIRELY possible for someone that started at universe day one to have experienced ONLY 6000 years, but for us looking back through time, for it to be 12.5 billion. This is a because of the way PHYSICS works. And yes, it is testable, just not to that level.

1. Well, great e=mc2, what created the energy There are two parts that I want to show on this… One… i think the answer is VERY VERY simple. its called GOD… However, this equation is only partially correct… e=mc2 is rest energy… in other words… absolute zero mph. Einstein equation is actually e = (1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2))mc^2. Why am I saying this, because I want to show you that energy is ALSO Dependant on speed relative to the speed of light. Keep in mind speed denotes passage of time, which also means, energy is a function of time as well… Throw in time dilation because of the incredible mass and the problem is not as strait forward as it seems.

By the way, scientist do have a theory that does explain where the energy came from, sorta… you know what else… they can almost test it…

Physics

These problems are far more complicated than people seem to want to give them credit for. Big Bang is NOT some hi in the sky idea someone came up with while smokin’ some peyote. There is an INCREDIBLE amount of physics behind it, and not just physics lay-people understand. Physics that requires pages and pages to solve.

There is another requirement for these theories… any theory they develope MUST fit and be able to support other areas of the Natural word. Example… if you develop a mathematical equation to explain the Big Bang. if you apply the equation to nature, and come up with the mass of a baseball to = the sun… the hypothesis is WRONG

It doesnt fir Nature… All these THEORIES hold true when applied to other areas of nature.

Please… PLEASE…
Physics is not an armchair item that has whims of someones mood. Unless you have a PhD or some comparable training in the specific field. Please do NOT assume it isn’t true because YOU do not understand it. Would you want a McDonald’s Burger Flipper performing brain surgery? Then why do we as lay people think we know better than those that spent their lives investing in Physics…

There is no conspiracy’s. Popularity Doesn’t matter to TRUTH. Even popular theories fall away when SCIENCE proves them otherwise… research Ether…

If you really want to see how complicated the whole Idea of the creation of the universe is to Physicist, google “why is gravity so weak” This is one of the problems that has to be worked out for an accurate creation theory.

I know someone will say “what is my authority for saying this” My authority is that I have a degree in Physics, and I know whats required… I also know NOT to comment on areas of Physics i am not fully aware of.

ALL that being said… there is NOTHING wrong with God creating the universe. Science cannot contradict Scripture, and vice versa

In Christ

 

[heisenburg]

Sorry for the long windedness but please read through it if you want a better understanding of the problem

In Christ

 

[Parrot]

Please… PLEASE…
Physics is not an armchair item that has whims of someones mood. Unless you have a PhD or some comparable training in the specific field. Please do NOT assume it isn’t true because YOU do not understand it. Would you want a McDonald’s Burger Flipper performing brain surgery? Then why do we as lay people think we know better than those that spent their lives investing in Physics…

I agree with what you have said but I believe you are being a bit severe upon us. While it is true that one really must have a PhD level of education to** fully** comprehend the physics involved in this subject, there is nothing wrong with people discussing it as they believe it, I feel - especially when they are trying to wrap their head around where God comes into the equation.

Just because I do not have a DVM degree does not mean I cannot discuss or have ideas about why a dog does what it is observed to do.

As example only and not to be mean… Please give us the physics formula where we can see the parameter G (God)?

 

[heisenburg]

Discussing the ideas is ok… no problem… and I do apologize for coming off as harsh… It is when people that aren’t trained in that area even remotely try and tell others what is and is not fact.

I don’t get frustrated at the idea of people discussing the big bang… thought it was a great thread until some posters began trying to say that their understanding is fact and that all physics and science is nothing more than bumken…

I equate it to this… We can have protestants on hear and thoughtfully debate all day long… but each of us shake our heads when someone comes in here and says we worship idols, and then have them TELL us what we believe…

Declaring a theory as bunk because YOU don’t understand it properly is just as bad

As a note… for me, the G factor is in how everything works so well together. if one of the constants were to change, everything would not be as it were. possibly not even life…

In Christ

 

[Faithful_One]

What are your opinions concerning the Big Bang Theory? Personally, I think that the Big Bang occurred about 13.7 billion years ago. It seems that at that point, time (as we understand it), matter, and space came into being. It would appear that God initiated the Big Bang, thus creating the universe. Pius XII share this opinion. He told the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in 1951,

“…it would seem that present-day science, with one sweep back across the centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to the august instant of the primordial Fiat Lux [Let there be Light], when along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, and the elements split and churned and formed into millions of galaxies.”

What do you all think?

Ha, ha, ha; lol

Ha, hee, hee, he lol, ha, ha.

Does that answer your question?

.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Declaring a theory as bunk because YOU don’t understand it properly is just as bad

I’ve noticed this too.

Some folks ask for clarification if they don’t understand something. If I have the info, then I give it. If I don’t, then I say I don’t know and ask if anyone else knows.

Some folks, if they don’t understand something, simply condemn the theory outright or even worse make attributions as to the sanity of the author or even as to the sanity of the poster.

This latter choice of behaviour does little to further the discussions and therefore does little to further our understanding of the topics. One has to wonder what purpose is served by such behaviour, other than to soothe the discomfort of not knowing something.

Admitting that we don’t understand things is not always comfortable. Learning is about leaving our comfort zones. So, folks, can we learn to ask for clarification when we don’t understand things?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

heisenburg:

1. For the big bang to exist, Time must not be a part of the equation before hand.

I don’t think **I **said this. What I said is that Feynman, Hawking et al – who do have their PhDs – have done the math, crunched the numbers and are of the view that time must have been one or more dimensions of space before the Big Bang.

heisenburg:

This is a complete misunderstanding of the problem. It is not that lack of time prior to the BB is required, it is that almost EVERY theory that exists falls apart at the instant of the creation of the singularity.

Yes. We cannot know or even have much of an idea of what happened pre-Big-Bang.

As for the singularity, F and H have proposed that a singularity may not have existed at the Big Bang. That the early universe had no-boundary conditions.

heisenburg:

Does that mean that a black hole doesn’t exist? Absurd! they do exist. It is our understanding of how they work thats the requires help

Yes.

heisenburg:

As a note, the goal of astrophysicist right now is to get physics to work going throw the singularity, to the other side. There is only one theory currently that currently works.

Exciting. Can you flesh this out and give us a link so we can read the context? Thank you.

heisenburg:

1. Big bang is at best a hypothesis This is not completely accurate. But it is accurate to say it isn’t a full blown theory either. Evidence though is the Key. There is ample evidence the universe is at a several billion years old, from our perspective… probably in the range of 12.5 billion. Notice I put from our perspective in italics… Time is not as strait forward as everyone assumes… Time dilates, distorts, etc when large masses are near by, and.or if the the object is approaching the speed of light.

Yes. Time is not straight forward. That’s what I have been trying to get across – with various wording – for the past few days. Thank you for this.

heisenburg:

it is ENTIRELY possible for someone that started at universe day one to have experienced ONLY 6000 years, but for us looking back through time, for it to be 12.5 billion. This is a because of the way PHYSICS works. And yes, it is testable, just not to that level.

Not testable at that level, but fun!

heisenburg:

1. Well, great e=mc2, what created the energy There are two parts that I want to show on this… One… i think the answer is VERY VERY simple. its called GOD…

The question was meant to stimulate an answer! How did God create that energy?

heisenburg:

However, this equation is only partially correct… e=mc2 is rest energy… in other words… absolute zero mph. Einstein equation is actually e = (1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2))mc^2. Why am I saying this, because I want to show you that energy is ALSO Dependant on speed relative to the speed of light. Keep in mind speed denotes passage of time, which also means, energy is a function of time as well… Throw in time dilation because of the incredible mass and the problem is not as strait forward as it seems.

Nice move.

heisenburg:

By the way, scientist do have a theory that does explain where the energy came from, sorta… you know what else… they can almost test it…

Tell us! Tell us! :bounce:

heisenburg:

There is no conspiracy’s. Popularity Doesn’t matter to TRUTH. Even popular theories fall away when SCIENCE proves them otherwise… research Ether…

Yes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. Physicists had veritable wars getting their contributions accepted. Tell us about ether.

heisenburg:

If you really want to see how complicated the whole Idea of the creation of the universe is to Physicist, google “why is gravity so weak” This is one of the problems that has to be worked out for an accurate creation theory.

OK. I’ll see if I can post some links when I get back.

heisenburg:

I know someone will say “what is my authority for saying this” My authority is that I have a degree in Physics, and I know whats required… I also know NOT to comment on areas of Physics i am not fully aware of.

But nobody said that we can’t ask questions – even if those questions seem at first glance whimsical – or that we can’t have some thought-fun with the universe. Part of science is creativity. Part of creativity is having fun.

N’est-ce pas?

 

[icxc_nika]

Wow…

…

it is ENTIRELY possible for someone that started at universe day one to have experienced ONLY 6000 years, but for us looking back through time, for it to be 12.5 billion. This is a because of the way PHYSICS works. And yes, it is testable, just not to that level.

1. Well, great e=mc2, what created the energy There are two parts that I want to show on this… One… i think the answer is VERY VERY simple. its called GOD… However, this equation is only partially correct… e=mc2 is rest energy… in other words… absolute zero mph. Einstein equation is actually e = (1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2))mc^2. Why am I saying this, because I want to show you that energy is ALSO Dependant on speed relative to the speed of light. Keep in mind speed denotes passage of time, which also means, energy is a function of time as well… Throw in time dilation because of the incredible mass and the problem is not as strait forward as it seems.

By the way, scientist do have a theory that does explain where the energy came from, sorta… you know what else… they can almost test it…

Physics

These problems are far more complicated than people seem to want to give them credit for. Big Bang is NOT some hi in the sky idea someone came up with while smokin’ some peyote. There is an INCREDIBLE amount of physics behind it, and not just physics lay-people understand. Physics that requires pages and pages to solve.

There is another requirement for these theories… any theory they develope MUST fit and be able to support other areas of the Natural word. Example… if you develop a mathematical equation to explain the Big Bang. if you apply the equation to nature, and come up with the mass of a baseball to = the sun… the hypothesis is WRONG

It doesnt fir Nature… All these THEORIES hold true when applied to other areas of nature.

Please… PLEASE…
Physics is not an armchair item that has whims of someones mood. Unless you have a PhD or some comparable training in the specific field. Please do NOT assume it isn’t true because YOU do not understand it. Would you want a McDonald’s Burger Flipper performing brain surgery? Then why do we as lay people think we know better than those that spent their lives investing in Physics…

There is no conspiracy’s. Popularity Doesn’t matter to TRUTH. Even popular theories fall away when SCIENCE proves them otherwise… research Ether…

If you really want to see how complicated the whole Idea of the creation of the universe is to Physicist, google “why is gravity so weak” This is one of the problems that has to be worked out for an accurate creation theory.

I know someone will say “what is my authority for saying this” My authority is that I have a degree in Physics, and I know whats required… I also know NOT to comment on areas of Physics i am not fully aware of.

ALL that being said… there is NOTHING wrong with God creating the universe. Science cannot contradict Scripture, and vice versa

In Christ

Sorry to quote the entire post here.
I will address some of your points when I get back, however I would like to say that I am assuming that some of your post was made directly becuase of my comments earlier on this thread.

Having gone through medical school, there is a lot of heavy science course work involved.
Having a significant intrest in science since I have been a wee bit little tike, made me persoanlly explore a tremendous amount of science in general.

I would however like to say that my points stand as I have presented them.

I do not pretend to have advanced degrees in physics or astrophysics, however their starting points and their physics in general are dubious.

Scholars in this field of science, and many others, are not listened to, and not published for political reasons in too many circumstances. I am not claiming any weird consipracy, but it is a fact in the world of academia that we live in.

I will attempt to expound later on some specifics: however, asdlack pretentious scientists with there 50 page formulas do not excite or scare me in the least, especially when they base their understanings, and starting points off of false premises.

If you want to begin your own search, google black holes and start looking at the varing degrees of understnading that do not fit the norm. There are plenty of very competant, and less heard from, scientists out there… not just our big bang buddies with formulas that only 100 people across the globe can solve.

 

[heisenburg]

ICXC…

For starters, I wish to apologize… I came off rude to you and many others. this was a faulting of my own zeal that sometimes gets the better of me.

However, I am curious what false points you talk about.

I do understand that there are several theories that are being fleshed out. There is no perfectly accepted theory, That is why i also pointed out that it isn’t accurate to say its a Theory, but also not accurate to say it is just a Hypothesis.

I also acknowledge that there are theories that are ‘politically correct’ or what have you at an instance, however, throughout history, the theory that best fits the evidence has always won out. again, reference Ether.

Even theories that are not accepted still get published. If they are right, people eventually come around. I noticed you were a doctor in your profile, which is also why i was a little taken aback by your statements. In any case, each theory that does exist right now does fit many of the natural laws, they just tend to fall apart at the point of “Bang”, and thus, thats why the search is still on. Theories that are popular come and go, eventually, the truth will probably come out, and it will probably be some combination of all of it.

Popularity though doesn’t in the long run win… no matter how popular the idea… a round peg will never fit in a square hole… so to, a bad equation will never work in nature just because its well loved…

In Christ

 

[heisenburg]

Ani…

Again… to you as well, please forgive me if my words came out as harsh.

You are right that its OK to question and Ask, i am never opposed to that, I am simply opposed to statements made as fact, that are false.

Anyway… your questions deserve an answer.

1. what do I mean by getting their theories through the Big Bang. Simply put, the laws of physics shouldn’t break down regardless. Even at t=0, the laws of physics should still hold. So, if the laws of physics fall apart at t=0, then that means there is a problem with our understanding, but not physics. Physics doesn’t fall apart. Scientist are simply trying to find the right understanding that doesn’t fall apart.

which leads to one of your other questions…
2) I mentioned that there was at least one theory that does explain it. I don’t know how I feel about it and haven’t done the digging, but it is called Membrane Theory. You may also have heard it called the Multiverse theory. The equations used for Membrane theory explain aspects in nature, such as weak gravity, but also explain the ‘how’ of the what started the universe. At a quantum level, energy fluctuates like a wave. This is sorta what zero point energy is, when two Membranes came extremely close, these fluctuation’s touched, combined, broke off from the old membranes, and created a new membrane, with its own rules and constants, and empty space, aka new universe. It explains where the energy for this universe came from, as well as what caused it.

The Next question stands, well, what created the MultiVerse. dunno, God can still be the answer.

1. Can they test it… Some scientist think they can, but worry about the moral aspects… This will be a completely separate universe with its own rules, and maybe one day, if God allows, its own people.

All this being said… I’m not sold on it and want to see how it plays out.

1. Ether… Ether is a theory that was extremely popular in the Latter half of the 1800’s. The wave properties of light were starting to become understood, but there was a problem, what propagated the wave. When you drop a rock in the water, the ripples are propagated by the water. Sound is propagated by Air, Light however, seemed to not have any medium that it traveled through. so, the theory of ether developed. An invisible, untouchable, untestable ‘substance’ that was used to propagate light. This turned out to be wrong. I kinda feel like dark matter is todays Ether personally, but then again, I could be wrong. Anyway, the whole point of this is that very popular theories, no matter how popular fall away when proven wrong.

Anyway… hope that helps… again, though my stance is not changed, to all i offended, I apologize.

In Christ