Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Big Bang Blowup at Scientific American
Institute for Creation Research ^ | 5-30-2017 | Jake Hebert, Ph.D.

Posted on 05/30/2017 10:44:18 AM PDT by fishtank

Big Bang Blowup at Scientific American

by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *

The February 2017 issue of Scientific American contains an article by three prominent theoretical physicists from Princeton and Harvard who strongly question the validity of cosmic inflation, an important part of the modern Big Bang theory.1 They argued that inflation can never be shown to be wrong—it cannot be falsified—and therefore inflation isn’t even a scientific hypothesis.

Inflation theory was proposed by physicist Alan Guth to solve a number of serious problems in early versions of the Big Bang model. Supposedly, the universe underwent an extremely short period of accelerated expansion right after the Big Bang.

However, physicists later realized this version of inflation theory was too simplistic.

(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: creation; liberalmedia; origins; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-136 next last
To: FredZarguna
You sir, are an abrupt idiot.

Contrary to the nonsense you spewed AND your condescending demeanor, the current condition of the universe came from outside of the theory.

Self-referential is the assumption that the current condition of the universe provides evidence of the theory based on observation of the current condition of the universe, which provides evidence... blah, blah, blah

It is not my intention to disprove your religious beliefs. I only take issue with the idea that
"The Big Bang theory cannot seriously be questioned, due to the enormous volume of evidence".
Clear, as that's what I replied to.

As to laughable baloney, you've certainly contributed your share.
61 posted on 05/30/2017 1:02:56 PM PDT by Hugh the Scot ( Total War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Knock knock knock “Penny”
knock knock knock “Penny”
knock knock knock “Penny”

Oh, THAT Big Bang...


62 posted on 05/30/2017 1:04:58 PM PDT by meyer (The Constitution says what it says, and it doesn't say what it doesn't say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

I’m in agreement. It’s a theory... A well supported one, in fact, but not beyond question by reasonable and intelligent people.


63 posted on 05/30/2017 1:10:04 PM PDT by Hugh the Scot ( Total War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
>>If you're a believer in Genesis; 

Which, per the religious, should we interpret literally:

Ezek 28:11-13

11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 "Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

"'You were the model of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;
NIV

Or:

Gen 3:23-24

23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east sidee of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
NIV


?

After the religious chew on that - they can chew on how E=MC^2 relates, in both a General and Special sense, to the length of a day:

Time being a derivative function of state-change that progresses relative to E within the inertial frame(s) in which it is observed.

And finally - perhaps they can tell us all what the length of a day was in the context of the inertial frame occupied by a Creator by whom all the E in the Universe was breathed into existence in a single moment?

64 posted on 05/30/2017 1:12:07 PM PDT by HLPhat (It takes a Republic TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS - not a populist Tyranny of the Majority)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Douglas

I believe that what I call “A BINGO”.


65 posted on 05/30/2017 1:14:37 PM PDT by 5th MEB (Progressives in the open; --- FIRE FOR EFFECT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: circlecity
"They argued that inflation can never be shown to be wrong—it cannot be falsified—and therefore inflation isn’t even a scientific hypothesis."

One can say the same thing about Darwinian evolution.

You make an interesting extrapolation.

66 posted on 05/30/2017 1:17:38 PM PDT by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hugh the Scot
In science nothing really progresses beyond a theory, even something as basic as gravity. Some think they become "laws", but laws are just mathematical relationships that themselves aren't really proven. A theory contains laws but theories don't become laws.

We're reasonably certain that the universe is expanding, and predictions generally match what we see today, but no one knows how the universe originally started. There are competing alternative theories to the standard model, such as the Brane concept, but we don't have the physics or the observational data to say what really happened at "the beginning". It's anyone's guess, basically.
67 posted on 05/30/2017 1:19:40 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder
It must be an agonizing burden to operate under the assumption that such basic tenets of science are unfamiliar to anyone who may disagree with you.

" we don't have the physics or the observational data to say what really happened at "the beginning".


Seriously, you must be exhausted. :-)
-Hugh
68 posted on 05/30/2017 1:29:45 PM PDT by Hugh the Scot ( Total War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

>>In science nothing really progresses beyond a theory,

Got Practical Application?

Observe the self-evident application of math associated with QED etc that’s engineered into the various processes involved in storing and transmitting bits of information - culminating with the photons that are streaming off the screen and into your eyeballs, right now!


69 posted on 05/30/2017 1:31:27 PM PDT by HLPhat (It takes a Republic TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS - not a populist Tyranny of the Majority)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

I appreciate your reasoned response. I believe that God is the author of all things, but there is no sin in trying to understand how he did it. The answers may well be beyond our reach, but it is fun to try to figure out how it all happened.


70 posted on 05/30/2017 1:33:37 PM PDT by cbvanb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
Oh, no! A scientific theory grounded in decades of observational evidence is going to have to be adjusted! The young Earthers must have been right all along!

Give me a break.

71 posted on 05/30/2017 1:33:42 PM PDT by backwoods-engineer (Trump won; I celebrated; I'm good. Let's get on with the civil war now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cbvanb

Yes, and I don’t believe that God and science are in any mutually exclusive. God made a universe that behaves according to physical laws. The ones making trouble are the ones trying to misuse science to disprove God, which is impossible. God is above science, not opposed to it.


72 posted on 05/30/2017 1:38:26 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Hugh the Scot

I’m not really saying there is a beginning either. Just that our knowledge of physics or ability to see back that far are limited. From a science perspective, purely.


73 posted on 05/30/2017 1:46:33 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: cbvanb
>> I believe that God is the author of all things, but there is no sin in trying to understand how he did it

Yep.

Seems to me that if there's a sin in the context of this debate - it's in the arrogant pride of the fallible and uninspired whose OPINIONS have assumed dominion over the faith of others - culminating in multiple generations of children who've been driven into rejecting religion, and their own redemption, because they've been told to disbelieve what they see with their own eyes and free minds.

Furthermore, having driven those children into an insane wilderness of self-worshipping OPINION; the religious have given over those children to predators who would further confound things until significant numbers can't even apply the meager logic, reason, and common sense to know what sex they are.

Luke 17:1-3

17 Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come. 2 It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. 3

NIV

74 posted on 05/30/2017 1:54:20 PM PDT by HLPhat (It takes a Republic TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS - not a populist Tyranny of the Majority)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

Again, we are in agreement. I’m not a theorist, I’m an engineer, and as such I frequently work with mathematical models post-failure, to try and understand why some component didn’t work as expected. This is also why I distrust this method.

I apologize for jabbing at you.


75 posted on 05/30/2017 1:55:30 PM PDT by Hugh the Scot ( Total War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Hugh the Scot

Funny, I didn’t feel jabbed. Skepticism is an important ingredient. It beats groupthink in a lot of cases.


76 posted on 05/30/2017 1:59:55 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: meyer
Big Bang Blowup at Scientific American

So this "blowup" doesn't involve a Kaley Cuoco lookalike sex doll, then. Well, that we know of.

77 posted on 05/30/2017 2:01:15 PM PDT by Charles Martel (Progressives are the crab grass in the lawn of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

I won’t bother drawing that line-—>You Will. If the Big Bang, the so-called engine of matter has nothing to do with ‘speciation,’ then what does? If matter didn’t come into existence when the Big Bang (pagan Cosmic Egg) exploded, then Nature’s (capital N for nature worship) primary creative energy, evolution, had nothing to work on. So once again, if the Big Bang has nothing to do with speciation, then what does? The magical, mythological energy called evolution?!?


78 posted on 05/30/2017 2:01:41 PM PDT by spirited irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: HLPhat
Indeed, Ezekiel must have meant it as literal since its in the Bible, and as we know, the Bible doesn't contain metaphors or analogies or idioms in any of its prophecies or creation narratives.</sarcasm>
79 posted on 05/30/2017 2:02:23 PM PDT by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

“Science isn’t perfect, but what are the alternatives?”

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.


80 posted on 05/30/2017 2:06:07 PM PDT by Keflavik76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-136 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson