Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Big Bang and the Big Question: A Universe without God?
Aish ^ | Lawrence Kelemen

Posted on 06/23/2003 11:31:49 AM PDT by yonif

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-326 next last
To: this_old_man_101
I appreciate your point of view, but allow me to point out where you are mistaken.

maybe no one does know what the matter came from, or where the energy came from, but what some people say is, how does that lack of knowledge demand that a creator created the universe?

Actually, we do know where all the matter came from. All the light gases of the universe were made by the Big Bang. At the time of Big Bang the Universe was situated in a very infinite small space and was so hot as if millions of suns were burning together. As the Universe was one thousandth of a second old, its temperature had fallen 10 billion degrees. Initially Quark was created, it is known as the creator of todays protons and neutrons. By the time the Universe had reached the age of one hundredth of a second it was failed up with protons, electrons, positrons and neutrinos. These three quarks combined together to form neutrons and protons, but these particles are found in very less quantity. By the time the Universe was a second old, the temperature had further fallen by 10 million degrees and protons did not have so much energy left with them that they could collect their own particles.

The most historic event took place after the Universe was 100 seconds old. Its temperature had further fallen by some lakh degrees. The protons and neutrons were moving very slowly, at that time the force was created that is responsible for holding the protons and neutrons to the nucleus. From here on the era of Nuclear Synthesis started when light Nuclear were created, they contained Helium and Lithium gases, but for creation of heavy elements like oxygen higher temperature was required. But as the Universe was expanding at the same rate it was cooling down. The heavy basic elements later were to become atomic furnaces in the stars.

Nuclear fusion in stars converts hydrogen into helium in all stars. In stars less massive than the Sun, this is the only reaction that takes place. In stars more massive than the Sun (but less massive than about 8 solar masses), further reactions that convert helium to carbon and oxygen take place in succesive stages of stellar evolution. In the very massive stars, the reaction chain continues to produce elements like silicon upto iron.

Elements higher than iron cannot be formed through fusion as one has to supply energy for the reaction to take place. However, we do see elements higher than iron around us. So how did these elements form? The answer is supernovae. In a supernova explosion, neutron capture reactions take place (this is not fusion), leading to the formation of heavy elements. This is the reason why it is said that most of the stuff that we see around us come from stars and supernovae (the heavy elements part). If you go into technical details, then there are two processes of neutron capture called rapid process (r-process) and the slow process (s-process), and these lead to formation of different elements.

So far as a creator, you seem to miss the point of a sigularity. A singularity, where the universe once resided, is so small, protons would be millions of times larger. The point of the matter is, according to Newtons laws of motion, for every reaction--the Big Bang, there had to be a preceding action. If the entire universe was contained in one sinularity--and nothing else was outside of it, what was the ACTION, that started the Big Bang REaction??

61 posted on 06/23/2003 2:36:36 PM PDT by Loose_Cannon1 (Part French and hating myself for it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #62 Removed by Moderator

To: MattAMiller
You seem to miss the point of a singularity. A singularity, where the universe once resided, is so small, protons would be millions of times larger. The point of the matter is, according to Newtons laws of motion, for every reaction--for example, the Big Bang-- there had to be a preceding action. If the entire universe was contained in one singularity--and nothing else was outside of it, what was the ACTION, that started the Big Bang REaction??
63 posted on 06/23/2003 2:41:14 PM PDT by Loose_Cannon1 (Part French and hating myself for it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: this_old_man_101
In my opinion, the Big Bang is a theory.

of course it's a theory. No one was witness to it, except the Father.

But the point is, what theory overrules the Big Bang? None so far. In fact, as Einstien and every physicist since him has proven, the evidence of a 'Big Bang' is the only explanation.

Otherwise, explain the discovery of the background microwaves found at Bell Labs in 1965. How do you explain the expansion of the universe, at such a high rate?? No other theory explains this.

It's only a theory in so much there was no witnesses. This doesn't mean it isn't proveable.

64 posted on 06/23/2003 2:46:08 PM PDT by Loose_Cannon1 (Part French and hating myself for it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Loose_Cannon1
And what started the action that started the Big Bang? And what started the action that started the action that started the Big Bang? And so on and so forth. It either begins somewhere or it doesn't.
65 posted on 06/23/2003 2:56:48 PM PDT by MattAMiller (Down with the Mullahs! Peace, freedom, and prosperity for Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. 5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it?

Exactly!! Exactly!! Thank you so much for this quote from the bible.

Something's ARE unknowable to us--like how do you reconcile Quantum theory with the physics our known universe? The so-called UNIFIED theory Einstein spent the rest of his life searching to find, but never did.

This just goes to further prove that searching for proof of God's work is as easy as looking into the eyes of another human being. If evolution is the answer, and science the key--we have all the materials we need to make life, why hasn't science achieved this yet?

Certainly we have the water, minerals, material, etc., to assemble life. Why can't we create it in a laboratory? IF, as the evolutionists tell us, life came together in a bastion of amino acids to form DNA, and a spark of electricity transformed it into life--then why hasn't science replicated this?

Any real educated person would have to admit that the beginning of life is beyond our capability to create spontaneously

And the only being that could produce it--obviously did. Why doubt his ability if you can't repeat it?

66 posted on 06/23/2003 3:00:17 PM PDT by Loose_Cannon1 (Part French and hating myself for it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
And to your comment, I would add: We're ALL going to be immortal. Some of us are just going to be immortal in one place; others are going to be immortal in another. If I had any doubts at all about a hereafter, I'd be doing my best to find out everything I could right now! Eternity is a really long time!
67 posted on 06/23/2003 3:08:50 PM PDT by Maria S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MattAMiller
And what started the action that started the Big Bang?

Obviously God.

And what started the action that started the action that started the Big Bang?

The answer is very simple--God. The problem is, you refuse to accept the answer that physics and science is proving daily. There was a beginning action, and it rested with an outside, ALIEN to our universe, force. It had to be, otherwise, it would be part of our universe and therefore contained in the singularity.

Einstein, for the better part of his life before he died in 1955, sought the answer to why Quantum theory is beyond what we know about the physics of the universe--he sought a so-called UNIFIED THEORY of the Universe. For instance: The Electrons Quantum Leap--an electron moves from one energy level to another, it doesn't gradually pass through all the energy levels in-between. Instead, there is a "Quantum leap", and the electron instantly leaps from one energy level to the next. In general, a Quantum leap is when a particle changes from one Quantum State to another. It's as if you were trailing someone, and you saw them at different points, but never saw them get there.

The greatest minds of our age have been unable to explain this--but it's answer lies in what we already know. The creator of the universe had his own timetable and his own laws.

68 posted on 06/23/2003 3:11:45 PM PDT by Loose_Cannon1 (Part French and hating myself for it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
No one can really fathom eternity.

Excellent point -- and it's worth noting that eternity pretty much has to be "bigger than" time or space-time.

69 posted on 06/23/2003 3:15:45 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: kkindt
Wishful thinking doesn't mean something is not true - or else what about you?

I never said as much. I was merely pointing out that being a Christian simply because it seems more optimistic is not an example of logical reasoning.

You surely don't wish there is a God to whom you must pray and to whom you are responsible, do you?

Actually, I'm rather ambivilant on the matter. I don't appreciate you asserting my opinions for me, though.

SO you wish the opposite - so you can be supposedly free to be whatever you want to be.

I lack belief in all gods (not just a single specific "God") because I have not seen convincing evidence to persuade me to hold such a belief. It has nothing to do with "wishing".
70 posted on 06/23/2003 3:21:29 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Loose_Cannon1
according to Newtons laws of motion, for every reaction--the Big Bang, there had to be a preceding action

Preceding is perhaps a little too wide or loose for old Newton. Simultaneous, perhaps, rather than preceding.

71 posted on 06/23/2003 3:21:48 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: showme_the_Glory
You'll be taking your logic to your grave.

I certainly hope that I don't break down into irrationality before I die.

Logic and truth are not one in the same.

I never asserted as much. My only point was that choosing Jesus because you like the idea of the consequences of that being right is not an example of logical reasoning -- further, it does not make for a convincing argument. I'll stick with my choice.

I didn't expect to change anyone's mind. I was merely hoping that a few people might realise that 'wouldn't it be wonderful if Christianity were true?' is not a logical argument.

Have a nice logical life here on earth.

I'm sure that it will have its ups and downs. On the upside, I won't be disappointed due to irrational expectations not being met.

I hope to meet you in heaven.

Is that a nightclub of some sort? I don't go to nightclubs.
72 posted on 06/23/2003 3:24:34 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Loose_Cannon1
Obviously God.

Why "obviously"? What necessitates the existence of this "God"? Does this "God" have any attributes that can be derived from its "obvious" nature?

The answer is very simple--God.

See above.

The problem is, you refuse to accept the answer that physics and science is proving daily.

Could you provide a reference for some of this "proof"? "God" is a lovely catch-all explanation, but it is useless without definition and unless this 'proof' also defines specific attributes of this 'god', then this 'proof' is also worthless.

There was a beginning action, and it rested with an outside, ALIEN to our universe, force.

Why can't it involve some kind of time loop?

Einstein, for the better part of his life before he died in 1955, sought the answer to why Quantum theory is beyond what we know about the physics of the universe--he sought a so-called UNIFIED THEORY of the Universe. For instance: The Electrons Quantum Leap--an electron moves from one energy level to another, it doesn't gradually pass through all the energy levels in-between. Instead, there is a "Quantum leap", and the electron instantly leaps from one energy level to the next. In general, a Quantum leap is when a particle changes from one Quantum State to another. It's as if you were trailing someone, and you saw them at different points, but never saw them get there.

The greatest minds of our age have been unable to explain this--but it's answer lies in what we already know. The creator of the universe had his own timetable and his own laws.


Waitaminute. You go from discussing the current lack of understanding of quantum mechanics and somehow conclude that there is a "creator"? I don't see how anything in quantum mechanics proves the existence of a "creator" of some sort. I am not going to make assumptions of a creator simply because I lack understanding of the field -- to do that would be to say that we already understand absolutely everything that there is to know about quantum mechanics, therfore a god is responsible for what we can't understand. I'm not that arrogant.
73 posted on 06/23/2003 3:28:45 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Loose_Cannon1
Obviously God.

It's not obvious, it's just one possible answer. Still God would have to come from somewhere and he'd have to have some reason to create the universe.

74 posted on 06/23/2003 3:32:52 PM PDT by MattAMiller (Down with the Mullahs! Peace, freedom, and prosperity for Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: yonif
One does not require 'permission' within science to believe in God; one simply chooses to believe for no particular reason whatsoever. There is no evidence to my knowledge that establishes the existence of any deities, so if one wishes to believe in such things, then the realm of science is irrelevant.

As I remarked quite some while ago on FR, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic perception of an infinitely omnipotent & benevolent deity is simply illogical. If an omnipotent deity were infinitely holy, then there would exist no evil with which It could find offense.... In my estimation, there are only eight resolutions to this paradox, none of which appear acceptable to contemporary Christian consciousness. In no particular order:

1) A dualist deity

2) A limited deity

3) Multiple deities

4) A capricious deity

5) An irrational deity

6) An indifferent deity

7) No deity

8) A dead deity...

Whatever the case, for all practical intents, further inquiry into God's nature appears inconsequential for all practical purposes.

PS. One might also posit that evil does not exist as a universal, absolute principle outside of our own value judgments. Everything which happens is accordant to the designs or wishes of such a deity, which finds it all 'good' in Its regard.

75 posted on 06/23/2003 3:38:40 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RRWCC
Evolution is lousy science based on teleological thinking.Genetics doesn't work teleologically.
76 posted on 06/23/2003 3:43:12 PM PDT by y2k_free_radical (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Read this article tonight BUMP
77 posted on 06/23/2003 3:49:07 PM PDT by Pagey (Hillary Rotten is a Smug, Holier - Than - Thou Socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
If an omnipotent deity were infinitely holy, then there would exist no evil with which It could find offense....

Sounds like a constraint on the Infinite. The Infinite might find this amusing.

78 posted on 06/23/2003 4:08:10 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: this_old_man_101
"In my opinion, the Big Bang is a theory. "

Well, so is the concept of God, since if God were more than a theory, there wouldn't be all this mindnumbing debate. The Eifle Tower is not a theory, you can go touch it, you can get postcards, no one debates the "essence" of the Eifle Tower.

Truthfully, neither The Big bang Theory, nor the Theory of Evolution have any effect at all on the question of whether there is a universal morality, i.e. a universal religion. As for the idea of God, unless you make a trivialized anthropomorphic figure of clay to represent him (a Michaelangelo figure touching the hand of Adam), well there isn't much of a definition that makes much sense to human brains. Define an omnipotent, omniscient creator in plain English, and you have distilled God to something akin to a saturday morning cartoon figure.

79 posted on 06/23/2003 4:08:53 PM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
I'm not evading anything, I'd just like to know where all that matter came from that was suppose to condense into a pin-point singularity.

You're telling me in didn't come from anywhere, and that's why the universe has zero energy and is flat. Fine. OK. I can do flat.

All I really want to know is what was around before that alleged singularity went bang. You haven't answered that question nor has anyone else, and according to your post you're in a position to know the answer. Unless, of course, you're evading it.



80 posted on 06/23/2003 4:09:11 PM PDT by Noachian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-326 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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