The Big Bang Theory

[usexpat97]

I like that: "theory" in atheistic science means that it is fact, whereas in colloquial use--where religion is considered non-scientific and therefore colloquial--theory means it is not.

Nope, no circular reasoning there.

 

[usexpat97]

How did DNA come into existence?

That is the question and one scientists can't answer.

It came from RNA. Everybody knows that. Pshaw!!!

 

[Daniel C]

It came from RNA. Everybody knows that. Pshaw!!!

No it didn't.

Again, this cannot be proven, only theorised and not demonstrated. Because DNA was created by God.

The other guy offered an article showing scientists can't prove this hypothesis,actually thinking it supported his view. Are you going to put one up as well?

 

[dad]

Well Big Bang scientists say that the universe is about 13.8 Billion years old. The Sun is about 4.6 Byo (middle-aged)

The 'age' of the sun is determined by radioactive isotopes found in planets and objects in the solar system that they assume were not created, but 'formed' around the same time basically.

".., if you want the current age of the sun (around 5 billion years) this number is determined from radioactive dating of objects in the solar system which are known to have formed around the same time as the sun.."
How do you calculate the lifetime of the Sun? (Advanced) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

Likewise the time when they prophesy it will go out is determined by the PRESENT realities and laws.

"The total lifetime of the sun before it becomes a red giant is, as you say, around 10 billion years (meaning that the transition will occur around 5 billion years from now). This can be estimated by assuming that the sun will "die" when it runs out of energy to keep it shining. The time for this to occur is roughly the total energy the sun has that can be turned into light, divided by the rate at which the sun is giving off energy, or:

lifetime = (energy) / (rate [energy/time] at which sun emits energy)" -- same link

No one can check what the future will be like or what it was like at creation in the way of what forces and laws existed/will exist. Science merely religiously assumes/believes that the present is the key to the future and past. The bible indicates something else. So the dates and prophesies of science are totally belief based.

 

[Just_a_Christian]

Does no one on this forum believe in a CREATOR??
God created the man Adam. Adam may have appeared to the human eye as being around thirty years old when in fact he was but only seconds old. Man is no where as smart as many believe he is.
Go contemplate the implications that the duality nature of quantum mechanics have, i.e., the double slit test....
In Him
Ps, I only read the first few post and got peeved, sorry.

 

[JerseyChristianSuperstar]

No, the Big Bang theory did not happen, it is incompatible with the creation account in Genesis, and with science even.

Whenever matter is created, an equal and opposite amount of particles called antimatter are created as well - and matter and antimatter destroy each other upon contact. The Big Bang theory says that massive amounts of matter was created from energy, when the universe was smaller than a dot, and it massively expanded in three seconds much faster than light speed, etc. If that were true, then the universe would not exist and would be a lifeless husk, as the matter and antimatter would have destroyed each other in the reaction.

But let's suppose, that somehow, the matter and antimatter which should have been created did not destroy each other. Fine. But that's mean that there should be equal amounts of matter and antimatter in the universe.

But that is what we do not see. The universe is virtually all matter, with only trace amounts of antimatter anywhere.

The Big Bang theory is false; Biblical creation is true.

 

[JCS 75]

Just a note, any current physical laws (like the laws of thermodynamics) apply in the universe, not outside of it or before it.

Your point is both timely and educational. Having studied both Scripture and sciences, I've often wondered why many people have such a difficult time with the fact that all of our knowledge is finite. Is it not the very definition of hubris to assume that there is nothing beyond our own viewpoints? There is much that we may not fully understand with regard to both Faith and physics.

 

[JacksBratt]

I had a few thoughts about the Big Bang theory. How did it happen. Did it happen spontaneously all of a sudden, or did someone or something light the fuse?

What was there before the Big Bang? The First Law to Thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created or destroyed. So it must have taken a humongous amount of energy to cause it. Where did it come from?


The most prominent and highly qualified scientists say that life has to come from life; that something that does not have life cannot produce life. This is a scientific law.

Therefore, if the Big Bang was a great fiery burst of energy creating mega temperatures that threw white hot material in all directions, wouldn't you think that everything would be sterile and totally devoid of life because of the great heat. We know that sterilizing medical implements kills all bacterial and makes them totally sterile. So, where did the life come from that produced life in the Primeval slime? A bolt of lightning couldn't have caused it because it is not life.

Also, science has proved that the universe is winding down like a clock. One day in the future the sun and stars would burn out. So, if the Big Bang happened a squillion billion years ago, or the universe has always been here, then would the sun and stars all be burned out by now?

It will be interesting if not done already, for scientists to calculate the rate at which the fuel of the sun is being burned up, and to calculate how long it will take for all the fuel in the sun to be used up and the sun will turn into a supernova. If, for instance, as the fuel in the sun burns up, it would get cooler, and just one degree cooler could causes many problems in the world. So, if it takes so many million years for the sun burns out, or that the sun cools down so that all life on earth becomes extinct, then it might be possible to calculate back to when the sun might have been one or two degrees hotter than it is now, causing life on earth not to survive. It would be interesting to find out whether it is millions or just thousands of years.


Your comments will be viewed with interest.

I thought this was disproved.

 

[Jonathan Mathews]

Day 1 of Creation WAS the Big Bang. God created light before he created the stars. All the Universe's energy was in the form of light. Look up "splitting water with light". There was water everywhere and God's Spirit hovered over it and said "Let there be light" and BANG, all that light struck the surface of the water, splitting the water molecules into hot gases which cooled and became stars. Secular Canadian scientists have already duplicated this process and provided evidence that the entire Universe could come into existence this way AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS in as little as 7 24-hour days.

 

[MournfulWatcher]

Y'all know that the big bang theory and God aren't in conflict right?

Like lots of theologians and christian philosophers have used it to show that the universe had to have a cause.

 

[Calvin_1985]

Just trust what God says and has given.

 

[Daniel C]

Y'all know that the big bang theory and God aren't in conflict right?

Like lots of theologians and christian philosophers have used it to show that the universe had to have a cause.

The big bang is just false. Nothing to do with being at odds with intelligent design, it's just false.

 

[usexpat97]

No it didn't.

Again, this cannot be proven, only theorised and not demonstrated. Because DNA was created by God.

The other guy offered an article showing scientists can't prove this hypothesis,actually thinking it supported his view. Are you going to put one up as well?

It's a moot point, because for purposes of this discussion RNA still has to come from somewhere. If we were discussimg evolution, that would matter, but we are discussing something-out-of-nothing and life-out-of-non-life.

 

[usexpat97]

The big bang is just false. Nothing to do with being at odds with intelligent design, it's just false.

In all fairness, Big Bang is a reasonable explanation for why there is red shift. It's just that red shift alone does not singlehandedly prove the theory.

 

[Cement]

I had a few thoughts about the Big Bang theory. How did it happen. Did it happen spontaneously all of a sudden, or did someone or something light the fuse?

What was there before the Big Bang? The First Law to Thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created or destroyed. So it must have taken a humongous amount of energy to cause it. Where did it come from?


The most prominent and highly qualified scientists say that life has to come from life; that something that does not have life cannot produce life. This is a scientific law.

Therefore, if the Big Bang was a great fiery burst of energy creating mega temperatures that threw white hot material in all directions, wouldn't you think that everything would be sterile and totally devoid of life because of the great heat. We know that sterilizing medical implements kills all bacterial and makes them totally sterile. So, where did the life come from that produced life in the Primeval slime? A bolt of lightning couldn't have caused it because it is not life.

Also, science has proved that the universe is winding down like a clock. One day in the future the sun and stars would burn out. So, if the Big Bang happened a squillion billion years ago, or the universe has always been here, then would the sun and stars all be burned out by now?

It will be interesting if not done already, for scientists to calculate the rate at which the fuel of the sun is being burned up, and to calculate how long it will take for all the fuel in the sun to be used up and the sun will turn into a supernova. If, for instance, as the fuel in the sun burns up, it would get cooler, and just one degree cooler could causes many problems in the world. So, if it takes so many million years for the sun burns out, or that the sun cools down so that all life on earth becomes extinct, then it might be possible to calculate back to when the sun might have been one or two degrees hotter than it is now, causing life on earth not to survive. It would be interesting to find out whether it is millions or just thousands of years.


Your comments will be viewed with interest.

I have often thought about this myself. The Bible makes it clear that God is separate from creation itself and that nothing can exist apart from him. It does not make a claim that God carved the universe from some previous materia that always existed. This can only be summed up by stating that God had created the universe out of nothing itself.(Ex Nihilo) The Logos simply spoke and it came to be. Furthermore you cannot say that the Laws of Thermodynamics can apply to God himself since he created that same law to govern all matter. There existed no science and no form of physics before he created them. He created the order of things himself out of nothing. It was all meant to be perfect until sin came along and created disharmony. This would explain why all matter will eventually become unstable and decay. The impossible is possible it would seem apparently with God. He made them out of nothing and they are not part of his essence. Its a deep mystery and impossible for anyone to know for certain.

 

[Daniel C]

In all fairness, Big Bang is a reasonable explanation for why there is red shift. It's just that red shift alone does not singlehandedly prove the theory.

The very fact that we exist suggests that the universe had a creator.

The earths distance to the sun is perfect. Closer and we would be fried, further away and it would be uninhabitable. A big bang or random unfolding of a universe is unlikely to cause this.

 

[Christopher0121]

My studies into this are limited. However, this is what I've come away with recently.

All the mass of the entire universe was once condensed into a pin point sized "singularity" that was smaller the tip of a needle. Then at some point... BOOM. That was approximately 14 Billion years ago.

The Big Bang launched an expansion of matter and energy that has essentially formed the universe as we know it. Scientists have been perplexed about this because for decades the amount of known matter throughout the Universe in relation to the wide open space created has not been equal to what would be necessary to facilitate the Big Bang. So, it has appeared that nearly 80% or more of the matter produced in the Big Bang was missing. However, with strides in the field of physics relating to dark matter and unified field theories leading to string theory and others has caused scientists to realize that open space is anything but empty. What appears to be empty space is actually vast expanses filled with dark matter and energy. Solid matter is in the minority in the Universe.

String theory is freaky. Due to what they believe is a unified field, what effects one particle in particular can effect another particle on the other side of the Universe instantaneously, as though there is no space between them at all.

Quantum physics, with the Double Slit Experiment, has demonstrated that particles are not "material" in nature, but rather, they are energy that is expressed in various densities relating to the vibration they produce. So, what they have always thought was "solid matter" is actually just energy at higher density than let's say less dense energy, like light. Think of the Matrix. When electrons are fired through double slits in a wall, they behave like waves, not particles. However, when observed, they behave like particles. This means that every single electron is an expression of energy that is reduced to potentialities that manifest in relation to being observed (hence, expectation). Freaky, is it not? LOL

As for life. Yes, it was assumed that life cannot come from non-living matter. However, our entire physical bodies are composed of complex combinations of natural elements found on our planet. Elements that are also scattered throughout the Solar System and the known Universe. We are made of the same stuff everything else is made of. The question has always been... but how did these molecules become connected in such a way to bring replicating complexity? They have created simple compounds of what could classify as living matter in laboratories. But it still doesn't answer questions relating to consciousness.

So, scientists began measuring consciousness as found in humans, animals, and plants. Some real interesting things were found in these studies. For example, when a large swarm of birds are flying together, they move in a unison that expresses a singularity of integrated consciousness, yet while not flying in such formations, they exhibit only individual measures of consciousness. In a very real sense, they share conscious awareness when in these formations. Same with various forms of fish in schools. Then they began to find that things previously thought of as not being conscious react on a subatomic scale to stimuli as a conscious thing would. Enter that Double Slit Experiment. If particles are somehow aware that they are being observed, and as a result express potentialities, does that mean that all matter is at some level... conscious???

Some scientists say, "Yes!" They embrace a minority theory at present called Panpsychism. This notion predicts that consciousness itself is an inherent property of the Universe. Not in that the Universe is consciously self-aware and thinking... but in that the basic property of consciousness resides in everything and is expressed in more complex forms... i.e... living things.

All this stuff is super freaky when one digs into it. Science, especially quantum physics, is bordering on the metaphysical.

 

[usexpat97]

The very fact that we exist suggests that the universe had a creator.

The earths distance to the sun is perfect. Closer and we would be fried, further away and it would be uninhabitable. A big bang or random unfolding of a universe is unlikely to cause this.

Random unfolding yes, but this does not address the question of whether a Big Bang and a Creator are by necessity mutually exclusive. Certainly they are not. That leaves the remaining question of whether Big Bang can jibe with the Genesis account. I think yes. But just because it can jibe does not necessarily mean that is actually what happened.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Well, we need to be careful here. I know you already recognise that the Bible is not a science book, yet I disagree with some here that say that it isn't scientifically accurate. Because I believe it is, depending on how much you are prepared to accept some pre-conditions such as... what the original audience of the bible would have known (without screwing up how a 21st Century person might read it) and having limited vocabulary (let alone scientific terms).

So in the above passage... I think "hung the earth in empty space" for me is a very good description for pre-scientific folks without even having the ability to observe the earth from the moon or send satellites into space to look back on the earth. Very insightful in my opinion. Also that other verse where it says God "stretches out the heavens" is very good description because recent scientific findings have confirmed that the universe is expanding rapidly. I should add here that that was courtesy of the Big Bang.



No, I don't know where you got that from but that is not what is observed. Even NASA just said that they are planning to make a base on the moon to stay long term there because they believe there is water they can use. But there are signatures for water elsewhere in our solar system. So far 23 places. The issue is the atmosphere and gravity, low or no gravity means atmosphere and water is lost to space, but if very cold then there is a chance that H2O is in solid form.

Oscarr, I recommend you watch this video to get an idea of how the elements are formed. It will also give you better idea why it would have taken all these 13.8 Billion years for this material universe and Earth to be ready for God's special creation... man.

By the way... forget about abiogenesis, and those experiments somebody mentioned here, those researchers are still scratching their heads. This webpage might be good for a quick read. Primordial soup - forget about that too, there is no evidence for such a thing in the fossil records.

The problem with science trying to explain the formation of the universe is that they can only guess at what might, or probably happened. They have no idea of what actually happened, yet they are peddling their theories as fact, and people who don't know any better are accepting it.

Most of our contemporary scientists are atheists. They are refusing to allow any sort of divinity to get a foot in the door. They are trying to peddle theories without considering the God of the Bible at all. It is interesting that when scientific research started with Newton, Galileo, Pasteur, and those of the same era, they were Christian believers who sought to find out more about God's creation.

 

[usexpat97]

String theory is freaky. Due to what they believe is a unified field, what effects one particle in particular can effect another particle on the other side of the Universe instantaneously, as though there is no space between them at all.

Which, if true, means that faster-than-light communication is indeed possible. And if we're going to travel to Mars, that very much matters.