Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
"Its gravitational field is so powerful it doesn't only warp and distort light but also time," he explained. Time, thus, doesn't exist in the black hole.
Using this as the final key to revealing how the universe created itself, Hawking explained that if you travel back in time toward the moment of the big bang, the universe gets smaller until it comes to a point where the whole universe is in a space so small that it is "in effect a single infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense black hole."
He concluded, "You can't get to a time before the big bang because there was no before the big bang. We have finally found something that doesn't have a cause because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me, this means there is no possibility of a Creator because there is no time for a Creator to have existed."
http://www.christianpost.com/news/s...othing-is-possible-53589/#IYHCAKMALsRUP6Dm.99
Big Bang cosmology doesn't require a first cause to the universe:
Big Bang cosmology doesn't require a first cause to the universe:
Furthermore, it's special pleading to claim that the universe required a cause that was itself uncaused.
One objection to the argument is that it leaves open the question of why the First Cause is unique in that it does not require any causes. Proponents argue that the First Cause is exempt from having a cause, while opponents argue that this is special pleading or otherwise untrue...
The Big Bang theory states that it is the point in which all dimensions came into existence, the start of both space and time.[31] Then, the question "What was there before the Universe?" makes no sense; the concept of "before" becomes meaningless when considering a situation without time.[31] This has been put forward by J. Richard Gott III, James E. Gunn, David N. Schramm, and Beatrice Tinsley, who said that asking what occurred before the Big Bang is like asking what is north of the North Pole.[31]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument#Objections_and_counterarguments
It's like you guys didn't even read the original post. Here is more:
Big Bang cosmology doesn't require a first cause to the universe:
Furthermore, it's special pleading to claim that the universe required a cause that was itself uncaused.
I will repeat what I said before. Why, if the question is meaningless, do we have atheist scientists indulging in unverifiable speculations, such as the big bang being the result of two branes colliding? Answer: Because they want an explanation which doesn't involve God, no matter how far outside the proper remit of science that takes them.
Yeah, same thing with lightening. Lots of people believed Zeus sent it, but those crazy scientists just HAD to find an explanation that didn't involve Zeus, no matter how far outside the proper remit of science it took them. Those zany guys!
BTW, what's the proper remit of science?
Big Bang cosmology doesn't require a first cause to the universe:
It still has nothing to do with scientists looking for any explanation that avoids God, as you asserted. That makes no sense, many scientists are Christian, so why would they avoid God? It looks like you're upset God is going to be removed from one more Gap.The proper limit of science is formulating FALSIFIABLE hypotheses about the physical world, and then testing them. Speculation about what caused the big bang is not science, but pure metaphysics, and it doesn't stop being metaphysics if you dress it up in "scientific" language.
It still has nothing to do with scientists looking for any explanation that avoids God, as you asserted. That makes no sense, many scientists are Christian, so why would they avoid God? You're just upset that it looks like God is going to be removed from one more Gap.
You are factually wrong. Theist scientists have speculated on how the big bang started without including God."..... many scientists are Christian"
That is why I said specifically atheist scientists. You do not hear that kind of speculation coming from the mouths of (say) John Polkinghorne or John D Barrow.
You are factually wrong. Theist scientists have speculated on how the big bang started without including God.
We conclude [wrongly] that if religion does indeed deal with objective truths, it ought to adopt the same criteria of truth as science. But I myself find the division of the world into an objective and subjective side much too arbitrary. The fact that religions through the ages have spoken in images, parables and paradoxes means simply that there are no other ways of grasping the reality to which they refer.
(Niels Bohr)
Big Bang cosmology doesn't require a first cause to the universe:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?