Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Aaaand there we have it. The correct answer is right here. So many people have misconceptions about the Big Bang, formation of the Earth, abiogenesis, evolution, etc.
Which, by the way people, are all different theories, and with the exception of abiogenesis, all proven theories.
Proven: What we think we know up to this point, but may find out later is completely wrong, at which time we will modify it and say we have "the latest research" to tell you about, which may be wrong too.......
I do believe the Big Bang has the ultimate evidence to support it...since Monsignor Georges Lemaitre got the hypothesis for his theory from the Bible, and researched it from there. It's always best to consult God when trying to figure out things relative to universe creation...since He did it.
Proven: What we think we know up to this point, but may find out later is completely wrong, at which time we will modify it and say we have "the latest research" to tell you about, which may be wrong too.......
Congrats. YOu just basically summarized science.
Quote:
I do believe the Big Bang has the ultimate evidence to support it...since Monsignor Georges Lemaitre got the hypothesis for his theory from the Bible, and researched it from there. It's always best to consult God when trying to figure out things relative to universe creation...since He did it.
When conducting research on natural forces, I tend to leave supernatural forces out of the equation.
ive recently become intreeged by the big bang theory, could it possibly be something, out of nothing, like god created? or is it a bunch of crap. big bang theorist say there was some rpe existing energy that concentrted and exploded, but how would there be energy? and if it created gases, why would they form planets and not fly off into the "newly formed" universe, id like to here some other peoples opinions on this thing, maybe educate me a bit more
Claim CE420:
The theory of a big bang has been shaken with unresolvable inconsistencies, such as an unexpectedly uneven distribution of matter in the universe and a need for dark matter. Several astronomers think it is no longer a valid theory. Source:
Gitt, Werner. 1998. What about the big bang? Creation 20(3): 42-44. What about the big bang? Response:
The big bang is supported by a great deal of evidence:
Einstein's general theory of relativity implies that the universe cannot be static; it must be either expanding or contracting.
The more distant a galaxy is, the faster it is receding from us (the Hubble law). This indicates that the universe is expanding. An expanding universe implies that the universe was small and compact in the distant past.
The big bang model predicts that cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation should appear in all directions, with a blackbody spectrum and temperature about 3 degrees K. We observe an exact blackbody spectrum with a temperature of 2.73 degrees K.
The CMB is even to about one part in 100,000. There should be a slight unevenness to account for the uneven distribution of matter in the universe today. Such unevenness is observed, and at a predicted amount.
The big bang predicts the observed abundances of primordial hydrogen, deuterium, helium, and lithium. No other models have been able to do so.
The big bang predicts that the universe changes through time. Because the speed of light is finite, looking at large distances allows us to look into the past. We see, among other changes, that quasars were more common and stars were bluer when the universe was younger.
Note that most of these points are not simply observations that fit with the theory; the big bang theory predicted them.
Inconsistencies are not necessarily unresolvable. The clumpiness of the universe, for example, was resolved by finding unevenness in the CMB. Dark matter has been observed in the effects it has on star and galaxy motions; we simply do not know what it is yet.
There are still unresolved observations. For example, we do not understand why the expansion of the universe seems to be speeding up. However, the big bang has enough supporting evidence behind it that it is likely that new discoveries will add to it, not overthrow it. For example, inflationary universe theory proposes that the size of the universe increased exponentially when the universe was a fraction of a second old (Guth 1997). It was proposed to explain why the big bang did not create large numbers of magnetic monopoles. It also accounts for the observed flatness of space, and it predicted quantitatively the pattern of unevenness of the CMB. Inflationary theory is a significant addition to big bang theory, but it is an extension of big bang theory, not a replacement.
Links:
Feuerbacher, Björn and Ryan Scranton. 2006. Evidence for the Big Bang. Evidence for the Big BangReferences:
Guth, Alan H., 1997. (see below).
Further Reading:
Ferris, Timothy. 1997. The Whole Shebang. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Guth, Alan H. 1997. The Inflationary Universe. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Harrison, E. R. 2000. Cosmology: The science of the universe. Cambridge University Press.
Quote:
Originally Posted by debbee
I really like Fred Hoyle's analogy which he calls the "junkyard mentality" the question asked is what are the chances that a tornado might blow through a junkyard containing all the parts of a 747, accidentally assemble them into a plane, and leave it ready for take-off? He states the possiblities are so small as to be negligible even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole universe. He wrote a very impressive book "The Intelligent Universe," in which he concludes, "as biochemists discover more and more about the awesome complexity of life, it is apparent that it's chances of originating by accident are so minute that they can be completly ruled out. Life cannot have come about by chance or explosion."
Claim CF002.1:
Order does not spontaneously form from disorder. A tornado passing through a junkyard would never assemble a 747. Source:
Hoyle, Fred, 1983. The Intelligent Universe. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 18-19. Response:
This claim is irrelevant to the theory of evolution itself, since evolution does not occur via assembly from individual parts, but rather via selective gradual modifications to existing structures. Order can and does result from such evolutionary processes.
Hoyle applied his analogy to abiogenesis, where it is more applicable. However, the general principle behind it is wrong. Order arises spontaneously from disorder all the time. The tornado itself is an example of order arising spontaneously. Something as complicated as people would not arise spontaneously from raw chemicals, but there is no reason to believe that something as simple as a self-replicating molecule could not form thus. From there, evolution can produce more and more complexity.
Funny how people think an explosion is random. Actually its simply atoms and molecules rearranging themselves and in so doing expanding and usually emitting light and other forms of energy.
(snip)
And as far as things arranging themselves into a structured order from apparent (notice the word apparent) chaos. Lets take a simple example. Get some hot water , dissolve a bunch of salt into it and mix it up good.
Wow, We now have a bunch of swirling salty water. (our universe) As it cools the salt will (and by no higher being or intelligence) start to organize itself and form salt crystals. A very well organized at the molecular scale and also looks like a perfect cube.
The universe and life doesn’t need a supreme being to be orderly .
And that’s how I see the universe with no problem of who created what.
Cheers
Aeroman
As is well covered in later posts here, Evolution as well as it's predecessor, the Big Bang, are all the logical consequences of the interaction of the elements of the universe. These are accounted for by the observable laws of molecular interaction, gravitation (which even stumped even the godless Einstein) and other possibly as-yet undefined mechanisms. So what? Be patient, or accept that we may never know for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigthirsty
Dumb question Alert From bigthirsty..
If the Universe continues to expand.. what is it expanding into.. is it just taking up nothing..
We may never know. That doesn't even begin imply a God though. Unless you need it to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ian6479
The typical arguments that try to discredit the big bang theory or evolution or any scientific explanation of nature usually involve the 747 being constructed out of scraps in a junkyard. This argument has been washed away in countless texts and really isn't worth the mention.
Yes; the organized construction and assembly of, let's say, 747s out of magnesium forgings and Huck-Boltâ„¢ fasteners..
...are all a construct of man's engineering creativity and efforts, in an effort to advance our own quality of existence. But that's not necessary for two molecules of DNA to interact because of known and measurable interactions and attractions.
The creative mentality that created those Huck-Boltsâ„¢ is, quite simply, a direct by-product and logical consequence of our molecularly-defined intelligence. Though science, we keep searching for better answers. As well as for our origins. And it's paying off, frankly. No more giant turtles under a flat earth. No more "gods" necessary.
The gross level of mis-understanding or stunning lack of any related education in the promoters of such blatant mis-information and straw arguments is amazing! Of course, for those who want to hear such stuff, it must be a godsend, huh?
All guesses , face it no one knows , i would like to think it was god but then that just creates more questions like where did god come from , all im saying is how did something come from nothing if space started as nothingness ? How does a big bang happen from emptiness ?
This is such and interesting discussion. I do believe that God created the Big Bang. We will never understand how God was created because God just is. God has always existed.
All guesses , face it no one knows , i would like to think it was god but then that just creates more questions like where did god come from , all im saying is how did something come from nothing if space started as nothingness ? How does a big bang happen from emptiness ?
You seem to have misconceptions about the origins of the universe. Creationists have proliferated the creation ex nihilo belief so that many people believe the universe came out of nothing, although the truth is that we don't know.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Straw; lots of straw!
