• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What caused the Big Bang?

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It is not what scientist think, it was what they can prove. Your argument doesn't prove the universe is eternal. Anyone can select a bunch of phenomena form the universe and say it proves infinity. It is BS. How does the disintegration of matter and energy as per laws of entropy relate to infinite? How does laws of physics related to infinity?



Your argument doesn't prove the universe is eternal. Anyone can select a bunch of phenomena form the universe and say it proves infinity. It is BS. How does the disintegration of matter and energy as per laws of entropy relate to infinite? How does laws of physics related to infinity? They prove nothing about it. You have no argument for infinity. It is amusing how you string a lot of unrelated things together and say, there is INFINITY.

I presented evidence for the universe being finite and you ignored it. The disintegration of matter and energy as per laws of entropy prove the universe is not infinite. And you can't make a logical argument by throwing it all together and saying, look there, it is infinite.

Here is an example of one of your many false statements. "and that all current formulations of quantum gravity predicts the existence of physical reality and time before the Big Bang."
There is no evidence for "the existence of physical reality and time before the Big Bang."
What disintegration of matter? Matter-energy is conserved by the laws of physics. There is no disintegration of matter.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Siti suggested a thread about the big bang. Can science ever explain it, or did God do it?

Here is my explanation. Because science cannot explain how the universe came from nothing, God is the only possible explanation. God doesn't use physical laws and a scientific laboratory to create, He uses his holy will.

What do you think?
That you are just being silly. That is the very definition of the God of the Gaps logical fallacy (argument from ignorance).
 

Repox

Truth Seeker
What disintegration of matter? Matter-energy is conserved by the laws of physics. There is no disintegration of matter.
Evidently, you don't know about laws of entropy
What disintegration of matter? Matter-energy is conserved by the laws of physics. There is no disintegration of matter.

The second law - The level of disorder in the universe is steadily increasing. Systems tend to move from ordered behavior to more random behavior.

One implication of the second law is that heat flows spontaneously from a hotter region to a cooler region, but will not flow spontaneously the other way. This applies to anything that flows: it will naturally flow downhill rather than uphill.

http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py105/Secondlaw.html

The level of disorder in the universe is steadily increasing. Systems tend to move from ordered behavior to more random behavior.

The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes. It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. Matter-energy continues on a irreversible trajectory which is finite, not infinite.

The implications are, as I mentioned, disintegration, or if you will, disorder of matter-energy which steadily increases. It is not reversible, the implications for the universe are finite processes, not infinite.
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Evidently, you don't know about laws of entropy

You should read about it.

The second law - The level of disorder in the universe is steadily increasing. Systems tend to move from ordered behavior to more random behavior.

One implication of the second law is that heat flows spontaneously from a hotter region to a cooler region, but will not flow spontaneously the other way. This applies to anything that flows: it will naturally flow downhill rather than uphill.

http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py105/Secondlaw.html

The implications are, as I mentioned, disintegration, or if you will, disorder of matter-energy which steadily increases. It is not reversible, the implications for the universe is not infinity.
I am well aware of the second law. It does not apply to the extremely high density realms near the Big Bang. (for more technical audience:- its does apply but its consequence in such high energy density quantum mechanical realms is no longer the increase in breakdown of order and structure). Hence it poses no problems to the continuation of the universe to realms before the Big Bang. Obviously all the cosmological theories of the universe that push the universe back beyond the Big Bang are completely consistent with the 2nd law in the realms it is applicable.

Note:-
I have a PhD in the sciences and have specialization in thermal systems including the 2nd law as applied to many applications of physics and chemistry . In this case I do not need to rely on others to decide what is scientifically accurate and what is B.S.
 

siti

Well-Known Member
Evidently, you don't know about laws of entropy


The second law - The level of disorder in the universe is steadily increasing. Systems tend to move from ordered behavior to more random behavior.

One implication of the second law is that heat flows spontaneously from a hotter region to a cooler region, but will not flow spontaneously the other way. This applies to anything that flows: it will naturally flow downhill rather than uphill.

http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py105/Secondlaw.html

The second law is concerned with the direction of natural processes. It asserts that a natural process runs only in one sense, and is not reversible. Matter-energy continues on a irreversible trajectory which is finite, not infinite.

The implications are, as I mentioned, disintegration, or if you will, disorder of matter-energy which steadily increases. It is not reversible, the implications for the universe are finite processes, not infinite.
Sorry - I'm not getting this at all, why does entropy and irreversibility imply (much less prove) finitude? There is no logical reason that matter-energy could not continue on the path of increasing entropy until it reaches perfect equilibrium and stasis and then remain in that unchangeable condition for ever. In fact, unless there is some other 'force' of nature that causes a 'rebound' it seems to me that this is precisely what science predicts - the cold 'death' of the cosmos - but all the matter/energy will be still be there - it will be just too spread out to 'do' anything - just as, in fact, the bits of matter-energy that I am made of will be when I die.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Sorry - I'm not getting this at all, why does entropy and irreversibility imply (much less prove) finitude? There is no logical reason that matter-energy could not continue on the path of increasing entropy until it reaches perfect equilibrium and stasis and then remain in that unchangeable condition for ever. In fact, unless there is some other 'force' of nature that causes a 'rebound' it seems to me that this is precisely what science predicts - the cold 'death' of the cosmos - but all the matter/energy will be still be there - it will be just too spread out to 'do' anything - just as, in fact, the bits of matter-energy that I am made of will be when I die.
Until another inflationary false vacuum is created inside the universe and swallows up this one in a flash...

(direct quote from Dr. Vilenkin when I attended one of his talks :D )
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Yikes! Did he say when?
He came to our college for an invited talk in the physics department. Probably Dr Linde invited him. There was a big turnout. I was at that time a part of a muti-faith student group discussing various aspects of sciences and religions. It included several physics graduates and they alerted us to his lecture . So we went...was an excellent talk, I took 20 pages of notes. Need to find them. :)
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Yikes! Did he say when?
Ok , got the notes.

1) Our universe has a small positive energy vaccum (the cosmological constant is positive).
2) Vacuum energy has multiple quantum levels (just like levels of energy of electron orbits in atoms)
3) There exists (according to the inflation math) a negative energy level vaccum just below our vaccum and there is a small but positive probability of spontaneous transition of a small part of space in our universe into that level. It may take a trillion years, but it will happen.
4) Once formed, it will rapidly expand and engulf our universe, creating a new "Big Bang" at that level of vacuum energy while destroying our own.
5) Ad infinity....
 

siti

Well-Known Member
It may take a trillion years
Phew! That's a relief - I thought it might be imminent :relieved:

there is a small but positive probability of spontaneous transition of a small part of space in our universe into that level...Once formed, it will rapidly expand and engulf our universe, creating a new "Big Bang" at that level of vacuum energy while destroying our own.
Now that is interesting - do you suppose it is possible that a sufficiently advanced intelligence would be able to initiate such a transition rather than simply waiting for it to happen? Are there preferred parameters or circumstances under which such a transition would favor the evolution of a 'biophilic' or, dare I suggest, anthropic universe? (I know this line of question is more SF than science, but its fun to speculate - even wildly - as long as one knows that's what one is doing)
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Phew! That's a relief - I thought it might be imminent :relieved:

Now that is interesting - do you suppose it is possible that a sufficiently advanced intelligence would be able to initiate such a transition rather than simply waiting for it to happen? Are there preferred parameters or circumstances under which such a transition would favor the evolution of a 'biophilic' or, dare I suggest, anthropic universe? (I know this line of question is more SF than science, but its fun to speculate - even wildly - as long as one knows that's what one is doing)
I have no idea frankly. Good SF book possible though...
 

Repox

Truth Seeker
I am well aware of the second law. It does not apply to the extremely high density realms near the Big Bang. (for more technical audience:- its does apply but its consequence in such high energy density quantum mechanical realms is no longer the increase in breakdown of order and structure). Hence it poses no problems to the continuation of the universe to realms before the Big Bang. Obviously all the cosmological theories of the universe that push the universe back beyond the Big Bang are completely consistent with the 2nd law in the realms it is applicable.

Note:-
I have a PhD in the sciences and have specialization in thermal systems including the 2nd law as applied to many applications of physics and chemistry . In this case I do not need to rely on others to decide what is scientifically accurate and what is B.S.

I have a PhD in a social science discipline. I admit to not having your level of expertise. Nevertheless, I don't accept natural cause explanations for the universe being infinite. I have not found a science argument that closes all the loop holes. If you study such a theory long enough you will find deficiencies. No use discussing it further, it leads to a log jams. I have had some supernatural experiences which have informed about the nature of eternity. God and heaven is an entirely different reality, it does not resemble our dark, hostile universe. God created the universe as a prison for Satan. Knowing eternity can be a spark of bright white substance, I find no such matching entity in our universe. If the universe was infinity or eternal it would be heaven. I understand the nature of science is to constantly seek solutions. However, some things are impossible. You cannot create a condition, state of existence, or material substance, which is eternal, neither can you find it in the universe. No matter how advance the math, or the theory, it can never, and will never, be done. Only God is eternal.

The world "eternity" has been abused. I've heard Christians say, I will have eternal life in heaven. Not even angels have eternal lives, they had beginnings. You may say you will be immortal, which is partly correct. Immortality may be a condition for a creature's existence, but creatures always have a beginning. Only heavenly creatures live without an end. In heaven you may enjoy God's eternity, but only God is eternal. I think one reason for people getting it mixed up is arrogance. For some reason, they believe they are entitled to have god-like status. No matter how advanced or sophistical a theory, or the math, given an opportunity and enough time, I can critique it. I have an advantage, I know for certain God exists, and I know for certain heaven exists. In many ways, the universe is the anti-thesis to heaven, it is Satan's finite prison. God did not intend to put Satan in a prison without an end. Based on Satan's transgressions, God is generous to allow him so much time.
 
Last edited:

siti

Well-Known Member
If the universe was infinity or eternal it would be heaven.
Well that's precisely where the idea of "heaven" came from - men looked at the seemingly "fixed" stars - that were still there generations after their ancestors who first noted their trajectories (across our sky) and "fixed" relative positions (in relation to one another) had passed off the scene. "Down here" was all change and decay and death - "up there" was always reliable and seemingly immortal. Heaven = eternally unchanging and reliable, earth = temporary, fickle and unreliable. Except that it isn't. "Death" is the only certainty for galaxies as much as it is for people and the cycle of renovation and destruction is probably, as far as anyone can possibly tell, endless.
 

Repox

Truth Seeker
Well that's precisely where the idea of "heaven" came from - men looked at the seemingly "fixed" stars - that were still there generations after their ancestors who first noted their trajectories (across our sky) and "fixed" relative positions (in relation to one another) had passed off the scene. "Down here" was all change and decay and death - "up there" was always reliable and seemingly immortal. Heaven = eternally unchanging and reliable, earth = temporary, fickle and unreliable. Except that it isn't. "Death" is the only certainty for galaxies as much as it is for people and the cycle of renovation and destruction is probably, as far as anyone can possibly tell, endless.
It is also true, as mentioned in the Bible, that angels have come to earth. They are witnesses to God's eternal heaven. It is not like the earth or the universe. We find prophets revealing heavenly realms. In particular, read Ezekiel's stories about heaven and heavenly creatures. Compared to heaven, the universe is hell.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I have a PhD in a social science discipline. I admit to not having your level of expertise. Nevertheless, I don't accept natural cause explanations for the universe being infinite. I have not found a science argument that closes all the loop holes. If you study such a theory long enough you will find deficiencies. No use discussing it further, it leads to a log jams. I have had some supernatural experiences which have informed about the nature of eternity. God and heaven is an entirely different reality, it does not resemble our dark, hostile universe. God created the universe as a prison for Satan. Knowing eternity can be a spark of bright white substance, I find no such matching entity in our universe. If the universe was infinity or eternal it would be heaven. I understand the nature of science is to constantly seek solutions. However, some things are impossible. You cannot create a condition, state of existence, or material substance, which is eternal, neither can you find it in the universe. No matter how advance the math, or the theory, it can never, and will never, be done. Only God is eternal.

The world "eternity" has been abused. I've heard Christians say, I will have eternal life in heaven. Not even angels have eternal lives, they had beginnings. You may say you will be immortal, which is partly correct. Immortality may be a condition for a creature's existence, but creatures always have a beginning. Only heavenly creatures live without an end. In heaven you may enjoy God's eternity, but only God is eternal. I think one reason for people getting it mixed up is arrogance. For some reason, they believe they are entitled to have god-like status. No matter how advanced or sophistical a theory, or the math, given an opportunity and enough time, I can critique it. I have an advantage, I know for certain God exists, and I know for certain heaven exists. In many ways, the universe is the anti-thesis to heaven, it is Satan's finite prison. God did not intend to put Satan in a prison without an end. Based on Satan's transgressions, God is generous to allow him so much time.
Your beliefs are yours of course. Needless to say I do not share them. The sciences say what they say. Accepting or rejecting that is your choice, as is mine.
 

MrMrdevincamus

Voice Of The Martyrs Supporter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PARTIAL QUOTE>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There are no theistic implications. Even.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<PARTIAL QUOTE<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I thought I would clarify what I meant by 'theistic implications' beginning with the simple. Well simple in concept but if one is interested in delving into the more advanced constructs of inflationary theory and the like the mathematics can be frightening. Of course my mind is allergic to advanced mathematics, lol! So I only do the math if I don't trust the scientist or logician, or want to explore. In any case the lets look at the first fifty to seventy years of cosmology and astronomy etc. According to the scientific community the universe was 'static', or unchanging. Ok to be truthful we should go back to the 1600's and credit Newton for that wonderful claim! His 'Principia' described a static steady state universe that he claimed was infinite. Einstein also agreed with Newton, well at least until evidence emerged say otherwise decades later. Newton said a lot about our universe but what I am interested in was the falsehood of infinite 'dimensions' and no bigbangish' starting point. However God said let there be light and other things that agreed with the fact that the universe was CREATED or for the atheists here that are appalled by such words as 'created', we can say the universe 'began to exist'. There are more theistic implications but you get the idea? Thanks again for your reply ArtieE ~...
 

Repox

Truth Seeker
Your beliefs are yours of course. Needless to say I do not share them. The sciences say what they say. Accepting or rejecting that is your choice, as is mine.
Credentials don't count, it depends on the validity of the theory, and it should not be unfathomable. I continue to search, and I find no valid theory for infinity or eternity for the universe. Hypotheses must have evidence to validate the theory.
 

MrMrdevincamus

Voice Of The Martyrs Supporter
>>>>
Your beliefs are yours of course. Needless to say I do not share them. The sciences say what they say. Accepting or rejecting that is your choice, as is mine.

After reading some of your replies I would like to ask you a question (note this question is open to anyone). If you believe supernatural processes exist, do you think all or some are they what I call super-normal** processes or are they really (assuming you feel they are valid) a manipulation of physical law, or simply 'natural' processes(s) science does not yet understand or have the ability to detect? In other words is there a sharp delineation between the natural world and the 'supernatural' world and events or does the natural world blend into the 'supernatural'* world? To a certain extent my question almost answers itself! My personal beliefs are that there are true supernatural events and a supernatural realm that must be forever separated from the material world...maybe. I mean analogically speaking it could be like matter and anti-matter both are purely 'natural' (or material) processes and things but they can't touch etc. Again personally I think the reason God sends temporal messengers 99% of the time to bridge the gap between the natural and supernatural worlds instead of coming in person. Oh no offense I am speaking of the Christian God but most religions have a near identical deity. (and this is why I think one god is all Gods but that is material for another thread). Lastly that a atemporal God and spiritual realm exists is how God caused the big bang to bang when there was no temporal related causality before (I say outside time when describing 'events' 'before' the BB began, and hence its importance to my way of believing. Language oftentimes fail us, or at least is a weak point when speaking etc about the natural and the supernatural, the material and the immaterial just as it does in higher mathematics and science.

notes

* supernatural = events that exist outside the natural world
* super-normal = events that may appear supernatural but are actually operating
within the confines of natural law.

Kurt Godel the famous mathematician and creator of the incompleteness theorem said; "The more I think about language, the more it amazes me that people ever understand each other at all." Oh how true my virtual friend, RIP.....

250px-1925_kurt_gödel.png
 

MrMrdevincamus

Voice Of The Martyrs Supporter
To the forum

If the universe in the unimaginably distant future behaves as the 'forever expanding one universe Big Bang' model suggests and it dies a so called 'heat death' shouldn't spacetime itself be left ? I am speaking of the 'time' after the black holes have 'evaporated' and matter isn't anything but cold energy (if its warm enough for energy in some form to exist) and bits and pieces of matter, I wonder what will happen to photons that are massless (except for some circumstances) and other particles like neutrinos. Even with well established forever expanding BB theory (standard hot model the one universe version) the end game description is ever changing. What is the latest take on it? Its not too important to my faith or world view I am simply curious....thanks in advance ;
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
>>>>


After reading some of your replies I would like to ask you a question (note this question is open to anyone). If you believe supernatural processes exist, do you think all or some are they what I call super-normal** processes or are they really (assuming you feel they are valid) a manipulation of physical law, or simply 'natural' processes(s) science does not yet understand or have the ability to detect? In other words is there a sharp delineation between the natural world and the 'supernatural' world and events or does the natural world blend into the 'supernatural'* world? To a certain extent my question almost answers itself! My personal beliefs are that there are true supernatural events and a supernatural realm that must be forever separated from the material world...maybe. I mean analogically speaking it could be like matter and anti-matter both are purely 'natural' (or material) processes and things but they can't touch etc. Again personally I think the reason God sends temporal messengers 99% of the time to bridge the gap between the natural and supernatural worlds instead of coming in person. Oh no offense I am speaking of the Christian God but most religions have a near identical deity. (and this is why I think one god is all Gods but that is material for another thread). Lastly that a atemporal God and spiritual realm exists is how God caused the big bang to bang when there was no temporal related causality before (I say outside time when describing 'events' 'before' the BB began, and hence its importance to my way of believing. Language oftentimes fail us, or at least is a weak point when speaking etc about the natural and the supernatural, the material and the immaterial just as it does in higher mathematics and science.

notes

* supernatural = events that exist outside the natural world
* super-normal = events that may appear supernatural but are actually operating
within the confines of natural law.

Kurt Godel the famous mathematician and creator of the incompleteness theorem said; "The more I think about language, the more it amazes me that people ever understand each other at all." Oh how true my virtual friend, RIP.....

250px-1925_kurt_gödel.png

I personally do not believe supernatural processes exist. All processes are within nature and follow regularities associated with it. This does not mean that current science can access or properly investigate all such processes or that there may not exist processes that seem "super-weird" to us because our limited minds cannot cognize them properly. We are already facing difficulties regarding this "ability to grasp nature" problem with quantum mechanics, string theory etc. and I believe this is only going to get worse in the future. Does not mean any of it is super-natural.

Taking about religion. Hinduism and also (I suspect) Buddhism reject the possibility of supernatural processes. For Hinduism, all phenomenon and activity lie within the domain of Nature (Prakriti) and her guna-s (properties). Beings of greater knowledge (that's what incarnations are supposed to be, as well as any god) can manipulate this Nature to do things that seem miraculous to beings of lesser knowledge. Whether such beings exist or have ever interacted with the world is an empirical and historical question, but philosophically, this is the stance.
 
Top