The Search For Truth

[nPeace]

the singularity is not the beginning, particularly in the boundless universe or a cyclic universe.


No as above the universe DOES NOT HAVE a beginning nor a boundary

The universe beginning as a singularity DOES NOT HAVE a beginning?

General vague knowledge is not significant. Not a question of contemporary science., or science in general.

The Bible is not a science text book, so your statement is irrelevant.
Besides that, what the Bible says about the earth, is significant, because at a time when people thought the earth rested on some object(s) the writer of Job knew what was only recently discovered to be a fact.

You don't seem able to explain why you don't think that it is significant, other than you just said it.

You have not responded to the time frame of the Bible, and the problem of Noah's flood, It is not what people say it is what the Bible says.

I didn't respond to the strawman, because it argues from the premise "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence"... which is false.

The mythical world of Genesis, the Pentateuch are not remotely in what we know of science. Your comments concerning 'water' and womb' of the earth is an example, of these contradictions in the Bible your dodging. Science knows basically where the water came from and it is not the 'womb' of the earth. Your failure to respond demonstrates you avoiding the facts of science and the Bible.

The reality of various hypotheses for the origin of water on earth, are in conflict with anyone who makes the assertion "Science knows basically where the water came from"

Origin of water on Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A New Hypothesis on the Origin of Water on Earth and Mars | Challenging Issues on Environment and Earth Science Vol. 3

The question regarding the origin of water on Earth is still to be answered scientifically and accurately

The Bible directly states the earth is the center of the universe and all heavenly bodies rotate around the earth.

You are the one directly stating that the earth is the center of the universe and all heavenly bodies rotate around the earth.
We are still waiting for you to show where you read it.
Since you are unable to do so, it is seen that you are directly stating what's in your mind. Not the Bible.

 

[nPeace]

The Bible says Creation and the Earth are between ~6.000 and maybe 10,000 years old at most, and that a flood covered the earth at the time of Noah. There is no evidence that this has any validity whatsoever, In fact, all the evidence is to the contrary.

The Bible also says the Earth is the center of the universe and all heavenly bodies rotate around the Earth.

No. This is what shunyadragon is saying. Nowhere in the Bible do we read this.

 

[nPeace]

Not talking about fossils here, we are talking about history. I didn’t bring up fossils, so I don’t know why you would.

plus. You cannot mixed fossils and archaeology together, certainly not in the timeline of Bible stories.

Archaeology is dating any physical objects (eg tools, weapons, pottery, minted coins, clay tablets, stone steles, etc) or places (eg buildings in a village or town, tombs, monuments (like ziggurat or pyramid), etc) made by humans. Tools made from iron, bronze and stone/flint can be dated to certain periods.

fossilisation cannot occur within the last 10,000 years. You won’t find any fossils less than 6000 years such as timeline of Adam to Jesus. Unfossiilized human remains, yes. Mummified remains, yes. But no human fossils of the past 6000 years.

you have absolutely no idea about fossils, the long processes that turn the sediments into rock. You are ignorant on the subject of paleontology, if you think fossils can exist in the bible.

you were the one who cited some passages from the bible in the OP, so talking about fossils in your reply, isn’t relevant, since you won’t any non-avian dinosaur fossils or fossils of any other animals, within 6000 years period.

You totally missed the point.
I suppose because you isolated something mentioned, as if it was a topic for discussion.

The Big Bang cosmology is the beginning of the universe as we know it, so far.

Meaning, it referred to evolution of the OBSERVABLE UNIVERSE, from the initial expansion plus inflation that cool down the universe, that

• separates the four fundamental forces or interactions (symmetry breakings),
• that allow for formation of elementary particles (eg quarks, leptons, bosons) from the universe’s plasma state,
• followed by formation of earliest atomic matters (eg hydrogen, deuterium, helium, lithium) via Big Bang Nucleosynthesis & Recombination epoch (electrically neutral atoms, the decoupling of photons, the residual energy of last scattering (which you would be familiar with CMBR) & transparent universe,
• and eventually leading to the formations of large structures (eg molecular clouds, stars, galaxies, planets, etc)…
• …the universe as we know it, the OBSERVABLE UNIVERSE.

The Big Bang theory actually don’t say much about anything beyond the initial expansion of the universe, only to say that the universe as a singularity was infinitely hot and dense.

This singularity contains all the universe’s energies and spacetime. The Big Bang theory explained the expansion (& inflationary state) of those energies & spacetime, as what I have already listed in bullet-points.

if you are interested in the boundless universe, then you would need to explore the highly theoretical models, such as the Cyclical Universe models (sometimes known as the Big Bounce), or one of the variants of Multiverse models.

So, the universe began about 13 billion years ago, according to current understanding.

 

[shunyadragon]

You totally missed the point.
I suppose because you isolated something mentioned, as if it was a topic for discussion.


So, the universe began about 13 billion years ago, according to current understanding.

No

 

[shunyadragon]

You totally missed the point.
I suppose because you isolated something mentioned, as if it was a topic for discussion.


So, the universe began about 13 billion years ago, according to current understanding.

This is a bit misleading the expansion theories never specifically support a beginning to the universe. es, it is likely that time and space began at one time unless the universe is cyclic, The universe likely existed as a singularity.

Fundamentalists misuse this concept to justify the Biblical view that God Created our physical existence from absolute nothing at some point in the past.

 

[gnostic]

You totally missed the point.
I suppose because you isolated something mentioned, as if it was a topic for discussion.


So, the universe began about 13 billion years ago, according to current understanding.

The Big Bang theory is the starting point of the OBSERVABLE UNIVERSE…before the formation of recognisable elementary particles.

Look up “Observable Universe”.

The Universe didn’t form from “nothing”.

The Universe as a singularity is another matter. Singularity isn’t “nothing”.

 

[nPeace]

This is a bit misleading the expansion theories never specifically support a beginning to the universe. es, it is likely that time and space began at one time unless the universe is cyclic, The universe likely existed as a singularity.

Fundamentalists misuse this concept to justify the Biblical view that God Created our physical existence from absolute nothing at some point in the past.

You used the word likely, twice. You don't seem sure.
Neither do those promoting the multiverse idea. Our Universe Was Born in a Black Hole

However, why are you talking about expansion.
What expanded... the singularity? What's the singularity? Did that begin?

In any case, there was a beginning.
The Origins of the Universe: Black holes

In some ways, you can think of the universe as a black hole turned inside out. A black hole is a singularity into which material flows. The universe is a singularity out of which material has flowed.

What is the Big Bang singularity?
The Big Bang theory, which assumes general relativity to be true, is the modern cosmological model of the history of the universe. It also contains a singularity. In the distant past, about 13.77 billion years ago, according to the Big Bang theory, the entire universe was compressed into an infinitely tiny point.

Physicists know that this conclusion is incorrect. Though the Big Bang theory is enormously successful at describing the history of the cosmos since that moment, just as with black holes, the presence of the singularity is telling scientists that the theory — again, GR — is incomplete, and needs to be updated.

One possible resolution to the Big Bang singularity is causal set theory. Under causal set theory, space-time is not a smooth continuum, as it is in GR, but rather made up of discrete chunks, named "space-time atoms." Since nothing can be smaller than one of these "atoms", singularities are impossible, Bruno Bento, a physicist studying this topic at the University of Liverpool in England, told Live Science.

The most well-understood black holes are created when a massive star reaches the end of its life and implodes, collapsing in on itself.

How did the universe begin? And how do we know that the universe had a beginning in the first place?

The beginning of the universe has been debated by philosophers and theologians since the beginning of recorded history. But there’s no more need to continue the debates on the subject. We now know that the universe had a beginning.

Without further ado, here is a simple explanation of how our universe began.

 

[nPeace]

The Big Bang theory is the starting point of the OBSERVABLE UNIVERSE…before the formation of recognisable elementary particles.

Look up “Observable Universe”.

The Universe didn’t form from “nothing”.

The Universe as a singularity is another matter. Singularity isn’t “nothing”.

I don't believe the universe was created from nothing. Nothing from nothing is still nothing.

 

[gnostic]

I don't believe the universe was created from nothing. Nothing from nothing is still nothing.

nor do the Big Bang cosmologists. The Big Bang theory described singularity, not nothingness...

...but, it doesn’t describe the singularity being “God”, “Creator” or “Designer“ superstition nonsense, which is where I’m assuming, you are going with. If my assumption is wrong, then I’ll apologise, but if I am correct with my assumption about what you are thinking of, then you’ll get no apology.

Getting back to the singularity…

The current models of the Big Bang theory (eg the Inflationary model (early 1980s) & the ΛCDM (Lambda-CDM model, late 1990s)), implement Quantum Field Theory (QFT) into the traditional Big Bang models (1920s (eg Hubble’s law, Redshift), and the 1948 model (eg the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, the Hot Big Bang model)).

Anyway, the Singularity isn’t nothingness.

The singularity is where General Relativity breaks down, so the solution to the singularity might be explained, through quantum field theory.

I don’t know how much you know about Quantum Field Theory, but i will give you some hints: quantum fields, vacuum energy, quantum fluctuations.

look them up, especially in connection to the singularity. Unless someone else can explain these concepts to you, I would suggest that you look them up, as they are more complicated for me to explain them to you.

 

[shunyadragon]

No. This is what shunyadragon is saying. Nowhere in the Bible do we read this.

Not me the Bible.

Throughout the Bible geocentrism is the theme like the beliefs of culture at the time the text was written, but some references are more specific.

Psalm 93:1 -1 The Lord reigneth, he is aclothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.'

Psalm 104:5 1 The Lord reigneth, he is aclothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.

1 Chronicles 16:30 - tremble before him, all the earth; yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved. 30 Let all the earth tremble before him. The world stands firm and cannot be shaken. 30 God is serious business, take him seriously; he's put the earth in place and it's not moving.

Yes, the Earth is fixed in the heavens, and as observed at the time the Sun and celestial objects move around the earth. In one instant the Sun and Moon are commanded to stand still in the sky.

 

[shunyadragon]

You used the word likely, twice. You don't seem sure.
Neither do those promoting the multiverse idea. Our Universe Was Born in a Black Hole

However, why are you talking about expansion.
What expanded... the singularity? What's the singularity? Did that begin?

In any case, there was a beginning.
The Origins of the Universe: Black holes

In some ways, you can think of the universe as a black hole turned inside out. A black hole is a singularity into which material flows. The universe is a singularity out of which material has flowed.

What is the Big Bang singularity?
The Big Bang theory, which assumes general relativity to be true, is the modern cosmological model of the history of the universe. It also contains a singularity. In the distant past, about 13.77 billion years ago, according to the Big Bang theory, the entire universe was compressed into an infinitely tiny point.

Physicists know that this conclusion is incorrect. Though the Big Bang theory is enormously successful at describing the history of the cosmos since that moment, just as with black holes, the presence of the singularity is telling scientists that the theory — again, GR — is incomplete, and needs to be updated.

One possible resolution to the Big Bang singularity is causal set theory. Under causal set theory, space-time is not a smooth continuum, as it is in GR, but rather made up of discrete chunks, named "space-time atoms." Since nothing can be smaller than one of these "atoms", singularities are impossible, Bruno Bento, a physicist studying this topic at the University of Liverpool in England, told Live Science.

The most well-understood black holes are created when a massive star reaches the end of its life and implodes, collapsing in on itself.

How did the universe begin? And how do we know that the universe had a beginning in the first place?

The beginning of the universe has been debated by philosophers and theologians since the beginning of recorded history. But there’s no more need to continue the debates on the subject. We now know that the universe had a beginning.

Without further ado, here is a simple explanation of how our universe began.

Compare the universe to the life cycle of a butterfly. The butterfly leaving the cocoon is not the beginning of the butterfly.

I do not like the term Bib Bang, First, there was no Bang, second, it is the expansion of the universe that we directly observe. We do not observe any beginning. The singularity would form as a black hole does from preexisting matter or possibly simply cyclic..

 

[nPeace]

nor do the Big Bang cosmologists. The Big Bang theory described singularity, not nothingness...

...but, it doesn’t describe the singularity being “God”, “Creator” or “Designer“ superstition nonsense, which is where I’m assuming, you are going with. If my assumption is wrong, then I’ll apologise, but if I am correct with my assumption about what you are thinking of, then you’ll get no apology.

Getting back to the singularity…

The current models of the Big Bang theory (eg the Inflationary model (early 1980s) & the ΛCDM (Lambda-CDM model, late 1990s)), implement Quantum Field Theory (QFT) into the traditional Big Bang models (1920s (eg Hubble’s law, Redshift), and the 1948 model (eg the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, the Hot Big Bang model)).

Anyway, the Singularity isn’t nothingness.

The singularity is where General Relativity breaks down, so the solution to the singularity might be explained, through quantum field theory.

I don’t know how much you know about Quantum Field Theory, but i will give you some hints: quantum fields, vacuum energy, quantum fluctuations.

look them up, especially in connection to the singularity. Unless someone else can explain these concepts to you, I would suggest that you look them up, as they are more complicated for me to explain them to you.

Why would the cosmological model describe the singularity as being “God”, “Creator” or “Designer“? It's science... which doesn't do God, Ceator, Designer.
Neither does the Bible describe the singularity as being “God”, “Creator” or “Designer“. It's not a science book, and certainly isn't forming hypotheses about the origin of the universe.
Rather, the Bible informs us of the origin of the universe.

No matter how many hypotheses man creates, he will never be able to say, this is the truth about the origin of our universe... unless he actually sees a universe come into being, and assumes that's it.
He can say, yes, "Likely... blah blah blah, but we don't know. We believe."

 

[shunyadragon]

Why would the cosmological model describe the singularity as being “God”, “Creator” or “Designer“? It's science... which doesn't do God, Creator, Designer.
Neither does the Bible describe the singularity as being “God”, “Creator” or “Designer“. It's not a science book and certainly isn't forming hypotheses about the origin of the universe.

The cosmological model does not make any of the bizarre ridiculous assumptions above

Rather, the Bible informs us of the origin of the universe.

No matter how many hypotheses man creates, he will never be able to say, this is the truth about the origin of our universe... unless he actually sees a universe come into being, and assumes that's it.
He can say, yes, "Likely... blah blah blah, but we don't know. We believe."

Humans do not create hypotheses.

If I see God Create a universe "yes, Likely... blah blah blah, but we don't know. "

Come down to earth with coherent dialogue the above is ridiculous beyond belief.

 

[nPeace]

Not me the Bible.

Throughout the Bible geocentrism is the theme like the beliefs of culture at the time the text was written, but some references are more specific.

Psalm 93:1 -1 The Lord reigneth, he is aclothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.'

Psalm 104:5 1 The Lord reigneth, he is aclothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.

1 Chronicles 16:30 - tremble before him, all the earth; yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved. 30 Let all the earth tremble before him. The world stands firm and cannot be shaken. 30 God is serious business, take him seriously; he's put the earth in place and it's not moving.

Yes, the Earth is fixed in the heavens, and as observed at the time the Sun and celestial objects move around the earth. In one instant the Sun and Moon are commanded to stand still in the sky.

Several verses say that.
it shall not be shaken / made to totter.
mot מוֹט - to totter, shake, slip
It's not referring to movement of earth, but rather refers to it being fixed forever - its durability.
This can be seen when you read the context.

(1 Chronicles 16:30) . . .The earth is firmly established. . .

(Psalm 93:1) . . .The earth is firmly established;. . .
(Psalm 93:2) . . .Your throne was firmly established long ago; From eternity you have existed.

 

[nPeace]

The cosmological model does not make any of the bizarre ridiculous assumptions above

What assumptions? You didn't take your time reading, did you.

Humans do not create hypotheses.

Form; create; Yes they do.

If I see God Create a universe "yes, Likely... blah blah blah, but we don't know. "

Come down to earth with coherent dialogue the above is ridiculous beyond belief.

When one does not take time to read, they write things like this.

 

[nPeace]

Compare the universe to the life cycle of a butterfly. The butterfly leaving the cocoon is not the beginning of the butterfly.

I do not like the term Bib Bang, First, there was no Bang, second, it is the expansion of the universe that we directly observe. We do not observe any beginning. The singularity would form as a black hole does from preexisting matter or possibly simply cyclic..

Okay. The butterfly still dies. It doesn't become a caterpillar.

 

[shunyadragon]

Okay. The butterfly still dies. It doesn't become a caterpillar.

I only gave the example as the relationship between the singularity and the universe. Yi still beed to respond to the whole post.

While you're at it respond to #90

 

[gnostic]

Rather, the Bible informs us of the origin of the universe.

The Bible don’t inform anything about the universe (as it had no concept of the universe as we know it now), and certainly not of the origin. The Genesis only talk of the origin of Earth, but there are no explanations as to the mechanism of the origin.

The biblical/Genesis origin, only say that the Earth had beginning and that God did it. That’s just superstitious beliefs, it is not explanations to the mechanism of the Earth’s origin.

Genesis 1;2 also say that it had watery beginning, but not only that’s wrong, it doesn’t explain where the water come from.

It say, that divided the water above from the water below (sea), and between these two waters is a “dome” or “vault” or “expanse” or the “firmament”, that call the “SKY”, hence the “dome of the sky” (Genesis 1:6-8):

Genesis 1:6-8 6 And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so. 8 God called the dome Sky.

And that later it say (on the 4th day) the sun, moon and stars existed in that “dome” or sky that existed between the 2 waters (Genesis 1:14-17):

Genesis 1:14-17 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars.17 God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth

It is ridiculous to think that there are water above the sun, moon and stars. There are no waters above the sun, moon and stars.

Then it say that birds fly in the same dome of the sky as where god set the sun, moon and stars (Genesis 1:20):

Genesis 1:20 20 And God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.”

There are no ways for the birds to fly in this same “dome of the sky” as the sun, moon and stars.

Genesis Creation really don’t know anything about the Earth and about astronomy.

No such water exist above the sun, moon and stars.

Genesis often no explanations whatsoever, and whatever descriptions the Genesis do supply are usually wrong, especially those 3 passages I had quoted.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I don't believe the universe was created from nothing. Nothing from nothing is still nothing.

You don't believe God created the universe from nothing?

 

[viole]

It's worth considering then, if the Bible does have an answer on the origin of water.
Surprisingly, it does .
Job 38:
8 And who barricaded the sea behind doors
When it burst out from the womb [No. It's not the womb of a woman],

My ancestors (vikings) also had a beautiful explanation for lightnings a few centuries ago, when nobody had a clue. That they have been caused by Thor. When He was sort of pissed. The same with thunders, as the name suggests.

ergo, having an explanation, entails that the explanation is true. And reliably so. Or at least gives a lot of credibility to the explainer, Thor, in this case. Correct?

if not, what was wrong with my ancestors’ thinking?

ciao

- viole