God is not in the Big Bang

Pah · Aug 16, 2004

You can not create something from nothing and this has led to the religious theroy that the Big Bang must have been intitiated by God for something (the universe) was created from nothing (the state of matter/energy previous to the Big Bang) If a cause, other than God, was found that explained the Big Bang, then it would not be neccessary for God to exist.

Well, folks, we have proof in mathematical theroy that we know what was present previous to the Big Bang. Basically, it goes like this -

the universe we live in is not seem as particles but as strings
strings exist in 22 or 21 dimensions and fewer
strings are the component of membranes (shortened to "branes")
membranes encompass both 21 and 22 dimensions
M Theroy (membranes) have an infinite number of branes comprised of an infinite number of strings
when interaction is weak the string looks like a string
when the interaction is strong the strings "unwrap" into a membrane
membranes ripple (a wave motion) and the collision of two membranes created the Big Bang producing the pecularities of our universe by the circumstances of the ripples
an infinate number of collisions have taken place producing an infinite number of universes
each universe created by a collision is considered an alternate universe to ours
the science fiction "parallel" universe is confirmed by the M Therory.
the laws of physics may be different in each universe.

Not only does the creation story not reflect the actual galaxy we live in, it does not reflect the universe we live in except from an extrapolation from a melding of science and a mythological creation story. If the concept of God is to be kept, then it will be imposible to prove that there are not an infinite number of gods. Rather, it seems more and more likely that God will take a "back seat" to science and beneficial only for a mythological basis for human existence and conduct.

-pah-

Paraprakrti · Aug 16, 2004

pah said:
You can not create something from nothing and this has led to the religious theroy that the Big Bang must have been intitiated by God for something (the universe) was created from nothing (the state of matter/energy previous to the Big Bang) If a cause, other than God, was found that explained the Big Bang, then it would not be neccessary for God to exist.

Only if such a cause contained all the qualities of the concept known as "God" will it be necessary for "God" not to exist. But then, if such qualities are existing in this cause it would, by definition, be "God". The concept of God, more specifically, the supreme 'something' from which all things emanate, is an inescapable conclusion. You will find it one one form or another.

pah said:
Well, folks, we have proof in mathematical theroy that we know what was present previous to the Big Bang. Basically, it goes like this -

the universe we live in is not seem as particles but as strings

strings exist in 22 or 21 dimensions and fewer

strings are the component of membranes (shortened to "branes")

membranes encompass both 21 and 22 dimensions

M Theroy (membranes) have an infinite number of branes comprised of an infinite number of strings

when interaction is weak the string looks like a string

when the interaction is strong the strings "unwrap" into a membrane

membranes ripple (a wave motion) and the collision of two membranes created the Big Bang producing the pecularities of our universe by the circumstances of the ripples

an infinate number of collisions have taken place producing an infinite number of universes

each universe created by a collision is considered an alternate universe to ours

the science fiction "parallel" universe is confirmed by the M Therory.

the laws of physics may be different in each universe.

Not only does the creation story not reflect the actual galaxy we live in, it does not reflect the universe we live in except from an extrapolation from a melding of science and a mythological creation story. If the concept of God is to be kept, then it will be imposible to prove that there are not an infinite number of gods. Rather, it seems more and more likely that God will take a "back seat" to science and beneficial only for a mythological basis for human existence and conduct.

-pah-

God is simultaneously One and many. He is One God and infinite God. Just because He is one doesn't mean that He is limited, and just because He is many doesn't mean He is divided. God has already taken a "back seat" to modern science. But God is not so concerned with "modern" things. God is eternal. So these modern scientists must place God in the back seat because they have no way of studying such a grand concept.

Jayhawker Soule · Aug 16, 2004

pah said:
Well, folks, we have proof in mathematical theroy that that we know what was present previous to the Big Bang.

Really? Is it a mathematical theory or a mathematical proof - or don't you know?

Pah · Aug 16, 2004

Deut. 32.8 said:
Really? Is it a mathematical theory or a mathematical proof - or don't you know?

You know, I have probably spoken in error. Let me say that the theory is peer reviewed and ties together several other theories also accepted by cosmologists

-pah-

Jayhawker Soule · Aug 16, 2004

It's an exciting theory.

(Q) · Aug 16, 2004

I think string theory/M-theory will amount to very little. For example, it appears to contain a theory of gravity, yet is not a consistent quantum theory of gravity. The divergent series is speculated to be finite unlike the quantization of General Reltivity. Other than predicting the magnitude of the cosmological constant should be larger, no other useful predictions have been made. Experimentation is literally out of the question even if string theorists could conduct such an experiment, they could only speculate at best what it is they are observing. Claims of replacing the Standard Model remain unfounded as no experimental evidence or mathematical proof has been forthcoming.

These theories are probably just a fad, soon to be shelved.

Zero Faith · Aug 16, 2004

These theories are probably just a fad, soon to be shelved.

Mmm, I disagree with you there. String theory has been around for awhile; it's a robust theory that continues to advance and consolidate previously unconnected ideas. I think it's on the right track but, like Bohr's atom, will see some intense revision in the near future.

painted wolf · Aug 16, 2004

I once heard a theory likening the multiverce concept to soap bubbles....
Has anyone elce heard of this one?
This subject isn't my strongsuit but I find it very interesting.

wa:do

croak · Oct 20, 2005

I can honestly say I barely understood anything about strings. I just have one, annoying point:

membranes ripple (a wave motion) and the collision of two membranes created the Big Bang producing the pecularities of our universe by the circumstances of the ripples

Where did the membranes come from? How did 'something' come out of 'nothing'?
Another thing: what are the membranes?

And I don't understand dimensions either. I've heard of 3 dimensions and maybe even 4, but 22?!

Halcyon · Oct 20, 2005

Cosmology isn't my forte, it takes me hours of concentration for it to even start to slot into place, but i do find it interesting.
Do you know if M-theory has managed to find a solution to the contradictory elements of the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics yet?

RearingArabian said:
I can honestly say I barely understood anything about strings. I just have one, annoying point:

Where did the membranes come from? How did 'something' come out of 'nothing'?
Another thing: what are the membranes?

And I don't understand dimensions either. I've heard of 3 dimensions and maybe even 4, but 22?!

You beat me to it RA! M-theory doesn't prove the non-existance of God, nor the creation of the universe by divine means, it just pushes the creation one step back. Something made those strings and membranes, or did they just appear from nowhere?

Kowalski · Oct 20, 2005

Quatum soup, Equations suggest that in a vacuum, virtual particles can flit in and out of virtual existence, eventually building a super dense mass of Photons, which rreasons not fully understood, suddenly and massively expanded outwards in what really should be called the Big Flash, as no bang was possible in a vacuum. This singularity of the first time, is thought to been about three times the size of our sun, from this, everything you know arose and time began.

K

Halcyon · Oct 20, 2005

Kowalski said:
Quatum soup, Equations suggest that in a vacuum, virtual particles can flit in and out of virtual existence, eventually building a super dense mass of Photons, which rreasons not fully understood, suddenly and massively expanded outwards in what really should be called the Big Flash, as no bang was possible in a vacuum. This singularity of the first time, is thought to been about three times the size of our sun, from this, everything you know arose and time began.

K

So... where did this concept of virtual existance come from then? Why do photons exist at all, why are they in the form that they are? Why does any form of reality exist?

Kowalski · Oct 20, 2005

Nobody knows the whys, not even Hawking or Einstein. What appears to have happened is that a frenzied mass of radiation, matter and anti-matter was expanding and cooling, most of the matter was anihilated by the anti-matter, but enough matter remained to cause the big flash as matter formed atoms of hydrogen and helium .

You might consider what came before the Singularity as something out of Nothing, and is in many ways, still a mystery.

K

almifkhar · Oct 20, 2005

an astronomer named james joyce has said that the universe seems to have been desgined by a pure mathematician and begins to look more and more lke a great thought rather than a great machine.

an astrophysicists named robert jastrow said for the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. he has scaled the mountians of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

another astrophysicits named paul davies wrote a book called the mind of god. it really was an intresting read.

pah you have to consider that the creator has to be greater than his/her creation, not to mention all religions that have a belief in a supreme god have a big bang story of creation. they are not written down in a scientific way but in a philosophical way. in the occult teachings of the kabbalah it speaks of positive and negitive forces causing not only the big bang, but every thing in existance. for example a baby cannot be concieved with out a sperm (positive) and an egg (negitive)

Fatmop · Oct 21, 2005

an astronomer named james joyce has said that the universe seems to have been desgined by a pure mathematician and begins to look more and more lke a great thought rather than a great machine.

an astrophysicists named robert jastrow said for the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. he has scaled the mountians of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

another astrophysicits named paul davies wrote a book called the mind of god. it really was an intresting read.

Those are just about the exact quotes I heard in a creationist lecture yesterday. Only there were more of them. The idea is that somehow, the universe and all its pretty little parts are juuust right to support human life here on Earth. What you fail to mention is that the Earth is going to be swallowed up by the sun in about 5 or 6 billion years, meaning pretty much all life (except for us Houstonians) is going to be burnt to death. You also seem to be focusing on our particular part of the universe as the sole purpose of all those quirky little equations, not realizing that we are an infinitesimal part of a universe so vast it boggles the mind. None of these equations, IMO, have any purpose outside of the mind. The universe does not 'exist for us' - we happen to exist in our current state because a particular part of the universe that was not being swallowed by a black hole or being bombarded with too much radiation exists.

jamaesi · Oct 24, 2005

This is sort of... offtopic, but I have a friend who thinks that the Big Bang was G-d exploding and that we´re all G-d Guts.

: )

Scuba Pete · Oct 24, 2005

Science could never prove the existence or non-existence of God. It's a fool's errand to even try and you have to ponder the motives and ethics of a scientist ensconced in this endeavor. To that end, the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy has a much more probative argument to disprove God.

Jayhawker Soule · Oct 24, 2005

Kowalski said:
Equations suggest that in a vacuum, virtual particles can flit in and out of virtual existence, eventually building a super dense mass of Photons, ...

That is extremely exciting! I know of no equations that "suggest" [sic] virtual particles "eventually building a super dense mass of Photons". Would you please cite your source?

Kowalski · Oct 25, 2005

Deut. 10:19 said:
That is extremely exciting! I know of no equations that "suggest" [sic] virtual particles "eventually building a super dense mass of Photons". Would you please cite your source?

Yeah dude, just as soon as i have time to find my references.

K

Jayhawker Soule · Oct 25, 2005

Kowalski said:
Yeah dude, just as soon as i have time to find my references.

Right, dude.

God is not in the Big Bang

Uber all member

Custom User

-- untitled --

Uber all member

-- untitled --

Active Member

Member

Grey Muzzle

Trickster

Lord of the Badgers

Active Member

Lord of the Badgers

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

To Save A Lamb

Le plongeur avec attitude...

-- untitled --

Active Member

-- untitled --