The big bang, something from nothing?

[Subduction Zone]

Cosmological theories are formulated by scientists, and theories by definition, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who, like Hawking are prone to change their minds, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

There are as many, if not more scientific theories as to the origin of our universe, as there are differing religious bodies, such as Christianity, Hindu, Abrahamic, Muslim, etc.

Here is but one of many theories as to the creation of our three dimensional universe. This one is by Niayesh Afshordi, an astrophysicist with Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada, who proposes that our three-dimensional universe floats as a membrane in a “bulk universe” that has four dimensions and that the “Bulk Universe” has four dimensional stars, which go through the same life cycles as our three dimensional stars.

The most massive ones explode as supernovae, and their central core collapses into a black hole, like in our universe---only in four dimension. The four dimensional black hole has its own four dimensional “Event Horizon,” the boundary between the inside and the outside of a black hole.

In a three dimensional universe, the event horizon appears to be two dimensional. In a four dimensional universe, it appears to be three dimensional. The four dimensional black hole, then blows apart, with the leftover material forming a three dimensional membrane surrounding a three dimensional event horizon, which expands---and is essentially our universe.

So, according to the theory proposed by Niayesh Afshordi, our universe is the vomited-up guts of a fourth dimensional black hole. The expansion of the event horizon explains our universe's expansion; the fact that its creation stems from another 4D universe explains the weird temperature uniformity.

If I were forced to choose between the theory of Afshordi, or that of Hawking, who believes that the energy from which this universe was created, spontaneously appeared out of nothingness, I know which one I would choose.

So many errors. You do not seem to understand what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is a testable idea that explains a wide body of observations and is supported by evidence. There are very few scientific theories on the start of the universe. You are mixing in speculation and WAG's (onager guesses to avoid the censor bot) with scientific theories. Many creationists make this error because their ideas do not even tend to qualify as WAG's. The idea that a theory must be testable or falsifiable is perhaps one of the strongest ideas man has ever come up with. If one's idea cannot be tested it is not worth much in the world of science.

And without links to your sources it is hard to say how wrong you got the idea that the man was trying to put across, nor do I feel like doing your homework for you. Arguing against the sciences using a strawman only convinces others that have no education in the area.

 

[sealchan]

and you are able this consideration......
while not considering what it was to be .....the First

Someone had to be....First

If you look closely, carefully enough...you will realize that this is a fallacy which logic itself is blind to. Reality claims a much deeper and richer process for the unfolding of newness.

 

[Subduction Zone]

and you are able this consideration......
while not considering what it was to be .....the First

Someone had to be....First

Here is a simple example that demonstrates your error. We know that Spanish was a language the developed from Latin. Spain used to be part of the Roman Empire and Latin was the language spoken in those days. Spanish did not exist as a language. Was there a first Spanish speaker? If so where and when?

 

[sayak83]

Both science and faith both require proofs and both have their foundation to confirm those proofs. I would ask from the other side of the fence as to why the Scientific community has no embraced the knowledge gifted in that tablet?

I do not want you to blindly accept anything. That was not why this document was offered. Personally I see it contains all the answers science is looking for, but science will need to mature.

Science will need to understand that a unity of mind is required to unlock the truths that are already available. It will flounder until it finds this unity.

I am also from an engineering background. In civil works and town planning. I accept that science and religion must work together.

Peace be with you.

Since all answers is in that tablet, please let us know what is dark matter and how to observe it in a lab. Thank you.

 

[sealchan]

Here is a simple example that demonstrates your error. We know that Spanish was a language the developed from Latin. Spain used to be part of the Roman Empire and Latin was the language spoken in those days. Spanish did not exist as a language. Was there a first Spanish speaker? If so where and when?

And if so who did they speak to who could understand them?

 

[Jumi]

Nothing has no potential and is impossible.

So no creation, or big bang... just eternity?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Since all answers is in that tablet, please let us know what is dark matter and how to observe it in a lab. Thank you.

If you need those answers, is it not up to you to look? I know the author of that Tablet accessed a knowledge far beyond the greatest minds that have yet lived.

It is many scientists that crave these answers and not I, it is but an interesting subject to me. I admire a scientist that has found the balance with Faith and that is the reason I posted that Tablet.

People are free to do with the gift as they so wish.

I note the Tablet has given us much to consider on this aspect of Dark Matter;

"..The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or move as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter..."

Peace be with you

 

[ecco]

.

and you are able this consideration......
while not considering what it was to be .....the First

Someone had to be....First

Why someone? Why not something?

 

[ecco]

That line is the Messenger of God.

Which Messenger:

• Moses
• Jesus
• Allah
• Bahá’u’lláh
• Joseph Smith
• L. Ron Hubbard

The Mediator between man and God is the Messenger. The Messenger is the primal cause of our existance.

If The Messenger is the primal cause of our existence, what is the purpose of your god?

 

[ecco]

As long as I have the word of God, which our scientific community is beginning to come to terms with, I have need of nothing else.

Which parts of the word of God is our scientific community beginning to come to terms with?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Which Messenger?

All that are of God, see below;

If The Messenger is the primal cause of our existence, what is the purpose of your god?

The Messenger (Primal Will) is from our one God. The Messenger is the Mediator between man and God and they are the cause of creation and they are the source of our capacity in knowledge, our capacity in science.

"....The Primal Will is the first and only direct creation of the hidden God .......Everything else including the physical universe and all of its beings were generated through the Primal Will."

Which Messenger?

It would appear, therefore, that the Primal Will originates with or is present in the Manifestation (Messenger) of God, and in this sense they are identical. We make no difference in their Messages, as they all have but one purpose.

Peace be with you

 

[Polymath257]

I actually agree with you on this.

The earlier epoch of the Primordial Nucleosynthesis or the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) is closely related to the CMBR and Recombination Epoch.

George Gamow was working on the Primordial Nucleosynthesis with fellow physicist, Ralph Alpher, in 1948. Alpher was also coauthor to the CMBR with Robert Herman in 1948.

Their works were essential in understanding how matters form in the early universe, but their predictions weren’t verified and validated until 1964, with the accidental discovery of CMBR.

The period of nucleosynthesis was quite a bit before the era of recombination and formation of the CMBR. Nucleosynthesis mainly happened in the first few minutes and recombination was approximately 370,000 years later.

But the models of nucleosynthesis have been verified by observing the light element abundances (which put quite tight limits on the rate of expansion at the time of nucleosynthesis).

 

[The Anointed]

So many errors. You do not seem to understand what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is a testable idea that explains a wide body of observations and is supported by evidence. There are very few scientific theories on the start of the universe. You are mixing in speculation and WAG's (onager guesses to avoid the censor bot) with scientific theories. Many creationists make this error because their ideas do not even tend to qualify as WAG's. The idea that a theory must be testable or falsifiable is perhaps one of the strongest ideas man has ever come up with. If one's idea cannot be tested it is not worth much in the world of science.

And without links to your sources it is hard to say how wrong you got the idea that the man was trying to put across, nor do I feel like doing your homework for you. Arguing against the sciences using a strawman only convinces others that have no education in the area.

Subduction Zone wrote…… So many errors. You do not seem to understand what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is a testable idea that explains a wide body of observations and is supported by evidence.

The Anointed responds…… The once accepted theory that the earth was the centre around which the universe revolved, seemed to have been supported by the observable evidence. One could observe the heavenly night bodies rising from the east and revolving across the heavens to descend beyond the western horizon. But that theory was abandoned when Copernicus’ theory of the sun centred universe was finally accepted by the scientific community of his day, which theory has now also been abandoned.

Subduction Zone wrote……. There are very few scientific theories on the start of the universe.

The Anointed responds…… Here are but 11 of the many theories: 11 Mind-Bending Theories About Our Universe

Subduction Zone wrote…… You are mixing in speculation and WAG's (onager guesses to avoid the censor bot) with scientific theories. Many creationists make this error because their ideas do not even tend to qualify as WAG's. The idea that a theory must be testable or falsifiable is perhaps one of the strongest ideas man has ever come up with. If one's idea cannot be tested it is not worth much in the world of science.

And without links to your sources it is hard to say how wrong you got the idea that the man was trying to put across, nor do I feel like doing your homework for you. Arguing against the sciences using a strawman only convinces others that have no education in the area.

The Anointed responds…… which scientific theory do you support as to the supposed singularity from which all the electromagnetic energy from which this universe is supposed to have been created? Was it an infinitely dense, infinitely hot, infinitesimally small object that was spatially separated by the event that is called the Big Bang, or was it the White Hole which was connected to a Black Hole into which a galactic cluster from somewhere far beyond the visible horizon of this boundless and eternal cosmos, which had fallen into a massive Black Hole [Great Attractor] and ripped apart and reconverted to the electromagnetic energy from which that cluster was created, where it was accelerated along the Einstein Rosen bridge to speeds far, far in excess to the speed of light and spewed out in the trillions and trillions of degrees, where that cluster is resurrected in a different Space Time.

Enoch, the only man recorded in the Scriptures to have been carried to the throne of the Most High in the creation, and who was anointed as his successor, was then escorted to the ends of time, where he witnessed the universe burn up and fall as massive columns of fire, beyond all measure in height and depth into the GREAT ABYSS, which is described by Enoch, as the prison of all the stars and the host of heaven, beyond which, there was nothing, not even the space in which the universe had existed.

In 1935, Einstein and physicist Nathan Rosen used the theory of general relativity to elaborate on the idea of black holes and worm holes, proposing the existence of "bridges" through space-time. These bridges connect two different points in space-time, theoretically creating a shortcut that could reduce travel time and distance; Billions of light years to mere metres.

According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular Schwarzschild black hole. In the Einstein–Cartan–Sciama–Kibble theory of gravity, however, it forms a regular Einstein–Rosen bridge.

The gravitational collapse of a single star such as the star of our solar system, can form a White Dwarf, the gravitational collapse of bigger stars can create a neutron star, or a Black Hole, depending on its mass, but not necessarily a Worm Hole.

A worm Hole could theoretically be used as a method of sending information or travelers through space, unfortunately, physical matter which includes humans journeying through the space tunnels would appear to be an impossibility as there are strong indications that material objects travelling through a worm hole is forbidden by the law of physics.

But now that it has been discovered that Physical matter is but an illusion, and all is, but the eternal energy, perhaps one day new technology may develop a way to teleport bodies of energy along light beams and reform them to their original form, with no damage done.

Wormholes may not only connect two separate regions within the universe, they could also connect two different universes.

If the entire universe is expanding, why is the Galaxy Andromeda on a collision course with our Milky Way Galaxy?

https://phys.org/news/2016-05-great-attractor-milky.html

 

[Subduction Zone]

Subduction Zone wrote…… So many errors. You do not seem to understand what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is a testable idea that explains a wide body of observations and is supported by evidence.

The Anointed responds…… The once accepted theory that the earth was the centre around which the universe revolved, seemed to have been supported by the observable evidence. One could observe the heavenly night bodies rising from the east and revolving across the heavens to descend beyond the western horizon. But that theory was abandoned when Copernicus’ theory of the sun centred universe was finally accepted by the scientific community of his day, which theory has now also been abandoned.

Subduction Zone wrote……. There are very few scientific theories on the start of the universe.

The Anointed responds…… Here are but 11 of the many theories: 11 Mind-Bending Theories About Our Universe

Subduction Zone wrote…… You are mixing in speculation and WAG's (onager guesses to avoid the censor bot) with scientific theories. Many creationists make this error because their ideas do not even tend to qualify as WAG's. The idea that a theory must be testable or falsifiable is perhaps one of the strongest ideas man has ever come up with. If one's idea cannot be tested it is not worth much in the world of science.

And without links to your sources it is hard to say how wrong you got the idea that the man was trying to put across, nor do I feel like doing your homework for you. Arguing against the sciences using a strawman only convinces others that have no education in the area.

The Anointed responds…… which scientific theory do you support as to the supposed singularity from which all the electromagnetic energy from which this universe is supposed to have been created? Was it an infinitely dense, infinitely hot, infinitesimally small object that was spatially separated by the event that is called the Big Bang, or was it the White Hole which was connected to a Black Hole into which a galactic cluster from somewhere far beyond the visible horizon of this boundless and eternal cosmos, which had fallen into a massive Black Hole [Great Attractor] and ripped apart and reconverted to the electromagnetic energy from which that cluster was created, where it was accelerated along the Einstein Rosen bridge to speeds far, far in excess to the speed of light and spewed out in the trillions and trillions of degrees, where that cluster is resurrected in a different Space Time.

Enoch, the only man recorded in the Scriptures to have been carried to the throne of the Most High in the creation, and who was anointed as his successor, was then escorted to the ends of time, where he witnessed the universe burn up and fall as massive columns of fire, beyond all measure in height and depth into the GREAT ABYSS, which is described by Enoch, as the prison of all the stars and the host of heaven, beyond which, there was nothing, not even the space in which the universe had existed.

In 1935, Einstein and physicist Nathan Rosen used the theory of general relativity to elaborate on the idea of black holes and worm holes, proposing the existence of "bridges" through space-time. These bridges connect two different points in space-time, theoretically creating a shortcut that could reduce travel time and distance; Billions of light years to mere metres.

According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular Schwarzschild black hole. In the Einstein–Cartan–Sciama–Kibble theory of gravity, however, it forms a regular Einstein–Rosen bridge.

The gravitational collapse of a single star such as the star of our solar system, can form a White Dwarf, the gravitational collapse of bigger stars can create a neutron star, or a Black Hole, depending on its mass, but not necessarily a Worm Hole.

A worm Hole could theoretically be used as a method of sending information or travelers through space, unfortunately, physical matter which includes humans journeying through the space tunnels would appear to be an impossibility as there are strong indications that material objects travelling through a worm hole is forbidden by the law of physics.

But now that it has been discovered that Physical matter is but an illusion, and all is, but the eternal energy, perhaps one day new technology may develop a way to teleport bodies of energy along light beams and reform them to their original form, with no damage done.

Wormholes may not only connect two separate regions within the universe, they could also connect two different universes.

If the entire universe is expanding, why is the Galaxy Andromeda on a collision course with our Milky Way Galaxy?

https://phys.org/news/2016-05-great-attractor-milky.html

Can you debate properly? A Gish Gallop is usually a method of lying. Let's go over your errors one at a time. For example, your link to eleven supposed theories fails on the first "theory" listed. That was not a scientific theory, it was wild speculation.

 

[sayak83]

If you need those answers, is it not up to you to look? I know the author of that Tablet accessed a knowledge far beyond the greatest minds that have yet lived.

It is many scientists that crave these answers and not I, it is but an interesting subject to me. I admire a scientist that has found the balance with Faith and that is the reason I posted that Tablet.

People are free to do with the gift as they so wish.

I note the Tablet has given us much to consider on this aspect of Dark Matter;

"..The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or move as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter..."

Peace be with you

That was a non answer.

 

[The Anointed]

Can you debate properly? A Gish Gallop is usually a method of lying. Let's go over your errors one at a time. For example, your link to eleven supposed theories fails on the first "theory" listed. That was not a scientific theory, it was wild speculation.

Subduction Zone wrote….. Let's go over your errors one at a time. For example, your link to eleven supposed theories fails on the first "theory" listed. The Theory: The Matrix is real, and we are living in it. That was not a scientific theory, it was wild speculation.

The Anointed…… Once a theory has been proven beyond all doubt to have been correct, it becomes a fact and only then does it cease to be no more than just a theory.

The theory that all matter was made of tiny particles was first developed by the early Greek scientist Democritus in the 5th century BC. Although references to atoms being the basic building blocks of all matter, can be found as far back as the 6th century in India, and atoms, which comes from the ancient Greek “Atomus,” which means, “Uncuttable,” were believed to be indivisible and indestructible.

This is just another theory to have gone under the hammer with the knowledge of sub-atomic particles.

Now let us look at some of the other THEORIES that were mentioned in the previous article.

Some physicists theorise that the universe might have started with the collapse of a 4D black hole, and that the ejected debris formed the universe we live in. Can you prove their theory to be wrong?

Another scientific Theory is that Our universe is just one of many parallel universes, or maybe even an infinite number of parallel universes, in existence. Can you prove those scientists to be wrong?

The scientific Theory that the universe will end in a "big crunch" as galaxies are pulled back together by gravity, ending in a kind of reversed Big Bang, has already been theorised that another universe may have preceded ours.

Three physicists from Penn State University say they have done calculations suggesting that before the birth of our universe, which is expanding, there was an earlier universe that was shrinking. Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University, a cosmologist also agrees that the universe “may have undergone one or more bangs in its past history,”

According to some scientific theories, the Big Bang is a repeating cycle. Universes might expand, then shrink back to a point, then expand again.

Another scientific Theory is that the universe will expand so much that eventually galaxies, solar systems, planets and even individual atoms will be ripped apart.

Then again, there is also the Theory, that if the universe keeps expanding forever, but not enough to rip itself apart. The stars will go out and the black holes will evaporate. Also known as the theory of "heat death" of the universe, it's the sweet spot between a big crunch and a big rip.

Or perhaps you believe the Theory, that the universe is a giant hologram, or, in more scientific language, "a projection of a two-dimensional shell".

Many Scientists have long theorised that the universe looked the same in all directions, but a new theory says that's not the case – some bits of space are hotter than others, and there is Lots of evidence that point to this being true. The latest comes from the Planck satellite that took a snapshot of the cosmos further back in time than ever before. More difficult is trying to work out why this is the case.

Another Theory is that everything in the universe is being pushed apart by an invisible force called dark energy. It's so powerful that it's making the expansion of the universe accelerate. This appears to be very likely, as the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics was won by two teams who discovered the accelerated expansion of the universe. Dark energy is not necessarily what is causing this, but many physicists do think it is the culprit.

The Theory: Distant stars only look like they're rushing away from us. But rather than stars speeding up, it happening because time is slowing down and we're looking at them in the past, when time passed quicker.

This is one Theory that I do like: Black holes are wormholes that connect our universe to other universes. Wormholes are hypothetical warps in the fabric of space-time that form a sort of tunnel.

All of these are simply theories, and will remain the hypothesis, suppositions and opinions of certain people until they are proven to be facts.

Even the theory that a universe of mindless matter has produced beings with intrinsic ends self- replication capabilities, and “coded chemistry” without any intelligent designer, remains no more than a theory.

I believe that the Space Station and all its complex and intricate ground support systems evolved from the wheel. But I also believe that the creator of the wheel, with the billions of creations that evolved from the wheel, that were only expressions of the heights to which the mind of the creator had evolved with each subsequent creation, until the grand designer had the knowledge, the infrastructure, and the material to create his master piece, after which, he could create space station after space station after Space Station. Or universe after universe, after universe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Subduction Zone wrote….. Let's go over your errors one at a time. For example, your link to eleven supposed theories fails on the first "theory" listed. The Theory: The Matrix is real, and we are living in it. That was not a scientific theory, it was wild speculation.

The Anointed…… Once a theory has been proven beyond all doubt to have been correct, it becomes a fact and only then does it cease to be no more than just a theory.

Wrong. I stopped there. First off you need to learn to write shorter posts until you learn what you are talking about in the first place. Theories are always tentatively true in the sciences. But thanks for admitting that evolution is a fact by your standards.

Why don't you learn what a theory is? That would be a good starting point.

 

[The Anointed]

Wrong. I stopped there. First off you need to learn to write shorter posts until you learn what you are talking about in the first place. Theories are always tentatively true in the sciences. But thanks for admitting that evolution is a fact by your standards.

Why don't you learn what a theory is? That would be a good starting point.

Subduction Zone wrote...….. First off you need to learn to write shorter posts.

The Anointed...…….. WHY? Could it have something to do with the short attention span of the reader?

Subduction Zone wrote...… Theories are always tentatively true in the sciences. But thanks for admitting that evolution is a fact by your standards.

The Anointed...…….Tentative??? (1) Of an experimental nature: (2) Uncertain, hesitant.
Theories remain the hypothesis, suppositions and opinions of certain people, until they are proven to be factual, or dismissed as having been erroneous.

Subduction Zone wrote...… But thanks for admitting that evolution is a fact by your standards.

The Anointed...… Evolution through intelligent design.

Einstein had previously explored this belief that man could not understand the nature of God in an interview published in 1930 in G. S. Viereck's book Glimpses of the Great explaining:[11]

I'm absolutely not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza’s pantheism, but admire even more his contribution to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and body as one, and not two separate things.

Nonetheless, Einstein was more inclined to denigrate disbelievers than the faithful.[12] "The fanatical atheists," he said in correspondence, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who--in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres."[13] Although he did not believe in a personal God, he indicated that he would never seek to combat such belief because "such a belief seems to me preferable to the lack of any transcendental outlook"

Subduction Zone wrote...….. Why don't you learn what a theory is? That would be a good starting point.

The Anointed...….. Nah my friend, it is you who must come to terms with the fact that a theory, will always remain no more that the hypothesis, suppositions and opinions of certain groups until those theories are proven to have been correct, or dismissed as having been erroneous.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let's go over what a scientific theory is. @The Anointed should quickly see that most of the so called theories that were in his article were not scientific theories:

"A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge."

Scientific theory - Wikipedia

To be a scientific theory the examples that you gave would have to be testable. That is foremost to be a theory. Not only does a theory need to be testable, it also has had to have been tested before it is accepted. What tests would falsify those ideas? If scientists cannot name one then it is not a scientific theory by definition.

 

[The Anointed]

Subduction Zone wrote...….. First off you need to learn to write shorter posts.

The Anointed...…….. WHY? Could it have something to do with the short attention span of the reader?

Subduction Zone wrote...… Theories are always tentatively true in the sciences. But thanks for admitting that evolution is a fact by your standards.

The Anointed...…….Tentative??? (1) Of an experimental nature: (2) Uncertain, hesitant.
Theories remain the hypothesis, suppositions and opinions of certain people, until they are proven to be factual, or dismissed as having been erroneous.

Subduction Zone wrote...… But thanks for admitting that evolution is a fact by your standards.

The Anointed...… Evolution through intelligent design.

Einstein had previously explored this belief that man could not understand the nature of God in an interview published in 1930 in G. S. Viereck's book Glimpses of the Great explaining:[11]

I'm absolutely not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza’s pantheism, but admire even more his contribution to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and body as one, and not two separate things.

Nonetheless, Einstein was more inclined to denigrate disbelievers than the faithful.[12] "The fanatical atheists," he said in correspondence, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who--in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres."[13] Although he did not believe in a personal God, he indicated that he would never seek to combat such belief because "such a belief seems to me preferable to the lack of any transcendental outlook"

Subduction Zone wrote...….. Why don't you learn what a theory is? That would be a good starting point.

The Anointed...….. Nah my friend, it is you who must come to terms with the fact that a theory, will always remain no more that the hypothesis, suppositions and opinions of certain groups until those theories are proven to have been correct, or dismissed as having been erroneous.​