The Big Bang and Evolution- Help!

[Oblimo]

The big question of course, and the one that still gives me chills, is what was there before the Big Bang?

Einstein: Nothing.

Hawking: Imaginary time (a really cool way of saying "nothing" )

String/Brane Theorists: Rock and roll!

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Einstein: Nothing.

Hawking: Imaginary time (a really cool way of saying "nothing" )

String/Brane Theorists: Rock and roll!

I think it was Oprah Winfrey. I can't wait till she has God on her show.

No, really. I need to find a decent book about string theory. Everything I've looked at so far looks like desperate hand-waving. Any suggestions?

 

[sophia jane]

The big question of course, and the one that still gives me chills, is what was there before the Big Bang?

Thanks, as always, for the great post Dr. M. I find what Hawking said about that interesting, btw. That it essentially doesn't matter- "If there were events earlier than this time, then they could not affect what happens at the present time. Their existence can be ignored because it would have no observational consequences." Isn't that like science's way of saying- we'll never know, so we're going to ignore it?

 

[CharleyH]

Actually, the required text for the class is his A brief history of time. I obviously didn't understand or read the whole thing.

Read it - what is the series of questions that you want to ask and what was difficult about it for you? (NOT SARCASTIC - just want to help.)

T

 

[fifty5]

You may also find it useful to google for Fred Hoyle. The wikipedia article is good, but misses out Fred's change of mind - "your conclusions were right, but your reasons were wrong! I'm still right to reject your reasoning."

The Big Bang is now generally accepted. What is still up for grabs is what happens in the end (and this is where 'dark matter' comes in). Depending on exact figures for the total mass of the universe (and visible matter isn't enough), either the universe carries on expanding for ever; the rate of expansion slows down until it stops; or it slows down and starts to contract again to give a Big Crunch, which could result in another Big Bang.

As far as Physics is concerned, 'intelligent design' has some perplexing aspects. There are several Constants (numbers that are necessary to make physics equations actually equal) that have to be the size they are observed to be. If they were significantly bigger or smaller than we find them to be, then the universe couldn't exist: stars, planets and ultimately the human race just wouldn't have happened. So maybe something (God) decided that they would be the size they are. The perplexing thing is that if so, then the same God must have decided not to interfere after that - once s/he had decided on those values the whole shebang simply had to be allowed to carry on to its inevitable conclusion (so that the laws of physics, etc. continued to work). That implies that God decided not to intervene - so prayer necessarily cannot work. In this approach, accepting that God exists (to decide on the values of those constants) directly necessitates that all religion and worship is futile. If there is a God, it is a total waste of time to acknowledge his existence - and Humanism (or religions as approximations to Humanism) is the only valid guide to morality. Alternatively, there is no God - and Humanism is the only valid guide to morality - all religions merely await complete description in terms of human psychology - if God didn't exist, humanity would need to invent Him.

Good luck with your teaching.

Eff

 

[Oblimo]

Everything I've looked at so far looks like desperate hand-waving. Any suggestions?

I wish I had some, but I cannot even begin to understand the topology behind string theory, so I too just see lots of mathematicians tryin' to look like Jeff Goldblum and wavin' their hands.

 

[Oblimo]

Isn't that like science's way of saying- we'll never know, so we're going to ignore it?

Sorta. It's more of a definitional statement of the limits of science. If something (or it's effects) cannot be measured, science cannot help you understand it, and so for the purposes of working out a scientific theory, it can be put aside. The next step -- deciding that if science can't describe it, it doesn't exist or isn't worth thinking about in other fields such as philosophy or religion -- is a value judgement (and a unscientific one, at that. )

It's also a polite way of saying, "Dude, whatever might be out there, it's outside the Universe. That's pretty much my definition of the word 'nothing.'"

 

[Oblimo]

As far as Physics is concerned, 'intelligent design' has some perplexing aspects. There are several Constants (numbers that are necessary to make physics equations actually equal) that have to be the size they are observed to be. If they were significantly bigger or smaller than we find them to be, then the universe couldn't exist: stars, planets and ultimately the human race just wouldn't have happened. So maybe something (God) decided that they would be the size they are.

This, however, is classic "magical thinking." And I'm not trying to sound rude, I'm being literal. What Fifty5 just described is exactly the basic tenet of ancient sacred geometry cults such as the Pythagoreans and the Egyptian and Assyrian stargazers before them.

The ancient Pythagoreans believed the Pythagorean theorem was proof of the existence of the divine. Who else but God could make a universe where for any right triangle, the area of the square whose side is the hypotenuse is always equal to the sum of areas of the squares whose sides are the two legs?

It's math as miracle.