The Origins of Life

[doshkadog]

Does the Big bang Theory offer a perfect explanation without any unanswered questions, or are there any measurable features of our universe that do not comply with the theory?

[Leon Roskilly]

Does the Big bang Theory offer a perfect explanation without any unanswered questions, or are there any measurable features of our universe that do not comply with the theory?

 

 

What happened in the first milliseconds of creation cannot be explained because the conditions then were so bizarre that the fundamental laws of physics, now prevalent, could not exist. (that's kinda what you expect if you compress all the matter in the universe, space, time etc into a space that is smaller than a particle).

 

Even Stephen Hawkings has speculated that there may not of actually been a moment of creation, but something else (my maths aren't up to it! LOL)

 

There is also a lot of material that appears to be missing, or perhaps we cannot detect it, and so it is called 'dark matter'.

 

 

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-02c.html

 

http://www.rense.com/general53/bbng.htm

 

http://www.calresco.org/cosmic.htm

 

 

Oh! Loads more alternatives etc

 

But Big Bang does explain what we observe (debate!).

 

But the way I understand it, it's just that not everything needed to tie up the loose ends has (yet) been observed, and if they are speculative figments, rather than simply we don't have the science or technology to observe them, then the theory needs significant modification or replacement which is why so many people are putting up possible alternatives (these leaving as many questions unproven, and usually not as robust as 'Big Bang')

 

It will be nice if we do actually detect some of those extra dimensions that must exist according to the mathmetics, rather than having just mathmetical proof that they must be there.

 

That's why some of the current research is so exciting (even if it does costs billions!)

[Alan Stubbs]

 

Clearly Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle doesn't exist on this thread

 

/quote]

 

 

Are you suggesting that Heisenberg probably rules, OK?

[Leon Roskilly]

Next Week's Horizon programme will be looking at why 96% of the Universe (which the Big Bang Theory predicts should be there) is missing!

[*Ant*]

I got lost on this thread about 5 pages ago.

[The Flying Tench]

You added "unsure" smileys afterwards. Does that mean that you're not a fan of Arthur C. Clarke?

 

Reply: I'm afraid I've never read him, but if he a CLARKE he must be a good man!

 

I see ID as an attempt by Christians to reconcile their beliefs with science. For that I applaud them. However ID doesn't stack up scientifically, which is why the vast majority of scientists still accept evolution.

 

Reply: As I understand it ID can include evolution, but judging from one of Vagabond's references ID is a somewhat narrow and politicised movement based on the work of two people. In my earlier posts I was really referring to the arguments from Design more generally, which I had understood had swung a bit in the theists' direction a bit in recent years - though I accept I may have been over-optimistic on that score!

 

Of course evolution doesn't deny the existence of a God, for who created the laws of the universe? Or are these down to pure chance? Are there parallel universes where different laws apply?

 

If so Creation is bigger than we think!

 

Reply: I hope so!

[The Flying Tench]

Good Night

 

Hey, are you an ally, Leon, and I hadn't realised it?

[The Flying Tench]

If the fine tuning arguments are what I think they are (that life as we know it could not exist were any of the physical laws or constants slightly different), I think it's similar to the "divine ordination of Prince Charles" example; it's a post-hoc analysis.

 

Maybe I'm missing your point, Steve, but I don't see why it's being a post hoc argument destroys its validity. Let me give an example:

 

There are 2 lakes, A and B. In A there are 10million bream and 1 roach. In B there are 10million roach and one bream. You go fishing at night and you're not sure which lake you have got to, but you start fishing and catch a bream. As a gambling man wouldn't it be a fair bet that you'd found yourself on lake A?

 

Now in the case of the big bang (judging from the one book I've read on the subject!), if the balance between the expansive force and the gravity force had been out by one part in 10 to the power 60 the matter would have zoomed out into space so fast that no galaxies would have been formed, or else it would have retreated back into the great big heavy pinhead!

 

I can see your 'post hoc' point if you're claiming there were almost infinite numbers of parallel universes. Absolutely. As conscious beings we were bound to have come from the 'good one'. Is that what you're saying?

[Leon Roskilly]

Hey, are you an ally, Leon, and I hadn't realised it?

 

 

Ally in What?

 

Be aware of the spirit of God at work in the ordinary activities and experience of your daily life.

 

Spiritual learning continues throughout life, and often in unexpected ways.

 

There is inspiration to be found all around us, in the natural world, in the sciences and arts, in our work and friendships, in our sorrows as well as in our joys.

 

Are you open to new light, from whatever source it may come?

 

Do you approach new ideas with discernment?

[Ken Davison South Wales]

Clearly Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle doesn't exist on this thread

 

I'm always uncertain