View Single Post
May9-11, 06:04 AM
chronon's Avatar
P: 499
(It seems that this comes from
"The bedrock of the so called intelligent design movement is that matter cannot come from nothing. Illustrating one of the many reasons intelligent design isn't allowed in a class room is that physics shows that matter does indeed spontaneously materialize, and that the true evidence of a universe with a God, would be one in which nothing existed. In fact, it has been said by Nobel Prize winning scientists that because there is material in the Universe, is proof God doesn't exist."
I would say that every claim of this statement is wrong, so I wouldn't bother trying to defend it.

Now if you believe
A:It's OK for something to have existed since t=-infinity but it's not OK for something suddenly to come into existence.
Then it seems reasonable to believe that something existed before the big bang which caused the universe to come into existence, i.e (on the basis of A) Big bang=>Creator (or equivalently No creator=>No big bang)

Certainly this was a common point of view before the discovery of the CMBR, when the big bang was seen by many as tantamount to creationism.

I would say, though, that A isn't a reasonable belief, since time is we can easily rescale the time coordinate. The real question is 'Why is there something rather than nothing', and this provides much less support for the idea of a creator.