Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The Big Bang and the Creator's Soup

  1. Sep 22, 2004 #1
    The Big Bang and the Creator's "Soup"

    I have never believed in the Big Bang Theorey as it sounded preposterous that all the "matter" in the Universe could have been squeezed into such a small mass. However, I want to put forward this "Supposition" as to a way in which "The Big Bang" could have come about.

    I believe that the Creator could have begun the Universe in this way:

    First, the Creator formed into a "clump" all of the necessary ingredients to make a Universe, but these ingredients were NOT YET physical matter, but rather, a form that could only exist in, say, Heaven.

    Then, by HIS infinite wisdom and creativity ability, caused, at a sudden moment, that "Clump" to become Physical Matter, containing therein all of the Physical Laws by which the Universe would exist within. This "Clump" then began its outward expansion as Science tells us is currently underway.

    What do you think?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 22, 2004 #2
    That begs the question: where did the Creator, or the "clump", come from? If you're going to start with no explanation for where things come from, then why ask the question at all?
     
  4. Sep 22, 2004 #3

    Eh

    User Avatar

    Let's discuss science instead of magic.

    What you call "matter" is mostly empty space anyway. Why is a contracting universe so absurd to you?
     
  5. Sep 22, 2004 #4
    I don't believe in the big bang or evolution, evolution causes big errors in the Bible!
     
  6. Sep 22, 2004 #5
    one has to ask themself, where did matter come from? the farthest down the timeline we have come is to the big bang i think the best think to find out now is where the matter for the big bang came from? "the creator" as you call him follows my general belif now, i believe that god did not create man, i belive that god created the big bang, it seems that only he could condence that much matter into such a small place, however, there is anotheror theory that i find makes sence as well. The theory of a universe qwhere the galexys are starting to fall back in acordince with their own gravity, the momentum of all these galexys flying into eachother, maybe at the same time, would create enough force to push all matter back into a condeced form, this would then explode again in another big bang and form a new universe, thus the universe is forver imploding and exploding (although forever is not likely, some force has to be lost and eventually i think the process will stop at some point). this brings up a lot more theorys that i have, but this one-i realize has many flaws, it actually becomes more of whitch came first, the chicken or the egg kind of problem. i think i speak for everyone when i say an answer would be hard but worth the effort

    Adam

    P.S. Oblio, if you do not belive in the big bang or evolution because of the bible, how can you belive the passage on the giving of fish and bread to the people, you may answer-faith, well the peple here have faith in mathematics and physics (at least i do) more to the point; disgussions of religion should be left out of this fourum
     
  7. Sep 22, 2004 #6

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I am a student of religions and philosophy, as well as science. I do not hold religion falsifiable by science, nor so I hold science falsifiable by religion. You may wish to take an inquisitive view toward science, as an intellectual pursuit. Whatever you learn, you can chalk up to "it was God's will".

    When you approach science with a faith-based yardstick that "falsifies" anything that conflicts with your religion, you run the risk of confining your own knowledge so that it cannot progress beyond that of your elders. That is not the way science works! Every previous construct must be falsifiable. If it cannot be proved or disproved by comparing observation with prediction, it must be set aside or ignored until it can be. Stating that "God did this, and then set this in motion" is NOT testable or falsifiable, and therefor real scientists cannot afford to spend time considering it. If you can look out at the present data and prove that God HAD to have started it all, then please provide the proof, because there are a lot of folks struggling with this concept.

    Welcome to Cosmology!
     
  8. Sep 22, 2004 #7

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Have you read the PF posting guidelines timejim?

    Here are PF we have a rule to not discuss religion; we are a science site.

    Giving you the benefit of the doubt, perhaps you meant to ask something like: "if I speculate about something which, in some sense, preceeds the Big Bang, is it possible to test this speculation, even if only in principle?"? That being the case, I'm moving this to a more appropriate section of PF.
     
  9. Sep 22, 2004 #8

    Janitor

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    May we call your material by the name 'phlogiston'?

    :tongue:
     
  10. Sep 22, 2004 #9

    Kerrie

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Sorry, but this topic has been discussed and miserably failed when it became too sensitive for some to handle.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: The Big Bang and the Creator's Soup
  1. Big Bang theory 4 (Replies: 0)

  2. God & Big Bang (Replies: 16)

Loading...