Quatum Singularity Theory of God Any Takers?

Question

Ok as I under stand it the big bang theory states at 1 point in time and space that all known matter in the universe converged into 1 area and then was rapidly dispersed and formed balls of gas that formed stars, planets and all known matter in the universe.

There is something illogical about this assessment. That is to say that would a huge black hole have been formed and all matter would have been a black hole or later consumed by a that black hole. What was the force that propelled the matter apart? I say it was god.

This is a short version of a much larger theory.

Answer 1

Well, in reading responses to this question, I was hoping to see one that would negate the need for me to respond, as it is a very complex and often sensitive issue. However, I saw nothing like this.

You may be happy to hear that modern science and mathematics are no longer wholly exclusive of divine interaction. It does seem that there are certain scientific rules or principles by which we are able to repeatably and substantiatively measure and predict behaviors within our environment, even some distance beyond. But there are gaps in our knowledge, anomylies for which we have no empirical explanation.

A very good book to read on this topic is called God in the Equation. It can be found at:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0684863480/sr=8-2/qid=1151691805/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-1495421-2692634?ie=UTF8

It speaks to the possibility that these gaps are explainable, quantifiably by using math, by the presence of "God."

Now, I personally do not believe in god, per se. It is my opinion that organized religion is and always has been nothing more than the codification of frightened minds via the use of a control channel, i.e. religion.

In fact, late one night while on duty at the Korea desk at JICPAC Hawaii, I hammered out a "proof" that, while likely containing many scientific and mathematical errors, shows or at least outlines my present belief. Our concept of reality is merely an illusion. The long and short of it is that everything must exist everywhere at all times. This would hint at the possibility that we may never have left the singularity--and never will.

You may browse my "proof" for yourself if you wish:

http://homepage.mac.com/jmkolenc/iblog/C911597367/E1032172267/index.html

An intersting FACT to note here, is that I wrote this "proof" on a government computer. More specifically, a government computer located within a military intelligence facility. Shortly after finishing this "proof," I showed it to an Air Force officer who held a B.S. in physics and had worked at Nellis A.F.B. in Nevada, to ask him what he thought. He basically shrugged it off. Shortly thereafter though, my entire archive mysteriously vanished from said government computer. Several calls to the "help desk" could procure neither an explanation for the information's disappearance, nor a means of locating it! Luckily I had printed of a single hard-copy and was able to reproduce the document electronically.

On somewhat of a side-note, you may want to read Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553380168/sr=8-1/qid=1151692588/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-1495421-2692634?ie=UTF8

He mentions a phenomena which I personally find very interesting. It is the particle/wave duality. That is to say that all particles are also waves.

Why is this so interesting? Well, the notion of a wave implies motion. Waves are measured from peak to peak as they move through space, thus delineating a wavelength. But if the particles that comprise our bodies appear to be stationary, i.e. me sitting at this computer right now, how could they also be moving? (Please extricate this from the idea of our planetary bodies, which are moving while we remain motionless.) Well, perhaps this movement is our motion through time itself. If you were to track those waves of our particles backwards, would you not be pinpointing their location at a specific point in time, specifically the past?

As brilliant a mind as Einstein's was, I am not wholly convinced that space-time bends around objects of large mass, thus creating gravity. If particles and waves are tantamount to each other, this could be the tie-in between space and time, with time moving completely, or mostly, independent of space. This would still leave gravity unexplained, however. Fodder, I suppose, for another question!

Thanks for your time!

Answer 2

The theory of the Big Bang, or at least my understanding of it, is as such:

When all the mass of the universe was consolidated at to one point, which is referred to a singularity in science, time itself would have no meaning.

Thus for the singularity to have existed for 1 minute or a 1-katrillion years (I know katrillion isn't a word, but its cool in its own right!) would not have mattered, because there would be nothing to show for it - no clock ticking to measure time, no trees aging, and before that minute, and after that minute, all would be exactly the same. Thus, if we accept that there was a singularity to have occurred, it doesn’t matter how it got there, or how long it got there, because once it got to the point of being a singularity, there is no definite way of telling what happened before then, and actually, the past leading up to the existence of that singularity is immaterial.

Thus, by accepting the singularity notion, we have eliminated the requirement to explain its existence and its past, and actually, have eliminated all need to explain its existence as long as it remains a singularity, because nothing ever changes.

Now comes the point of change. Big Bang, Creation, Genesis, call it what you will...

The scientific way of looking at the point of transition of the singularity is that since there is no such thing as a perfectly rigid body there is a very, very, very, very, low probability that the singularity would become unstable and trigger a change.

Now assume that there is a one in a katrillion chance that this thing would become unstable, given ample time, this probability will be fulfilled by laws of statistics. So eventually (katrillion years the singularity becomes unstable... and bang... we arrive at the point of change.

The omnipotent being way of looking at this is that the being created this change and shaped things.

This is just to let you know that there may be a scientific way to explain the occurrence of the Big Bang

Answer 3

If the big bang theory is true then it is very possible that God
or universal natural forces caused the big bang and black holes.

We are humans from the planet Earth and we tend to think that
everything in the universe functions from our point of knowledge of nature, science and math on Earth when it absolutely does not.
There is more knowledge in the universe than all we know on Earth. On Earth 2 + 2 = 4 but in the universe it might equal ten.
There are perhaps some things the human brain is not built to comprehend.

Answer 4

Not on a summer hours Friday before a long holiday weekend! =D

People who don't understand science, or trust that it exists and explains such things as evolution and history, like to pop god into the mix. I don't think there is a god, there is no way to put god into a scientific theory that is credible, and people who just use god as a catch all to explain things they don't understand need to open their minds. To say that there was a force that propelled something is fine, to just say it was god is childish. Your understanding of this theory you're writing about seems flawed, and way too simplistic.

That being said, get the bar ready, it's almost the weekend! =D

Answer 5

Until a better thoery comes along Ill stick to the big bang. Why is it that god is usually broght into play when discussing the origins of life? The problem I have with your theory is if it was god, where did he come from. was he just there. How come its so easy to assume that god was just there yet when it comes to everything else it had to have an origin and it must have been god..like i said ill stick to the big bang untill SCIENCE comes up with something better

Answer 6

before the beginning of the universe,nothing existed,including "a god". like humanity, god only came into being as humanity evolved.god was invented as a word, to simply explain that which humanity could not explain. of the 2 theories the big bang is more plausible.religious belief is simply a comfort zone for the weak minded.

Answer 7

you're back for greater eh? right here is the deal... What you're doing right that's figuring out to characteristic events, whose origins are unknown, to God. that's comprehensible, and that i'm no longer asserting that God would not exist, however the lack of info of one rationalization (Evolution over Creationism) would not require its contradiction (Creationism over Evolution) to be real. It basically is going to instruct that technology is incomplete at this given time. looking back at human background, i will illustrate lots greater proper. immediately, we settle for that the international is around, and the sunlight is the middle of our photograph voltaic equipment. back, even till now the time of Galileo, it replaced into standard that the earth replaced into the middle. How did this transformation? With discoveries that have been yet to be made. ultimately it did, and now we scoff at a guy or woman who claims the earth is flat, and the middle, a similar way how human beings scoffed at heliocentrism back then. So a die-troublesome scientist can declare that a proof hasn't been got here across yet to describe all that we be conscious. it must be that interior the top the two technology and faith could come to the top of the existence of an all-powerful being, yet till technology can come to that end logically, there extremely is unlikely be a thank you to get die-troublesome scientists to settle for the existence of the all-powerful being

Answer 8

Of course it was God:
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
That's all I need tthe first line in the book of Genesis.GOd created everything: the heavans above and the hells below and Earth in the middle.What about your much larger theory,can I hear that?

Answer 9

I believe it was God, a gaseous belch in the center of the universe couldn't have created what we see today. Things are too complex to be created from random chance.

Answer 10

I believe the bang was the force...since space is a vacumn and all things in a vacumn does not lose their energy as it moves because there is nothing to pass the energy to.