Um, I really hate to have to keep bringing this up, but the "Big Bang" really isn't the settled science everyone here would like it to be. Cool your jets and don't pick on people whose guess is at least as good as yours, unless anti-religious bigotry is such a problem for you that you just can't help yourself. For an executive summary of some of the major problems facing Big Bang theorists today, see the URL listed below.
Incidentally, inferring causation from effect is a very prevalent human habit of mind and is not likely to go away anytime soon, even if you throw Latin at it. Aristotle himself was apparently afflicted by it, as he used the same basic reasoning to infer his famous Unmoved Mover. He even dealt with infinite regression as a bogus way to avoid the real problem. If you say there was never a time when the motion started, what you are really saying is you don't have a clue. That's fine, but cut our questioner a little slack; he's looking at it much as Aristotle did, and that's pretty good company to keep.
2007-10-29 05:16:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Your profile says you are near to retirement age....that would mean you are at least over 60 years old....and you ask a question in the manner of a 12 year old?
1) matter, atoms and electrons were not created; they formed. They formed after the Big Bang not before; it was not an explosion from nothing; all the matter and energy was condensed into a singularity which expanded exponentially. What come before that we don't know...if you want to assume it was a deity that caused this singularity to expand, that's okay.
2) You lost me when you said "like any sound it has a beginning." The Big Bang was not a "sound."
3) You would do better if you would think more about what you are saying before you say it.
4) People who give thumbs down to answers that are factual and straightforward but that do not agree with their own opinion are not thinkers.
2007-10-29 06:00:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Well, I think I must do this first. *drink*
Secondly, physics doesn't claim that matter was created from nothing at the Big Bang. In fact, they're not sure what happened before a certain point in creation, called "Planck Time" when everything was pushed into such a small space that all of the forces of nature were unified into one force. And they don't know if the Big Bang was the result of a previous Big Crunch. You're showing your ignorance of modern physics. Science isn't sure what happened, so while they have many theories on the subject, none of them has been accepted as Law yet. But its a nice try.
2007-10-29 05:00:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by average person Violated 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
Not nearly as much as you are, apparently. Nobody really knows what happens before the big bang. It could be that space and time just appeared or it could be that they have always been around, just in different forms. I personally favor the latter view of an eternal universe since it is very difficult to see how time could ever have gotten started if it did not already exist.
The problem with your reasoning is the same problem that has plagued the cosmological argument ever since it was developed. You want to use God as an explanation for the origin of things, then insist that God does not himself need an explanation. If the rule that everything must come from something else is to be held, it is also going to apply to God. And if you want to exempt God, then why not just exempt the universe? Saying that the universe has always existed answers just as much as saying God has always existed does, and it has the added advantage of only assuming the existence of entities that we know exist (the universe).
2007-10-29 05:09:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by student_of_life 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
The difference is, if I want the cuckoos to fly me somewhere to look at things from a different angle they will. In my land if I say because the 'big science book says so.' the cuckoos will attack - if I say I don't believe the explanation and look for another it is not a crisis of scientific belief but an affirmation of it.
2007-10-29 10:00:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Grinning Football plinny younger 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Religion versus science or science versus religion is ironic because most wars have been fought over religion but not science, but it is science that is winning many wars, although it will be science that end all wars and us with it.
I myself am an agnostic, I believe in a creator of all things, including sound and atoms, and if the word God describes a creator of all things then that's okay with me.
The Bible is the greatest book that has ever been written and the lessons it offers are sadly misinterpreted.
Each story told in the Bible are stories made up to teach, of course noah's ark didn't exist the story is supposed to teach, look at the environment, are we not facing floods of biblical propotion.
2007-10-29 06:53:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
"The concept that matter atoms electrons etc' was created from nothing before the big bang" is none other than a creationist straw man argument. I'm sure you'll get to the Big Bang theory in science class soon and you'll see how ridiculous you're being. Try paying more attention in English, too.
2007-10-29 04:57:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
*sigh*
The Big Bang doesn't say the universe was created from nothing. It doesn't deal with the question of before the bang at all. We don't have enough information to form a theory about before the bang yet, but we're working on it.
It is you that are trying to add something because you demand an explanation even if it is a fairy tale. You are trying to explain our ignorance with magic.
2007-10-29 05:00:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by thewolfskoll 5
·
2⤊
3⤋
You are suffering from quid hoc ergo propter hoc. That means you have looked at two succeeding events and are insisting that the first caused the second. And mythology does not have scientific evidence to back it up like the Big Bang. Whether you want to believe that God was responsible for the Big Bang or that nothing was, it is the truth about the origin of the universe. Go right ahead believing in this "wanderful creation", but do so knowing that it started with the Big Bang.
2007-10-29 04:58:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by mommanuke 7
·
4⤊
4⤋
The big bang is a THEORY not a fact.
Just like God is a THEORY not a fact.
No-one really knows how we got here but there is a lot more evidence in favour of evolution than a supreme being.
2007-10-29 22:26:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by Catwhiskers 5
·
0⤊
1⤋