ChemEngineer
Diamond Member
- Feb 5, 2019
- 6,061
- 5,867
- 1,940
So, Taz, now that we have reduced you to spouting the same mindless slogan over and over again regarding issue number one, let us now move on to issue number two, as science has recently caught up with what the imperatives of logic and mathematics have told us for centuries, namely, that the cosmological order at large cannot be past eternal. The proof is in the pudding, Taz. Taste it. It's simply scrumptious!
To access the original article below, one must subscribe to New Scientist. Fortunately, I saved it to Word in 2012 because it was the very best summary of the matter for the layman I had come across. After you read it, we can systematically review the pre-reviewed proofs I discuss in my article.
Why physicists can't avoid a creation event
by Lisa Grossman
ISSUE 2847
14 January 2012
Excerpt:
While many of us may be OK with the idea of the big bang simply starting everything, physicists, including Hawking, tend to shy away from cosmic genesis. "A point of creation would be a place where science broke down. One would have to appeal to religion and the hand of God", Hawking told the meeting, at the University of Cambridge, in a pre-recorded speech.For a while it looked like it might be possible to dodge this problem, by relying on models such as an eternally inflating or cyclic universe, both of which seemed to continue infinitely in the past as well as the future. . . .. . . However, as cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University in Boston explained last week, that hope has been gradually fading and may now be dead. He showed that all these theories still demand a beginning.His first target was eternal inflation. Proposed by Alan Guth of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1981, inflation says that in the few slivers of a second after the big bang, the universe doubled in size thousands of times before settling into the calmer expansion we see today.This helped to explain why parts of the universe so distant that they could never have communicated with each other look the same.Eternal inflation is essentially an expansion of Guth's idea, and says that the universe grows at this breakneck pace forever, by constantly giving birth to smaller 'bubble' universes within an ever-expanding multiverse, each of which goes through its own initial period of inflation.Crucially, some versions of eternal inflation applied to time as well as space, with the bubbles forming both backwards and forwards in time.But in 2003, a team including Vilenkin and Guth considered what eternal inflation would mean for the Hubble constant, which describes mathematically the expansion of the universe.They found that the equations didn't work. "You can't construct a space-time with this property", says Vilenkin. It turns out that the constant has a lower limit that prevents inflation in both time directions. "It can’t possibly be eternal in the past", says Vilenkin. "There must be some kind of boundary."Not everyone subscribes to eternal inflation, however, so the idea of an eternal universe still had a foothold. Another option is a cyclic universe, in which the big bang is not really the beginning but more of a bounce back following a previous collapsed universe. The universe goes through infinite cycles of big bangs and crunches with no specific beginning[. . . .] Yet when he looked at what this would mean for the universe’s disorder, again the figures didn’t add up.Disorder increases with time. So following each cycle, the universe must get more and more disordered. But if there has already been an infinite number of cycles, the universe we inhabit now should be in a state of maximum disorder. Such a universe would be uniformly lukewarm and featureless, and definitely lacking such complicated beings as stars, planets and physicists—nothing like the one we see around us.One way around that is to propose that the universe just gets bigger with every cycle. Then the amount of disorder per volume doesn’t increase, so needn’t reach the maximum. But Vilenkin found that this scenario falls prey to the same mathematical argument as eternal inflation: if your universe keeps getting bigger, it must have started somewhere.Vilenkin's final strike is an attack on a third, lesser-known proposal that the cosmos existed eternally in a static state called the cosmic egg.This finally "cracked" to create the big bang, leading to the expanding universe we see today. Late last year Vilenkin and graduate student Audrey Mithani showed that the egg could not have existed forever after all, as quantum instabilities would force it to collapse after a finite amount of time. If it cracked instead, leading to the big bang, then this must have happened before it collapsed—and therefore also after a finite amount of time."This is also not a good candidate for a beginningless universe", Vilenkin concludes. "All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning."
Please, I beg you, send me the entire article. I'll pay you for it, Friend.
“A scientific discovery is also a religious discovery. There is no conflict between science and religion. Our knowledge of God is made larger with every discovery we make about the world.” – Joseph H. Taylor, Jr., who received the 1993 Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery of the first known binary pulsar, and for his work which supported the Big Bang theory of the creation of the universe. Taylor is a devout Christian.
.
“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.” – Albert Einstein
(The Wall Street Journal, Dec 24, 1997, article by Jim Holt, “Science Resurrects God.”)
.
“Atoms are weird stuff, behaving like active agents rather than inert substances. They make unpredictable choices between alternative possibilities according to the laws of quantum mechanics. It appears that mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent inherent in every atom. The universe is also weird, with its laws of nature that make it hospitable to the growth of mind. I do not make any clear distinction between mind and God. God is what mind becomes when it passes beyond the scale of our comprehension.”
“Technology is a gift of God. After the gift of life it is perhaps the greatest of God’s gifts. It is the mother of civilizations, of arts and of sciences.”
“You ask: what is the meaning or purpose of life? I can only answer with another question: do you think we are wise enough to read God’s mind?” – Physicist Freeman Dyson. When Einstein died, there was an opening for the title of “most brilliant physicist on the planet.” Dyson filled the opening by assuming Einstein’s professorship in physics at Princeton University. He is the winner of the 1981 Wolf Prize in Physics, the 1993 Enrico Fermi Award, the 1969 Max Planck Medal, amongst many other awards.
You don't have to pay me for anything. All you need is a Youtube account, then sign in. Then go to my Discussion Page and see "Genetically Modified Simpleton (GMS) Bumps His Head and Makes Baby Talk about the Fine-Tuned Argument".
Use this link after you sign in: "https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr5aMlaeI6J7FOrDc0kctDg/discussion
That link takes one to the comments, not to the lecture you reference.