The Big Bang Theory

As you hear talk about The Big Bang, you need to realize and remember that this is not a fact, but only a theory of how the universe was created. Over the years there have been many theories put forth, and there are currently other theories. The Big Bang is only the currently most popular theory, and as such it has, since the mid-1900s, been the most studied theory. As it has developed, the theory does have many points in its favor, but like all other theories it contains some problems. The most problemic is in the event proposed.

Stephen Hawking ranks right with Einstein as a primary theoretician of recent centuries, and he is one of those who have been studying the theory. His calculations have said that, prior to the event, there was nothing: no space, no time, no mass . . . nothing! In microseconds, out of nothing the foundation of our entire universe suddenly appeared! This is a major problem with The Big Bang theory, as well as with every beginnings theory ever developed. Things simply don't arise from nothing! Reason says it can't happen. Research says it can't happen. Thermodynamics says it can't happen. If you asked him, Hawking would probably tell you it can't happen - yet, his calculations say that it did!

The underlying problem is that we are trying to explain something of which we have no knowledge and we have no way of gaining event knowledge. Our attempt to understand the event can only be through examining events which occur today and gradually work our way backwards to the original event. This requires a paradigm that all reactions are unchanging through time. But what if they have changed? Many calculation involve the speed of light. What if the speed of light approached infinity during the first microsecond of the creation event, and has been hyperbolicly slowing since that time? (This has been suggested by a few.) By now it would be effectively constant over the several centuries since it was first measured, and all historical measurements using speed of light would be in error. Light travels in a straight line and it's path can only be altered by passing through a boundary between substances of differing density. What if the boundary at the edge of our universe actually reflects light? In this case the universe might be much smaller than calculated. Both events are unlikely, but we cannot know they are absolutely impossible, because we have no way to test the possibility. What these points do demonstrate is the problem with using an incorrect paradigm when making theoretical calculations of events that can not be reproduced.

When it comes to the origin of the universe, we have only theories and calculations - we have no real knowledge. In the bible the Lord asks Job, "Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge?" (Job 38:2) He then goes on to ask a series of questions, to which no human, even today, has the information necessary for an answer. A few astrophysicists have suggest the existence of multiple universes, some of which may actually coexist with ours. While this seems unlikely, most, if not all, societies believe in some kind of heaven supervised by a god. Would not a heaven be a coexisting universe? In the Judaeo-Christian tradition, an all powerful God is recognized and worshiped. To fit all biblical descriptions of God, there would need to be no space, so time, and no mass in heaven. So far as we know, there is only one thing remaining upon which a universe might exist, that being energy. Einstein theorized that all mass is, basically, organized energy, and this has been proven true. Could initiation of our universe possibly be the result of an all-powerful God simply gathering some energy from what we call heaven and, in an event we are calling The Big Bang, setting into motion the organization of this energy to form mass? All of time and space are mass dependent, so would follow that event.

Just something to think about!