Philosophical musings on Quanta & Qualia; Materialism & Spiritualism; Science & Religion; Pragmatism & Idealism, etc.
Big Bang
Creation
Ex Nihilo!
Post 56.November 08, 2018
Creation versus Big Bang Tradition or Evidence or Information?
In a creationist YouTube video, an Evolution Theory proponent ridiculed "Creation Science Evangelist" Kent Hovind for his belief in divine creation based on an ancient myth rather than on objective facts. In his rebuttal, Hovind accused the scientist of basing his materialistic worldview on faith in a god-less miracle whereby something arises from nothing. He said that both views are religious because they are faith-based. I happen to agree with both the Evolution & Creation theories, but not with the Materialist & Spiritualist assumptions that underly them. Both paradigms have accepted the evidence that our world suddenly materialized from nothingess. But they disagree on the provenance of that event.
Although “Faith” is a four-letter-word for secular scientists, the creative Singularity is essentially an abstract mathematical myth, to be accepted as a gap-filler until a more Materialistic alternative can be devised. [ Click here for popup ] And the ancient religious myths were merely elaborate primitive guesses about mysterious forces & causes. Both fables are clearly incomplete, and out of date. Therefore, my alternative theory of creation, Enformationism, is intended to fill the plausibility gap between scriptural traditions, and scientific extrapolations ─ partly intuitive & partly rational, part speculation & part calculation.
At the dawn of the 20th century, most astronomers & astro-physicists assumed that the universe was eternal. So the new observations implying a beginning to space & time came as a shock. The so-called "Big Bang theory", that was proposed to explain the evidence, is not based on observation of the actual original event, but is a poetic explanation for the observed fact that space is now expanding, apparently from a singular origin point1. Ironically, the notion of a material universe appearing suddenly from nothingness2, like a magician’s “presto”, sounded so preposterous that skeptical steady-state theorist Fred Hoyle3 dismissed it with a derisive-but-evocative epithet that went viral in the popular mind.
Even proponents of the new theory were uncomfortable with the obvious similarity to the biblical account of the world spoken into existence by divine fiat. Christian creationists like Hovind have enthusiastically accepted the BB theory as an empirical endorsement of the Genesis account of creation in a sudden burst of light (energy) that evolved in stages (seven days) to the stable state we see today. Nobody was there to witness that cosmic birth, so anything we might say about it will be conjectured from circumstantial evidence. Some will caulk that knowledge gap with all-purpose mundane matter, while others will fill it with shape-shifting spiritual stuff. I prefer to fill it with Information4. To replace ignorance with knowledge.
The empirical and theoretical evidence produced by pragmatic scientists in the early 20th century has revealed a something-from-nothing scenario at both ends of the scale : cosmic and quantum. Our world began in an abstract Singularity beyond space & time; it’s now grounded upon an immaterial Quantum Field of virtual reality. So, theists are pleased to have some hard rational evidence to corroborate the Bible, and to quote in their emotive sermons on divine providence. Yet, frustrated atheists still hold out hope that digging deeper into the primeval mysteries of the universe will eventually justify their “faith” in a material world consisting only of atoms & void . . . no spooky spirits mischievously toying with credulous humans.
Post 56 continued . . . click Next
Singularity or God or G*D? The Big Bang theory was developed to explain how early 20th century observations of the stars found that they are moving away from each other at incredible speed. This astounding fact mandated an explanation, because it contradicted the then dominant science paradigms of an Eternal Static Universe or a Steady State Universe. So mathematicians traced the radiation of star-stuff back to a point in time where their computations shot off into infinity. This implied that Space/Time and Matter /Energy emerged into measurable reality from somewhere off the charts, where normal names & numbers are meaningless, and normal reasoning approaches absurdity. Consequently, the proposed mathematical Singularity exists, by definition, outside of space & time and beyond the purview of Science ─ like a god.
Therefore, any conjectures for where & why the universe came into existence are essentially mythical interpretations of counter-intuitive concepts1. Hence, the modern theories are no more empirical or factual than the Bronze Age allegories of Mount Olympus or Sinai-dwelling deities. They are divided primarily in their definition of Nothingness2. In effect, the Singularity is a creative agent with the statistical power to produce a new world from nothingness. However, I prefer to use the less presumptive term “potential” to describe the limitless options available in Enfernity. The early notions of humanoid gods pushing stars around, and causing all sorts of mysterious events in the world, were simply crude ways to describe what we now call Energy, the shape-shifting stuff of matter and the cause of all physical changes. The combination of creative Energy and destructive Entropy is what I call EnFormAction. And the First Cause Creative Agent is what I call G*D, without presuming to know anything personal about that entity.
2. Nothingness : Religion – a spiritual realm populated by angels & gods Science 1 – the infinite Multiverse beyond our finite universe. Science 2 – the quantum field from which virtual stuff becomes real Philosophy – eternal statistical potential from which real things (actualities) emerge
God or Big Bang? Hovind video
Click Here for Popup
3. Miracle of Creation : Notable Scientist’s opinions on BB theory
Fred “Big Bang” Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." (changed his tune)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological status of the word.
Paul Davies (British astrophysicist): "There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming”
1. Big Bang : The point of origin for the radial expansion of all matter in the universe – now known as the Singularity – was described by ancient thinkers as a “primeval atom” or a “cosmic egg”, or “the birth” of our universe. The new theory was sarcastically labeled as a “bang” by Fred Hoyle because of the mythical implications from the sudden appearance of a Cosmos from nothing in an instant. Even when disguised in mathematical language though, that something-from -nothing, matter-from- immaterial, concept still sounds suspiciously like an act of creation. And such an unnatural miraculous event would seem to require a supernatural Agent or Cause. Which is, by definition, not a valid inference for Secular Materialists. It is however, the favored deduction for Religious Spiritualists. And it is also a plausible notion for Secular Informationists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
2. Instantaneous Inflation : There is no evidence of a primordial explosion (the Bang), but only of the subsequent expansion (inflation). According to the current theory, a universe 840 times the size of our Milky Way galaxy puffed-up, faster than light speed, in a fraction of a second from a dot like this period . That incon-ceivable notion can only be grasped as an act of magic. https:// . . . size-of-universe-after-inflation “Despite its name, the big bang theory is not really a theory of a bang at all. It is really only a theory of the aftermath of a bang.” ____Alan Guth. https:// . . .before-the-big-bang
NEXT
BACK
Forum
