How did the Universe begin?
Andrew Lerch, James Silva,
Soroush Vosoughi
21W.732
Essay 3
To
All those who have not Accepted Gods Word,
"In the beginning God
created the heavens and the earth". There
is a lot of beauty in this world how could it all happen as a matter of
chance as Big Bang theory suggest. All this beauty has to be the work of a
perfect being; not even the greatest artist of all time could create anything
as complex as the world is. The universe is vast and unique if one was to paint
the universe an infinite amount of detail would be required. This is part of
the beliefs of a creationist but the beliefs of those labeled as creationist
are diverse from strict creationism to Intelligent Design theory to in general they
all involve the role of god in the universe. Strict creationism is the belief
that everything takes place exactly as
it is in the bible from Adam and Eve to Noah’s flood. Intelligent Design is the
theory that some perfect being must have created this universe but does not
involve the belief of the events of the bible.
God has existed since the
beginning of time as described in John
1:1 "In the beginning was the Word,and the Word was with God, and the Word
was God." this constant presence by god is much like the constant nature
of steady state theory and that is why both theories do not conflict and
scientist such as Einstein could rationalize god’s existence and their
scientific beliefs. If god did create everything then there isn't much left
unanswered it all is part of god's work all part of his plan. Creationism is
what a majority of the world believes in, Science may say otherwise, but to
those with faith what science says is unimportant, it is the lies of heathens.
In the USA there is a significant percentage of citizens who do not believe in
evolution; some studies estimate almost half of all Americans do not believe in
evolution. Our world exist due to the grace of our lord and savior. However
even creationism is a broad term that covers many different beliefs such as
creation science. It is all part of one’s personal beliefs.
Sincerly,
James
To whom it may concern,
In
the debate of how the universe was created, there are many different opinions
about how everything started. The most
valid is the Big Band theory. This theory
states that the universe was created about 10-20 billion years ago from an
explosion that hurled matter in all directions. It was proposed because an observance of a red shift in distant
galaxies. This shift from is similar to
the Doppler Effect, where as a body is moving away from a point, the sound, or
in this case, light waves appear to be spaced further apart. Similar to the effect when an ambulance drives
past you, the sound changes to be lower pitched. This red shift implies that the galaxies are moving apart.
The only way to explain the
galaxies moving apart is that some force was applied to them. The Big Bang is able to explain this by an
explosion when the universe was in an infinitely dense state because that is
one reasonable explanation how there was enough repulsive force to make the
universe expand at such a fast rate. The
laws of physics and time did not apply before the Big Bang, which makes the
instant of the Big Bang the beginning of everything from a scientific
standpoint. The Big Bang can be
supported by experimental evidence that has been gathered by the Hubble Space
Telescope, which has observed that galaxies are moving apart at a speed
proportional to their distance from earth.
As opposed to other
theories, such as creationism or steady state, this theory is supported by observational
evidence. The Big Bang Theory has
enough evidence for it to disprove the other ideas. From the observational evidence as well as models that have been
set up, the facts show that the Big Bang theory is indeed the best at
explaining the origin of the universe.
The belief in Creationism
would lead you to believe that God created the Universe, but in a world where
we use facts as a base for assumptions, I ask where is the proof. Having faith in something does not make it
true. The Big Bang theory can be
supported by observational evidence and has physical data gathered from our
universe that supports it. It is fact
and fact cannot be argued with.
Sincerely,
Andrew
Lerch
Dear Andrew and James,
In response to your recent
letter about the creation of the universe, I would like to look at this issue
from a philosophical point of view. To
do so, I will start my argument with a quote from the 17th century
mathematician and philosopher, G.W.F Leibniz, "The first question which
should rightly be asked is, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” This question does seem to possess a
profound existential force, which has been felt by some of humankind’s greatest
thinkers. Why does
something exist instead of nothing?
Leibniz answered this question by arguing that something exists rather
than nothing because a necessary being exists which carries within itself its
reason for existence and is the sufficient reason for the existence of all
contingent being.
Although Leibniz (followed
by certain contemporary philosophers) regarded the non-existence of a necessary
being as logically impossible, a more modest explication of necessity of
existence has been given by John Hick, a current Philosopher of religion. He says, “A necessary being is an eternal,
uncaused, indestructible, and incorruptible being.” Leibniz, of course, identified the necessary being as God. His critics, however, disputed this
identification, contending that the material universe could itself be assigned
the status of a necessary being. David
Hume, a well-known philosopher of the 18th century known for his
atheistic views is one of Leibniz’s critics.
Opposing the idea that the necessary being is God he asks, “… may not
the material universe be the necessary existent Being, according to this
pretended explanation of necessity?".
Typically, this has been precisely the position of the entire
atheist. Atheists have not felt
compelled to embrace the view that the universe came into being out of nothing
for any reason at all; rather they regard the universe itself as a somewhat
factually necessary being: the universe is eternal, uncaused, indestructible,
and incorruptible. As Bertrand Russell,
a modern analytic philosopher and an atheist put it, “. . . The universe is just there, and that's
all."
Unlike any other theories,
this theory at the same time proves and disproves the creation of the universe
by God depending how it is look at and interpreted. This theory therefore leaves us in a rational impasse, suggesting
that the origin of universe is an issue that is far beyond the comprehension
and understanding of humankind.
Sincerely,
Soroush
Vosoughi
Dear Andrew
and Soroush,
One
may ask, “what about evolution, steady state theory, big bang theory how do
these fit into the idea of creationism”, I say the fit in just right. The big bang theory proposes everything was
initiated by a primordial explosion of matter, a seemingly random event in the
eyes of those without faith but to those with faith it is an act of god who
acts as a catalyst to this explosion. The
big bang theory is not much different from religion it makes too many
assumptions such as the perfect timing needed for the big bang to create
anything. Even evolution could it not
be the work of god, who else could create a system in such perfect harmony , a
system meant to eliminate mistakes and promote it's own successes, a perfect system
which could only be the work of a perfect being. In the eyes of those who believe in god most theories such as big
bang, steady state, and evolution. Intelligent
Design can all be rationalized as being different takes on the work of god after
all “god works in mysterious ways”. In
any case, one thing we can all agree upon is uncertainty and in this
uncertainty is where God must exist for us all.
Sincerely,
James
Dear James and Soroush,
In order to describe how the world is, people must look to
science. Science shows that the Big
Bang Theory is based on fact. There is
observational evidence that shows that the universe is acting similar to the
way that the Big Bang Theory described it.
Other theories such as the solid-state theory and creationism have no
basis in fact and are poor attempts at describing the universe. The physical way to describe the expanding
universe is there was some type of beginning where the universe began to expand. If we trace the universe backwards, physical
laws dictated that there would be a point where the universe will have no
volume and infinite density, proving the Big Bang theory true. When explaining how the universe came to be,
science is the only viable way to ensure that what one has found is fact.
Sincerely,
Andrew
Dear Andrew
and James,
When searching for the
origin of universe, most people always think that there are only two sides to
this issue, the creationists versus the scientists. Not many people know that philosophers have been trying to
explain the existence of the universe well before any creationists or
scientists even existed. Some
philosophers state that the belief that God created the universe is
unsatisfactory. They refer to the
"Cosmological Argument," a three-step process verifying a cause to
the existence of the universe.
Everything that begins to exist, according to them, has a cause, and
since the universe began to exist, there must be a cause to its existence. They claim the cause to the universe is just
the universe itself. They agree that
every thing has a cause, however they argue that the universe is not a thing
and that it's a conjunction of things that come together to form the existing
universe. Other philosophers however,
attack the other group’s interpretation of the Cosmological Argument. They claim that the universe is indeed a
thing, stating its expanding properties, elements, and matter as examples. They say the universe is not self-explained,
but call it a physical being that comes into being at the Big Bang. Even the philosophers do not agree on this
issue leaving one to wonder that maybe the origin of the universe is something
that humankind was never meant to know.
Sincerely,
Soroush
Sincerely,
Soroush
Bibliography
Copleston, F.C. and Russell,
Bertrand. "The Existence of
God," in The Existence of God, ed. with an Introduction by John
Hick, Problems of Philosophy Series.
New York: Macmillan & Co., 1964), p. 175.
Forrest, Barbara and Gross,
Paul R. Creationism's Trojan horse : the wedge of intelligent design. Penguin Books: New York, 1995.
Hawking,
Stephen. A Brief History of Time.
Bantam Books: New York, 1996.
Hick, John. "God as Necessary Being," Journal
of Philosophy 57 (1960): 733-4.
Hume, David. Dialogues concerning Natural Religion,
ed. with an Introduction by Norman Kemp Smith, Library of the Liberal
Arts. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
1947, p. 190.
Leibniz, G.W. "The Principles of Nature and of Grace,
Based on Reason," in Leibniz Selections, ed. Philip P. Wiener,
The Modern Student's Library. New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1951, p. 527.
Leibniz, G.W. Theodicy: Essays on the Goodness of God,
the Freedom of Man, and the Origin of Evil, trans. E.M. Huggard. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1951, p.
127; cf. idem, "Principles," p. 528.
National
Aeronautic and Space Administration. The Big Bang Theory. 11/21/04.
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/universe/b_bang.html
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/CMBergman.html
All works contained herein are copyright their respective owners.