There are several theories of what could have happened before the Big Bang. One such theory is that before this universe another was created and before that one another one existed giving the idea that there could be an inifinity of universes one coming after the other, one dying and one being created. I believe that there is God but lately I am having some doubts about this theory because if the universes go back in time for infinity then they may have not been created initially by someone. I know that even if they are infinite in time life must have been created by God because life cannot be created out of nothing but the above theory transfixes me.

Another idea is that the idea that the total energy of the universe is O. There is another theory that the universe originated from a singularity but someone must have caused the universe to form from this singularity despite total energy being zero?

Without the universe that expanded from the Big Bang, there is no such thing as time, at least as we know it. This is one of the reasons, even supposing that these previous universes go back ad infinitum, nothing precludes a God who created it/them because such a being would be outside the framework of time as defined by the existence of matter. Hence, God is far beyond what we can comprehend or measure or even conceive based on our time-bound experience, and not subject to any of the "laws" of the physical universe, whether this one or any previous (or subsequent) one. That's why the question "Where did God come from?" is meaningless, because we have no way of exploring or even defining anything that is outside of time.

I hope this makes sense and I hope it helps.

Sorry, in Christianity, there is no "big bang" that is science.

With God, yes life was created out of nothing, thus why God is God. Nothing was there, God just though his spoken world ( or to some the Word was Jesus) created all things. It was the all life except man was created just by saying the word and it came to life, Man was created by the breath or spirit of God.

No science, if you try to justify God, or explain God and creation using science you will always doubt, since it is beyond man.

Did God create other worlds or even planets with life, perhaps, he has not told us that. No reason to doubt he may not have. Was there a universe before ours, perhaps and they were destroyed because of their evil and God started fresh.

For God, where space, and even time have no meaning, anything is possible. Man is limited since he wants to explain it within his understanding

Hi Roddilla,

I think you are alluding to the universe coming from nothing theory as articulated by people such as Lawrence Krauss and others. More specifically the problem of design or coincidence implications for the theory.

Basically, the idea is centred on the fact we live in a universe that is dominated by dark energy. The ratio of dark energy to dark matter is 70/30. Krauss says this is significant because it it were any different, say 60/40 then there would have been no star formation, no formation of galaxies. The obvious outcomes is that we would not be here to talk about living in a 60/40 universe.

It therefore seems obvious that we live in a fine tuned universe. Fine tuned
Universes don't happen by accident. Someone must have done the fine tuning to allow for us to be here.

Without going into a lot of detail Krauss rejects this idea on the basis that our universe has gone through all different stages of development and the energy of empty space depends on something know as the cosmological constant. So the fine tuning actually depends on a time when the mass of the universe is in tune with the cosmological constant.

In other words,as the density of empty space expands we are fortunate enough to be in a time when the total amount of energy of empty space is zero. This ideal situation has allowed for the formation of stars and galaxies and eventually the formation of us.

Krauss says that things seem fine tuned because it just so happens we live in a time that gave the universe the opportunity to give rise to people. There are other universes were no observations are made about the uniqueness of that universe because the total amount of energy in that universe is not yet zero.

Fr_Chuck, I have to disagree. God created, yes. But there's no reason why we can study and posit something like the Big Bang as the mechanism. I agree that science can't even begin to explain God, but it can definitely tell us some things about the wonders of his handiwork.

Rodilla, if you are indeed talking about Krauss's work, I read it and found it untenable. Basically, he can only get where he does by completely redefining the word "nothing." By that approach, I could say my dog is a duck simply by redefining either "dog" or "duck." It doesn't work.

May I ask another thing? So far science has not come up with the idea of how the very first livi

May I ask another thing? So far science has not come up with the idea of how the very first cell was created no? So life as the Bible itself says must have been created directly by God

And another one to conclude: we say in physics
That in universe entropy is always increases which
Is what happened between the singularity and the
Universe. What I want to know is if this implies
That the singularity converted to the universe by
The Big Bang Reaction went off by itself because it is driven by entropy? Still the question would be who caused the formation of singularity

At some point in the past, it was so hot that individual atoms would have been blasted apart by the radiation in the Universe. This means that — as we come forward in time past that point — there was a point when all the nuclei and electrons in the Universe became stable, neutral atoms for the first time.
What Happened Before The Big Bang? – Starts With A Bang

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Rodilla, if you are indeed talking about Krauss's work, I read it and found it untenable. Basically, he can only get where he does by completely redefining the word "nothing." By that approach, I could say my dog is a duck simply by redefining either "dog" or "duck." It doesn't work.

---

By nothing Krauss means empty space.

One can get an appreciation of the enormity of the problems faced by physicists in understanding,'empty space'. Google: Vacuum Energy and you will see what I mean.

Tut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

And another one to conclude: we say in physics
that in universe entropy is always increases which
is what happened between the singularity and the
universe. What I want to know is if this implies
that the singularity converted to the universe by
the Big Bang Reaction went off by itself because it is driven by entropy? Still the question would be who caused the formation of singularity

---

We could probably say that the universe in its very early stages was very uniform. It had very low entropy. I guess the short answer( if there is a short answer) is that the universe later exhibited disorganization and reorganization.

Your next question might be,"To what extend does a universe with zero energy follow the laws of thermodynamics?"


These question might be better discussed in the physics forum. It also leaves the possibility that people with better knowledge than myself can help.


Tut

What I mean is that by this thoery we cannot state that God caused the change from singularity to universe?

Then there is still the idea of who created the singularity. But can this singularity have been there for ever and not created by God? Or no because then it means that still something must have caused it to change after so much time being a singularity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

What I mean is that by this thoery we cannot state that God caused the change from singularity to universe?

Then there is still the idea of who created the singularity. But can this singularity have been there for ever and not created by God? Or no because then it means that still something must have caused it to change after so much time being a singularity.

---

What you are asking here is a metaphysical question. When you ask a religious question you are asking a metaphysical question. That's fair enough because this is a religious forum.

But yes you are right, you cannot say that God cause the universe FROM A SCIENTIFIC point of view. On the other hand, from a religious point of view you CAN SAY that God caused the Universe.

However, science doesn't address metaphysical questions. So when faced with the problem problem of who or what caused the Big Bang science ignores the 'who' part and addressed the 'what' part. The 'what' bit is actually a scientific explanation. In other words, it gives us a casual explanation for the origins of the universe.

If you read Dave's response you will see why the two explanations are incompatible. It isn't that science is deliberately ignoring the issue, it is just that metaphysics is not part of the scientific method. So you cannot play one off against the other.

Does this help?

Tut

But do you agree with my statement that only God could have created singularity and singularity could have never been for ever?

Firstly thanks a lot for your help? SO what you are saying that entropy increased and then decreased and then increased? In what way however?

Last thing I have know accepted the fact that if there was a singularity it should have been created by God; the universe is too exact to be created on its own; singularity could have never existed for ever because then the universe should have been created longer in infinity, right?

One last thing if before our universe there were others and so on for infinity what does this show about God? Could they have existed for ever without the introduction of God?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

But do you agree with my statement that only God could have created singularity and singularity could have never been for ever?

---

I agree that it is logically possible. However, I am not sure what you are asking in the second part of your question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

Firstly thanks a lot for your help? SO what you are saying that entropy increased and then decreased and then increased? In what way however?

---

Basically I think we could say that the universe started in a highly organized state. In other words, very low entropy. As far as matter and an expanding universe is concerned we can imagine that entropy would naturally increase over time. It would seem rather strange to say that the universe started in a highly organized state and became even more highly organized. In other words, star and galaxy formation seems to bed the result of this.

The second law of thermodynamics seems to have helped in this regard. As disorganization tended to cause matter to clump this gave gravity the opportunity to reorganize matter into stars and galaxies.

I think I am right in saying that the role of gravity in the formation of the universe is still not completely understood. For example, it is difficult to explain why gravity is so weak compared to the other fundamental forces.

Tut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

Last thing I have know accepted the fact that if there was a singularity it should have been created by God; the universe is too exact to be created on its own; singularity could have never existed for ever because then the universe should have been created longer in infinity, right?

---

Yes, it is possible that a singularity could have been created by God. However, singularities are something that was only begrudgingly accept by physicists. The problem is that the mathematics associated with singularities gives rise to too many infinities. Many physicists do not like infinities as outcomes because it suggests a lack of understanding.

At the moment there are a number of competing theories that do away with the singularity. In other words, they give us an explanation for the Big Bang without the need for a singularity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rodilla

One last thing if before our universe there were others and so on for infinity what does this show about God? Could they have existed for ever without the introduction of God?

---

I think you are asking about a cycle of universes, but I am not sure. Are you saying that the universe will eventually contract into a Big Crunch and create another singularity? From this singularity another Big Bang will occur and so the process of expansion and contraction goes on forever? I don't see this process as needing a creator because the universe in this model generates and regenerates itself.

The idea of a Big Bang Big, Big Crunch universe is not supported by the latest evidence. What is actually is happening is that the universe is accelerating away from us ( and every other point) at an ever increasing rate. Dark energy is the dominate force and if it continues the universe will suffer a heat death. Eventually we will think we are the only galaxy in the universe. Every other galaxy will be moving away from us faster than the speed of light.


Tut

Sorry double post

I like hearing theories of the universe and beyond and before, for the sheer enormity of it all, for the fact that there is so much still unexplained and mysterious and conflicting, and for getting away from the trials and tribulations of petty daily life.
What I wonder (as someone who doesn't believe in God) what people here who do believe and who also study and appreciate science think God consists of, is made of?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joypulv

I like hearing theories of the universe and beyond and before, for the sheer enormity of it all, for the fact that there is so much still unexplained and mysterious and conflicting, and for getting away from the trials and tribulations of petty daily life.
What I wonder (as someone who doesn't believe in God) what people here who do believe and who also study and appreciate science think God consists of, is made of?

---

Science is merely the understanding of how things work. The problem with humanity trying to understand God and even to a lesser extent the spiritual world, is that our idea of the scientific method simply does not apply because that plane of existence is OUTSIDE of our physical realm. Things like what God consists of is something I believe we really have no possible way to answer.

Of course, it's always fun to speculate!

If God is not matter, anti-matter, dark matter, energy, SOMETHING, then doesn't anyone in the physics world wonder if he interferes with the laws of physics? I know Einstein believed in God. I've watched Douglas Hofstadter talk about his wife's consciousness 'out there' after her death, and others talk about an afterlife of 'information' from our being.

Oh yes, I'm in no way saying it's not interesting. And I love thinking about the subject... but in the end I think it is something that is beyond us. We don't even really know what spirit is. But we know that God is spirit and essentially so are human beings. What is that? It's not matter, that's out bodies. It really hurts my brain to think about. Yet, as a spirit, we are still a fully functioning being. In fact, the Bible even describes what we will become as a glorified body... so there is still as aspect of "matter" than may be involved. Who knows... I'm sure it'll be great no matter what it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hauntinghelper

Science is merely the understanding of how things work. The problem with humanity trying to understand God and even to a lesser extent the spiritual world, is that our idea of the scientific method simply does not apply because that plane of existence is OUTSIDE of our physical realm. Things like what God consists of is something I believe we really have no possible way to answer.

Of course, it's always fun to speculate!

---

So how do we come that we believe if we cannot find proves of his existence since we cannot explain anything about him?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hauntinghelper

Oh yes, I'm in no way saying it's not interesting. And I love thinking about the subject...but in the end I think it is something that is beyond us. We don't even really know what spirit is. But we know that God is spirit and essentially so are human beings. What is that? It's not matter, that's out bodies. It really hurts my brain to think about. Yet, as a spirit, we are still a fully functioning being. Infact, the Bible even describes what we will become as a glorified body...so there is still as aspect of "matter" than may be involved. Who knows...I'm sure it'll be great no matter what it is.

---

But what proof do we have that we have a spirit and so is god - after all to belief requires some reasoning as well

A basic tenet of believing in God and a spirit is faith. Faith isn't based on reasoning; it is belief without proof.
That's why I ask the physicists if they can explain what God is 'made of' and if they don't want to try, how they manage to separate yet reconcile faith and reason.

I simply work on the only theory that comes from revelation and not from science. God created. Science has offered us no explanations, just facts about details which may, or may not, be the correct version of events. The reality is we haven't been told and we don't need to know, at least, not at this stage of our development. What have we gained by knowing that the universe might be 13 billion or some year old, nothing but questions and the certain knowledge that nothing we have observed exists today. It is a wonder and nothing more than that. The latest theory is that four billion years ago about all the matter that ever existed existed then, well whoop=de=doo, another useless fact or theory, according to what you believe. Black holes are now having to justify themselves, the arrogance of science.

What I know is this, God exists, how or why I don't know

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joypulv

A basic tenet of believing in God and a spirit is faith. Faith isn't based on reasoning; it is belief without proof.
That's why I ask the physicists if they can explain what God is 'made of' and if they don't want to try, how they manage to separate yet reconcile faith and reason.

---

Hi Joy,

That's a difficult question to answer in a few posts. Perhaps, for a start we could change a few definitions you have used. This may help.

Actually, our Western society has a strong history of explaining faith with reason. History of theology and philosophy has a strong tradition of demonstrating the existence of God through reasoning. This is quite different to scientific reasoning and I will try to demonstrate why as we go on.

Reasoning in a theological way can actually mean a lot of things, but generally speaking it is said that the existence of God can be demonstrated through logic.

To give you a very poor example, that I have just made up (only for the purposes of this demonstration) of a logical argument for the existence of God:

"It is inconceivable to imagine a superior being that cannot, not exist"

The important point is that my argument for God's existence is based solely on the terms of the sentence I have used. In other words, anyone can see the truth of this sentence, even if they never move out of their armchair. All they have to do is read the sentence. Another way of saying this is that it is self-evidently true.

The reasoning used by science is also self-evidently true. Mathematics, for example can be said to be self- evidently true. Naturally, mathematics is an important part of science. We can also see the truth of mathematical propositions by sitting in our armchairs.

The important point is that we can never do science sitting in our armchairs. Science can only be achieved by getting out of our armchairs and conducting some observations.

In the end we can never test by way of observation the truth of my statement:

"It is inconceivable to imagine a superior being that cannot not exist"

No telescope, or any other scientific instrument can ever hope to reveal a superior being that would prove my sentence true BY WAY OF OBSERVATION.

Science makes the observations using the instruments and then formulates a theory to explain what they are actually seeing. For the purposes of this argument we might say that the radiation left over from the Big Bang tends to be fainter the further we go out into space, but stronger the closer we are to earth. This is not actually true, but let us imagine it is true.

This observation might suggest that at an earlier time in history there was a strong concentration of radiation in the one spot and it seems as though there was some type of explosion that resulted in a spreading out of this radiation.

This seems like a reasonable theory based on the observations but we need to back it up with some 'reasoning' The reasoning in this case would be the mathematics that might explain some of the observations.

In light of what I have just said I will try and answer your question that stated:

"That's why I asked the physicist if they can explain what God is 'made of' and if they don't want to try, how they manage to reconcile faith and reason"

A physicist would be happy to acknowledge the existence of God if he/she could actually make the observations. If such observations were possible then he/she could use mathematics ( a type of reasoning) combined with the observations to determine what type of substance God is made of. Obviously this is not possible.

So its not a case of not wanting to try, but more of a case of there is nothing to observe in terms of physical things. On this basis it is also the case that there is no conflict between faith and reason on the part of the scientist because reasoning in science ( for the purpose of this exercise) is a different type of reasoning.


I don't know if this is much of an explanation, but it is the best I can come up with.

Tut

So the idea of cycling universes is not accepted ?

Not at the moment.

Brian Schmidt won the Nobel Prize in physics in 2011 for his discovery that the universe is actually accelerating at an ever increasing rate. This is probably because of the dominance of dark energy over dark matter.

If the acceleration rate continues and there is no reversal then we will end up being one galaxy in an empty universe. More correctly, this will be the way it seems to us- as it will to every other inhabitant of other galaxies ( assuming there is intelligent life in other galaxies). Everyone on every other galaxy will believe they are the only galaxy in the entire universe because no light from anywhere else will reach them or us.

It seems we are destined to eventually live in a cold dark universe that will keep on expanding.

Tut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

But what proof do we have that we have a spirit and so is god - after all to belief requires some reasoning as well

---

One possible starting point would be to try and logically prove that spirit, consciousness is a non-physical substance. It has been tried many time in the past in one way or another without much success. This hasn't stopped some fairly good recent attempts to formulate arguments in favour of dualism. Physical body and a non-physical mind.

Tut

Why is there no theory that our big bang created just one universe out of many that have their own time agenda in an infinite space?

Still if many universes were created it still counts the theory that someone must have created and caused BIg Band

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TUT317

One possible starting point would be to try and logically prove that spirit, consciousness is a non-physical substance. It has been tried many time in the past in one way or another without much success. This hasn't stopped some fairly good recent attempts to formulate arguments in favour of dualism. Physical body and a non-physical mind.

Tut

---

What I want to know is if someone who doesn't believe asks me how can you believe in the spirit?
In order to do this I make use of the argument that if a wrong spirit may take control of a person (a person becomes possessed) then a person may have a good spirit as well. We have proves that persons become possessed.

Proof of someone being possessed? I'm outahere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joypulv

Why is there no theory that our big bang created just one universe out of many that have their own time agenda in an infinite space?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

still many universes were created it still counts the theory that someone must have created and caused BIG Bang

---

I think you both are alluding to some type of first cause argument. In other words, if we trace a cause back far enough we will eventually get to the Big Bang. The next logical step in the causal chain is to ask who caused the Big Bang.

Sometimes this better know as a cosmological argument. As I said earlier, this is a logical, or metaphysical argument. So strictly speaking it is not a theory, but an argument for an uncaused cause.

Many people see this as a very good argument, but as far as science is concerned it is still a metaphysical argument because we have no way of tracing causes backward to the beginning. Science doesn't acknowledge metaphysical arguments.


Tut

Tut

You want to prove God by observation, this is not hard to do. There are many inexplicable events, God in action. The greater question is why does he bother?

Einstein once said "I just want to know the thoughts of God, everything else is just the details".

Just as we cannot see the wood for the trees, so we are unable to see God for the details, we are busy trying to explain the details

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

What I want to know is if someone who doesn't believe asks me how can you believe in the spirit?
In order to do this I make use of the argument that if a wrong spirit may take control of a person (a person becomes possessed) then a person may have a good spirit as well. We have proves that persons become possessed.

---

A psychologist would probably say that this person is suffering from some type of psychosis.

If you want to try and convince someone that humans have something 'extra' that is of a non-physical nature then ask them if it is possible for them to create a computer programme that builds in consciousness. In other words, can anyone create for me a computer that is conscious in the same way humans are conscious?

However, keep in mind is very difficult to prove the existence of something that is non-physical. Not impossible but difficult.

Tut

I didn't ask a metaphysical question. It was plain and simple physics.