Transcript Big-Bang

S
E
E
TATEMENTS of
CIENCE and
CRIPTURE
XHIBITED
XAMINED
XPLAINED
DUCATIONAL
DIFYING
VANGELICAL
Presented
by
Dr Thomas J Kindell
Founder & President of Reasons for Faith Ministries, Inc.
“Be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is
within you” I Peter 3:15
DESIGN IN THE
UNIVERSE…
BIG BANG OR
DIVINE
CREATION?
For in six days the Lord
made the heavens, the
earth, the sea and all
that is in them…
Exodus 20:11
The Big Bang
“Fifteen to twenty billion
years ago a big bang, or
explosion, occurred, creating
the universe. The universe
began as an infinitely dense,
hot fireball, a scrambling of
space and time.”
The Handy Space Answer Book, 1998
BIG BANG PROBLEMS
PRESENT
DAY
COSMIC
EGG
Starts with the cosmic egg
EVERYTHING THAT HAD A BEGINNING
REQUIRES A CAUSE TO EXPLAIN ITS ORIGIN
1. The Universe (including time itself) can be
shown to have had a beginning.
2. It is unreasonable to believe something could
begin to exist without a cause.
3. The Universe therefore requires a cause.
4. God, as Creator of time, is outside of time.
Since therefore He has no beginning in time,
He has always existed, so doesn’t need a
cause.
NOTHING – THE PREFERRED CAUSE
It is tempting to go one step further and speculate
that the entire universe evolved from literally
nothing.
Allan H. Guth & Paul J Steinhardt
...that our Universe had its physical origin as a
quantum fluctuation of some pre-existing true
vacuum or state of nothingness.
Edward Tryon
This “quantum cosmology” provides a loophole
for the universe to, so to speak, spring into
existence from nothing, without violating any
laws of physics.
Paul Davies
The Big Bang
Paul Davies, physicist and evolutionist, in his book - The
Edge of Infinity, describes the big bang this way:
“[The big bang] represents the
instantaneous suspension of
physical laws, the sudden abrupt
flash of lawlessness that allowed
something to come out of nothing.
It represents a true miracle…”
Why is this more scientific than
In the beginning God created?
BIG BANG PROBLEMS
PRESENT
DAY
COSMIC
EGG
No anti-matter
No heavy elements
“The standard Big Bang model does
not give rise to lumpiness. That
model assumes the universe started
out as a globally smooth,
homogenous expanding gas. If you
apply the laws of physics to this
model, you get a universe that is
uniform, a cosmic vastness of
evenly distributed atoms with no
organization of any kind…”
Philip E. Seiden, Cited by Ben Patrusky, “Why is the Cosmos Lumpy?”, Science 81, pg. 96
Star Formation and Physics
The popular theory is that stars form from
vast clouds of gas and dust through
gravitational contraction.
Nebula
Gas and
dust clouds
will expand
NOT
contract
Star Nurseries
Do pictures confirm stars are forming?
EAGLE NEBULA
Star Nurseries
“Stars are still forming today. About
1500 light-years away lies the Orion
Nebula: enough gas and dust to make
millions of stars….
It even contains protostars that are
still condensing …”
Martin Rees (A leading researcher on cosmic evolution),
Before the Beginning, 1998, p. 19.
Star Formation and Nebula
Images taken by the European
Southern Observatory Very
Large Telescope in January
2002 of the Horsehead Nebula
in Orion verified that the
structures are
Anglo-Australian Observatory, Photograph by David Malin
Star Nurseries
Ron Cowen, “Rethinking an Astronomical Icon: The
Eagle’s EGG, Not So Fertile,” Science News, Vol. 161,
16 March 2002, pp. 171–172.
“NASA’s claim in 1995 that these
pictures showed hundreds to thousands
of stars forming was based on the
speculative ‘EGG-star formation theory.’
It has recently been tested independently
with two infrared detectors that can see
inside the dusty pillars.
What did they find?
Few stars were there, and 85% of the
pillars had too little dust and gas to
support star formation. ‘The new
findings also highlight how much
astronomers still have to learn about
star formation.’
No star
nurseries
“Astrophysicists also have developed
plausible hypotheses concerning the
formation of galaxies, individual stars,
and planetary systems. The sun and
planets in our solar system are believed
to have been formed by condensations
from an interstellar cloud of dust and gas
like those now visible in parts of our
galaxy…the condensation resulting in
our solar system was initiated by a
nearby exploding star (or supernova)…”
Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, National
Academy Press, Washington DC (1984), pp. 3-19
“Most disturbing, however, is the fact that
despite numerous efforts, we have yet to
directly observe the process of stellar
formation. We have not yet been able to
unambiguously detect the collapse of a
molecular cloud core or the infall of
circumstellar material onto an embryonic
star. Until such an observation is made, it
would probably be prudent to regard our
current hypotheses and theoretical
scenarios with some degree of suspicion.”
C. J. Lada and F. H. Shu, “Star Formation: From OB Associations to
Protostars,” IAU Symposium 115, pg. 1
“The universe we see when we look
out to its furthest horizons contains
a hundred billion galaxies. Each of
these galaxies contains another
hundred billion stars. That’s 1022
stars all told. The silent
embarrassment of modern
astrophysics is that we do not know
how even a single one of these
stars managed to form.”
Martin Harwitt, Book Reviews, Science, Vol. 231, pp. 1201-1202
Conclusion on Star Formation
Abraham Loeb, (Harvard Center for
Astrophysics), quoted by Marcus Chown, “Let
there be Light”, New Scientist, Feb 7, 1998,
“The truth is that we
don’t understand star
formation at a
fundamental level.”
Formation of Galaxies
Joseph Silk (Professor of Astronomy at the
University of Oxford), The Big Bang, 2001, p. 195.
“Many aspects of the
evolution of galaxies
cannot yet be
determined with any
certainty.”
“The problem of explaining the
existence of galaxies has proved
to be one of the thorniest in
cosmology. By all rights, they just
shouldn’t be there, yet there they
sit. It’s hard to convey the depth
of frustration that this simple fact
induces among scientists.”
James Trefill, The Dark Side of the Universe (New York: Charles
Scribners’s Sons), pg. 55
“But there are plenty of
mysteries left, many of them
discussed by other authors in
this issue. Of what kind of
matter are galaxies and
galactic clusters made?
How did the stars, planets and
galaxies form?”
Steven Weinberg, “Life in the Universe,” Scientific American,
October 1994, pg. 35
“This [big bang] picture of the
universe…is in agreement with
all the observational evidence
that we have
today…Nevertheless, it leaves a
number of important questions
unanswered…[including] (the
origin of stars and galaxies).”
Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, 10th edition, 1998
MR BIG BANG SAYS. . .
MR BIG BANG SAYS. . .
It’s just the origin of
the stars and galaxies
that I’m having trouble
with!
“Thus, the existence of life of any kind
seems to require a cancellation between
different contributions to the vacuum
energy, accurate to about 120 decimal
places. It is possible that this cancellation
will be explained in terms of some future
theory. So far, in string theory as well as in
quantum field theory, the vacuum energy
involves arbitrary constants, which must be
carefully adjusted [by chance?] to make the
total vacuum energy small enough for life
to be possible.”
Steven Weinberg, “Life in the Universe,” Scientific American, October 1994, pg. 49
It is He who sits above the
circle of the earth,
and its inhabitants are like
grasshoppers; Who
stretches out the heavens
like a curtain and spreads
them like a tent to
dwell in.
Isaiah 40:22
He counts the
number of the
stars; He gives
names to all of
them.
Psalm 147:4
Gravity distorts space-time
Space-Time Distortion
The Affect of Gravity on Time
Fast
Slow
Redshift of Starlight
Light Spectrum
UV
Blue
Moving toward
Red
IR
Moving away
Redshifts are used to describe the
expansion of the universe – the distance
of a galaxy from the earth due to the
stretching of the light waves.
Compressed (blue side)
Stretched (red side)
Edwin Hubble
Redshift Interpretation
Galaxy 1
Galaxy 2
Galaxy 3
Blue
Red
We should observe redshifts at all distances
along the light spectrum (big bang model)
Redshift Values
Blue
What we
observe
Blue
Red
Big bang model predicts
a homogeneous
universe
Red
Distinct quanta (1-million light year
intervals)
Dr. D. Russell Humphries
“Our galaxy is the
centre of the
universe,
‘quantized’ red
shifts show”
www.answersingenesis.org
“Such a condition [these red shifts]
would imply that we occupy a
unique position in the
universe,…But the unwelcome
supposition of a favored location
must be avoided at all costs…[it] is
intolerable…moreover, it represents
a discrepancy with the [big bang]
theory because the theory
postulates homogeneity.”
E. Hubble, The Observational Approach to Cosmology, Clarendon, Oxford, 1937
1984
“There is now very
firm evidence that
redshifts of galaxies
are quantized. . .”
W. G. Tifft and W. J. Cocke, “Global Redshift Quantization,”
Astrophysical Journal, 1984
“The fact that measured values of
redshifts do not vary continuously
but come in steps – certain
preferred values – is so
unexpected that conventional
astronomy has never been able to
accept it, in spite of the
overwhelming observational
evidence.”
Halton Arp (staff astronomer at Mt. Wilson and Palomar observatories
for 29 years), Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies, 1987, p. 195
“Quantized redshifts just don’t fit
into this view of the cosmos, for
they imply concentric shells of
galaxies expanding away from a
central point – earth! Even though
more recent redshift data have
supported the notion of quantized
redshifts, cosmologists find them
undigestible, even pathogenic.”
“Quantized Redshifts: What’s Going on Here?”
Sky and Telescope, 84:128, 1992
“. . .the redshift distribution has
been found to be strongly
quantized in the galactocentric
frame of reference. The
phenomenon is easily seen by eye
and apparently cannot be ascribed
to statistical artifacts, selection
procedures or flawed reduction
techniques.”
W. Napler and B. Guthrie, “Quantized Redshifts: A Status Report,”
Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 1997
“Perhaps because of this clarity, or
because of the confirming studies
by other astronomers, critics seem
to have stopped questioning the
validity of the data. It appears that
redshift quantization – the
phenomenon itself, not the theories
trying to explain it – has survived a
quarter-century of peer review.”
Dr. D. Russell Humpries, “Our galaxy is the centre of the universe,
‘quantized’ red shifts show”
George Ellis
People need to be aware that there is a range of
models that could explain the observations, Ellis
argues. “For instance, I can construct you a
spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its
center, and you cannot disprove it based on
observations.” Ellis has published a paper on
this. “You can only exclude it on philosophical
grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing
wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open
is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria
in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries
to hide that.”
Profile: George Ellis, Scientific American, October 1995
Billions of years
Six Days - Earth Standard Time
“Our posturings, our
imagined self-importance,
the delusion that we have
some privileged position in
the universe, are challenged
by this point of pale light.
Our planet is a lonely speck
in the great enveloping
cosmic dark. In our
obscurity -- in all this
vastness -- there is no hint
that help will come from
elsewhere to save us from
ourselves. It is up to us.”
Carl Sagan
Audio CD Albums