Big Bang is incomplete?

Is it generally accepted that the big bang theory is incomplete?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It seems incomplete to me, since it doesn't seem to explain where the fuel for the big bang originated from.

If it is generally accepted that the big bang theory is incomplete, then would you agree that the big bang theory fails to explain the origin of the universe? Rather, it seems to be explaining, what we assume are, the earliest moments of the universe as we understand it.

Are there any theories out there that try to explain the origins of the universe?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hey James,

Thanks for your confirmation! I'll look into String and Brane theories shortly.

You also said:

"There are also plenty of non-scientific "theories" which explain the origins of the universe, but I'll leave those for the Religion forum."

Considering the fact that science has not been able to provide a comprehensive theory of creation, would you agree that religious theories can be said to have more validity? Afterall, if someone poses the question what is 2 plus 2 and somebody says "3", the person who says "don't know" can hardly object!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree that religion does not explain matters such as gravity etc., but it doesn't seek to do so either. There are an infinite number of questions that puzzle everyday people. Rather than seeking to answer all such questions in detail, religion seems to take an approach in which quick answers are given to very complex questions.

"God did it" is an explanation, whether we agree with it or not. Since God is all-powerful, the question, "How did God do it?" can be said to be of less concern, although certainly still worth asking and investigating.

Does religion provide a comprehensive theory of creation? No, it doesn't. But, again, that is not what religion seeks to do, just as science does not seek to tell us the best way to live life. Science does infer that certain habits such as smoking are hazardous, and in turn, religion does infer various theories of creation.

I can see how the Big Bang may well have occured, but also that God may well have caused it to happen. I can see that life evolved over millions of years, but I can also see that God balanced the chaos of the universe to allow this to happen.

Indeed, the laws of physics could well be interpretted to be the laws of God's creation. The only difference seems to be how highly we regard our capabilities.

 

"God did it" is an explanation, whether we agree with it or not.
True to some extent(since it is also an incomplete answer), however it does leave the question where did god come from? I think the incomplete part of any theory is the debate about how something can come from nothing, which of course will forever be contested, a true explanation must account for everything and as far as universal origins are concerned it may never happen.

 

Hi Lemming3k,

You said:
"...however it does leave the question where did god come from?"

Yes, this is indeed a very interesting point, and well made.

However, if we perceive God as the creator, rather than part of the creation, then this question does not arise. I believe that God has always existed and it is we humans (part of the creation) that face mortality.

 

Ok, only 3 words, Super String Theory. Read it, live it, love it, cause its only a matter of time.

And yes the bigbang is incomplete and even wrong because of this. Stephen Hawking's work on black holes have also been proven wrong so the begining of the universe is now up for grabs to who ever can make sense of it. And string theory is on its way and truning heads.

 

n0n,

Could you please sum up why you believe string theory to be so important? I know the basics about string theory, but obviously not enough to see your point.

Could you recommend any partticular websites regarding string theory?

 

Well that does make me wonder why a creator is necessary, if the creator can always exist then its not unreasonable to believe the universe in some form can have always existed, and since either way something has to have always existed, the way without god cuts out the middle man so to speak.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This is an excellent point - I had never considered this before!

However, since the universe has been proven to be expanding, it must have started somewhere! Hence it is part of the creation.

 

Hello there,

I thought I'd pass on this link as it gave me a basic understanding of the theory, though to be honest I find it mind blowing. I mean four dimensions is difficult enough to grasp, but string theorizes 12(or something like that)! Hope you find this useful.

Dave

 

"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened" - Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy

But seriously, if the universe is expanding and has been slowing down over the uncomprehendable millions of years since the Big Bang then hasn't Time itself begun to slow down. Of course in relation to our civilization it isn't noticeable in the least but in the whole Universal sense, maybe.

Anyone agree, disagree or just want to hit me for my stupidity?

 

Whether we believe Science or religion has the answer, the fact is we are still alive to experience both, so in my beliefs, both Science and religion make just as much sense as the other.
It is that which we create which closest to god, not what we can answer, the answers have already been proven by the energy that created us, what is most important is the questions we create and evolve from.

After all our current science, technology and love for our planet came from what we call "mythilogical" beliefs, as a young race.
And as a young race we still cant prove a thing, we try to defeat ourselves with physical proof. .....but your heart still beats whether you know why or not !

 

How is "God did it in some unknown way" a more valid explanation than "The laws of physics did it is some unknown way"? To me, both statements are empty. You might as well invoke the Great Green Arkleseizure.

Isn't "I don't know how it happened, but I'm trying to figure it out" a better answer than both?

 

Hum,
i would go even further and say I don't <b>know</b> how it happened, but we’ve theories that describes and answers almost everything that we tried to figure out.

 

SpicySamosa, to sum it up, I'm a producer musician who has tirelessly looked for the answers within my own head. I came up with some crazy idea about a matrix of continual divisional reduction, how, well that took alot of time and comparing music to the universe to both existing and none exiting states, to mathmatics. I then begain my search on the net to find if any one has had this idea before, and sure enough no. so I was like ok well this is a "theory of everything" so I'll try that, typed it in and boom first site I got too, superstringtheory.com And it described my idea almost completely, and thats how I got into it. http://particleadventure.org/particleadventure/index.html is also a really good site.

 

The problem with string theory is the same problem with creation. One doesn't have the ability to test it and prove it.

 

But matter in itself may have always existed, this is where we reach a paradox, either something appeared out of nothing(be it god or the universe) or something has always existed(but where did it come from?) and since something cant come from nothing(even a god since it would be creating itself) we reach a slight problem. I believe matter has always existed and there isnt a middle man called god, also this universe is most probably finite and will collapse, this leads to my personal theory of multiple universes(apparently hawkings has a similar theory? I havnt read up on that however) where a universe will expand, and then collapse, and then another universe will emerge in its place, like an everlasting circle.
Whatever the reality is we will probably never know, but lots of theorys are interesting to be entertained and perhaps one is correct.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Lemming3k, interesting points. We both agree that something must have always existed in order for this universe to have come about, since something can't come from nothing. We differ on what that primal enitity is. I believe it to be God and you suggest that it is matter.

My case for God is that, as an intelligent creator, God is far more likely to have been the one to have brought miraculous order to an otherwise chaotic universe. Matter would not appear to have the ability to plan the universe in such a manner.

Further, I would suggest that repetitive creation and destruction of the universe can conceptually only be done by a controlling power which is higher than matter itself. Matter is more akin to the building blocks of the universe (part of the creation), rather than the primal entity.

Pete, you said:

Yes, I agree that neither science or religion provide definate proof of how the universe began. Its really a matter of whether you believe the theories of religion, or the theories of science. With that in mind, the fact that religion does have a story of creation which has an absolute beginning is more than what science has provided. This does not mean that religion is correct, but it does give religion a slight edge. Its a case of religion saying, "here's how it all started", and science saying, "not sure".