Hello

The beleivers in God's existance try to convince people that evolutionism can be the result of an intelligent design
A lost battle ,in my opinion
It is not even worthwhile mentioning creationism, being really a nonsense.

However science can also support religion
The theory of big bang is widly accepted

It is hard to think at a universe without a beginning , but it is even harder in my opinion to think at a universe with a beginning but without a creator

What do the doubters in God's existence reply ?

In my opinion the most likely solution is a sort of Demiurg
God have created the universe but he does not take care of it
Seriously I dont' beleive in this alternative but I can not find a better explanation

Alberto
I find it amazing that people always contemplate the "beginning" of the universe and try to explain it but they cannot provide the answer to the "end" of the universe. I am no physics master but I know that gravity should eventually lead to the reverse of the "big bang" yet the evidence points to a continually expanding universe. And can somebody explain the particles that exist in a vacuum.

i always wanted to understand that, space is a vacuum..... so why is there distance between everything, and its not like a platic bottle with all the air sucked out of it, shrinking together, not only that, the universe is expanding.... to where? other universes? what describes a universe, were are the boudary lines?

Ptr1c and lostclimate

The theory of relativity can provide an answer to your questions
I do not mean I grasp the theory , of course
You ,same as me and anybody else and Newton too, assume that space is a sort of empty box
The universe is expanding inside the box but where are the boundary lines ?
According to Einstein it is not like that
Space(and time)can not be separated from matter
If matter does not exist then also space and time do not exist
However I dont'think, as far as I know, that the theory of relativity can answer my original question.
Not only, Einstein himself realized that it was a key issue
He did what a scientist should never do
He introduced a "constant" in his equation to "force" the universe to be "stable"
No beginning, no end
But some years after the expansion of universe and the big bang have been proved beyond any reasonable doubt

Infinity isn't hard to understand, yet try to fit it inside any theory and people will start to get headaches because they ask the wrong questions imho hehehe.

The start or end of things is quite irrelevant when something goes on for infinity and when what you really want to know is about that infinity.

I know there's one flaw in this reasoning, because things that are infinite can have a start and simply go on forever after that, however as for the beginning of things and the big bang, what exactly do we know about before the Big Bang? So, that does mean that we can't say for sure that it's the start,

Cheers

Actually an answer might be :

What about before a big bang ?
Is the big bang the start ?

A possible explanation might be a continuos expansion and contraction of universe
But as far as I Know, this hypothesis does not fit with the theory
There was one only big bang

Nowadays Science is geared toward atheism
Maybe scientists are wrong , of course but it is a matter of fact

However big bang is more in favour of a religious wiepoint, in my opinion

May anybody suggest a book or article or a web site whereas this topic is discussed ?

Yes, those questions are very good ones, that's what would have to be researched somehow.

I'm not quite getting though, why the big bang theory would be in favor of a religious viewpoint? It's not an atheistic viewpoint either, it's a scientific viewpoint, however I think I do understand where you are comming from, because of this quote;

Quote:

---

Nowadays Science is geared toward atheism

---

Yes, it seems geared towards atheism, but that's because theists usually claim their religion can't be proven or disproven with science, since science doesn't deal with the supernatural and the like. In my opinion this claim is only true for about half of everything what might be possible to disproof. Disproving the bible would be a start and as for it's historical 'truths', it's very possible to disproof it, infact most of it doesn't get any true support by serious scientific research. Think of archaeological research not supporting some if not most of the biblical (historical) claims. (Most of the things that could be supported by archaeological research turns out to be exagerated at least if not downright wrong, that's one area of science that contradicts the bible, and there are more, like geology, but also in the physics area, like turning water into whine ...).

Okey, I'm drifting away off topic here I know, but since theists do not even have a theory other than 'it happened' and 'the big bang theory is wrong', I can't help it hehehe. Off course there's plenty of room to agree with the Big Bang theory and still be religious, but yeah ... often they don't ...

Cheers

I am not mixing up science and religion I mean that scientists are people as anybody else
Well it is a matter of fact that most of the scientists nowadays are not religious people
However there is an important issue related to my original question :
In the 19° century most of the phisics were atheists while most of bio's , Darwin included,were theist
For obvious reasons, I suppose
Nowadays it is the direct opposite
It is hard to find a religious biochemic while there are a lot of phisics who beleive in God

It is hard to find a religious biochemic while there are a lot of phisics who beleive in God

i wonder where you got that theory from.
its not true. a lot of scientists are religious. biologist or physics.

a nice idea about the "start of the univers" is the definition of existence.

for example our eyes can only see moving objects.
to be able to get input our eyes are moving very fast every second. so as soon as everything would stop or freeze we wouldnt see anything anymore.

now imagine the same sheme for "existence". we are because we move. if we stop we are no more.
so maybe like the infitity for time there is the infinity for possibilities and our existence is not defined by a time value but by the fact that we and our universe move corresponding to be able to exist within an infinitive web of "movements".

my biggest problem with the "creation" theory is the reason why. all of this "god created the time and the earth aso" sounds to me like somone got bored and decided to build something.

before arguing if god created everything i would like to know "why should he had done it?". and "becasue he is almighty" is not an acceptable argument.

if someone is almighty why create somehing so unimportant like physical existence.
ist any spiritual goal to lose the bounds of this existence to enter a universal level.
so if someone is allready at the finish line, why bothering to build a new start?

cheers

When the big bang actually occured, well we can use the following as a great example of how it expanded.

For instance, take an unbaked chocolate chip cookie (yum...) for example. Prior to it being baked, you have a small area with chocolate chips in it (all within a small area). However, when you shove that delicious cookie in the oven the entire area expands, as well as the chocolate chips move apart from one another. Now as a final product you have a multiple of more room since it was baked (more area), and your chocolate chips are spread out moreso than from the start.
**This is my artistic, ha, illustration of what I'm talking about**

In a way this is how our universe works too. Instead of the oven stopping though, so far it just keeps on expanding and hasn't stopped yet. So every day our universe is gradually getting bigger and giving more room for other galaxies to move further and further apart (and sometimes maybe even collide) but they are given more freedom room to move.