& it all went bang…

Nowadays people have two dominant theories regarding the origin of the universe, intelligent design, & big bang. So what’s the story, can we ever know what actually happened?

Intelligent design is based primarily on mathematics. The probability of the universe falling conveniently together as it now is, is normally given as one in ten to the power of eighty. That’s: 1 in 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000, or a very small chance. In fact, if you remove thirty zeros, you’ll have the probability at which point mathematicians would say something is impossible.

Here’s a good way of looking at it, I did the maths to calculate the probability of someone tossing heads ten times in a row in a coin tossing game, I have yet to meet someone who is willing to bet they can do this. The odds are 1 in 1024. Far better than the odds to win the lottery, or the odds that the universe was a fluke. I’m not willing to say big bang is impossible on those grounds though, but I am willing to say that it’s improbable.

“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” – Albert Einstein

Another argument for intelligent design states that since well structured complex things don’t simply fall into existence, then something must have designed the universe which is full of well structured complex systems. The problem with this is that the designer would have to be at least as complex as that which it designed, & it would also have to be well structured. The same argument could then be used to say that the designer would also need a designer, which would also need a designer, ad infinitum. This argument is logically fallacious.

To be fair, you can logically prove anything you can’t see simply by using a priory language, that is by making a logically valid statement that no observable event can prove wrong. So we can prove the argument wrong, it doesn’t mean that intelligent design is not valid, it proves that if it is true, then it isn’t true for that reason.

Big bang, is a scientific theory, so we are told. The first problem with this is that science deals with observable & testable events, & this theory is neither of those. Nobody saw how the universe started, & nobody has yet come up with a test that could involve creating a new universe. This means that universal origin isn’t even a scientific question, that is, it can’t be examined by scientific method. So if big bang were true, then it wouldn’t be true for any reason scientists have given us.

Let’s examine it for a moment. First we were told that nothing exploded, this obviously isn’t possible. The new theory involves antimatter or some such thing exploding, it really doesn’t matter what they say exploded, because nobody can prove the theorists wrong, or right. Then this explosion which was presumably spinning, sent particles of matter flying into the nothingness that would become the cosmos.

Somehow, in complete contradiction to the second law of thermodynamics, these tiny particles that where randomly hurtling along started getting together into ordered systems. So from complete randomness came galaxies; solar systems; moons orbiting planets all from randomness. This isn’t plausible, or scientifically feasible.

So again, I can’t really say I know that big bang didn’t happen, just that it is improbable; unscientific & implausible.

There are four options, big bang; intelligent design; a combination of the two, or something we haven’t dreamed up yet. Sorry, but I don’t see big bang as an accidental origin theory remotely worthwhile. In fact, I don’t see accidental origin as plausible, but I’m willing to admit that I can’t prove it either way.

The debate over how things began is stupid if you aren’t religious. Religious freedom gives people the right to believe what their religious doctrines teach if there is absolutely no evidence contrary to it. Frankly, apart from the religious issues, there is no reason why we need to waste money on scientists studying origins when people are starving now. I’m sure all the starving people in the world agree that finding out about how the universe began is far more important than them getting a meal.


2 thoughts on “& it all went bang…”

  1. Isn’t it simply lazy science to say, “I can’t explain it so it has to be though divine intervention”.

    Sorry, that simply doesn’t fly. Despite the fact that I find the “Big Bang” theory to be a little thin (surely there simply has to have been something before it exploded?) it still seems to hold more water than ID.

    What’s to say that the world isn’t really held on the back of a turtle?

    1. It would possibly be lazy, but no lazier than ignoring the possibility that there is a god on the grounds that science can’t explain it.

      The real issue is that no theory of origin can be scientifically examined unless we revise scientific method. This would put the question firmly in the realm of philosophy & theology, not science. So it wouldn’t be lazy science.

      Mathematically, I’d holds more water, but that isn’t a proof, as the Einstein quote points out.

      The point is, neither are certainties, and I acknowledge that. The point also, is that we have enough to worry about in the world, stuff that’s happening in the present, do we actually need to know how it all began? Doesn’t it make more sense to concentrate our time energy & money on feeding the starving & fixing the environmental issues?

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s