I found a site which talks about a newer scientific theory concerning the beginning of the universe... Academically intriuging perhaps for some who find these things of interest...


http://www.physorg.com/news102516861.html

no thanks

Big bang is a crock of poop


creation started with a swirling ball of gases

very interesting article... the idea that the universe is more like a rubber ball or a rubber band... ahh the joys of mathematics and quantum theory.

they had a TV special on that, 2 different parrelel worlds? yeah, i couldnt get into it.

Scientific explainations about creation are always disappointments, especially the big bang. How did all this start? Huge explosion and then things formed and here we are.

Before the bang? Um, not sure, but the biggest explosion ever happened and here we are.

i dont feel like reading the article but if you want more reading also search super string theory. its the same concept as what you speak i think its less credible than religon, but every one has an opinion... and they are like you know whats haha.... i think einstien supported this and he was a little smarter than me so pick your side.

It seems that a lot of people compare scientific inquiry with their religious faiths. This is truly sad because it only goes to show how truly uninformed they really are. Science should in no way be viewed as a competition to religious ideals. In fact, it’s truly sad that religion has become a crutch for the intellectually challenged. Using the idea of a God to refuse to think about these things is nothing more than an excuse for sloth of the mind.

The Loop Quantum Gravity hypothesis is interesting. But not unlike String Theory, Twistor Theory, and some others, it also depends on a large amount of speculation. The bottom line in all of this physics is that we simply aren’t at a point yet where we can construct these kind of theories confidently. We don’t even yet have a working model of quantum gravity and until we’ve done that we’re really just jumping the gun to predict what might have happened before the Big Bang. I personally actually favor Alan Guth’s model of an inflationary quantum fluctuation which doesn’t required a pre-existing universe. It does however require pre-existing quantum fields. But quantum fields are not physical so in a sense it could be said that Guth’s model presumes the existence of a spiritual essence. In other words, Guth’s model could be correct whether or not there exists a God. Even if God created the universe he would have needed to use some method of creation and this is all that physics really investigates.

In other words, even if we knew with absolute certainty that a God had created the universe, science could still pursue the valid question of how that creation was accomplished. Even magic has physics (i,e. rules governing how it works). If it didn’t it would be totally chaotic and useless.

So physics will always be a valid endeavor whether a supreme being exists or not. Science does not deny the existence of a supreme being, science merely investigates how the supreme being does things.

So anyone who is thinking in terms of science versus religion is totally out to lunch.

The greatest scientists have always recognized that science is the investigation of the mind of God. Even though they may not have thought of God with respect to any particular religious view. In fact, religions aren’t really much differnet than science in that regard, they too are investigations in to the mind of God.

Why anyone would think that any particular religion got it right is beyond me. That’s no less naïve than to believe that any particular scientific theory got it right. They are all just mankind’s investigation into that which he does not yet fully understand.

Science has certainly made huge progress over the last few centuries in particular. It has panned out more secrets about our universe than all the religions of the world can claim combined. Just in that alone it seems to certainly be the most productive human intellectual endeavor.

Actually Loop Quantum Gravity is quite a bit different from String Theory. They are entirely different theories and share no common ground in their separate explanations of what caused the "Big Bang".

Why you say that science is less “credible” than religion is beyond me. Science has made literally billions upon billions of predictions about our universe that have been observed to be true. Religion has no such record. In fact, religion can’t even come up with one shred of ‘evidence’ for divine intervention.

There’s no contest if you’re going to compare them for “credibility”. Science is based on observation, experiment and logical proofs. Religion is based on pure faith, nothing else.

This is why I say that they aren’t even in competition with each other. If they were, religion would have lost a very long time ago. They simply aren’t playing the same game. One is based on evidence, the other is based on faith. To compare them is like comparing apples and oranges. They are two entirely different beasts.

i still waiting for my big bang....

Tell me about it!