Is it plausible that there was a series of big bangs? The premise is that matter is eternal, expands after a big bang for a few trillion years or so, then collapses and repeats.
The oscillating models have been universally rejected by most cosmologists and astronomers today. This is mainly due to the fact that entropy would require each bounce to be larger than the one before, and therefore going back in time to the smallest bounce or singularity, which is what the model intended to circumvent. Also, the Borde, Guth, and Vilenken spacetime theorems prove an absolute beginning to space and time, matter and energy. Therefore, matter is not eternal, but began to exist a finite time ago and was created, not from a material cause, but from an efficient cause (God). Remarkably, the hot big bang model is still the most tested and resilient model today. We can measure the temperature of the cosmic background radiation left over from the big bang and it matches the temperature predicted by Einstein's theory of General Relativity to a high degree of precision. Einstein's theory also pointed to a singularity, which he sought to avoid by introducing his fudge factor, the cosmological constant. Yet, his discovery and model's predictions only buttress the fact that the universe began to exist a finite time ago, and astronomers measure that to be about 13.72 billion years ago.
We know him by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe, since that universe is before our eyes like a beautiful book in which all creatures, great and small, are as letters to make us ponder the invisible things of God: his eternal power and his divinity, as the apostle Paul says in Romans 1:20. All these things are enough to convict men and to leave them without excuse. Second, he makes himself known to us more openly by his holy and divine Word, as much as we need in this life, for his glory and for the salvation of his own.
I am a Christian, married, small business owner with a passion for science/faith issues. I have an MBA from Union Graduate College and graduated in June 2010. I also am a volunteer apologist for Reasons To Believe (www.reasons.org) Economics is also something that I study and have a passion for - my favorite economist is the late Dr. Milton Friedman who taught me (through reading his books) of the benefits to society of free markets. I also enjoy listening to economics talk radio on the internet with Jason Lewis at www.jasonlewisshow.com.
you are invited to follow my blog
ReplyDeleteIs it plausible that there was a series of big bangs? The premise is that matter is eternal, expands after a big bang for a few trillion years or so, then collapses and repeats.
ReplyDeleteThe oscillating models have been universally rejected by most cosmologists and astronomers today. This is mainly due to the fact that entropy would require each bounce to be larger than the one before, and therefore going back in time to the smallest bounce or singularity, which is what the model intended to circumvent. Also, the Borde, Guth, and Vilenken spacetime theorems prove an absolute beginning to space and time, matter and energy. Therefore, matter is not eternal, but began to exist a finite time ago and was created, not from a material cause, but from an efficient cause (God).
DeleteRemarkably, the hot big bang model is still the most tested and resilient model today. We can measure the temperature of the cosmic background radiation left over from the big bang and it matches the temperature predicted by Einstein's theory of General Relativity to a high degree of precision. Einstein's theory also pointed to a singularity, which he sought to avoid by introducing his fudge factor, the cosmological constant. Yet, his discovery and model's predictions only buttress the fact that the universe began to exist a finite time ago, and astronomers measure that to be about 13.72 billion years ago.