The Gap after the Big Bang (and others)

[Incarnate]

One of my arguments for the existence of a deity is always the God of the Gaps theory - which states, effectively, that whatever scientists cannot find an answer to, God is involved. Science describes things at amazing levels - beyond atoms, even into mysteriously microcosmic levels such as quantum foam and superstrings (theories which I myself have difficulty understanding).

Science, though, has not a single plausible theory for what happened just after the Big Bang (about 1*10^-48 seconds, I believe), and no computer model can predict (or perhaps postdict, seeing as it is looking into the past) what happened then. My belief is that it was at this time that God, whoever he or she, or perhaps they, is/are, intervened at this point.

Another thing is Goldilocks theory - the chances of such a universe occuring are so microscopic - consider that atoms having even 0.01% more or less energy than they do have would have resulted in an inhospitabible, barren universe - that God must have intervened at some point.

Any comments are welcome.

[E99]

Agree with you, and taking it a step further, God had no point of intervention, but it seems that he was in control of the situation from the start of the creation and prior to creation of our physical laws. This can be seen by the intricately finely tuned aspects of atomic structure. The power of the omniscient being is all encompassing. Design....cosmological or biological seems to be a series of extreme probabilities that hover into impossibilities if by random means.

The atomic balance is far beyond 0.01%. We have the atomic and sub atomic forces, the structural particles for life to form anywhere in the first place. Elements vital for our life (particularly carbon, oxygen, and iron) could not exist were it not for the fine-tuning of the four forces evident in the universe....Gravity, electromagnetic force, strong and weak nuclear forces. E.G. electromagnetic force.... If it were significantly weaker, electrons would not be held around the nucleus of an atom. "Would that be serious?". Yes, because atoms could not combine to form molecules. If this force were much stronger, electrons would be trapped on the nucleus of an atom. There could be no chemical reactions between atoms-meaning no life. The fine tuning probability for the electromagnetic force against gravitational forces is ...10 raised to the power of 40. All in all it is Billions upon billions upon billions to one. "Chances-of-life-from-nothing" Not to mention improbabilities of life that would be unable to form or continue if the exact rate the universe expansion was a million millionth slower,or faster, the exact position of the earth to the sun and its near circular orbit, the fine tuning between the strong and weak nuclear forces, the exact size of the earth, the exact rotational speed of the earth and even the position of the solar system on the outer edge of the galaxy, if it was nearer the centre, the gravitational effect on neighbouring stars would distort earths orbit. This is not a chance happening, this was calculated. Design

[Quahom1]

God, the perfect explosives expert. He innitiated a controled blast that still affects us? I'm warm to the idea. The movie the "Matrix" comes to mind. Time is relative. God manipulates time? Could be...


v/r

Q

[I, Brian]

Arthur C Clarke made the comment "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".

In a related manner, determining that which science cannot explain can only be explained by invoking God, is in my opinion being dishonest both to science and God. Science is a process of exploration - the frontiers of today are the settled pastures of tomorrow - so if God is made synonymous with mystery and the unexplained by scientific method, then we simply repeat the mistake of the past 100 years that presumes that just because science can describe a thing, therefore God must be absent from it.

Personally, I see science as describing the physical universe - the what - while religion and spirituality address the metaphysical universe - the why.

As for the Big Bang - if God is The Creator, then once the event is unfolded, why does God need to dip a proverbially hand into the mix after the start? Such a view almost seems to perceive God as inferior to the universe - the universe as larger than God, and God as having to physically mess with this greater construct to shape it to His Will. Why not have God in control from before the very begin, and the mystery of the first instances of the Big Bang as a physical problem with a physical answer?

Just 2c.

[Tao_Equus]

I would also add that Einstiens' General Theory of Relativity while very elegant in its simplicity the 'gravity' part of it is still largely untested and so all extrapolated lines of thought on it are very much unverifiable excersises in pure maths. Stanford/Nasa have just completed the science phase on their Gravity Probe B sattelite and are now hard at work examining the data from a mission that appears to have run flawlessly. The hope is that the experiments carried out here will give us some clues as how to marry Gravity, the only incompatable part of general relativity, with quantum physics and give us the long awaited Grand Unified Theory.
My belief is that until we do have a Grand Unified Theory we are only playing guessing games and to relate them to any theory of God is premature. My own hunch is that the theory that emerges will give us a definitive answer to these theological questions and that intelligent intervention will be proved.....or disproved once and for all.

Link for anyone interested in the afformentioned experiments; http://einstein.stanford.edu/index.html

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

As for the Big Bang - if God is The Creator, then once the event is unfolded, why does God need to dip a proverbially hand into the mix after the start? Such a view almost seems to perceive God as inferior to the universe - the universe as larger than God, and God as having to physically mess with this greater construct to shape it to His Will. Why not have God in control from before the very begin, and the mystery of the first instances of the Big Bang as a physical problem with a physical answer?

Just 2c.

Conversely if the universe does not require God's continued intervention than it has reached co-equality with God, and such doesn't fit the theology we are told from numerous religions. Rather think of the universe as a flower needing water - while these are constructs that fit within the universe there is a metaphor. I hold that at some level, perhaps outside the normal laws of physics, the universe is not a closed system unto itself.

Put another way, I extrapolate Godel's Theorem to it's extreme case - The entire universe being a "system" all of which cannot be explained as true, and yet is, based on the gift of existence eternally emminating from God.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Arthur C Clarke made the comment "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".

In a related manner, determining that which science cannot explain can only be explained by invoking God, is in my opinion being dishonest both to science and God. Science is a process of exploration - the frontiers of today are the settled pastures of tomorrow - so if God is made synonymous with mystery and the unexplained by scientific method, then we simply repeat the mistake of the past 100 years that presumes that just because science can describe a thing, therefore God must be absent from it.

Personally, I see science as describing the physical universe - the what - while religion and spirituality address the metaphysical universe - the why.

As for the Big Bang - if God is The Creator, then once the event is unfolded, why does God need to dip a proverbially hand into the mix after the start? Such a view almost seems to perceive God as inferior to the universe - the universe as larger than God, and God as having to physically mess with this greater construct to shape it to His Will. Why not have God in control from before the very begin, and the mystery of the first instances of the Big Bang as a physical problem with a physical answer?

Just 2c.

Indeed, why can we see a father mimicking his child who is swinging the bat in the game (baseball or cricket). The child knows how to play (or is learning), and the father knows how it should be done, but he won't step in, yet he mimes the child in the background, almost willing the child to succeed.

Nothing inferior there, just the pride and love of a father for his child to do it right.

v/r

Q