Now I'm not totally mad enough to even try catch up with this thread, as the last page would have taken me a few hours to read. But as someone studying a masters in Physics next year I feel I can try weigh in with a few things, that from what I briefly read, seem to not be mentioned (Albeit I'm sure they have been).
The main one being, the big bang theory and idea of a creator arn't necessary in direct conflict. The Big Bang theory is a study of what we believe to have happened when time began, we observe what we can and from that infer and predict what happened back then. The singularity at which time began could have had events previous to it - just that we cannot ever hope to see them due to the nature of what happens in a singularity.
It is much like if I were to throw a rock into a pond. The Big Bang Theory explains what happens when the rock hits the pond, why the ripples go outwards, what happens as they traverse further - it tells us nothing of who threw the rock or why he chose to throw the rock in that way.
Of course the fact that the Big Bang Theory has a hard time explaining why it's initial conditions are just such that they are is probably it's biggest downfall - and Hawking et all are dreaming up other possible theories that get rid of the need for this beginning singularity. Not that this is really worth bringing up in this sort of debate or anything, it's more a very complex mathematical model then anything, albeit a somewhat incredible piece of work.
I might actually try weigh in with more if I can get around to reading some more pages... if anyone needs any clarification on actual theory behind the Big Bang and stuff though I should be able to help... I get the most of it up until we start talking 7 dimensions and curved Euclidian space time :(.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
