Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Progress: After 3000 years, we have achieved a mathematical model of how an eternal universe might work

arroba Email

While searching Discover, I ran up against this from Perimeter Institute cosmologist Neil Turok, “Will We Discover That the Universe Had No Beginning and Has No End?” (October 2010):

In the conventional picture of the origin of the universe, the Big Bang is the beginning of time. This is one of the greatest mysteries in science, and I’ve spent the last few years trying to work out how to make sense of the moment when, in that picture, the universe emerged from a point of infinite density and temperature—what’s known as the initial singularity. I’m exploring the idea that the singularity was not the beginning of time. In this new view, time didn’t have a beginning, and the Big Bang resulted from a collision of branes, sheetlike spaces that exist within a higher-dimensional reality. These collisions might happen repeatedly, creating an eternal, cyclic universe. We are now close to having the first mathematically and logically complete, consistent description of the passage of a universe through a singularity.

The thing is, we’ve been close to the eternal cyclic universe for the better part of three millennia. That’s what the ancient Greeks assumed we were living in. It was the evidence that turned left when the theory turned right.

I wonder how the “first mathematically and logically complete, consistent description of the passage of a universe through a singularity” will fare against that.

F/N: also, what they don't usually tell you, is that the branes need to be very, very accurately aligned to bounce like that. As in: fine tuned . . . and as in a plainly contingent circumstance, at cosmogenetic level, requiring explanation by a causally sufficient necessary being. One with the knowledge, intelligence and skill to build a fine tuned cosmos as a whole that is set up to create a sub-cosmos t6hat is fine-tuned for C-Chemistry, cell based life. kairosfocus
Gil, yes I agree, and surely most of the atheists must realize, in their heart of hearts, they have 'a big pile of crap' for evidence, but I can't force them to ask Christ into their lives, much less can I force God/Christ to reveal Himself intimately to them, and therefore we must do the best we can. Myself, It was not a overwhelmingly powerful miracle that caught my eye, but was a subtle miracle when I was 'at a bottom' that caught my eye. The beauty of it being that God/Christ, as all-powerful as He is, chooses to speak to us through such gentle ways in this period of grace man-kind is currently in. fn; The First Cause Must Be A Personal Being - William Lane Craig - video http://www.metacafe.com/w/4813914/ bornagain77
BA77: I always appreciate your contributions, which are universally wonderful, but there is one thing that people need to understand: Once one's soul is darkened by atheism and materialism, it takes a supernatural intervention of the Holy Spirit to change such a hardened heart. The irony is, all one needs to do is ask, which I did, and The Promise will be fulfilled, even for the most seemingly hopelessly lost atheist and materialist like I was. There is no way I can convey this to anyone else with words. On the other hand, even the most trivial analytical scrutiny of Darwinism and multi-verse speculation should convince a reasonably rational person that this stuff is just a big pile of crap. GilDodgen
A mathermatical model that explains everything??? Will they ever learn? THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS - DAVID P. GOLDMAN - August 2010 Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel's critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes. http://www.faqs.org/periodicals/201008/2080027241.html Gödel’s Incompleteness: The #1 Mathematical Breakthrough of the 20th Century Excerpt: Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem says: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle - something you have to assume to be true but cannot prove "mathematically" to be true.” http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/blog/incompleteness/ This following site is a easy to use, and understand, interactive website that takes the user through what is termed 'Presuppositional apologetics'. The website clearly shows that our use of the laws of logic, mathematics, science and morality cannot be accounted for unless we believe in a God who guarantees our perceptions and reasoning are trustworthy in the first place. Proof That God Exists - easy to use interactive website http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/index.php Nuclear Strength Apologetics – Presuppositional Apologetics – video http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/video/ondemand/nuclear-strength-apologetics/nuclear-strength-apologetics Materialism simply dissolves into absurdity when pushed to extremes and certainly offers no guarantee to us for believing our perceptions and reasoning within science are trustworthy in the first place: Dr. Bruce Gordon - The Absurdity Of The Multiverse & Materialism in General - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5318486/ etc.. etc.. etc.. bornagain77
Denyse, Desperation on the part of Darwinists and infinite-multiverse,infinitely-bouncing-universes anti-theology represents an attempt to explain away the obvious: The universe and living systems were designed by a super-intelligence with a purpose. Why not just give up and admit the obvious, like I did? Come to think of it, I think I have it figured out. Such an obvious conclusion would mean that these pathetic clowns wasted their lives on a lie. Wasting one's life on a lie is a horrible thing to contemplate. GilDodgen

Leave a Reply