Big Bang Intelligent Design News

About that quantum equation that shows the universe has no beginning…

Spread the love

Further to The latest no-Big Bang theory relies on a quantum fluid of hypothetical massless particles (here), physicist Rob Sheldon kindly writes again to say,

The “study” goes through 3 pages of messy algebra and then introduces a simplification in the last 4 paragraphs to find the age of the universe. In the last paragraph, it makes a bad mathematical approximation to that simplified age, shows that this bad math turns a finite number into infinity, and then trumpets this conclusion as removal of the Big Bang.

In other words, there’s 3 pages of snow job before the sleight-of-hand in the last paragraph, just to throw the proletariat off the scent. This is as irresponsible as it gets, and if I were a reviewer, I would have rejected it outright for intentional obfuscation and misrepresentation. Very clearly the paper is a pretext for the title and abstract, which is the only part of the paper likely to be read by journos and the public.

My only consolation was that it wasn’t published in Phys Rev, but in a “second-tier” journal. But if this is the future of peer-reviewed physics, we are in deep trouble.

Maybe the solution is not to call it science.

Some of us aren’t sure that post-empiricism even works in science.

But what should we call this stuff?

See also: Big Bang exterminator wanted, will train

Follow UD News at Twitter!

5 Replies to “About that quantum equation that shows the universe has no beginning…

  1. 1
    kairosfocus says:

    News, it is beginning to be natural philosophy again . . . and not in a good sense. KF

  2. 2
    humbled says:

    “Maybe the solution is not to call it science.”
    Amen 😉

  3. 3
    awstar says:

    to paraphrase Paul when he wrote to the church in Corinth 1,965 years ago:

    For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of [TRUTH]. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

  4. 4
    bornagain77 says:

    as to:

    “shows that this bad math turns a finite number into infinity, and then trumpets this conclusion as removal of the Big Bang.”

    In regards to the finite becoming infinite, Dr. Dembski, with PhDs in both mathematics and theology, states,,

    The End Of Christianity – Finding a Good God in an Evil World – Pg.31
    William Dembski PhD. Mathematics
    Excerpt: “In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity.”
    http://www.designinference.com.....of_xty.pdf

    Of note: I hold ‘growing large without measure’ to be a lesser quality infinity than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The main principle for why I hold growing large without measure to be a ‘lesser quality infinity’ is stated at the 4:30 minute mark of the following video:

    Can A “Beginning-less Universe” Exist? – William Lane Craig – video
    ,,”the impossibility of forming an actually infinite number of things by adding one member after another.,,,
    1. A collection formed by adding one member to another cannot be actually infinite,,,”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8YN0fwo5J4

    Thus materialism cannot reach an actual infinity by adding one member to another. Yet if materialists try to use the other method of reaching infinity, by forming ‘a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero, then they have the insoluble problem of a finite material object having to first become non-existent before it can become infinite. Thus the materialist, with no resource to appeal to rescue the finite material object from the nothingness it must go through, is back to square one in trying to explain why there is something rather than nothing.
    The Christian does not suffer from this insoluble problem as the materialist does because the Christian has a ‘rescue devise’ to save Jesus Christ from the nothingness that would result from His being permanently separated from God in the ‘nothingness of death’:

    Philippians 2: 6-9
    Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped.
    Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.
    Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,

    Moreover, we actually have very good empirical evidence that Christ was resurrected from death by God so as to, as Dr. Dembski put it, ‘unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity’. For one example of the evidence, the 3-D holographic/photographic negative image on the Shroud of Turin is now found to be formed by a quantum process. The image was not formed by a classical process:

    The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values – Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio – 2008
    Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the ‘quantum’ is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril.
    http://cab.unime.it/journals/i.....802004/271

    Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural – December 2011
    Excerpt: After years of work trying to replicate the colouring on the shroud, a similar image has been created by the scientists.
    However, they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax.
    Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic.
    “The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin,” they said.
    And in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the Enea report spells it out: “This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/n.....79512.html

    The Center Of The Universe Is Life – General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy and The Shroud Of Turin – video
    http://vimeo.com/34084462

    Verse and Music:

    Colossians 1:15-20
    The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

    Natalie Grant – Alive – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap2vrLCU85w

  5. 5
    PaV says:

    For what it’s worth, the ‘graviton’ they use in their model is “massive,” not “massless.” There are two parts to the paper. Using their model they come up with a figure for dark energy that is reasonable. The second part is more problematic, or, let’s say, tentative. They use an approximation method that they consider good, but end the paper saying that they now what to use a more accurate ‘perturbation’ method.

Leave a Reply