Many Worlds Hypothesis - Origin of the Universe

Origin of the Universe and the Many Worlds Hypothesis. Randall Niles reviews the two major cosmogonies: 1) Something Did It OR 2) It Did Itself.

How Does Mainstream Science Currently Explain the Origin of the Universe (Cosmos)?

First, some definitions...

Cosmos the orderly universe and everything in it.

Cosmology the study of the physical universe, including its properties, structure, and dynamics.

Cosmogony a theory about the origin of the cosmos.

The mechanics of the cosmos are observable and testable through the scientific tools of Cosmology. The origin of the cosmos is limited to forensic conjecture -- Cosmogony.

Cosmogonies are philosophical theories, not scientific theories, since the origin of the cosmos is a singular, historic event. The scientific method cant be used, because that would require duplicating, observing, and testing that one-time event. A cosmogony must be examined like any other historic event using standard rules of evidence, logic, reason, and conviction.

There are only three basic cosmogonies:

1.The cosmos is eternal its always been here.
2.The cosmos started as a random phenomenon an accidental explosion of some kind.
3.The cosmos started as a creation of a Creator a supernatural cause and designed effect.

In the decades since Einstein, observational discoveries in the areas of cosmology, astronomy, physics, and mathematics have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that our universe did, in fact, have a beginning. Science now declares that prior to a certain moment in history there was nothing; during and after that certain moment in history there was something -- our cosmos. Therefore, Cosmogony No. 1 is off the table...

What about No. 2?

The Big Bang Theory is today's dominant scientific cosmogony. According to this theory of origin, the universe was created between 13 and 20 billion years ago from the random, cosmic explosion (or expansion) of a subatomic blip that hurled space, time, matter, and energy in all directions. Everything the whole cosmos -- came from an initial speck of infinite density (also known as a singularity). This speck (existing outside of space and time) appeared from no where, for no reason, only to explode (start expanding) all of a sudden. Over a period of approximately 10 billion years, this newly created space, time, matter, and energy evolved into remarkably-designed and fully-functional stars, galaxies, and planets, including our earth.

If you think this sounds a bit too simplistic, heres what the mainstream experts say:

NASA: "The universe was created sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from a cosmic explosion that hurled matter and in all directions."

UC Berkeley: "The big bang theory states that at some time in the distant past there was nothing. A process known as vacuum fluctuation created what astrophysicists call a singularity. From that singularity, which was about the size of a dime, our Universe was born."

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology: Many cosmologists believe that the universe was created about 15 billion years ago with a cosmic explosion they nicknamed the Big Bang. This explosion produced an expanding cloud of the simplest known chemical elements: hydrogen and helium.

University of Michigan: "About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point. What existed prior to this event is completely unknown and is a matter of pure speculation. This occurrence was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all of the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other."

American Association for the Advancement of Science: "In the last fifty years a great deal of evidence has accumulated in support of a 'consensus' theory of the evolution of the universe. The theory holds that a 'big bang' precipitated a huge split-second inflation of the universe, followed by a gradual expansion that continues to this day..."

Cosmogony No. 3 is pretty simply stated: "In the beginning [time], God created [bara -- Hebrew: created from nothing] the heavens [space] and the earth [matter]." (Genesis 1:1)

Visit http://www.allaboutscience.org/many-worlds-hypothesis.htm to explore more questions of science, philosophy, and theology related to the Origin of the Universe and the Many Worlds Hypothesis.

Also, go to http://www.RandallNiles.com/videos.htm to watch more videos about Science, Philosophy, Origins, and God.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Origin of the Universe
• Cosmos
• Origins
• Science
• Philosophy
• Theology
• Big Bang
• Singularity
• Randall Niles
• Many Worlds Hypothesis
• You Tube
• Video

[Gorteenminogue]

No, Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (No mention of 'from nothing'.)

Yes, you are over-simplifying. The universe expanded from an extremely hot and dense state. and 13 or so billion years later, he we are. Not 6 days and 6, 000 years

later, like the Bible says.

[reflect7]

Yes, Gen 1:1 actually uses the Hebrew word "bara" -- "to create from nothing".

What's your point on oversimplifying?

[djbanizza]

Science is not made using common sense. Otherwise we would never have discovered quantum mechanics which is extremely counter intuitive. If you think you can compensate your lack of knowledge with a lot of enthusiasm, you are dead wrong ...

[reflect7]

But you interpret the scientific evidence with reason, logic, and common sense. If the cosmos is the result of cosmic chance, and everything we see is the byproduct of matter acting on matter over time, then how can you trust the reason, logic, and common sense inherent in your matter-only brain? What is reason in an accidental, materialistic, naturalistic, deterministic universe? How can you trust your common sense interpretation of the evidence any more than jello and a sandwich...?

[NekoMouser]

Part of the problem is that you are grossly over-simplifying the scientific positions and theories.

Also, you are using a lot of outdated resources. NASA's own WMAP probe set the age of the universe at around 13.72 billion years (with a 1% margin of error) several years ago. No one says 10-20 billion years anymore unless the site is woefully out of date.

[RadiationSpreader]

I don't understand anything

[SocialPromotionTips]

You say in your description that the universe being eternal is off the table. In actual fact, the idea of the universe not being eternal is off the table, because of simple laws like what goes up must come down, every effect has a cause, and every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Causality means that either God created the universe, or it was always there, and I believe in the big crunch theory.

[killer4hire]

Another oversimplification other than on the big bang and the nature of nothing is about the supernatural explanation. As the supernatural has little limits as we know nothing about it it could provide nearly endless explanations for things like the big bang. Just one form of billions upon billions of supernatural explanations would be a God. But off course you default to the God hypotheses because that is what the entire argument is all about, defaulting to God without any valid explanation.

[killer4hire]

Definitely oversimplifying.

You should not just look at the pages for children on the scientific sites. They only give the simplest summary/introduction possible for the big bang.

You oversimplify by the way you talk about nothing. Absolute nothing does not and cannot exist with or without God. Nothing refers to what does not exist. Could nothing have existed? No, because that would be a contradiction. Nothing is not the proper way of thinking about beyond the big bang.

[Typho0n86]

Yes you are definitely not a scientist, you are officially mentaly retarded.

[socratus1]

We have 3 sources of Universe big bang , vacuum and God Which right About God Action when God compressed all Universe into his palm, we named –- singular point Action when God opened his palm we named - Big Bang About vacuum Dirac wrote The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description of something more complex?

[sergiomarchelli]

@DasKrabbe it is something much stronger than weed. :D

[DasKrabbe]

@sergiomarchelli

Stop smoking weed

[IAMAPEANUT1]

@reflect7 no...it doesnt...actually...

[macroman52]

Actually, you don't really undestand. No theory is ever "put off the table" by science for ever. For example, the vacuum could have existed forever, until the vacuum flucuation happened, for no reason at all.