Stephen Hawking describes scientific theory (as opposed to philosophical or colloquial theory) as thus: "It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations [...] Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis; you can never prove it."
The Big Bang theory is really just a reverse extrapolation of documented characteristics of the universe, namely, that all bodies of mass in the universe appear to be receding from Earth, i.e. the universe is expanding. It is widely accepted among the scientific community and corroborated by a vast amount of research. I don't really understand what's hard to accept about it, nor do I understand why it should be incompatible with religion. Literally nothing is incompatible with the idea of a god, that's the nature of religion.
Additional evidence for the big bang is that the ratio of different types of elements/sub-atomic particles and light (that wouldn't have been destroyed by stars since the big bang) is consistent with a hot big bang.
Also the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation is everywhere, it's the most dominant source of radiation in the universe. It is the light from when the universe was a lot smaller and all the matter in the universe was crushed into a hot plasma. This indicates the universe was previously a lot smaller and is consistent with the big bang theory.
I'm religious, and I have no doubt about the big bang. But, as I think the OP was saying, I also get annoyed when people use religion as an excuse for close mindedness.
This. The word "theory" has different meanings for scientists than it does in popular culture. People presume that because it is a "theory", it probably isn't true, which is nonsense.
Religious people always think I believe in the Big Bang Theory
← View full post
Stephen Hawking describes scientific theory (as opposed to philosophical or colloquial theory) as thus: "It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations [...] Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis; you can never prove it."
The Big Bang theory is really just a reverse extrapolation of documented characteristics of the universe, namely, that all bodies of mass in the universe appear to be receding from Earth, i.e. the universe is expanding. It is widely accepted among the scientific community and corroborated by a vast amount of research. I don't really understand what's hard to accept about it, nor do I understand why it should be incompatible with religion. Literally nothing is incompatible with the idea of a god, that's the nature of religion.
--
UnrecognizableMan
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
dom180
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Additional evidence for the big bang is that the ratio of different types of elements/sub-atomic particles and light (that wouldn't have been destroyed by stars since the big bang) is consistent with a hot big bang.
Also the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation is everywhere, it's the most dominant source of radiation in the universe. It is the light from when the universe was a lot smaller and all the matter in the universe was crushed into a hot plasma. This indicates the universe was previously a lot smaller and is consistent with the big bang theory.
I'm religious, and I have no doubt about the big bang. But, as I think the OP was saying, I also get annoyed when people use religion as an excuse for close mindedness.
This. The word "theory" has different meanings for scientists than it does in popular culture. People presume that because it is a "theory", it probably isn't true, which is nonsense.