“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.” – Einstein Albert
“Irritating” facts
The year was 1916 and Albert Einstein didn’t like where his calculations lead. If she was his theory of general relativity is true, it meant that the universe is not eternal but had a beginning. Einstein’s calculations actually detect a definite beginning of all time, all matter and all space. It was in conflict with his belief that the universe is static and eternal.
Einstein later called his discovery ‘irksome’. He wanted to make the universe exists in itself, independently of any external cause, but the universe seemed like one huge effect.
Einstein, in fact, hated consequences of general relativity – a theory, which is now proven as accurate to five decimal places – that into your equations introduced the cosmological constant to show that the universe is static, and to avoid the absolute beginning.
Einstein’s constant (fudge factor), however, didn’t last long. In 1919 by the british cosmologist Arthur Eddington during the solar eclipse experiment, which confirmed that general relativity is actually true – the universe was not static, but had its beginning. as Well as Einstein wasn’t even Eddington satisfied with the consequences of this theory. He later wrote: ‘From a philosophical point of view is, for me, the idea of the beginning of the current arrangement of nature repulsive…. I’d like to find a genuine loophole.“1
In 1922, Russian mathematician Alexander Friedmann officially revealed Einstein’s fudge factor as algebrickou mistake. (It is incredible that in an effort to avoid the beginning of the great Einstein shared zero – something that even schoolchildren know that ain’t right!) In the meantime, the Dutch astronomer Willem de Sitter found that general relativity requires that the universe was expanding. And in 1927 was the expansion of the universe actually observed by the astronomer Edwin Hubble (after whom I was named space telescope). Looking through the 100palcový telescope at california’s Mount Wilson observatory discovered the Hubble ‘redshift (redshift)’ in the light of each observable galaxies, which meant that these galaxies were moving away. in Other words, the general theory of relativity was again confirmed – it seems that the universe is expanding from a single point in the distant past.2
In 1929, Einstein delivered to Mount Wilson to make yourself look the Hubble space telescope. What he saw, was conclusive. Evidence of the observations showed that the universe is actually expanding, as predicted, the general theory of relativity. The cosmological constant was now completely devastated by the weight of the evidence against her, Einstein could no longer support their wish to the eternal universe. Subsequently described by the cosmological constant as ‘the biggest mistake of my life’ and redirected their efforts to find a solution to the riddle of life. Einstein said that he wants ‘to know how God created the world. I don’t care about this or that phenomenon, the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.“3
Although Einstein claimed that he believed in the pantheistic God (the god who is the universe), his comments conferring of creation and the divine thoughts to better describe the teistického God. And as much as it can be ‘irritating‘, his theory of general relativity is today one of the strongest evidence of the existence of teistického God.
General relativity actually supports one of the oldest formal arguments for the existence of teistického God – the cosmological argument.
COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT – the beginning of the end of atheism
‘Cosmological’ comes from the Greek word for cosmos, which means ‘world’ or ‘universe’. This means that the cosmological argument is an argument about the beginning of the universe. If the universe had a beginning, then the universe had a cause.
In the logical form of a sound argument as follows:
1. Everything had a beginning had a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe had a cause.
Everything had a beginning, was the cause – is the law of causality, which is a fundamental principle of science. Without the law of causality would science has not been possible. Francis Bacon (father of modern science) even said: ‘True knowledge is knowledge by causes.’4 in Other words, science is the search for causes. That’s what scientists are doing – trying to discover what caused this.
If we are about the universe learned anything, it’s that nothing happens without a cause. When a person goes down the road, never in front of his car out of nowhere appears a car without a driver or without any cause. Many would this view like force officers, yet it’s not true. 😁
Definition: the Law of causality is a fundamental scientific and philosophical principle, according to which every event, phenomenon or a change in the world of his cause, which it precedes. Causality defines the relationship of cause-effect.
Even the great skeptic David Hume could not deny the law of causality/causation. Wrote: ‘I Never so absurd to claim that something could arise without a cause.’5
In fact, to deny the law of causality is to deny the rationality of. The process of rational thinking requires us to join ideas (causes) that lead to the conclusions (results in). If somebody ever tells you that doesn’t believe in the law of causality, simply ask him: ‘What led you to that conclusion?’ 😁
Due to the fact that the law of causality is a well-established and undeniable, is the assumption number 1 is true. 1. Everything had a beginning had a cause.
And what assumption number 2? Should the universe have a beginning? If not, then there was no need to no cause. If yes, then the universe was created by some cause.
Up to the time of Einstein with atheists could to comfort the belief that the universe is eternal, and therefore does not need a cause. Since then, however, it was discovered five of scientific evidence, that without a doubt prove that the universe actually had a beginning.
And this the beginning of the scientists today call the ‘big bang’. These five evidence for the big bang can be easily remember by the acronym T. Ø.E.With.To.
In the beginning there was a big “T. Ø.E.With.To.”
About every few years brings the main news media – Time, Newsweek , and the like – on the front-page article on the origin and fate of the universe. ‘When the universe was created?’ and ‘When will it end?’ are two of the questions which these articles are dedicated. The fact that the universe had a beginning and will eventually die, in these reports is not even a subject of discussion. Why? Because modern scientists know that the beginning and the end are the essence of one of the most proven laws in all of nature – the second thermodynamic law.
T – the Second law of THERMODYNAMICS
Thermodynamics is the science dealing with the study of matter and energy and the second law of thermodynamics, inter alia, says that the universe is applicable energy. With each passing moment, the amount of usable energy in the universe decreases, which leads scientists to the obvious conclusion that one day, all of the energy disappears and the universe will cease to exist. As with the moving cars and the universe eventually run out of fuel.
You say to yourself: ‘Well and what? How this proves that the universe had a beginning?“ Look at it this way: the first law of thermodynamics says that the total amount of energy in the universe is constant,. in Other words, the universe has only a limited amount of energy (as well as your car has only a limited amount of fuel). If your car is only a limited amount of fuel (the first law) and when driving constantly consumes fuel (the second law), if you started from an infinitely long time ago, it would be your car now still in motion? No, of course not. Ran out of him a long time ago gasoline. Similarly, the universe was already without power, if it worked from eternity.
But here we are – the light still shines, so the universe must arise sometimes in the final the past,. It means that the universe is not eternal – and had its beginning.
Another way to think about the universe, is a flashlight. If you leave the flashlight through the night on, what will be the intensity of the light in the morning? Will be weak, because the battery consumed most of their energy. the Universe is like discharging the battery. only Has a limited amount of energy, which can consume. But because the universe still has some battery life (still not completely discharged), it cannot be eternal – he must have had a beginning – because if he was eternal, the battery would be discharged.
The second law is also known as the law of entropy, which is an elegant way to say that nature has a tendency to bring things into the mess. It is, with time, things naturally fall apart. Falling apart your car, your house, even your body. But if the universe becomes less structured, whence then came the original order? Astronomer Robert Jastrow likens the universe to a tensing hours.7 If the wind-up clock is running, then someone had to stretch.
This aspect of the second law also tells us that the universe had a beginning. Since we have left in some kind of order – just as we have left a certain amount of usable energy – the universe cannot be eternal, because if he was, we would have made the already chaos (entropy).
A few years ago, I (Standard) invited a student from a christian organization on campus, one of the best high schools in the U.S. (the Ivy League), to be there delivered a lecture on this topic.
During the lecture I students basically said that what we have written, but in much more detail. After the lecture, a student, who asked me, he asked me to go with him and his professor of physics have lunch.
When we sat down to eat, the professor made it clear that he is skeptical about my claim that the second law requires the beginning of the universe. In fact, he said, that is a materialist, who believes that there is only matter and that there are from eternity. ‘If matter is eternal, what do you do with the second law?’ I asked him. He replied: ‘Every law has an exception. This is my exception.“
I could oppose him question whether he really is scientifically correct to assume that every law has an exception. It doesn’t sound very scientific, and it may even be counterproductive. I was only gone from the subject of the second law and decided to ask him about materialism.
‘If everything is material,’ I asked, ‘then what is scientific theory? After all, the theory that everything is material, is not material; it is not composed of molecules.“ Without hesitation he replied: ‘the Theory is magic.’ 😁
‘Magic?’ I repeated, nevěříc what I hear.
‘What are you basing your claims?’
‘Faith,’ he answered quickly.
‘Faith in magic?’, I thought. ‘I can’t believe what I was hearing!
If it is faith in the magic of the best that materialists can offer, then don’t get faith to be a materialist!“
Retrospectively, it seemed to me that this professor knew he could not answer the compelling evidence supporting the second law, and so he admitted that his position has no basis in the evidence or good reasons for it. This provided another example of the will, which refuses to believe what the mind knows that it is true, and how is the view of atheists based on pure faith. In fact, he needed a leap of faith to willingly ignored the most respected law in the whole of nature.
Thus characterize the second law of Arthur Eddington in front of more than eighty years ago: If it turns out that your theory is in contradiction with the second law of thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing else, than to collapse in deepest humiliation.8
Since I realized that this professor has no real interest in the acceptance of the truth, I presented him any other potentially embarrassing questions. But because we couldn’t ignore the power of the second law on our own bodies, we both ordered dessert. Neither of us was willing to deny that we need to replace the energy that we just consumed!
D – the Universe is expanding – expanding
Good scientific theories are those that can predict phenomena that have not yet been observed. As we have seen, general relativity predicted the expanding universe. But it was only when the legendary astronomer Edwin Hubble more than ten years later, I looked in my telescope, scientists have finally confirmed that the universe is expanding and that it is expanding from a single point. (Astronomer Vesta Melvin Slipher was on the trail of this expandujícímu the universe already in 1913, but it was Hubble who at the end of the 20. years compiled all the information together.)
Expanding universe is the second scientific proof that the universe had a beginning.
How the expanding universe proves its beginning? Think about it this way: if we could watch a video of the history of the universe backwards, we can see how all matter in the universe collapses back to a single point, which is the size of a basketball ball, golf ball, or a pinhead, but mathematically and logically to the point, which is, in fact, nothing (i.e., no space, no time, and no mass).
In other words, once there was nothing and then BANG, something was created – the whole universe exploded into existence! It is, of course, is what is commonly called the ‘big bang’.
It is important to understand that the universe does not expand into the empty space, but that expanding the space itself – before the big bang, no space existed. , it Is also important to understand that the universe did not come from existing matter, but of anything – before the Big bang there was no mass.
In fact, chronologically, there was no ‘before’ the Big bang, because without time there is no ‘before’ and before the Big bang there was no time.9 –
‘Time, space and matter originated in the Big bang.‘
These facts atheists cause big trouble. And that’s exactly how it was in the rainy night in Georgia in April 1998. That night I I (Frank) took part in the debate in Atlanta on the topic of ‘is There a God?’ William Lane Craig has delivered a positive attitude and a Peter Atkins negative. The debate was very lively, and sometimes even funny, partly thanks to the moderator William F. Buckley Jr. Buckley did not hide his favor to craig’s for-God’s attitude. After the show, Craig and his impressive titles and references started Buckley featuring Atkinse funny remark: ‘And on the side of the devil’s Dr. Peter Atkins!’
One of the five Craigs arguments for the existence of God the cosmological argument based on the evidence of the big bang, which we discussed here. He pointed out that the universe – all time, all matter and all space – exploded out of nothing, which Atkins admitted in his book and later in the debate that evening, confirmed once again.
As Craig spoke first, informed the audience about how the Atkins attempts to explain the universe from the atheist point of view:
‘In his book, The Creation Revisited Dr. Atkins very trying to explain how the universe arise without a cause, out of the blue. Eventually, however, finds himself in a conflict with myself. He writes: ‘Now we go back in time back to the moment of creation, to the time when there was time and space.’ In this time before time represents the swirling dust of mathematical points, which again and again combine and eventually by trial and error creates our space-time universe.“10
Craig further pointed out that Atkinsův attitude is not a scientific theory, but in fact it is contradictory to the popular metaphysics, because it is a fanciful explanation– there is absolutely no scientific evidence that would support him. And this is contradictory, because it is believed that time and space before time and space existed. Since Craig had the opportunity to directly with Atkins to discuss this point, and so we Atkinse turned after the debate behind the scenes.
‘Doctor Atkinsi, you admit that the universe started with an explosion from nothing, but your explanation of the beginning is ambiguous in terms of what is ‘nothing’. Swirling mathematical points are nothing. They are something. How do you explain that?“
Place to address this issue, Atkins verbally surrendered to the other termodynamickému law. He said: ‘Look, gentlemen, I am very tired. Now I can’t answer any more questions.“ In other words, his drop in power, prove that the second law of works. Atkins literally had nothing to say!
According to modern cosmological evidence, not the universe, literally nothing, from what could arise. However, when it came to the provision of the atheist explanation of this phenomenon, Atkins, in fact, started with nothing, but with mathematical points and time. Of course, you can’t imagine, how could a mere mathematical points, and time can in fact cause the creation of the universe. Nevertheless, we would like to emphasize the fact that atheists such as Atkins, must be able to explain how the universe was created out of absolute nothing.
Editor: a Similar view is string theory. DEFINITION: string Theory is a physical model. – Instead of point (mathematical) of the particles considered to be the basic building blocks of matter and energy one-dimensional, vibrating strings. Due to the lack of experimental data is sometimes criticized as purely a mathematical construct.
What is nothing? Aristotle had a good definition: said, that nothing is what dreams stones! Nothing created the universe, is not a ‘mathematical points‘, as suggested by Atkins, (or ‘vibrating strings‘), nor the ‘positive and negative energy‘, as it was once written by Isaac Asimov, who is also an atheist.11
Nothing is literally nothing – it’s what dream stones.
British author Anthony Kenny honestly described his own situation, as an atheist, in the light of evidence of the big bang: ‘According to the theory of the big bang started the whole mass of the universe to exist at some point in the distant past,. a Proponent of such a theory, at least if he is an atheist, must believe that the matter in the universe came from nothing and by nothing.’12
E – EINSTEIN’s general theory of realitivity
Einstein’s general theory of relativity is another scientific proof that the universe had a beginning, and its discovery marked the end of the original theory, that the universe is eternal.
The theory of relativity, that has been verified to five decimal places, this requires an absolute beginning of time, space, and matter. Shows that the time, space and matter are interrelated. This means that they are interdependent – one cannot exist without the other.
On the basis of the general theory of relativity, scientists have predicted and then discovered the expanding universe and the big galaxiální seeds (seeds) which have been accurately adjusted, so that the universe could develop into its current state.
With -SEEDS (seeds) of the galaxy
Scientists believed that if the Big bang actually occurred, we should observe a slight deviations (or waves) in the temperature of the cosmic background. These thermal waves have allowed the mass of the cluster gravitational attraction of the galaxies. If they were found, they would be the fourth line of scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning.
In 1989, it was the search for these waves intensified, when NASA launched a satellite in the amount of 200 million dollars with the characteristic name of the BOAT. Due to the extremely sensitive devices was COBE able to find out whether these waves actually exist in the background radiation and how they are accurate.
When the head of the project, the astronomer George Smoot, announced in 1992, the COBE results were, his shocking characteristics was quoted in newspapers around the world. He said: ‘If you’re religious, it’s like looking at God.’ Astrophysicist Michael Turner of the university of Chicago was equally excited and said: ‘the Importance of this [objevu] cannot be overstated. Found the holy grail of cosmology.“
Astronomer Stephen Hawking of Cambridge agreed with him and called this discovery for ‘the most important discovery of the century, if not of all time’. 14
What COBE discovered that deserves so significant descriptions? COBE not only appeared waves, but scientists were amazed by its accuracy. Waves shows that the explosion and the expansion of the universe were precisely tuned so that the gathered just enough mass to create the galaxy, but not so much that there was a collapse of the universe. Any slight deviation in one direction or the other and none of us would be here. , In fact, are the waves so accurate (with an accuracy of one hundredth of a thousandth), that the Smoot is called ‘traces the creation of the universe’ and ‘fingerprints of the Creator‘.15 Smoot called this mass ‘seeds’ of galaxies.
The – COSMIC microwave radiation (cosmic background)
The last series of scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning, was discovered by accident in 1965. When Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson detected a strange radiation on its antenna at Bell Labs in the Extraordinary in New Jersey. No matter where you direct your antenna, this mysterious radiation was maintained. This radiation not only persisted, but was coming constantly from all directions.
What Penzias and Wilson discovered, turned out to be one of the most incredible discoveries of the last century – a discovery that earned the Nobel prize. , These two scientists have discovered a glimmer of after the explosion of the fireball of the Big bang! Technically known as the cosmic background, this reverberation radiation is, in fact, the light and heat from the initial explosion,. This light is no longer visible because its wavelength has been stretched by the expanding universe at wavelengths slightly shorter than you, that produces the microwave. But the heat can still find out and detect.
Already in 1948, three scientists have predicted that this radiation existed, if the big bang actually occurred. For some reason, however, no one tried to find him, than in him, Penzias and Wilson stumbled by accident nearly twenty years later. When he was this discovery is confirmed, refuted all the persistent assumptions that the universe is in an eternal steady-state.
Agnostic astronomer Robert Jastrow put it this way: For the radiation of the fireball was not found any other explanation than the Big bang. The decisive argument that convinced almost the last doubting Thomas, is that the radiation discovered by Penzias and Wilson has exactly the same formula wavelengths, what is expected by the light and heat generated during the big bang. Supporters of the theory of permanent state desperately tried to find an alternative explanation, but they did not succeed. does not currently have The big bang theory no competition.13
The discovery of the radiation of the fireball basically destroyed any hope on the theory of the standing condition.
DEFINITION: the Term ‘cosmic background’ (more precisely, the cosmic microwave background radiation , or cosmic microwave background radiation) refers to electromagnetic radiation, which uniformly fills the entire observable universe. For the ‘echo’ or ‘afterglow’ of the Big bang and represents the oldest light that can be in the universe to observe.
The theory of relativity, the expanding universe, cosmic microwave radiation, the large seeds of the galaxy, and then add these discoveries to the other termodynamickému the law and you have five strong scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning – the beginning of which came in the form of the big BANG.
SUMMARY – 5 scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning
T – the Second law of THERMODYNAMICS. – If the universe existed from eternity, he would have long ago without energy. Since, however, we are still here, the universe had to arise sometimes in the past, that was the beginning.
D – the Universe is expanding – expanding – from a certain beginning.
E – EINSTEIN’s general theory of relativity requires an absolute beginning of time, space, and matter. Shows that the time, space and matter are interrelated. This means that they are interdependent – one cannot exist without the other.
S – ‘SEEDS’ of the galaxy – Waves in the temperature of the cosmic background shows that the explosion and the expansion of the universe were precisely tuned (to one hundredth of a thousandth), that gathered just enough mass to create the galaxy, but not so much that there was a collapse of the universe.
To – TOOSMICKÉ microwave RADIATION – the cosmic background – Flash after the explosion of the fireball of the Big bang, for which there is no other explanation than the Big bang – the origin of the universe.
Excerpts from the book ‘I don’t Have enough faith to be an atheist’ by Dr. Norman Geislera and Dr. Frank Turk
1. Quoted in Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos (Colorado Springs:NavPress, 1995), 57.
2. All the galaxies are moving away from us, but that does not mean that weare at the center of the universe. To visualize how this can be, picture and balloon with black dots on it. When you blow up the balloon, all of the dotsseparate from one another whether they are near the center or not. The dotson opposite sides of the balloon (those farthest away from one another) separate more quickly than those next to one another. In fact, Hubble discovered and linear relationship between distance and speed, which showed that agalaxy twice as far from the us moves away at twice the speed. This becameknown as Hubble’s Law.
3. Quoted in Fred Heeren, Show Me God (Wheeling, Ill.: Daystar, 2000), 135.
4. Francis Bacon, The New Organon (1620; reprint, Indianapolis: BobbsMerrill, 1960), 121.
5. David Hume, in J. Y. T. Greig, ed., The Letters of David Hume, 2 vols. (NewYork: Garland, 1983), 1:187.
6. You may have heard the First Law of Thermodynamics stated like this:“Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.” That is a philosophical assertion, not an empirical observation. How could we know that energy was notcreated? There were no observers to verify it. And the more accurate definition of theFirst Law, as far as observations go, is that “the total amount of energy in theuniverse (i.e., usable and unusable energy) remains constant.” So as usableenergy is consumed, it is converted into unusable energy, but the sum of thetwo remains the same. Only the proportion of usable it unusable changes.
7. Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers (New York: Norton, 1978), 48.
8. Quoted in Paul Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint (New York: Simon & Shuster,1988), 20, emphasis added.
9. Words like “precede” and “before” usually imply time. We don’t mean itthat way, because there was no time “before” the Big Bang. For there can beno time before time began. What then could exist before time? The answeris, very simply, the Eternal! That is, the Eternal Cause that brought time,space, and matter into existence.
10. The entire debate is available on video at www.rzim.com.
11. Isaac Asimov, Beginning and End (New York: Doubleday, 1977), 148.
12. Anthony Kenny, The Five Ways: St. Thomas Aquinas’ Proofs of God’s sExistence (New York: Schocken, 1969), 66.
13. Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, 15-16.
