Quotes Tagged "big-bang"

The role played by time at the beginning of the universe is, I believe, the final key to removing the need for a Grand Designer, and revealing how the universe created itself. … Time itself must come to a stop. You can’t get to a time before the big bang, because there was no time before the big bang. We have finally found something that does not have a cause because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means there is no possibility of a creator because there is no time for a creator to have existed. Since time itself began at the moment of the Big Bang, it was an event that could not have been caused or created by anyone or anything. … So when people ask me if a god created the universe, I tell them the question itself makes no sense. Time didn’t exist before the Big Bang, so there is no time for God to make the universe in. It’s like asking for directions to the edge of the Earth. The Earth is a sphere. It does not have an edge, so looking for it is a futile exercise.

Death was an inverse Big Bang; an impossible magic trick where everything had become nothing in the very same instant, where one state had been replaced so completely by another that no evidence of the first could be detected, and where the catalyst had been vaporized by the sheer shock of the new.

If the fate of the universe was decided in a single moment at the instant of the Big Bang , that was the most creative moment of all.

People cited violation of the First Amendment when a New Jersey schoolteacher asserted that evolution and the Big Bang are not scientific and that Noah's ark carried dinosaurs. This case is not about the need to separate church and state; it's about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers.

120 million of us place the big bang 2,500 years after the Babylonians and Sumerians learned to brew beer.

By looking far out into space we are also looking far back into time, back toward the horizon of the universe, back toward the epoch of the Big Bang.

One of the most intriguing problems is to understand the precise nature of time, especially with regard to the big bang, the big crunch and the long-term future of an open universe.

The realization that time can behave like another direction of space means one can get rid of the problem of time having a beginning, in a similar way in which we got rid of the edge of the world. Suppose the beginning of the universe was like the South Pole of the earth, with degrees of latitude playing the role of time. As one moves north, the circles of constant latitude, representing the size of the universe, would expand. The universe would start as a point at the South Pole, but the South Pole is much like any other point. To ask what happened before the beginning of the universe would become a meaningless question, because there is nothing south of the South Pole.

Some piously record 'In the beginning God', but I say 'In the beginning hydrogen'.

Now, almost one hundred years later, it is difficult to fully appreciate how much our picture of the universe has changed in the span of a single human lifetime. As far as the scientific community in 1917 was concerned, the universe was static and eternal, and consisted of a one single galaxy, our Milky Way, surrounded by vast, infinite, dark, and empty space. This is, after all, what you would guess by looking up at the night sky with your eyes, or with a small telescope, and at the time there was little reason to suspect otherwise.

New Rule: Instead of using their $10 billion atom-smashing Large Hadron Collider to re-create the Big Bang by melting atom parts in temperatures a million times hotter than the sun, scientists should not do that. I'm just sayin' it sounds dangerous. I'm as interested as the next guy in determining the origin of matter, but first couldn't we solve some simple mystery, like why some-detector batteries always die at four a.m.?

If the standard model is correct, the universe started in a state of high density and temperature, with all matter and radiation forming one great continuous mass. It is very remarkable that this undifferentiated soup should have the intrinsic property that in due course of time it develops into galaxies of which at least one creates life with such staggering complexity, subtlety and diversity and often such stunning beauty. It also creates thinking and feeling beings which in turn can contemplate the universe and study its properties and which can love and hate.

Indeed, it is not clear whether it is meaningful to talk about 'after' the big crunch, just as it is not clear whether it is meaningful to talk about what happened 'before' the big bang. These questions are not necessarily meaningless, but the fact is we simply do not know.

When the Great Explosion occurred, from infinitely large energy, matter was created. So, that first thing was the idea!

За скінченний час стала Хаббла стане нескінченною, і Всесвіт припинить своє існування Великим розривом. Це відбуватиметься так: спершу віддалені галактики відлетять від нас, потім розпадеться Місцева група, далі - наша Галактика, згодом - Сонячна система, потім Городок відлетить від Львова, Бровари - від Києва, а Зміїв - від Харкова, і врешті-решт, коли сила гравітаційного відштовхування стане сильнішою навіть за ядерні сили, розпадуться атоми та їхні ядра. Як би лячно це не виглядало, Великий розрив може статися не раніше, ніж за 55 мільярдів років, і у людства до того часу буде вдосталь інших можливостей загинути.

The evidence for the beginning of the universe in the big bang has become so powerful and so convincing that scientists have accepted it as true even though the philosophical and theological implications may be repugnant to some.

Based on the evidence from both observations and theoretical calculations, the scientific community eventually, and maybe reluctantly, has accepted the idea that the universe appear to have begun about fourteen billion years ago--because there is no other explanation that fits the evidence.

The evidence that the big bang was God's method of creation is compelling for many reasons. For instance, it reveals the very nature of God, just as Romans 1:20 says creation should. It doesn't just reveal God's character to those who already believe in him or to those who only look superficially at nature; it reveals the very nature of his character to those who study the universe in depth. It drives people to realize that the creator is a transcendent designer who cares for humanity. It leaves them truly without excuse because they have rejected the creator, not for the record of creation.

When we understand how the big bang reveals the person and character of God, we see him more clearly, and this shows his glory, majesty, and wonder.

It should not surprise you that the big bang reveals characteristics of the creator that (1) are clearly evident, (2) are apparent even to those who do not accept any kind of deity, and (3) correspond to attributes ascribed to God in the rest of the Bible. After all, that is exactly what Paul [in Romans 1:20] said the evidence should do.