Why is the Universe both so large and so old?

[Seraph]

From my post in the Aliens thread, I thought I would split this into another topic because its something I often think about.

My post in the Aliens thread:

Because the part of the universe that we can actually see from Earth is only a millionth of the universe in it's entirety. There is so much out there that we will plain and simply never see or experience because there is too much of it. Our solar system compared to the universe makes a grain of sand look enormous when compared to a beach.

Check it out: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 9_001.jpeg

Even in that picture, the Supercluster is only a microscopic portion of the universe.

Plus age is another factor. The universe has been around for 14,000,000,000 years, human civilization has been around for about 10,000. To put that in perspective, if the age of the universe was shrunk down to an hour, humanity has only been around for the last second. For all of the rest of that time, there was no humanity. The universe existed without us for all that time.

When looking at the unimaginable size and age of the universe, I really don't get the impression that we are the sole focus of it. It would be like renting out the country of China so that you have a nice place to play checkers with someone.

In that thread, I said that I don't think we are alone in the universe because the size and age seem to suggest that we are not the focal point of it. So, I want to know, why do you guys and gals think (at least if you're an OEC or Theistic Evolutionist) that God made the universe so goshdarn large and so goshdarn old in comparison to us? I read the GodandScience page that explains why the universe needs to be that large for heat to disperse properly, but surely God could've made the laws of physics differently so that this wouldn't be the case couldn't he?

The age and size of the universe is somewhat of a double edged sword for me. Some of the time it makes me realize how grand and awesome God is, but being completely honest with myself, it also tends to be my biggest cause of doubts in regards to Christianity for me. Sometimes it seems that the God who created and sustains this grand universe would have a hard time noticing that we even exist, let alone care enough about us to die on a cross for us.

Anyhow, what say you?

[jlay]

First- How are you judging the age of the universe?
2nd- How are you judging the size of the universe?
3rd- Where is the center of the universe? (you would have to know it, to conclude that the earth is not at its center.)

[Seraph]

You should study some Astronomy and Cosmology.

The age of the universe has been calculated in many different ways. For example, when astronomers look at the wavelength of light being recieved by a distant galaxy, they can calculate how far away the galaxy is by looking at how much the light's wavelength degenerated since it first left the distant galaxy and when it reached us. Light breaks down at a constant rate so astronomers can tell that the light travelling from some very distant galaxies have been travelling for at least 10 billion years. Since it's been travelling for 10 billion years, that means that the galaxy must be at least 10 billion light years away. Thus, the universe is at least 10 billion light years wide and 10 billion years old since it would have to be that old for the light to have been travelling that long. The furthest thing scientists have measured is the Cosmic Microwave Background, which seems to be at least 14 billion light years away. Some have argued that God created the light in a state of being close to us so that it "appears" young, but then God would be a deciever wouldn't he? This is only one way they've measured both the age and size of the universe.

More (better explained and probably more accurate) ways: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe
If you don't trust wikipedia as a source, there's other external links at the bottom.

Actually Rich Deem would do a nice job explaining it.

As for the center of the universe, there really isn't any. According to the Big Bang theory, space has been expanding at all places in all directions at the same time, so wherever you are, you're at the relative "center". When scientists measure the red shift of galaxies, they see that all galaxies seem to be moving away from us. If you went to the Andromaeda galaxy, it would look the same, with all galaxies still flying away from you.
Under this theory, if you could see the universe as a whole at the same time, it would probably look like some strange 4-dimensional object or something weird.

[Human]

As for the center of the universe, there really isn't any. According to the Big Bang theory, space has been expanding at all places in all directions at the same time, so wherever you are, you're at the relative "center". When scientists measure the red shift of galaxies, they see that all galaxies seem to be moving away from us. If you went to the Andromaeda galaxy, it would look the same, with all galaxies still flying away from you.
Under this theory, if you could see the universe as a whole at the same time, it would probably look like some strange 4-dimensional object or something weird.

Take a broken rubber band and put some dots at random distances in a row on it with a pen or marker or something. Focus on one dot. Now stretch the band from both sides. Notice that all the other dots appear to be moving away from it. Pick any other dot and do and notice the same.
Our universe is just like this, except 3 dimensions instead of one. Heck, put a dot on a balloon and inflate it and you'll notice the same effect.
However! In both cases, there *is* a clear center.

Topic: Idea: We're early in human history. We could expand to things that seem impossible now,

[jlay]

I'm addressing the issues of your doubts, not debating the actual age of the universe. My point Seraph is that no matter what measurement you use, you are evaluating its age and size from a human perspective. So, when you say old or big, it is only relative to the fact that you are able to observe it and have cogent ideas about it. I mean you kind of hinted at it in your OP. But we can't assume the universe is big or old, unless we are presupposing that humans are the standard to measure those things by. Since we are the only known beings to have self-awareness and the ability to acquire and deduce such things. The fact that we can obtain knowledge and understanding about our universe ought to tell us something.

Some have argued that God created the light in a state of being close to us so that it "appears" young, but then God would be a deciever wouldn't he? This is only one way they've measured both the age and size of the universe.

Actually there are some other arguments from some brilliant minds, but they are not OEC stuff. But that really wasn't the point I was driving at.

[Seraph]

Alright I see what you're saying now. Sorry for getting a bit hasty jlay . I guess from my perspective I would consider it to be "too big" not just because of the size, but the content. Each of those billion galaxies contains a billion stars, many of which have their own planets. It just seems proposterously excessive for a universe that was intended for humans alone, unless God was preparing humanity for space colonization someday or something like that.

But as for the doubting part, I guess it would be that the universe's size, age, chaoticness, and hostility to humans (I guess I could add those last two) somewhat make the idea that we are the product of chaos, chance, and lots and lots of time seem less rediculous to me. If the universe is so large and old (oldness is a factor because a lot of cause and effect chains happen within that time), sometimes it seems like life of some kind was bound to pop up somewhere on its own eventually, through chemical combinations and darwinian evolution (even if you don't believe that it took place with humans, it still is a feasibly possible process that could happen somewhere). It doesn't disprove God's existence to me by any means, but it certianly plants seeds of doubt.

[jlay]

it still is a feasibly possible process that could happen somewhere

Really? See I don't see that. The odds against life are astronaomically more likely, and I don't mean by just a little bit.
When you actually get down to probabilities it becomes absurd. There is a point where when looking at probabilities you have to accept the impossible. For example. let's say you walk by the breakfast table and you see a box of alphabet cereal. It has been knocked over. And on the table the letters are arranged to spell, "take out the trash, love Mom."

What is the probability that it happened by just accidently knocking over the box? You could assign a probability to it, but it nonsense to do so. It is only possible in the sense that a probability can be assigned. But it is really impossible. Random processes can't communicate messages.

It just seems proposterously excessive for a universe that was intended for humans alone, unless God was preparing humanity for space colonization someday or something like that.

Yet the more we learn about our universe, the more we discover how each of those billions of galaxies is essential for life to exist on this earth.

You can even look at this from another perspective. Look at the human cell on the microscopic level. We don't look so small now. Life is an incredible thing.

[Maytan]

You can also say 'Why didn't God create everything in an instant, and only what's absolutely necessary to survival of life-forms on the Earth?'

I'm not going to claim to know the mind of God, and this question is quite frankly irrelevant to whether or not God exists. If you read (or listen to) some of RTB's (or other science-based website's) various articles (or debates/talks) you can see there's some proposed reasons (or beneficial items) as to the age of things. (mostly the Earth)

Don't forget, creation is also to declare God's glory. Not just be practical.

[MarcusOfLycia]

Along the same lines, Maytan:

Why do we have art? Why do we have music? And stories? This stuff could be almost considered like 'fluff', just like the universe's scope. We're made in God's image, and we love to create things, just like He does. And yet, none of this stuff is 'essential' per se. But God created more than what was 'necessary'. He created all this 'fluff' too, in much the same way we produce art.

That's not to say, like I've heard atheists say, that stuff like this proves that we can give meaning to things that don't have it (the thing I hear atheists say when they try to defend a position of absolute meaninglessness). In fact, it kind of requires God. The entire universe declares the Glory of God. Our creation points to us and then we point to God.

[Silvertusk]

From my post in the Aliens thread, I thought I would split this into another topic because its something I often think about.

My post in the Aliens thread:

Because the part of the universe that we can actually see from Earth is only a millionth of the universe in it's entirety. There is so much out there that we will plain and simply never see or experience because there is too much of it. Our solar system compared to the universe makes a grain of sand look enormous when compared to a beach.

Check it out: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 9_001.jpeg

Even in that picture, the Supercluster is only a microscopic portion of the universe.

Plus age is another factor. The universe has been around for 14,000,000,000 years, human civilization has been around for about 10,000. To put that in perspective, if the age of the universe was shrunk down to an hour, humanity has only been around for the last second. For all of the rest of that time, there was no humanity. The universe existed without us for all that time.

When looking at the unimaginable size and age of the universe, I really don't get the impression that we are the sole focus of it. It would be like renting out the country of China so that you have a nice place to play checkers with someone.

In that thread, I said that I don't think we are alone in the universe because the size and age seem to suggest that we are not the focal point of it. So, I want to know, why do you guys and gals think (at least if you're an OEC or Theistic Evolutionist) that God made the universe so goshdarn large and so goshdarn old in comparison to us? I read the GodandScience page that explains why the universe needs to be that large for heat to disperse properly, but surely God could've made the laws of physics differently so that this wouldn't be the case couldn't he?

The age and size of the universe is somewhat of a double edged sword for me. Some of the time it makes me realize how grand and awesome God is, but being completely honest with myself, it also tends to be my biggest cause of doubts in regards to Christianity for me. Sometimes it seems that the God who created and sustains this grand universe would have a hard time noticing that we even exist, let alone care enough about us to die on a cross for us.

Anyhow, what say you?

The universe needs to be as large and old as it is for enough stars and enough generations of stars to have come and gone to produce the heavier elements that make up our world. Yes God could have done it quicker - but if he is making a universe that allows us to have perfect freewill then he has obviously allowed natural laws and time to go through the process at its own pace.

[1harpazo]

On the lighter side:

Since we'll be spending eternity with God, we'll need a few places to vacation at. I think it'll be better than the Bahamas.

[Kristoffer]

I think a better question to ask is "Why is most of the universe so inhospitable to life?" There are places in the universe where the heat and radiation will KILL instantly. Think about that, instantly! The percentage of livable space is so tiny that it is almost zero, when you look at the world and see beuty, you shouldn't see a nice place for a motorway, you can view it as a creation of god if you will, but nothing that we should have dominion[control] over. Its something we need to protect.

those is just are my thoughts.

The odds against life are astronaomically more likely

The flaw to this is that, the odds are that it at least happens once[that we know of]. Maybe we simply exist because we live on a world where it is possible for us to exist?

[jlay]

The flaw to this is that, the odds are that it at least happens once[that we know of]. Maybe we simply exist because we live on a world where it is possible for us to exist?

Actually there is nothing wrong with examining the odds. And it is foolish in my opinion to dismiss and to simply say, 'oh well here we are.' The human mind desires to know why. As if it is etched into our DNA to seek meaning and purpose.

[Kristoffer]

But its the honest answer why is it foolish? Its like the philosopher saying "I think, therefore I am" Its not really a position where you admit with any certainty that you know exactly what happened. Is it a statement that is unacceptable? I do not think that it is sophistry.

[Noah1201]

I read the GodandScience page that explains why the universe needs to be that large for heat to disperse properly, but surely God could've made the laws of physics differently so that this wouldn't be the case couldn't he?

Besides that, God isn't bound by the laws of nature. He can do metaphysically impossible things. So this always seemed like an extremely lame argument to me. Just like the supposed "necessity" of natural evil given our laws of nature.