Darwin_Rocks wrote:I see what you are saying, there would have to be a cause for a random fluctuation of propeties to occur or something would have had to have been around to create this idea of quantum mechanics,
Now you picked up upon one absurdity, which was there is not really "nothing" if quantum mechanics existed. But the argument I had in mind was actually more technical. I believe it was in Davies book
God and the New Physics where he appealed to quantum tunneling to explain his theory that the universe literally popped into existence from nothing. Davies points out how virtual particles can pop into existence from nothingness through quantum tunneling. Apparently such particles can be produced out of "nothing,"
provided they are converted back into nothingness before the human observer can detect their appearance. Davies suggests that perhaps the cosmos could have popped into existence by this means. Yet, it has been pointed out by Ross in his book, The Creator and the Cosmos, that Davies forgot to acknowledge that for a system as massive as the universe, the time for it to disappear back into nothingness must be less than 10<sup>-103</sup> seconds (0.00000[up to 102 zeros]1). To say this is a moment a bit briefer than the age of the universe is a bit of an understatement.
Ross further points out that quantum mechanics is also founded on the concept that quantum events occur according to finite probabilities within finite intervals of time. So if the time interval is zero, then the probability of a quantum event occuring is also zero. As time began when the universe was created, the time interval is zero, and therefore quantum tunneling is eliminated as being a possible candidate for the "creator."
DR wrote:but during these times of uncertainty as a Scientific minded person I must remind you that there have been many things that religious minded people have used God to explain that Science has later disproved (eg, The Bible states that the Earth was created only thousands of years ago where as fossils have been proven to exist millions of years ago).
Where in the Bible is it stated that the Earth is only thousands of years old? The idea generally comes from Christians who view the days in Genesis as 24-hour days, but many Christians in the past have not believed them to be so (see
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... c&start=45 for example). And even science disproves scientific theories, yet this does not mean one can't advocate a particular scientific theory as currently the best available explanation from all we know? Should we never believe anything because we never have 100% certainty?
As far as I can see, science is entirely compatible with my beliefs in God. Additionally, I see many "real" gaps (e.g., origin of life problem, origin of universe, etc) that have not been explained naturally, and as scientific knowledge has grown, the problems that require solving increase for any natural explanation. Such a trend suggests to me that these are true gaps unexplainable by any natural explanation. Therefore I think it more plausible to consider God as the explanation, rather than natural processes.
DR wrote:Who is to say that the initial 'spark' that triggered the big bang will not be explained by Science in the future?
Actually, because we can't observe the creation of our universe from "outside" there appears no way science can tell us what triggered our universe coming into being. We can only measure what is inside our universe. So if we accept that our universe had a beginning, then our universe isn't eternal. This leaves many who don't believe in God in an uncomfortable situations for:
1) Something that begins to exist has a cause for its existence.
2) The universe began to exist.
3) Therefore it has a cause for its existence.
Now if our universe hasn't always existed, and it is absurd to think that something can just popped into existence from entirely nothing, then something outside of our universe caused its existence...
Kurieuo.