Evidence for God from Science

I read this in a magazine, but here's a link to wikipedia about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bounce

Some scientists are now considering the big bounce theory in which prior to the big bang, there was a big crunch in which a previous universe collapsed onto itself. In fact, this theory states that our current universe will eventually contract into another big crunch and then big bang into another universe. Thus bouncing per se. Currently, they don't know if this is the first universe or the 1 billionth universe.

Isn't God supposed to bring about an end to this universe and create a completely new one at some point?

Interesting, although this isn't really new....I remember learning about this back in high school and college (although I'm sure the model has changed, the idea that we have alternating expanding and crunching universes is not new)

Although I've not heard you're take on it, are you suggesting that this goes along with "a new creation and a new earht"?

harth1026 wrote:Some scientists

That should read Atheist scientists,

harth1026 wrote:are now considering the big bounce theory in which prior to the big bang, there was a big crunch in which a previous universe collapsed onto itself.

harth1026 wrote: In fact, this theory states that our current universe will eventually contract into another big crunch and then big bang into another universe. Thus bouncing per se.

Wow! it takes a lot of faith to believe that drivel!

harth1026 wrote:Currently, they don't know if this is the first universe or the 1 billionth universe.

I'm sure some bright soul will come up with a believable number, like this is the 401≠³ th Universe.

There, you heard it here first.

FL

Yeah, I saw a thread around here somewhere discussing how it takes faith to be an atheist. It sure does. There's some obscure book out there by David Hawking that I think discusses this theory as well. Of course, even he says that when it comes down to it, they have no way of knowing where the original matter came from.

As I understand it, current science estimates the amount of matter in the universe to be too small for there to be enough gravity for the universe to collapse on itself, which rules out this theory unless we discover a lot more matter out there.

zoegirl wrote:Interesting, although this isn't really new....I remember learning about this back in high school and college (although I'm sure the model has changed, the idea that we have alternating expanding and crunching universes is not new)

Although I've not heard you're take on it, are you suggesting that this goes along with "a new creation and a new earht"?

I've first read about this a few months ago. And yes, the first thing I was thinking about after reading it was that God would put an end to this world and create a new one. If there is any truth to the big bounce, it could be what they're talking about. But it's just a thought.

harth1026 wrote:I read this in a magazine, but here's a link to wikipedia about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bounce

Some scientists are now considering the big bounce theory in which prior to the big bang, there was a big crunch in which a previous universe collapsed onto itself. In fact, this theory states that our current universe will eventually contract into another big crunch and then big bang into another universe. Thus bouncing per se. Currently, they don't know if this is the first universe or the 1 billionth universe.

Isn't God supposed to bring about an end to this universe and create a completely new one at some point?

Well this doesn't qualify as a "Scientific Theory", but rather a "Hypothesis" since it's merely a hypothetical speculation which has accompanied the Big Bang Theory in which the nucleosynthesized expansion of the universe is reversed and returns to the singularity point of infinite density.

Further more it's unlikely that the bounce hypothesis will be given any real attention in the scientific community, since the structure, laws, and function of the universe before the Big Bang can have no effect on the universe as we know it today. Not to mention the fact that while the Big Bang is supported by the fact that our universe is constantly expanding, the Big Bounce could only be confirmed by the start of the process.

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

harth1026 wrote:Some scientists

That should read Atheist scientists,

Theism or Atheism has nothing at all to do with the Big Bang Model, since it has nothing to do with the creation of the universe, but rather the formation and continued expansion as we know it today.

harth1026 wrote:are now considering the big bounce theory in which prior to the big bang, there was a big crunch in which a previous universe collapsed onto itself.

harth1026 wrote: In fact, this theory states that our current universe will eventually contract into another big crunch and then big bang into another universe. Thus bouncing per se.

Wow! it takes a lot of faith to believe that drivel!

harth1026 wrote:Currently, they don't know if this is the first universe or the 1 billionth universe.

I'm sure some bright soul will come up with a believable number, like this is the 401≠³ th Universe.

There, you heard it here first.

FL

Uhh no, because little focus is placed on the state of the universe before the start of nucleosynthesis which marks the start of time and development of the universe in it's present state.

well the hole idea of a big crunch is contrary to the results of the WMAP sattelite. http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/ The probable scenario is now an open universe, expanding at increasing rate.