/lit/ - Literature

Is the Big Bang really used as a counter-argument against existence of God?

>>16889490
No

>>16889490
Kinda funny since the big bang was first theorized by a Catholic priest

>>16889490
If anything the big bang supports the existence of god since it is basically a supernatural event.

>>16889490
The big bang is probably the best piece of evidence Christians have for their cosmology being right.

>>16889560
Neat!

>>16889314
I could have won some many debates against chad thomists if only I knew I could have used the BIG BANG from 1927

How do you reconcile the big bang with materialist atheism? Where does energy to trigger such an event come from, what possibly could have let the universe expand from its singularity without there being an outside force adding energy to it?
I'm a brainlet when it comes to science so this is a legitimate question? What's the current answer atheistic science gives, they have to have some answer.

reminder:
>the entirety of the universe's mass and energy materializes out of an infinitesimally small speck of nothing
logical and scientific
>the entirety of the universe's mass and energy materializes out of an infinitesimally small speck of nothing as an act of God
balderdash and superstition

>>16889595
Big Bang has never happened, it's a stupid lie made by people who just want to seem important and get money writing nonsensical papers in academy. It's a model made on top of models made on top of models. There's no empirical evidence for it.

>>16889595
>Where does energy to trigger such an event come from, what possibly could have let the universe expand from its singularity without there being an outside force adding energy to it?
You need to move beyond the concept of the universe starting as a singularity. It is not really supported in modern theoretical physics. The big bang was an event with a rapid expansion of spacetime, and we only have vague ideas of what happened before it, but the universe probably existed in some form with some extent - although we really don't know.

The expansion of spacetime was probably driven by the inflaton field, which is a hypothetical scalar field (a quantum field with no "direction" so to say, much like the Higgs field). As it decayed to a lower energy state, the energy was used to expand spacetime extremely rapidly during the first few fractions of a second. The decayed lower vacuum state might be the dark energy we observe to drive the much slower, but still accelerating, expansion of spacetime today.

>>16889573
don't forget NIETZCHE (The God Challenger)!

>>16889640
>but the universe probably existed in some form with some extent
you still always come back to the question of the prime mover

>>16889652
Not really. There are two possibilities:

1) The universe always existed. In that case you don't need a prime mover.

2) The universe started to exist at some point. This could for example be through a quantum fluctuation, which is a non-causal event in that it doesn't require anything to trigger it. If the total energy of the universe sums to zero it also has no time limitation.

In the second case you might introduce a prime mover, but of course you just move the problem one step back since you need a prime mover for the prime mover and so on.

>>16889702
prime mover is god though. he's magic and doesn't follow the laws of the universe. it's conceivable for god to "create himself" or have "existed forever" because he's god, he is boundless. I believe in deism, that god snapped his fingers and set the clock in motion. I cannot accept that there is no supernatural component to the creation of the universe. I believe it starts and stops there

>>16889757
yeah, that sounds pretty dumb

>>16889776
I think it's the most logical conclusion really.

>>16889757
There's no prime mover, material things have always existed and will always exist.

>>16889781
There's no logic to it at all.

>The universe can't suddenly come into existence.
>Somehow a god can just magic himself into existence and then create the universe

Might as well cut out the god. It makes for the simple hypothesis, and you don't introduce anything you don't know whether exists.

>>16889490
Only in the minds of creationists.

>>16889794
The universe follows a set of rules. God does not. He wouldn't be god if he did. I believe the big bang is a magical event

>>16889314
what's funny is that the big band and evolution are both unproven scientific theories, not laws. So really, they contribute nothing to the argument against the existence of God.

I'm waiting for butterfag to show up and start shitting up the thread, I have my popcorn ready and everything

>>16889803
yeah, that sounds pretty dumb

>>16889595
>Where does all the energy in the universe come from
If you really want to know, ask a cosmologist. This isn't really the right venue.

>>16889621
>>the entirety of the universe's mass and energy materializes out of an infinitesimally small speck of nothing
Who believes this? I've never met such a person.

>>16889830
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46sKeycH3bE

Our whole universe was in a hot dense state,
Then nearly fourteen billion years ago expansion started. Wait...
The Earth began to cool,
The autotrophs began to drool,
Neanderthals developed tools,
We built a wall (we built the pyramids),
Math, science, history, unraveling the mystery,
That all started with the big bang! (Bang!)

"Since the dawn of man" is really not that long,
As every galaxy was formed in less time than it takes to sing this song.
A fraction of a second and the elements were made.
The bipeds stood up straight,
The dinosaurs all met their fate,
They tried to leap but they were late
And they all died (they froze their asses off)
The oceans and Pangea
See ya wouldn't wanna be ya
Set in motion by the same big bang!

It all started with the big BANG!

It's expanding ever outward but one day
It will pause and start to go the other way,
Collapsing ever inward, we won't be here, it wont be heard
Our best and brightest figure that it'll make an even bigger bang!

Australopithecus would really have been sick of us
Debating out while here they're catching deer (we're catching viruses)
Religion or astronomy, Descartes or Deuteronomy
It all started with the big bang!

Music and mythology, Einstein and astrology
It all started with the big bang!
It all started with the big bang!

>>16889815
Well I guess we'll find out when we die (or we won't).

>its another "We took literally every word in X sacred text" episode
Theology and formal sciences are different forms of knowledge, each in their own field but we should thrive to expand our understanding of the world as a whole instead of "muh field is better than yours"

>>16889794
Well let's assume that God has always existed, what then?

>>16889854
He looks like a wax sculpture 15 minutes after the air conditioning stops working

>I believe the big bang is a magical event
There are seriously people on this board who believe in magic.

>>16889913
you can't get something from nothing, nevermind everything from nothing

>>16889889
Why not just assume the universe has always existed? It's simpler, and doesn't require us to assume the existence of anything we don't know for a fact exists.

>>16889928
So if the universe can't have come from nothing, nor could it have just always existed, why does this not apply to God? The only argument is that God is magic. Your entire world view relies on the existence of magic. How do people that are supposedly well read base their entire world view on magic?

>>16889947
Because God is God. I'm no religious nut or anything but it's really as simple as that. God is omnipotent. He is not governed by an observable set of rules the way the universe is.

>>16889640
>and we only have vague ideas of what happened before it

This seems nonsensical to say, since it's talking about time before time.

>>16889966
So...
>The only argument is that God is magic. Your entire world view relies on the existence of magic.

>>16889971
God is magic, correct. And it doesn't govern my "worldview". Deism means an absence of god in everyday life, so I never think about this stuff. It exists in the background, and maybe I'll find out when I die, and maybe I won't. It's simply the only satisfying answer for the beginning of the everything.

>>16889967
Only if you assume that the big bang is actually the beginning of time, which, as I stated earlier, is not really the mainstream opninion in theoretical cosmology anymore. Of course if it is, then it doesn't even make sense to speak of a "before", but it might also very well be that the universe as a whole is eternal, and the part we can observe is just a small local pocket which has existed for 13.7 billion years.

>>16889982
>It's simply the only satisfying answer for the beginning of the everything.
Why does there have to be a satisfying answer? Why can't people just accept that it is impossible to know something?

>>16889996
It is impossible to know, that's why I said "maybe we'll find out when we die, maybe we won't." No one knows anything, it's all speculation and belief, and in all likelihood it's an unanswerable question. But I'm a fairly logical person and I cannot reconcile how the entire universe appeared into being while obeying the laws of physics.

>>16889947
the idea is that everything in the universe relies on strict rules and causality, thus the first cause needs to be outside the universe and not subject to those rules, which is the meaning of supernatural in the literal sense. You can basically only counter this by saying the universe is in some sense eternal and iterative or with Kant (that things like that surpass our reason, but then scientists have to shut up about it as well)

>>16889929
Because the fact that the universe is eternal has been the position of theists forever. Now "scientists" and "rational thinkers" want to claim the religious position (after positing the exact opposite with the big bang) and claim credit for what religious teachings have known for thousands of years. There is an irrational order to the universe, and it will never be contained within any kind of human method or measurement, despite what your hubris may tell you.

>>16889640
I know that this is likely all technically correct, but I can't help but feel that it takes the same or even stronger faith to believe in this over God.

See what I don't get is, why is there anything instead of nothing? All things and concepts have inherent qualitative or quantitative values and the question persists as to how those values–of literally anything–exist at all. To me that's the biggest evidence of God.

>NAIVE REALISM
>SCIENTISM

This is what really happened, retards:

Long before the earth came to be, there existed the bright and flaming place called Muspell—a location so hot that foreigners may not enter it—and the foggy land of Niflheim. In Niflheim was a spring, Hvergelmir, and from it flows numerous rivers. Together these rivers, known as Élivágar, flowed further and further from their source. Eventually the poisonous substance within the flow came to harden and turn to ice. When the flow became entirely solid, a poisonous vapor rose from the ice and solidified into rime atop the solid river. These thick ice layers grew, in time spreading across the void of Ginnungagap.

The northern region of Ginnungagap continued to fill with weight from the growing substance and its accompanying blowing vapor, yet the southern portion of Ginunngagap remained clear due to its proximity to the sparks and flames of Muspell. Between Niflheim and Muspell, ice and fire, was a placid location, "as mild as a windless sky". When the rime and the blowing heat met, the liquid melted and dropped, and this mixture formed the primordial being Ymir, the ancestor of all jötnar. Ymir sweated while sleeping. From his left arm grew a male and female jötunn, "and one of his legs begot a son with another", and these limbs too produced children.

Ymir fed from rivers of milk that flowed from the teats of the primordial cow, Auðumbla. Auðumbla fed from salt she licked from rime stones. Over the course of three days, she licked free a beautiful and strong man, Búri. Búri's son Borr married a jötunn named Bestla, and the two had three sons: the gods Odin, Vili and Vé. The sons killed Ymir, and Ymir's blood poured across the land, producing great floods that killed all of the jötnar but two (Bergelmir and his unnamed wife, who sailed across the flooded landscape).

Odin, Vili, and Vé took Ymir's corpse to the center of Ginunngagap and carved it. They made the earth from Ymir's flesh; the rocks from his bones; from his blood the sea, lakes, and oceans; and scree and stone from his molars, teeth, and remaining bone fragments. They surrounded the earth's lands with sea, forming a circle. From Ymir's skull they made the sky, which they placed above the earth in four points, each held by a dwarf (Norðri, Suðri, Austri and Vestri—Old Norse 'north, south, east, and west', respectively).

After forming the dome of the earth, the brothers Odin, Vili, and Vé took sparks of light from Muspell and placed them around the earth, both above and below. Some remained fixed and others moved through the sky in predetermined courses. The trio provided land for the jötnar to leave by the sea. Using Ymir's eyelashes, the trio built a fortification around the center of the landmass to contain the hostility of the jötnar. They called this fortification Miðgarðr (Old Norse 'central enclosure'). Finally, from Ymir's brains, they formed the clouds.

>>16889570

That you know of. There is much science has proven that you will never see reported in the media or by your teachers.

https://youtu.be/Gg_BXNuD9Eo

>>16890353
I want to drink Auðumbla milkies.
mmmmmmmmmmm slurp slurp slurp

>>16890394

>>16890394
Will I actually lose readers if I don't have any female characters in my story?