What created the Big Bang?
A question from a student: If the Big Bang theory is true, then the universe had a beginning. If the universe had a beginning, it had to be created. Not necessarily by an old geezer with a long white beard who intones like John Gielgud, but there had to be some catalyst of some kind. Intelligent or not, it created the universe and is therefore the creator. I would appreciate it if you could come up with a good argument against this.
Mark Hume, OU student.
My reply: Here you are asking about the first cause, or also known as the first cause argument.
As you mentioned, we have a scientific theory that discusses a Big Bang. The theory goes on to explain that the Universe is the result of a massive explosion so great that it created the Universe as we know it. Assuming that everything has a first cause we then need to ask what was the cause for the Big Bang. Some would argue that God created the Big Bang. Therefore God is the first cause. However, this is a contradiction because if everything has a first cause, then God cannot be the ultimate creator because he needs a cause too.
So, some might say that another God created God, but then you would have to ask who created the God who created the God? Therefore, you would need to follow this path ad infinitum until you have a infinite chain of connections of creators for the creators. Some would dismiss this and would suggest that God is the exception to all of the rules of the Universe. As God does not apply in the realms of logic and naturalism, then those who say He exist will say he just came into existence out of nothing. In that, they make God the exception to the rule and assert that God is the first cause. But why should we stop with God? Why not suggest that the Big Bang came out of nothing? It is just as tangible, is it not? Well no it is not, as we still have the contradiction of the first cause argument to settle.
Let me illustrate the first cause argument another way….
You may have a mountain view outside your window. You might ask what created the mountain? You could answer that the Earth’s plates moved together and pushed the ground up to create the mountain. You would then ask what created the Earth? You could answer that a whole bunch of space debris came together by the force of gravity and formed the planet. You would then ask what created the debris and you could say the Big Bang. But then you would ask what created the Big Bang? And here is where we get stuck! What is the first cause of the Big Bang?
So I now suggest that the question asked does not make sense, and let me demonstrate why…
What is north of England? Scotland. What is north of Scotland? Iceland? What is north of Iceland? The Arctic Circle. Then what is north of the Arctic Circle? The North Pole. And what is north of the North Pole? Well, um….nothing you would say, and you would be right! You see, the final question does not make sense. You cannot go further north than the North Pole as nothing can be more north than north.
As a result, using the first cause argument we ultimatley encounter an unanswerable question. So we are left with a few options. We choose either:
a) Answer the question and say the Big Bang has a cause, but we haven’t discovered it yet.
b) We stop at God being the first cause.
c) We say that the Big Bang just happened and that’s the first cause.
d) Or we accept the question doesn’t even makes sense.
None the options given are satisfactory and here’s why, for each option:
a) The problem is that once we identify the cause we have to ask the question for the solution to the preceeding cause.
b) God becomes the focus of the question and we get the same problem as shown with ‘a)’.
c) Did the Big Bang really happen with no cause? I don’t think so!! I’m still not happy with the answer.
d) If we say the question doesn’t make sense, then what is the right question?
Readers of the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy will all smile and have realised the problem pointed out here already. The problem isn’t finding the right answer, the problem is asking the right question!
Based on an idea from: The Philosophy Gym, Stephen Law.
June 6th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Interesting theory – however the argument lacks 1 vital missing ingredient. If you turn to Genesis on the first day God said “let there be light”! On the first day God created the first day, what I mean is that on the first day God created time and then throughout the course of the next 5 days he created the mountains, the trees, mankind and the rest of the universe.
This creation may have taken the form of a big bang, the chances of the big bang being an accident is as likely as a paint factory exploding and getting the Oxford English Dictionary.
Where did God come from? Who created the creator? The most important question is none of these but how long is infinity. Infinity is very long you may say – this answer is incorrect. Infinity is infinity – it cannot be measured, it stands outside of time or is so big you cannot measure it. God is Infinity, he was here before time and indeed created time. When Moses asked who God was he said “I AM”, Revelation (last book of the Bible) talks about God being the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end.
God doesn’t need to be created because he stands outside of time, God just IS! Nothing was before God because before God there was nothing!
June 6th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Can stuff happen uncaused or not? If not then nothing exists. So it can.
The question is not how long is infinity. I saw God’s bum on the Sistine chapel ceiling last week and it was pretty pert. So it can’t be that long.
What was going on before time? Now that’s a question that certainly doesn’t make sense.
And anyway, why exactly did God sit around twiddling his thumbs for an eternity before making the world? Keeping his bum in good shape?
But seriously, saying there is an infinite past, is mathematically equivalent to saying that time has no beginning. And that therefore all this beginning of time stuff cannot exist.
June 6th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
Sorry, infinite past => no beginning. The converse implication does not hold.
June 6th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
Quote:
“What was going on before time? Now that’s a question that certainly doesn’t make sense.
But seriously, saying there is an infinite past, is mathematically equivalent to saying that time has no beginning. And that therefore all this beginning of time stuff cannot exist.”
Course it makes sense! The earth has a beginning, it started. Maybe it was the first milli second of the Big Bang. But my argument is that God is not bound by time because he created time. The first millisecond of the Bid Bang, or the instant that God created the first light was when time started. In short time does have a begining but God does not because before time there was no time.
It’s not any easy one to get your head around becuase we are bound by time, we are born, live and we die but an infinate being doesn’t have to have a begining.
June 6th, 2006 at 11:18 pm
Unless you have a time machine, the solution to what caused the big bang will never be agreed.
The big bang cannot fully be proven scientifically as our known physical theories break down the closer we get to the start of the big bang.
People trying to disprove God with science are fighting a losing battle. Some people look towards the church to explain the unexplainable/unthinkable. And there will ALWAYS be something that has not been explained by science.
June 6th, 2006 at 11:51 pm
If God exists outside of time – at what point did he decide to create time?
June 7th, 2006 at 11:45 am
Other Joe,
Before means ‘at an earlier time’. If there was a beginning to time, there was nothing ‘before’ it, because ‘before’ would imply that time already existed.
The idea of ‘before time’ is indeed difficult to get your head around, because it is self-contradictory. A bit like the Trinity perhaps.
Give your confusion a name, call it a theological concept, and when it no longer troubles you, claim to have understood it.
June 8th, 2006 at 12:34 pm
The question that should be asked is “Why does something have to have created it at all?”
We will, at some point, demonstrate that the whole thing is part of a continual cyle – big bang, big crunch, big bang etc.
I believe that, far from it being a one off, unlikely event, it will be shown to be (like the occurrence of life) a statistical certainty.
The universe is infinite, there is no start and there is no end. It just is. It always has been and it always will be. God and questions of creation have no place here.
June 11th, 2006 at 9:45 am
Quote:
If God exists outside of time – at what point did he decide to create time
If you read my response to the first post the very first thing God created was time, when he said “let there be” that was when time begin.
Quote:
The idea of ‘before time’ is indeed difficult to get your head around, because it is self-contradictory. A bit like the Trinity perhaps.
Not really if you read any decent book on Astropysics it isn’t really that hard to accept, the rules of time can easily be bent especially if you are able to travel at the speed of light (well near speed of light because speed of light is impossible). Most objects as they accelerate change shape and defy the laws of physics in all kinds of ways.
If you read my argument and understand it then it makes perfect sense, maybe I am not explaining it well enough? The easiest thing to do however is call something contradictory if you don’t understand it.
The trinity is very easy to understand but if you struggle this may help. H20 can be in 3 forms, Gas = Steam, Water = Liquid, Ice = solid. It’s still H20. But the trinity is a sperate argument for another day, let’s keep on about the Big Bang!
June 12th, 2006 at 9:44 am
Other Joe,
Which decent book on Astrophysics talks about ‘before time’?
You seem to be talking about relativity, but the theories of relativity are rules, they are not bendings of some other rules.
Anyway, I am not saying that ‘before time’ is physically impossible, I am saying that it is semantically meaningless. Before means ‘at an earlier time’.
June 12th, 2006 at 6:11 pm
Good I am glad that you agree that ‘before time’ is not physically impossible. There are no books on Astrophysics that talk about ‘before time’. My Astrophysics reference refers to travelling at the speed of light and the way that we measure time is different. I suppose I have tried to over simplify the discussion.
Anyway, I am not saying that ‘before time’ is physically impossible, I am saying that it is semantically meaningless. Before means ‘at an earlier time’.
Yes before time is almost contradictionary as ‘before’ is a unit of time however I am sure you get the point I am trying to make and indeed it proves my point. There doesn’t have to be a ‘before the big bang’ because time does not exist. Therefore the concept of an infinate being (God) can exist.
June 13th, 2006 at 12:25 pm
There is no need to bring physics or theology or mathematics into this argument, it is just a matter of logic. By definition the universe is “everything that exists” therefore outside the universe there is nothing, no matter, no space, no time, no gods, nothing. Or to put it another way “outside the universe” is a nonsense.
If we try to trace back time we can only do this from within the universe, since there is no outside of the universe. The problem to be decided therefore is the nature of time. There are various theories, but none yet seems conclusive.
June 13th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
Other Joe,
Because ‘before time’ is meaningless, claims about its physical possibility are also meaningless. Before time is like a square circle.
I do appreciate what you’re trying to say. But I suggest that it is difficult to articulate because it is not a coherent idea.
June 13th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Hi George
If you want to apply logic to an discussion here is a logical discussion: I am sat at a computer and due to the complexity of how it operates I assume it was designed by a designer and was created by a creator. I look at the world in which we live which is far more complex than a computer and therefore draw the same conclusion.
Joe Otten – I beg to differ I think it is very coherent, ‘before time’ doesn’t have to have a ‘physical possibility’ because with a God you are not dealing with a physical being.
God is infinate, no beginning and no end. Within infinity sits time and the universe. Which will start and finish. Time and the universe has a beginning and an end because God is infinate he sits outside of time. Therefore there doesn’t have to be a before the big band or before time because like you said before time is like a square circle. I hope this makes more sense to you now.
June 14th, 2006 at 10:37 am
Other Joe,
Is it possible for a pghaoigheioahgioehgioases to exist?
It is a meaningless question, just like ‘what existed before time?’
Now you tell me (as good as) that a pghaoigheioahgioehgioases doesn’t have to be a physical possibility. Which seems to be missing the point, that the word is meaningless.
The universe is, by definition, everything that exists. You are saying that God is not part of the universe. I agree. He doesn’t exist.
June 14th, 2006 at 11:12 am
As we try to trace time back to its origin, from within the universe, it seems to me that as we approach its ‘origin’ it must begin to become incoherent because there is no way it can be measured any more. Clocks cannot exist in a chaotic state. To extend Joe O’s analogy clocks go haywire as we approach the year zero, in the same way as compasses go haywire as we near the north (magnetic) pole.
There is still the question of why something exists rather than nothing. It may be possible to answer this by using a bit of ‘fuzzy logic’ which says that no concept is definite but has fuzzy edges. On this basis ‘absolute nothingness’ is an unstable concept. If it becomes even slightly fuzzy it becomes ‘something’. So things exist because that is the more probable situation.
Joe _ says that his idea of ‘God’ is a nonphysical being. But presumably he would still say that God ‘exists’ . This God would therefore be a part of the universe, within the universe, although the universe would now ‘exist’ in different ways, physical and nonphysical.
I’m not going to be drawn into the ‘intelligent design’ argument here, or into vague, non-mathematical, notions of a mystical ‘infinity’. Let’s keep to the original question.
June 14th, 2006 at 2:22 pm
Quote Joe:
The universe is, by definition, everything that exists. You are saying that God is not part of the universe. I agree. He doesn’t exist.
The universe is the summation of all matter that exists not everything that exists. The universe is everything that physically exists (matter) not everything that exists. I believe in a physical realm and a spirtual realm. The physical is the universe, the spiritual is the ‘heavenly realms’ (to quote the bible). So yes George I do believe the universe does ‘exist’ in different ways, physcial and non physical but I prefer to think of this as the universe (known matter) and the heavenlies (unknown matter).
Joe you seem to have a very black and white outlook on this subject and I still think it is very grey area. Even some scientists think that the universe may be part of a system of many other universes, known as the multiverse. To say the universe is everything, God is not in the universe and therefore God does not exist is far too simplistic. Considering how little we know about the universe and how little we know of the non physcial aspects of human nature I find it hard to go along with this line of thinking.
June 14th, 2006 at 10:45 pm
Joe _ accepts that his idea of ‘God’ exists and that it has a non-physical or, now he says, ‘spiritual’ existence, but what does this mean? Are there other things that have non-physical existence? Yes, they are called concepts or ideas, like Democracy or Pegasus or Sherlock Holmes.
These non-physical things exist within the physical universe, within the minds of human beings or in their communication systems. (So it could be argued that in a sense they are actually physical, taking the form of ink on paper or nerve impulses in the brain and so on.)
My conclusion therefore is that ‘God’ exists, but it was the Universe that created God, not the other way round! God exists in the minds of people. And minds capable of this sort of thought may perhaps only have been around for about 10,000 years. before that the Universe was godless.
June 15th, 2006 at 12:11 am
Joe (not Otten),
Your concept of God has many problems and by this I say it is an irrational concept. Examples of irrational concepts are: a square circle; a closed open door; a red green paint; and so on.
You see Joe, you say that God is infinite, and by this I assume that you mean God is all powerful and all knowing. Now, for anything to exist, you have to define attributes and when you do this, you limit the concept to have particular definitions – that is, you give it a nature. With this reasoning, you cannot say God is everything, infinite and all powerful, because when you assign God an attribute you restrict that very concept. We end up with a very messy idea and it would be irrational to ignore these problems and accept it as it is. In the end, you end up with an incoherent argument and forever painting yourself into a square round corner with red green paint, and the open closed door behind in front of you!
Now, I assume you are a person of deep faith, and it must be very difficult for you to have these emotional ideas challenged, but if you are to discuss your ideas and beliefs, you have to accept the challenges put before you. If after you have really thought about all of these problems and continue to assert that your idea of God exists, then we must either accept defeat in bringing you to a rational position, or you must give us a convincing argument how this can be so. That is, the burden of proof lies firmly in your hands, and we all wait in great anticipation for anyone to do this.
Finally, even though you brought up God as the first cause, you failed to apply the first cause argument to your own suggestion. The whole point of this article was to show the very problem of what ultimately came first. Have another read, and think about the contradiction within the question.
Your views have been interesting and it has fuelled debate
, so do continue to visit and have your say!
Adam
June 16th, 2006 at 12:35 am
Other Joe,
The multiverse and other meta-universe theoreies are still physical. You aren’t arguing that God exists in a parallel physical universe. So these theories don’t change the argument much. The only change they make is that they suggest something physical beyond the currently observable universe, and would probably therefore favour a new steady state theory of which various big bangs are a consequence.
You believe that in addition to whatever phyiscal universe(s) we have, there is:
a) a spiritual realm
b) wherein exists God
c) who created all the physical stuff
The question is whether any of this solves any problems of origin. Well it doesn’t. It just shifts the problem of origins into a different, hypothetical realm.
Moreover, in the process it makes it a bigger problem of origin. Rather than just tackling the existence of anything, it also makes inexplicable the existence of complexity, life and consciousness – because the thing of inexplicable origin is defined to have these properties also.
Science may only have answers to 3 out of 4, but that is still 3 more than faith.
June 18th, 2006 at 9:29 pm
My conclusion therefore is that ‘God’ exists, but it was the Universe that created God, not the other way round! God exists in the minds of people. And minds capable of this sort of thought may perhaps only have been around for about 10,000 years. before that the Universe was godless.
Hi George if God is made up in the minds of men then what is the point to life? I have to disagree with this line of thought.
reason42 – your first point about God being irrational is a valid one. If God was rational it would probably be argued that he wasn’t God because you can rationalise him. It’s a no win situation.
I also don’t accept the viewpoint that to assign an attribute to God is to somehow limit the power or nature of God. Human beings assign these attributes to God to help them to understand God. For example Jesus said “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a farmer sowing seed……….”. This doesn’t mean that God drives a combine harvester – it is a metaphor to help to understand God.
If you do not use these metaphors then you cannot begin to understand God or even begin to talk about God.
Quote:
Now, I assume you are a person of deep faith, and it must be very difficult for you to have these emotional ideas challenged, but if you are to discuss your ideas and beliefs, you have to accept the challenges put before you. If after you have really thought about all of these problems and continue to assert that your idea of God exists, then we must either accept defeat in bringing you to a rational position, or you must give us a convincing argument how this can be so.
I have no problems with people challenging my faith and indeed welcome it. We are not the first people to discuss this and we won’t be the last. It has been going on for the last 2000 years. You also say I have to accept defeat or convince you otherwise. There is a third option which is that we agree to disagree. So far I haven’t read anything that I haven’t heard before or read anything that has changed my mind. I also haven’t read a logical alternate viewpoint that explains the origin of life on earth. I still stand behind my original point:
God is infinate and because he is infinate he doesn’t need to have been created. He created the universe at the beginning of time and time will eventually come to an end. God therefore will always ‘be’.
This is a perfectly logical coherent view point – however you may disagree with it. You also mentioned in the original post:
Some would argue that God created the Big Bang. Therefore God is the first cause. However, this is a contradiction because if everything has a first cause, then God cannot be the ultimate creator.
It isn’t a contradiction because if you accept that God is infinate then he doesn’t need a first cause.
June 18th, 2006 at 9:53 pm
A valid question then would be not “What created the Big Bang” or “Does God exist” but “What is God”?
Is God the universe? Is God the event that created the universe? Is God a figment of human imagination?
I fear that it is the latter. Life is a statistical certainty. It is not miraculous. It has no purpose. Just as there will be stars and planets and moons there will be organisms living upon them. I suspect that God is nothing more than a label given to an event we cannot (yet!) explain.
Give up all hope in there being an afterlife (save that your biological material will be re-used) and give up all hope of salvation. Your actions are neither good nor bad (for no such distinction really exists beyond what is socially acceptable). There is no judgement day, there will be no rapture.
We are nothing more than the dust of dead stars – accept it and be happy! Everything can be, and will be, explained without the need for fiction.
June 18th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
Hi guys and gals,
hope you don’t mind me butting in on your little tete-a-tete here.
Just so you know exactly where I’m coming from, but not in any way looking to top trump anyone, I first got a degree in Astrophysics, then got called into full time Christian ministry and so have done another degree in theology now. So I guess I have a foot in both camps.
there’s loads of arguments on all this which either side can very diligently and sensibly argue from their side of the fence. The one thing I would ask you guys who are holding onto a ‘rational’ or ‘scientific’ view of all this to comment on is the following:
As a scientist I learned how to do experiments, how to create hypotheses and how to test them. One of the big things we learned was to understand the presuppositions, to understand the limits of our experiments, to understand the nature of the things we were studying and the built in limitations. When you understand and honour these things then the science becomes a great deal more productive. Knowing the inherent errors in a system you are studying allows you to filter out the mess and find the fact.
Anyway, my point is this. To talk about the beginning of the universe in a ‘rational – there is no God’ sort of way is to acutally do away with all good scientific method and veer headlong into the way of blind faith which you accuse us Christians of holding. I find it really ironic.
You know, by definition, absolutely nothing of the nature of the void before the big bang. I loved the comment about one day the whole being proven to be a continuing cycle. Wow! what faith you have! there is no logical way it can ever be proven. Science knows that, and currently you are placing a huge hope in something for which there is no experimental evidence – just some hypotheses waiting in vain to be tested by an experiment which can never be done.
To say the universe has always existed is also totally against any type of rational science or rational thinking that I know of. all we can do as scientists is to look at what we know to be the case and extrapolate into new areas we dont know about yet. Inference, conjecture, extrapolation. great tools of science – but all needing ratification by experiment to have any worth.
We see no evidence anywhere of anything existing forever. It isnt in the nature of anything within our known universe. Everything is created and destroyed – even energy. So why do so many base their hope on something for which we see no precedent – an eternally existing universe. An orange behaves itself and always exists within the limits of its nature, eg, it never suddenly becomes an apple. You can’t drive an orange, but you can eat it – that’s its nature. Likewise with our physical universe, it is not in its nature to be eternally existent. Nothing in this universe is eternally existent, it follows the behaviour of being created and destoyed.
why do you think it is ok to say it has existed forever when you have no empirical evidence that anything can behave this way. To say it exists forever is to say it behaves in desregard to its nature. It is contradictory.
for God though, to exist eternally is well within his nature. It is a consistent theory to postulate a God with properties of being outside time, eternally existent, omnipotent, etc etc. It is inconsistent to say our universe has existed forever. I value the consistent theory over the inconsistent and irrational one.
Also, when you think about any big bang model you also get into very hot water. The void of nothingness before the universe came into being – what evidence do you have that physical laws we understand today existed within this void?
I’ll help you out a bit there – none! By definition of what our universe is – we can not know anything beyond its limits. We cant know what was in the void, but I would say again, that it seems very inconsistent to postulate the existence of physical laws existing within this void which acted and caused the univese to come into being by a big bang (whether that was a quantum fluctuation, string mutations, or whatever it was). there is no way of ever knowing what was in the void. We can only know what is within our universe.
Again, I’d say you guys who hold out the banner of rationalism are being irrational by your own rules.
I don’t believe it is possible to prove or disprove the existence or non-existence of God in these discussions. But it would be good for both sides to know the limitations of their arguments. Then perhaps you might listen a little more to the empirical evidence we Christians also have of the true and living Jesus that we have a real relationship with through prayer, worship, miracles happening in our lives, and just the tacit knowledge of God with us every day, as opposed to the emptiness we all felt before we became Christians.
June 19th, 2006 at 7:40 am
Wowser MO you have a lot of faith in nothing. I wish I could be so confident in mankind to eventually understand everything. Your explaination however still doesn’t address the issue of how we came into being. If you ask a mathematician for the stats on life just being one big chance you would get a big number thrown at you. I reckon I would have more chance winning the lottery – 10 times in my lifetime – in consecutive weeks. Science will never be able to answer this question because it would require the ability to step into infinity to conduct its experiment. This will never happen.
What happens if at the end of it all I am wrong and you are right? I die get eaten by worms – but I know I will have led a good life. Trying to live life by the Bible doing the right thing, trying to help my fellow man and doing my bit to contribute to society.
If however I am right and you are wrong you face an eternity in a place where there is not God.
Statistically I am in a no lose situation.
June 19th, 2006 at 2:52 pm
Joe, Evan,
With respect, I’d say your position of doing the right thing by the Bible is a selfish position to hold. You may think you are doing the right thing, but you are only doing the right thing asserted by the preachers and theologians of your “book”. You live by the rules and you hold the position for what really is just to serve your own self interest. You see, you are only doing this to secure your place in a supposed heaven or afterlife.
I have lots of friends and family who are either atheists or agnostics, and when they do ‘good’ or the ‘right’ thing, they do it for humanity first, and not a supposed God or a nice place in an alleged afterlife. I have a lot more respect for those who are decent enough to do good for fellow man first and no other entity. So, I object to your statement flat out, because the only reason you do ‘good’ and ‘right’ is actually a result of fear in what your destiny might become.
If I saw that you were in trouble, no matter how much I disagreed with you, I would do my best to help you out. I would do this, Joe and Evan, for you, and not for a God. I would do it, because you needed the help and I am willing to give it, whenever I can. I didn’t learn this from a Bible or from a religious teacher; I do this because I have respect for humanity.
Not only this, but there is another problem for the whole notion of God and the supposed teachings of Jesus. That is, to be accepted into the Kingdom of Heaven you must accept Jesus as the Lord. How pathetic that is, that a supposed all loving and benevolent God wants you to submit all your doubt and accept him because he said so. Everyone else, who refuses to accept him, will be banished for good. I’d rather stand tall in Hell then cower to this supposed all loving God.
What has been done here, by the theologians and writers of the past, is to create a hook to commit you into this position, because if you don’t accept it, you are to be damned. It’s a very clever trick, but deceitful and dishonest. I can understand why the whole system was invented, and that was to scare gullible people like you guys into being ‘good’ people.
I do accept that nobody can know the existence of God to be true or false, just like you cannot know there to be a teapot circling around the Sun. We are all agnostic about the “idea” and all you and your fellow believers have is just faith and hope. To hold this position of faith requires some irrational beliefs, and your theologians will go to the utmost to deal with the problems created by such a notion, such as the problem of evil and so on.
Now, don’t forget, that this discussion started on the subject: ‘What caused the Big Bang?’. I wrote in my original article that the concept of God will not do when we apply the first cause argument. I do not know what caused the Big Bang and I’m happy to accept that as it is, like most other atheists and agnostics. However, your attempt to solve the first cause argument with the notion of God has failed because there has not been a convincing argument yet that satisfies the problems created by your assertion. That is, to say God caused the Big Bang, you must follow the rules of the argument and say what created God and so on.
In the future articles that I will write, amongst other things, I will revisit the concept of God and the problems of omnipotence, omniscience and benevolence. Until then, I’m happy to keep this debate open for everyone to have their say, but do remember the original point of the article… Where did it all start? An answer, I’d say, we do not yet know, or even possibly, we will never know.
Adam
June 19th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
Joe and Evan, nice to speak to you both. You’re both quite right, we’re all in the same hole, looking up, trying to find the answer to the ultimate question; the difference between us is that you, mistakenly, believe you have found it.
I’ve made some big assumptions but they are rational assumptions. I’m not basing my assumptions on a dusty work of fiction that was written two millenia ago by some guys who were unaware that the Earth goes around the Sun. To be fair to these guys though, their writings are proof that they were still thinking; the unfortunate effect of their writing has been stop a good many others from doing the same.
The question of life is a big issue and I have absolutely no proof. I have no doubt that life will be found elsewhere, within my lifetime, and when it is found you guys have some more excuses to make.
Apologies for slipping a little off topic, could you both answer me a couple of basic questions;
1. When God the Almighty was talking to his numerous prophets, why didn’t he think to enlighten them about their position in the great scheme of things? You know, basic stuff about the Earth being round and not flat and so on. It would have saved a fair bit of suffering at the hands of the church (remember that writing and thinking thing?) and he’d have told us something useful. Thou shalt not kill? I think we’d already figured that much out for ourselves.
2. Why did God the Almighty see fit to limit his Earthly interest to a one or two thousand year time period focused in and around the Middle East? I can perhaps accept that he’s a busy man (and when you’ve got a load of orbiting balls to play with it’d make sense to go for the middle) but why did he not choose China for example? They were at least three thousand years ahead of the Middle East at the time all of this was going on.
June 20th, 2006 at 12:04 am
I don’t want to go off on too much of a tangent, like Adam said lets keep the discussion focussed on the original question and we can talk about other issues raised at a later date. However since you run the site and raised some serious points I will give you an answer.
My faith is not based on a fear that if I don’t do what God says I am in big trouble or that my life on earth is about getting enough browny points to get into heaven. The bible is clear that a place in heaven cannot be earned by good works. Jesus talked about “life to the full” and that very much relates to this life. Christianity teaches that respect for others, grace, love, mercy, kindness, humility and a whole bunch of other stuff will benefit mankind. When Jesus was asked to sum up his teaching he said “love God & love your fellow man”. What sets Christianity apart from other religions is that it is not a religion at all. Christianity is a relational faith as Jesus said it focuses on our relationship with God and our relationship with each other.
I have a relationship with my wife and my son, I love my wife very much that is why I am faithful to her. It is also the reason why I try to do the right thing by her and the same applies to my son – it’s the relationship that is the motivating factor. Not a fear that if I sleep with another woman she will leave me and I’ll be all alone.
I know some Christians who have sold everything and have committed their whole lives to working in places like India, Haiti, Africa and South America. Living in shacks and mud huts to try and help people. Doctors who have given up careers to work with Aids victims in Africa. They do it because as their relationship with God grows so they gain a better understanding of mankind. I don’t think that they are being selfish by their actions.
What I also know is that my faith has changed my life – I was a drug taking, drunken, theiving, violent idiot (where as now I am just an idiot!!). Most of the people I grew up with are in prison and I would probably be there now if it wasn’t for my faith. It was a group ‘selfish’ people who decided to help me out and invest some time in me. Which school refused to do and my own Dad couldn’t be bothered to do. Most of the time they didn’t even mention God or brain wash me – like many people though I was searching for answers and God seemed to answer the questions.
Lets return to the original question of the first cause and where did it all start?
June 20th, 2006 at 12:19 am
MO I am not ignoring your questions and here is a very brief response. I’ll let Adam start a new topic if he thinks it warrants one.
Firstly the Bible isn’t a science book – it doesn’t even mention gravity never mind about the world being round. The questions the bible tries to answer is why things happen? Science explains how things happen?
With regards the Middle East it was the centre of the known earth at that time. It was the most populated, most developed, it was the commercial centre and it was the most key area for the Roman Empire. If the Romans thought it was good enough then why not God? or maybe he’s into his crude oil? There are tonnes of other reasons but lets keep it ‘on topic’ – Big Bang and all that jazz.
June 20th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
According to Joe Anon’s view the Universe (everything that exists) has a material part and a spiritual part both of which ‘exist’ but in different ways, the physical universe (including space-time) existing in some sense ‘within’ the spiritual universe, which he describes as ‘infinite’ in some mystical sense.
This is all very well, but the question is, how does Joe know that all this is true. To me it reads like many another science-fiction fantasy. Very little of this is actually in the Bible anyway, it is more like the writings or ravings of the mystics. I wonder if Joe has read more widely, say in the Hindu or Buddhist literature, where even more fantastic conceptions can be found.
The teachings of Jesus as regards loving your neighbour are not really the Christian part of his message, this is just pure humanism. In fact according to the Bible stories about Jesus he told his disciples to forsake their families, and do nasty things to those who wouldn’t believe in him and his God.
For those of us who don’t have the mysterious ‘faith’ which somehow gives people knowledge despite lack of evidence, it all looks rather like wish-fulfilment or self-delusion, or wild-eyed fantasy.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:03 pm
Hi George
I have to ask if you have ever read the bible? Here are some quotes directly from 1 Corinthians 15:
“But someone may ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they have?” All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another.
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body”.
Paul is writing to the church in Corinth and explaining about the Resurrection Body. As you can see it clearly distinguishes between the natural and the spiritual.
Ephesians 6:
A final word: Be strong with the Lord’s mighty power. Put on all of God’s armor so that you will be able to stand firm against all strategies and tricks of the Devil. For we are not fighting against people made of flesh and blood, but against the evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, and against wicked spirits in the heavenly realms.
Again another reference between the spirtual, sometimes called the heavenly realms and the flesh and blood or natural world.
Jesus was totally into humanism – this is from John 8. A woman was caught in the act of commiting adultery and they wanted to stone her – here was his respone:
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
“No one, sir,” she said. “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”
I am not really a person who would just make up stuff out of the Bible for the sake of it. I base what I believe in on what it says in the Bible, whether what is in the Bible is true or not is a seperate discussion.
June 22nd, 2006 at 11:33 am
“Put on all of God’s armor so that you will be able to stand firm against all strategies and tricks of the Devil. For we are not fighting against people made of flesh and blood, but against the evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, and against wicked spirits in the heavenly realms.”
This is realy weird stuff you’re prepared to believe Joe! Actually this sounds more like the Manichean or Cathar heresy than modern Christianity.
June 22nd, 2006 at 8:35 pm
I just looked up that quote in Ephesians 6, and the wording in my copy of the bible (King James version) is quite different from Joe’s. It reads: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” This translation gives it a completely different meaning. Nothing to do with evil spirits in an unseen world, but wicked men in power in this world.
June 22nd, 2006 at 10:50 pm
Hi George – the quote I gave was from the Living Translation, it was the one that was closet to me on my book shelf. The quote from 1 Corinthians 15 is from the New International Version. 99% of Christians use the NIV version of the Bible. Mainly because it doesn’t contain old english which is very hard to read – it’s also one of the most accurate translations.
Ephesians 6 in the NIV version reads:- For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
I also looked into the Greek phrase for you (no charge for the theology lesson) it’s en tois epouraniois, the literal translation of this phrase is – in heavenly places. The heavenlies is used throughout the Bible to refer to a heavenly or spiritual realm.
You say it is weird however there are people who swear blind that they have seen a ghost. Do ghosts exist? Is it in a persons mind or is it a possible there is a realm that people sometimes catch a glimpse of which is spiritual or non physcial? What about the devil where does he live? As a non physical entity I would say the spirtual realm. What about the soul? Where does this go when the flesh dies – the spiritual realm! Where is heaven? – the spiritual or heavenly realm. Where does God ‘live’ – the spiritual realm.
This is way off topic and although I am more than willing to discuss this the topic is about the Big Bang.
June 22nd, 2006 at 11:07 pm
Hey Joe, don’t worry. You keep posting and we’ll keep giving you something to think about
I’ve already answered the ‘What caused the Big Bang?’ question. It’s easy – we don’t know yet, or we may never know!
Now, if someone does know what caused the Big Bang, then say so with evidence that we – the sceptics – can accept.
Adam
ps. I reserve the right to post on comment 42!
June 26th, 2006 at 8:56 pm
Joe Anon wrote: “if God is made up in the minds of men then what is the point to life? I have to disagree with this line of thought.”
I find it rather sad that Joe can’t find any point in living without his reliance on his inexplicable faith in the bible(s). Perhaps purpose of life could be the subject of the next Philosophy debate here, since it is rather off the topic of the origin of the universe.
I looked up the ‘New Living Bible’ and it seems it is a recent translation c.1996 made by the Southern Baptist colleges in the US, so presumably they have chosen wording that fits in with their notions of the ‘Rapture’.
The truth is that there is no one agreed original version of the Bible texts, even the choice of which books should be included is disputed, and the meanings of the texts are inherently ambiguous and in many cases the original intention can only be guessed at.
October 12th, 2006 at 5:36 pm
If there was nothing before God how can there be anything now. If there is nothing then it can’t be followed by something.
What ever answers we discover will just give rise to even more questions. Why worry?
God has our destinies mapped out?! I would like it if he could spend more time worrying about someone who derseves his attention more than I.
What does he do on a Sunday? Golf? Church?
Maybe this life is a pennance from not believing in God in my previous life.
Let’s imagine I have just discovered God. Which holy book/religion should I follow?Each believer tells me they are right. Perhaps the Egyptians were correct in their beliefs. I hope not, ‘cos when they are resurrected from the after life we are all fkd when they realise we have robbed all their jewelry and ornamants.
October 14th, 2006 at 8:57 am
Does one not think, considering the grand scale of things, that our Big Bang was just a Minor Collision really?
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:10 pm
I believe in a creator.Where did a huge explosion came from and how did it grows.I think we can’t get away from the big bang theory. I believe that there is something holy outside time.We will have all our answers when we have a time machine. It will be arriving in the next generation. The only proof for the creator is from the holy book because the prophecies in the holy book is coming into existence. So the creator will reveal himself shortly.
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Neo123
Why do you believe in a creator?
Why do you think there is ‘something holy outside time’?
Does the ‘holy book’ give any proof of a creator? Is it not simply a circular justification?
Give good reasons for the above and you may convince a lot of sceptics. Until then, I strongly doubt your beliefs have any bearing on what is true.
Adam
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:32 pm
There will be discussions on this and thousands of other topics until the end of time. There is an absolute truth, regardless of how eloquent we speak or how smart we think we are. There is one truth and one alone. In math we all know 4+4 = 8. Someone can say well I think 4+4=9. Now thats super and he can think that all he wants but it wont change the fact that 4+4=8.
18 The message of the cross seems foolish to those who are lost and dying. But it is God’s power to us who are being saved. 19 It is written,
“I will destroy the wisdom of those who are wise.
I will do away with the cleverness of those who think they are so smart.” —(Isaiah 29:14)
20 Where is the wise person? Where is the educated person? Where are the great thinkers of this world? Hasn’t God made the wisdom of the world foolish? 21 God wisely planned that the world would not know him through its own wisdom. It pleased God to use the foolish things we preach to save those who believe.
22 Jews require miraculous signs. Greeks look for wisdom. 23 But we preach about Christ and his death on the cross. That is very hard for Jews to accept. And everyone else thinks it’s foolish.
24 But there are those God has chosen, both Jews and others. To them Christ is God’s power and God’s wisdom. 25 The foolish things of God are wiser than human wisdom. The weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
It is also written that Christ came to save those who were lost. Those who ‘think’ they have it altogether in this world will not be seeking a savior. I pray that we all humble ourselves before an all powerful, perfect God..who will return soon to take his children home.
Dale
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Dale
The quotes are from Corinthians 1:x, where x is your passage number. I’m not sure what edition of the Bible this is from, but it seems close to King James and the New International.
Anywho, what I think you are saying here is that wisdom, or the seeking of ‘wisdom’, is a bad thing and we should submit to the power of God and his infinite wisdom.
Surely man seeking his own wisdom is a good thing. It says so in Proverbs 4:7 “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.”
Either Wisdom is good, or Wisdom is bad. Which is it? Or, I suspect, there is the ‘correct’ type of Wisdom, and there is the ‘incorrect’ type of Wisdom.
The above is just one example of inconsistentcy from the Bible. Consistency is vital when trying to work out what is true and what is false.
Adam
April 4th, 2007 at 1:58 am
Hi Adam,
The Bible is consistent. I take the Bible for 100% accurate and perfect because I believe it to be the inspired Word of God. Take in mind that again to measure the Word and say it is inconsistent is measuring it with man’s mind. It sounds like your trying to approach it from a logical stand and not from a believer’s stance. God speaks thru his word and I have no doubt man that doesn’t want to hear the truth…won’t hear it in his heart. There will come a day though…”that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord”Phillipians 2:11
You have to open your heart and open your mind to what God is saying and you will hear it…..
If you are truly searching and seeking you will find. “Ask and it will be given unto you, seek and you will find, knock and the door will be opened unto you”Matthew 7:7
I pray that you will honestly search your heart, and earnestly ask the Lord to show you that He is real. Just look all around you…..the evidence of His existence and His love is all around you.
“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness”1 John 1:9
Later,
Dale
April 4th, 2007 at 10:27 pm
Dale,
Are you serious? You think the Bible is consistent? Please, define what you mean by consistent. Do you mean:
a) The Bible is internally consistent.
b) The Bible is externally consistent.
c) The Bible is both a and b above.
d) Something else (and explain what this is).
I’m seriously interested in what reasons you can give to justify your claim that the Bible is consistent. I completely disagree for reasons that I’ll put forward in a new article very shortly.
Adam
April 6th, 2007 at 2:13 am
Heh there Adam,
You know what..all I can share with you is what Christ has done in my life. He has given me reason to live. He is my Savior and He’s yours too. He died on the cross for our sins and He is coming again one day for all those who believe in Him. I pray that you can find Him as I did.
For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not parish but have everlasting life. John 3:16.
Dale
April 6th, 2007 at 2:23 am
I forgot to add one thing…
I’m not sure if you read my input from April 4th about not trying to approach this from a logical stance..but rather listen to your heart. The main ingredient in this is FAITH.
You exercise faith everyday in almost all situations….just think about it. Trusting in an all powerful God who created the world and who sent his Son as a sacrifice for our sins isnt such a stretch when you consider the alternative…..BANG!!! and then there was order….it just doesnt add up…..Look around you, search your heart, pray earnestly that God would show you the way……..
I will pray too.
Dale
September 17th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
I don’t know why you are all arguing over this! I be no human being will ever find out whether God exists or what started the big bang unless someone remembers a past life! I believe someone may have started a rumour about God. We don’t know whether God is a man, woman, animal or plant, really.
September 17th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
The Big Bang could be comets colliding but apparently there was nothing there before the Big Bang.
September 17th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Hi
Very interesting information! Thanks!
G’night
March 5th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Maybe u guys should be asking wot time is b4 thinking wot was there b4 it. time is space and vice versa, its space-time, wot was before space-time? who’s not to say that we as earth lifeforms need time, could time be man made? we “feel” time passing, but do we? perhaps just our bodies decaying, time to me is a measure of something moving, if nothing moved would we feel time? (would we exist). What was before time existed? probably loads, just maybe not wot we perceive as time, us humans stamped time as a duration until we realized it is married to space, then called it spacetime. What I think im trying to say is, time was probably not important before it itself existed.
May 23rd, 2008 at 4:01 am
hi,
I skipped to the end after that guy made up that word, this is just an idea from a 13 y.o. guy but just like you said if nothing moved would we feel it so IF we lived before time (hich we didn’t) we couldn’t feel it and IF nothing moved how was something created like God. I was watcing this show on S.B.S. they were trying to make a big bang with this big machine. but it involves movement so if there’s no movement and time, how was there a time to make the big bang?
May 31st, 2008 at 12:32 am
the ultimate question….
the question to why the hell are we here. why can we feel, comprehend, question and observe? as all the theories elaborate on the first cause, the infinate succession problem the failing ability of mankind to comprehend time and the events before it if there were any.
if one peers throu hubble the deduction is made that the ‘universe’ meaning everything was made in one instance we call the big bang 13.7 billion years ago. but this is a problem for me. as this assumes that the universe as we know it to be everything in existence takes the shape of a basket ball in an infinate ploom of nothingness. so they concluded by measuring sephiat stars that this basket ball of matter is indeed drifting appart. so thus the rule of thumb is to assume this ball came from a specific point.
now we assume that this point is the one and only point to have origionated either from the hand of a creator or from the unpredictability of quantum mechanics. propose the universe, well the obserable universe meaning the basket ball with a diameter of 13.7 billion light years has a boundry, when reaching this boundry one enters what i like to call dark space. absolutely nothing not even dark matter as they say 90% of the universe we exist in consists of. if one were to travel through dark space away from this ball in infinate nothingness, say for comprehensibilities sake five thousand trillion light years, far enough for no existing creature at anytime anywhre with any level of technology to observe would it be to bold to propose the existence of another big bang, seperate from this big bang? another universe we dont even know of, and never will? dark space and its infinate nature will thus result in an infinately large probability of an infinate amount of these points of singularity to origionate and to exlode into existence.
so if one zooms out even further again for the sake of explaining it in human terms say ten trillion google light yearscould we observe a cluser of these basket balls unaware of each others existence?
this whole elaboration about my unique little multiverse theory is but merely to try and grasp what the purpose of life is. there are 2 explanations:
1: atoms behave completely different from conventional laws of physics. they are known to pop up and dissapear entirely unexlicably. now given an infinately large area of ‘nothing’ , nothing wil ultimately constitute something as what is it? it is nothing. so ane infinately large space of ultimately something can result in infinate probability that something other than nothing will origionate. purhaps some deeper cosmic physics can be applied here. so out of an infinate nothing which is actually something its is infinitly likely for something other than nothing to come about. be this god be this many gods be this entirely fluke the chances are truly infinate given the infinate scale of the multiverse.
2: propose the universe has boundries and there is infact just one universe. according to steven hawking he assumed the theory that the universe had a boundry in tearms of if you keep traveling in a linear motion you will ultimately just end up where you started so it is infinity compacted into boundries as you can travel in one way for infinity but you will reach a point where u will travel though the same point again eliminating infinite probability as there can only happen so much in the ‘loop’. this scenario must lead to some intellegent design from some higher being with some or other purpose as how can a boundry exist from something without infinite probability on its side.
take life and the earth in consideration for a moment if this had to happen by chance it is said the likeliness would result in some ridiculis figure like ten to the power 743. once again for the sake of comprehensibility the probability that if a row of ten gallon drums filled with dice spanning from here to alpha centori and back were to be thrown on a flat surface that all of the dice would land on the same number. now this isnt impossible given a boundryless cosmos but totally impossible given a universe based on hawking theory.
conclusion, become religious. it cuts out a 50% chance of eternal damnation. but choose wisely as u got about 0.0002% chance of choosing the right one
July 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Geesh, folks, get on the ball! The Flying Spaghetti Monster created it all!
Well, either that or my great uncle Stan. He used to claim he created the cosmos, and he had some interesting stories to back it up (mostly concerning the idea that Scotch and soda existed prior to anything else). Sadly, great uncle Stan never gave us his full thesis, as great aunt Edna ultimately insisted he start taking his drugs again…
July 29th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Excellent article. How ironic it was posted on 06|6|06
August 31st, 2008 at 5:57 am
You got it all wrong, IMO.
If you believe in evolution:
In order for this world to be created through the big bang, there must be a SCIENTIFIC explanation for how something came from nothing. Or, something outside our understanding, not necessarily a God, created all the laws of science, in turn resulting in the big bang.
If you believe in creation:
God is beyond our understanding. Our knowledge is limited by the bounds of science, which God created, therefore there is nothing to understand. Think it’s in the bible somewhere.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Wait till you die. Then you’ll know.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
it’ll be too late when we die! it’s fun searching for the truth now – give it a go!
February 28th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
April 24th, 2009 at 2:44 am
You just read my mind Joe im 100% all the way on your side!
People are asking who created god
THERE IS ALREADY AN ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION! not that many people know it beacsue they haven’t look into the subject much.
PS- I know one thing for sure it is not man who created god
For every effect has a cause right!
Well god has isnt and effect therefor he needs no cause. HE ALWAYS EXISTED. there you have it
April 24th, 2009 at 2:46 am
sorry for the typo comment above
For every effect has a cause right!
Well god isn’t an and effect therefor he needs no cause.
September 11th, 2009 at 6:36 am
First of all, if the universe has a starting point of 15 bya, therefore is not infinite. So then we say the universe was created from something.
How does anything exist? How has something come to be? If everything is made up of atoms, how were those atoms created? It does not make sense in scientific terms. Something had to create those atoms, and since atoms make up everything, how were they created and the atomic particles that make them up? Are you saying out of nothing can come something? NOTHING IS NOTHING. It cannot exist create or destroy. Nothing does not exist, and since we exist and the universe exist, development out of nothing cannot be an answer. Take an completely empty glass container, no gases or a spec of anything existant in it, seal it for 15 billion years and I would like to see if something exists in it after that time if it were left perfectly alone. I’m sorry but it would be the same.
So therefore there had to be a creator. There is no explanation for the creation of atoms or atomic particles that make up the atoms. Somehow they had to be put there by something that created it. That is wear my faith lies. You can say ok well then prove theres a god. I cannot, but I believe there is and I believe he created everything. And at the end of the day your gonna ask how does anything exist and something can simply not exist out of nothing.
September 14th, 2009 at 9:22 am
You are centralizing your theory around time and space. There is no such thing as either. Time is a man made notion to keep track with life and to record history. We do not know when time started, and to back up the bing bang you will have to drop all theories of the belief of an Abrahamic God. Christianity was not the first religion set on this earth, it is actually a trickle down religion from its “creator” animism. So everyone should know their basic history before continuing onto this subject/.
Another thing is that infinity is the only thing that makes sense in this world. Why does EVERYTHING need to be created. As a society we are taught that if something is there, it was created by something. Yes i agree with this, but what created a creator….this world will burn out before that answer becomes resolved(saying that it will never be resolved) You cannot put a beginning of the past infinity, because it is infinity. I think the creation of the earth is a basic human question. Humanity should step outside of this question to get the bigger question. How did our universe come into existence at this time in infinity.
MAybe this will answer life’s other unquestioned questions/
November 24th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Ok, as how the big bang occur…it never did.It’s only a stupid theory coming from a jackass who has created more strings of stupid followers who listens to it like a cult. Looking at universe standpoint, we will all look smaller than a single atom so the creator has to be really really really like REALLY big.
You see it as one universe. I see it that there are another universe on top of this one. So the big bang can’t be the first cause.
To illustrated, let just say I am the creator. I am very very huge. Just say 1,000,000,000,000,000 bigger than a sun. I made a model and call it “universe”. Each day, I decided to add more sun and stars to it and I decide to get a bigger universe board and expand it. Because I am so huge, you think that the universe I have created is infinite but it’s not. It’s because to me, you old little microbes have not obtain to technology to see the end of the universe. If you do, you find out what it is all about. That’s part 2.
So because you couldn’t see the end, you “THINK” the universe in infinite and come up with some stupid theory called “Big Bang”…
There are 2 parts but you took the first part and sum the details when there is another part you didn’t see. That I created the checker board called universe.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:57 am
Hi. dude, areright. im almost sixteen. and ive been on a missions trip to the turks & caicos islands this past summer, and ive seen miricles with my own eyes. my own friends leg broke on another retreat called great escape just last year, he broke his ancle, and we all prayed over him and he was healed. before all of our eyes. but all i have to say for the people who dont believe in God. honestly. what is there to loose? all there is, is love and kindness. some people have gone through many things, and they say, “if there was a God, why does he let this happen to me?” well, hello. hes only trying to get your attention. everything horrid and evil is work of the devil. if there is an evil supernatrual there is an opposite. God only wants your attention, he wants you to see him for who he really is and believe with all your heart he is real. i believe every situation in your life is a test of your faith. okay, so you say there is no heaven &/or hell? wellll. whatdoya have to loose? nothing. BUT. what IF there is? you have nothing to lose if you believ bc you will go straight to heaven. i just dont understand how people dont see the obvious edvidence. or is it that they just are stubborn? and will argue every single thing?
just stating what i know:)
i hope it helps. everyone needs God.
he loves you no matter what.
December 28th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Here is what I have to say. I can safely say for now that NO scientist in the world has the
answer to the expansion of the universe, nor has proved the existence of the Big Bang. The Big Bang is just a theory so to me so nothing is certain unless proven, agreed? Till then, it is a bunch of “trying to be smart” theory which unfortunately a trait of humans for centuries who thinks they can fit in all the puzzles together.It’s no rocket science to tell you that!
As for the first cause theory, sure if we ask who is the creator who creates the creator. Just take a look at your wrist watch. Does the wrist watch ask who is his creator? No, you know why?
Because it doesn’t think, talk or do other than tell you it’s time for lunch. But as it evolves
perhaps to a day where the watch not only can tell you the time but has logical thought processes, it might move to the next level and ask you “who created me?” which you answer “the
watchmaker is your creator.”
So this is just to let you know that humans could not find the solution because we have NOT found knowledge to answer it yet. Yes, we can use the law of science but what if just say 100%, we just mastered 0.1% of it, then what happened to 99.99% of the unknown laws lying around? For example,
When was nuclear created? When did the law of gravity created? Definitely not a million years
ago. So the answer is that “we do not know because we have not reach the stage to know it.” We may have reached the infancy of nano technology, cloning of humans and etc….but we still do not know how we were contructed as a whole.
Physicist can’t even make a human without the help of dna, so how are they to tell you how
universe are form? They can’t even make a decent real hand and stick them to your existing body
so do you really think they know how the universe are made of?
Maybe such complex scientists who thinks the geniuses they inherit are man-made also made up the “First Cause” rule. Because in the law of physics, nothing can be created from nothing. But you know, the answers doesn’t lies in logic alone. It lies in the combination of all elements spiritual, biological and physics. Then the law of physics will collapsed.So why Quantum Physicist are unable to get the answer they want is because whatever esults they come up with has missing departments that are not taken into. You can’t create a car with just four wheels and diregarding the rest. This is what the scientist are doing. To me the “First Cause Rule” is a caused by the first who created the rule, I don’t know
his name and I don’t care to know it.
Here is what I believe. I believe there is a creator because the complexity of our genetic makeup that there is no way we can be transform from toad millions of years ago. If the Father of Modern Monkey like Charles Darwin states that we are made through evolvement, then all living creatures must have a point of origin which they do not. So that’s not true.Why some planets today are still lifeless even
when they are as old as the earth or older?
Some smart-alec asked me, If God can do anything, can he make a stone so big till He can’t carry it? I have heard it all. You know what? Some tell me that God can’t say that He can’t carry because He can do anything and saying that, contradict the law of…whatever. If I am a creator, I definitely can create something so big that I can’t carry because first rule counts. To ask God to build some so He can’t carry, I am sure it can be done if you account first rule.
So do I believe in God, yes! Do I believe that that we are not evolved, but rather wonderfully created that there is nothing out of something, yes and why do I believe? If men can’t answer the truth about our existence and the law of science collapse, then I would have to believe through Faith and you know faith has brought in many miracles in my life.
January 12th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
“However, this is a contradiction because if everything has a first cause, then God cannot be the ultimate creator because he needs a cause too.”
False.
The Creator ‘always’ existed. The Creator is the cause. The Creator is all. The Creator made a BIG BANG – The Creator made evolution. Will end you via his “natural selection” if the Creator wants to.
January 12th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
The Creator is all powerful, and can change your reality. Be careful though The Creator is not as you think. The Creator gave you a small brain.
January 19th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
Bing bang as it says, everything exploded from a single point and it is now what we are seeing. Was it the only point from which Big Bang occurred. If Big Bang occurred something should have unstabled the point like some external power/force. Existance of god cannot be proved through scientfic methods. But one thing is sure there is cosmic power and people worship this power as god in different names and other ways.
Is there any other universe existing some where at approx. infinity
February 17th, 2010 at 7:07 am
I’m just going to agree 100% and just say nothing is certain, therefore their is no wrong or right answer.
April 19th, 2010 at 3:02 am
This is an extremely interesting debate that will never have an answer I believe. The thing that astonishes me is that people believe that God needs a creater. Everything in the world (matter) needs a creater. However I believe god goes against every scientific property we know of. God as an energy force not as a person does not need a creater because it goes completely against science. Who agrees?
July 25th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
Lenny Herrera thinking very clearly here.
When you understand that the human body consists of a soul, you are on the way to solve the very oldest questions of mankind.
Here are some noteworthy facts to the people who doubt the human soul and the Almighty God who created all men:
1. The major world religions believe in a creator who in Islam is called Allah, Brahman in Buddhism and God in Christianity.
2. Some of the greatest philosophers and scientists believed in God and life after death(the spirit continues to live after the bodily death). Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Augustine, Spinoza, Kant, Einstein etc.
3. Also some great artists believed/believe in God: C.D Friedrich, S. Dali, Shakespeare, Goethe, J.S. Bach, W.A Mozart, L.V. Beethoven, Louis Armstrong, John Coltrane, Ray Charles, Freddie Mercury, Ringo Starr, Steve Wonder etc.
4. Other geniuses who believe in God: Pele, Maradonna, Messi, Usain Bolt, Jonathan Edwards, My composition teacher DZ, My piano teacher SR and I of course, though I’m no genius.
August 7th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
Lenny Herrera thinking very clearly here.
When you understand that the human body consists of a soul, you are on the way to solve the very oldest questions of mankind.
Here are some noteworthy facts to the people who doubt the human soul and the Almighty God who created all men:
1. The major world religions believe in a creator who in Islam is called Allah, Brahman in Buddhism and God in Christianity.
2. Some of the greatest philosophers and scientists believed in God and life after death(the spirit continues to live after the bodily death). Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Augustine, Spinoza, Kant, Einstein etc.
3. Also some great artists believed/believe in God: C.D Friedrich, S. Dali, Shakespeare, Goethe, J.S. Bach, W.A Mozart, L.V. Beethoven, Louis Armstrong, John Coltrane, Ray Charles, Freddie Mercury, Ringo Starr, Steve Wonder etc.
4. Other geniuses who believe in God: Pele, Maradonna, Messi, Usain Bolt, Jonathan Edwards, My composition teacher DZ, My piano teacher SR and I of course, though I’m no genius.
August 8th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Sam, to say that “God always existed” is pretty stupid. I could say the same: “the Universe always existed”. These two statements are merely assertions. They don’t prove anything nor disprove anything.
My view, on the most pedantic level, is that we cannot know either way. However, we can hold a view if we take them to be reasonable. For me the notion that “there is a God and he always existed” is pretty unreasonable. The view that the Big Bang is the cause for the Universe and all that followed is pretty reasonable. For my position the question remains: what caused the Big Bang. I happy put my view out there that I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t created by an imagined God.
Besides if the cause of the Big Bang was made by a God then who is to say that it was the God of Christianity or any of the three main monotheistic faiths. If we accept that a god did create the Universe then the god could have been any various type of god, such as an evil god, or a student god, or a god made out of spaghetti and meatballs.
November 12th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE, THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
Earlier it was impossible for us to give any satisfactory answer to this question. But modern science, rather we should say that Einstein has made it an easy task for us. And Stephen Hawking has provided us with the clue necessary for solving this riddle. Actually scientists in their infinite wisdom have already kept the ground well-prepared for us believers so that one day it becomes possible for us to give a logically consistent answer to this age-old question. Let me first quote from the book “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking:
“The idea of inflation could also explain why there is so much matter in the universe. There is something like ten million million million million million million million million million million million million million million (1 with eighty zeroes after it) particles in the region of the universe that we can observe. Where did they all come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle pairs. But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero.”
Here the question stops. So the clue is this: if we can ultimately arrive at zero, then no further question will be raised, and there will be no infinite regression. What I intend to do here is something similar to that. I want to show that our God is a bunch of several zeroes, and that therefore no further question need be raised about His origin. And here comes Einstein with his special theory of relativity for giving us the necessary logical support for our project.
God is a Being. Therefore God will have existence as well as essence. So I will have to show that both from the point of view of existence as well as from the point of view of essence God is zero. It is almost a common parlance that God is spaceless, timeless, changeless, immortal, all-pervading. Here we are getting three zeroes; space is zero, time is zero, change is zero. But how to prove that if there is a God, then that God will be spaceless, timeless, changeless? From special theory of relativity we come to know that for light both distance and time become unreal. For light even an infinite distance is infinitely contracted to zero. The volume of an infinite universe full of light only will be simply zero due to this property of light. A universe with zero volume is a spaceless universe. Again at the speed of light time totally stops. So a universe full of light only is a spaceless, timeless universe. But these are the properties of light only! How do we come to know that God is also having the same properties of light so that God can also be spaceless, timeless? Scientists have shown that if there is a God, then that God can only be light, and nothing else, and that therefore He will have all the properties of light. Here is the proof.
Scientists have shown that total energy of the universe is always zero. If total energy is zero, then total mass will also be zero due to energy-mass equivalence. Now if there is a God, then scientists have calculated the total energy and mass of the universe by taking into consideration that there is also a God. In other words, if God is there, then this total energy-mass calculation by the scientists is God-inclusive, not God-exclusive. This is due to two reasons. First of all, even if there is a God, they do not know that there is a God. Secondly, they do not admit that there is a God. So, if there is a God, then they have not been able to keep that God aside before making the calculation, because they do not know that there is a God. They cannot say that they have kept Him aside and then made the calculation, because by saying that they will admit that there is a God. At most they can say that there is no God. But we are not going to accept that statement as the final verdict on God-question, because we are disputing that statement. So the matter of the fact is this: if God is really there, then scientists have shown that both the total mass and energy of the universe including God are zero. Therefore mass and energy of God will also be zero. God is without any mass, without any energy. And Einstein has already shown that anything having zero rest-mass will have the speed of light. In other words, it will be light. So, if God is there, then God is also light, and therefore He is spaceless, timeless. So from the point of view of existence God is zero, because he is spaceless, timeless, without any mass, without any energy.
Now we will have to show that from the point of view of essence also God is zero. If there is only one being in the universe, and if there is no other being other than that being, then that being cannot have any such property as love, hate, cruelty, compassion, benevolence, etc. Let us say that God is cruel. Now to whom can He be cruel if there is no other being other than God Himself? So, if God is cruel, then is He cruel to Himself? Therefore if we say that God is all-loving, merciful, benevolent, etc., then we are also admitting that God is not alone, that there is another being co-eternal with God to whom He can show His love, benevolence, goodness, mercy, compassion, etc. If we say that God is all-loving, then we are also saying that this “all” is co-eternal with God. Thus we are admitting that God has not created the universe at all, and therefore we need not have to revere Him, for the simple reason that He is not our creator!
It is usually said that God is good. But Bertrand Russell has shown that God cannot be good for the simple reason that if God is good, then there is a standard of goodness which is independent of God’s will. Therefore, if God is the ultimate Being, then that God cannot be good. But neither can He be evil. God is beyond good and evil. Like Hindu’s Brahma, a real God can only be nirguna, nirupadhik; without any name, without any quality. From the point of view of essence also, a real God is a zero.
So, why should there be any need for creation here, if God is existentially, as well as essentially, zero?
But if there is someone who is intelligent and clever enough, then he will not stop arguing here. He will point out to another infinite regression. If God is light, then He will no doubt be spaceless, timeless, etc. Therefore one infinite regression is thus arrested. But what about the second regression? How, and from whom, does light get its own peculiar properties by means of which we have successfully arrested the first regression? So, here is another infinite regression. But we need not have to worry much about this regression, because this problem has already been solved. A whole thing, by virtue of its being the whole thing, will have all the properties of spacelessness, timelessness, changelessness, deathlessness. It need not have to depend on any other external source for getting these properties. Thus no further infinite regression will be there.
H. S. Pal
November 15th, 2010 at 2:04 am
How interesting that this forum alone has debated this topic for 4 years and ends with a god made of pasta!!
Also interesting that this 4 years is trackable by our linear concept of time. This forum commenced with an article, written by someone who was created by someone else who was born from a long line of people who originally landed in space ships in Sumer from a planet in a universe created by someone.
We are confined and restrianed by boundaries of time and space. While we believe these are linear concepts then we will debate creation adnauseum.
If we can start to phathom that time and space are circular for example and that all things go around, then perhaps we are the Gods and we are creation as we speak. This could be a circle or never-ending spiral with no beginning and no end. That is the concept of infinity that is a struggle for scientists that rely on linear because they are able to quantify it under current laws of physics. We need new math and new laws of physics to understand this issue.
January 19th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
i think this website is a bunch of **** and should be deleted. my oppinion is that the big bang created G-d and g-d greated the world suck on that you bunch of losers!!!!!
February 27th, 2011 at 2:23 am
This update is added in order is to address a recent sophisticated yet simultaneously clumsy attempt to try to discredit the Theory of the Big Bang/Big Crunch Infinite Cycle of the Universe and to render confusion in a paper and book by Stephen Hawking crony, Robert Penrose, plus some political updating:
Materialist Analysis of Theoretical Astrophysics
The Capitalist Dictatorship Deliberately Falsifies Basic Science!
Stephen Hawking, Michio Kaku, Wendy Freedman, Dennis
Overbye, Nicholas Wade, Brian Greene, etc. Are Exposed as Liars!
Self-Described Neo-Creationists Hawking and Kaku Are
Leading a Takeover Attempt of Theoretical Astrophysics!
Today basic medicine, science including climatology, astrophysics and even both Einstein’s Special Theory and General Theory of Relativity are brazenly and routinely falsified at the direction of genuinely Fascist elements for political/religious reasons. These scientifically fabricated and bizarre distortions are mixed in with some actual science and are passed off as “the new science” in exhaustive mesmerizing falsifications lasting for hours on NOVA, FRONTLINE, National Geographic Channel, CUNY TV, “Discovery Channel” and even the so-called “History Channel.” There is also a simultaneous attempt to create a sense of panic in order to help generate the Mass Psychology of Crisis based on falsely claimed imminent threats from space from rogue asteroids to Stephen Hawking’s alarmist claim of future invasions by inevitably hostile space aliens. See section below on UFOs and Extraterrestrial Life. In addition, the above-mentioned so-called “cosmologists” publish an endless stream of books, videos and magazine and newspaper articles, not to mention the new textbooks, to try to popularize their fiction and pass it off as good coin. The media, including the science media is simply a privatized arm of the U.S. “intelligence agency,” an actual army of legions of professional liars in every area of politics and academic discipline and includes even so-called “comedians” working in service to the capitalist dictatorship of millionaires and billionaires. The U.S. media is very similar to Blackwater, Dyncorp, Custer Battles and Triple Canopy, etc. the armed military contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, except that the media has always been privatized. Can you say Total Brainwash of the youth? Not to mention the adult population! Note that Stephen Hawking and Michio Kaku, who are leading the takeover attempt of theoretical astrophysics and “cosmology,” now both openly describe themselves as neo-creationist/”intelligent design” advocates and are campaigning through their statements to make neo-creationism the default belief taught in schools, colleges and universities! (See below.) Although Hawking simultaneously tries to deny this all his statements are contrived to lead to the same “conclusion.” The title and contents of Hawking’s book: “The Grand Design” is an example.
There is also a maximal attempt to confuse the masses in order to keep them susceptible to the constant stream of lies originating from NASA and the U.S. government. These lies include but are not limited to multiple false theories of the origin of life which include: 1.) so-called “panspermia,” 2.) evolution of life from submarine vents and now preposterously 3.) hypothetical civilizations based on arsenic (!) not phosphorus, all of which are fully disproved below. NASA first threatened to ram through a revisit of the Moon and a Mars mission before Obama under some public pressure temporarily cancelled the Moon and Mars ventures and made asteroids the first priority in order to lay the groundwork for an asteroid fear campaign to help reinforce the Mass Psychology of Crisis partially achieved by the “War on Terror,” complete with multiple U.S.-government-assisted and/or instigated mass provocations. U.S. “intelligence” has increased the number of these provocations in order to manipulate support for the Final Stage of Capitalism: Permanent War and State Terrorism! See below. There is also no possibility that a manned trip to Mars would ever return. Rocketry is a primitive form of space travel and there is no acknowledged attempt of efforts to develop the nuclear powered electromagnetic anti-gravity engine used by so-called UFOs, which are documented to have visited the Earth for Millennia. Such “space missions” along with “Supply-Side Economics” and the $4.7 trillion bank bailouts (!), are another fraudulent pretext to divert money from social spending and to decrease the U.S. living standard in accordance with Globalism, while trying simultaneously to try to boost U.S. patriotism from its nadir. The widespread academic opposition to these far-ranging falsifications of science in order to manipulate the public consciousness is never given equal time! We demand and will take some time to refute the U.S.-led capitalist dictatorship’s lies.
The Capitalist Dictatorship’s Attempt to Falsify the
Age of the Universe to Help Provide False Belief in “god”
The capitalists have tried to falsify the actual age of the Universe and the infinite cycle of a Big Bang followed by a Big Crunch, meaning a closed rather than an open Universe, because the reality of a closed Universe does not fit with the religious brainwash of a single creation and belief in a supernatural fictitious “god.” (The statecraft of capitalism’s alliance with religion and belief in “god” and other superstition is exposed further below.) The reality is that the process of contraction of the Universe began soon after the Big Bang, which began the process of expansion. The process of contraction began with the first condensations of gas after the Big Bang. At first the process of expansion was dominant, but the processes of expansion and contraction exist simultaneously from shortly after the Big Bang until finally the process of contraction becomes dominant and all galactic matter is finally drawn into Supermassive Black Holes, which today form the centers of all spiral galaxies and elliptical galaxies in the process of becoming spiral galaxies. These Supermassive Black Holes, which are growing larger continuously, finally link up all existing matter of the Universe at one spot, one huge super-maximal Black Hole known as the Singularity in the Big Crunch, at which time Critical Mass in the true and ultimate sense is reached for another Big Bang Cycle and the beginning of another Universe. This analysis clearly and conclusively demonstrates that THERE WAS NO “MOMENT OF CREATION” because all the matter for this Universe already existed in its pure nuclear form in the Singularity from a previous Big Crunch which preceded the Big Bang which began our present Universe. And the origin of matter is PROVED to be an unknowable. (See below.) This is the ONLY explanation which fits the facts! See below for comment on Roger Penrose and his recently published paper and book where he invents a highly contrived but easily disproved counter “theory” to the Big Bang Big Crunch Cycle of the Universe in order to try to discredit the cyclic nature of the Universe.
Ninety-five Percent of Matter in the Universe Exists in the Form of Energy According
To Einstein’s Formula E=mc2! Black Holes Completely Reverse that Relationship and
Solve the Equation for Mass: m=E/c2 thus Supplying the so-called “Missing Mass”!
The critical mass density required for the Big Crunch to occur is 1 x 10 to the negative 29th of a gram per cubic centimeter (approximately 5 hydrogen atoms per cubic meter), according to the calculation from the General Theory of Relativity, which predicted Black Holes. Neutrinos are now known to have mass which may be sufficient to supply the supposed “missing mass.” (See below.) But probably even more significant is the recent paper in Science, November 21, 2008, (Vol. 322, 5905:1198-1199 and 1124-1127), which shows that 95% of matter in the Universe exists in the form of energy according to Einstein’s formula E=mc2. This relationship would reverse in a Black Hole and the so-called “missing mass” would gradually appear as the contraction of the Universe allowed the energy-mass relationship to shift so that in a practical and real sense Einstein’s formula would be solved for mass: m=E/c2. Though the authors of the paper fail to draw this conclusion that is the inescapable significance of those papers. See below. The fact that the expansion and contraction of the Universe occur simultaneously is one more example of the Law of Unity of Opposites, the Second Law of Dialectical and Historical Materialism and demonstrates the correctness of the scientific philosophy of Dialectical and Historical Materialism, as opposed to the false philosophies of idealism and metaphysics, which are the only philosophies permitted to be seriously taught in U.S. colleges and universities, and which form the underlying basis for all phony “cosmological” theory! See further below!
Black Holes Rotate on an Axis and Have
Mass and a Size, which Can Be Calculated!
In addition, in the Big Crunch matter most certainly does NOT collapse to “less than the size of a single molecule,” a totally ridiculous assertion by the so-called “string theorists” (see below) designed to try to discredit the Theory of the Big Bang/Big Crunch Cycle of the Universe. The Black Hole in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy is 15 million miles in diameter—not “the size of a single molecule”! Black Holes are formed exclusively of condensed nuclear material; protons and neutrons (composed of quarks) and electrons (composed of leptons) devoid of their orbits and all motion, all collapsed together. The end point of all matter in the Big Crunch is a Single Black Hole, the so-called “Singularity.” The size of the final “Singularity” which forms prior to the Big Bang would thus be quite large because it must contain all the nuclear material in the entire Universe. All Black Holes have the same mass density, which is said to be infinite, and which vary only in actual mass depending on how many stars and how much nuclear material they contain. The only difference is the difference in mass, which is constantly increasing as matter changes from its energy form when entering a Black Hole. See above cited article in Nature, November 21, 2008. Note that while some of the information provided below may appear to be somewhat technical it is necessary for any subsequent challenges which might be made of this dialectical and historical materialist analysis. An educated reader should be able to understand most of it and follow for the most part the explanations, which have in turn vast political implications. A few key references are provided and the reader can research the area independently.
Black Holes have mass and size just as neutron stars (pulsars) also have mass!! All Black Holes, both Stellar Black Holes and Supermassive Black Holes (the result of combination of millions of solar masses) which form the center of evolving elliptical galaxies and all spiral galaxies, also rotate extremely rapidly just like neutron stars, some of which are estimated to be only 8 to 20 miles in diameter, and rotate in 1.4 milliseconds to 30 seconds! Black Holes rotate as fast or faster. All stars rotate on a central axis to some degree due to the angular momentum of gas approaching the center of the proto-star prior to the ignition of hydrogen fusion. In other words the gravitational collapse of gas in star formation is not uniform just as its opposite, an explosion such as the Big Bang is not uniform. When the radius of the star is reduced drastically in stellar collapse the angular momentum remains the same but the momentum of inertia is sharply reduced. The standard example is that of a figure skater spinning with outstretched arms who speeds up by pulling in his/her arms. Black Holes are formed from the collapse of the largest Blue Giant stars 5 to 20 or more solar masses. Neutron stars are formed from the explosion of stars with 1.35 to 2.1 solar masses in a Type II, Type Ib or Type Ic supernova explosion. The rapid rotation of Supermassive Black Holes is in fact the reason Spiral Galaxies exist in the flattened disk form they do with spiral arms—because of the huge gravitational force exerted by the rapid rotation of Supermassive Black Holes which form their galactic centers! As mentioned this fact is entirely covered up and denied by the phony NASA “scientists” on television, e.g., National Geographic TV. As the rotating Supermassive Black Hole in the galactic center gradually increases in size through accumulation/accretion of more stellar material and gas, the early elliptical galaxies, in the process of becoming a spiral galaxies, begin to flatten due to the rapid rotation of the Supermassive Black Hole in their center which causes the flattening. It should also be noted that as would be expected there exist a high number of stellar black holes in the galactic center drawn by their strong gravitational fields on their way to join the central Supermassive Black Hole. According to observations of the Chandra X-Ray Telescope released in a July 16, 2005 report there are 10,000 stellar black holes along with numerous neutron stars orbiting the Supermassive Black Hole in the center of our own Milky Way Galaxy, officially designated Sagittarius A (SGR A)! The Supermassive Black Hole at the center of the Milky Way has a mass of 3.7 million solar masses. The largest known Supermassive Black Hole in the OJ 287 Quasar contains 18 billion solar masses!
The spiral arms comprised of outlying stars are formed by the combination of the gravitational force coming from the rapidly rotating galactic center and the relative gravitational attraction of one outlying star to another based on their actual distances from one another. As the outlying stars approach neighboring stars due to gravity this leaves other areas where stars are much less concentrated giving rise to the appearance of usually 2 major spiral arms originating from each end of the central bar often found in the galactic center, as well as several minor spiral arms, all of which are actually in the process of being gradually drawn inexorably toward the galactic center. The gravitational force of the Black Hole, the mass of which is steadily increasing, gradually overcomes the outward centrifugal force caused by its rapid rotation. Central bars form after the Supermassive Black Hole in the center of a large spiral galaxy reaches a certain size and are therefore found more prevalently in more massive galaxies where the required mass is reached sooner. Central bars form when stellar orbits in a spiral galaxy become unstable and deviate from a circular path. The tiny elongations in the stars’ orbits grow and become locked into place, forming a bar. The bar becomes even stronger as it locks more and more of these elongated orbits into place. Eventually a high fraction of the stars in the galaxy’s inner region join the bar. The galactic center thus attracts both gas and stars. This concentration of gas at the center of spiral galaxies does result in the formation of new stars but does not represent the primary or original source of star formation, which occurs in the beginning of formation of galaxies from gravitational condensation and collapse of primordial gas clouds. The central bars draw a large amount of gas towards the galactic center, fueling this new star formation, building central bulges of stars, and feeding the Supermassive central Black Hole. The formation of a bar may be one of the last stages in the evolution of a spiral galaxy prior to its eventual total collapse entirely into its central Supermassive Black Hole.
Information Overload by NASA and U.S. Government Propagandists is used to Distract
Focus Away from the Significance and Central Role Black Holes Play in the Process
Of Contraction of the Universe which Finally Becomes Dominant in the Big Crunch!
In the interest of accuracy it is also important to mention that this information is being misused by NASA and other U.S. government propagandists to try to distract from and obscure the significance of black holes and the central role black holes play in the process of contraction of the Universe, which ultimately becomes dominant over the simultaneous process of expansion. First, it is a fact that matter generally enters a black hole through a combination of both gravitation and magnetism. Matter in the accretion disk, which spins around the black hole, can only enter the black hole after it loses its angular momentum. The inertia of the material in the accretion disk keeps it spiraling in a disk rather than falling straight into the black hole. The inertia in turn is due to the mass of the material in the disc and the gravitational field caused by the extremely rapid rotation of the black hole itself. An accretion disc is a rotating disk of gas, dust and other matter that may form around any of a variety of stars or other massive objects from protostars to white dwarfs to neutron stars to stellar black holes and Supermassive Black Holes and even quasars (see below). While the accretion disc of a young star or protostar usually contains dust which later consolidates or accretes to form planets and other objects, the accretion disk of a black hole, which may also contain stars, feeds matter directly into the black hole.
According to a report in the July 22, 2006 Nature, and another 2008 paper by F. Casse Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 50 124020 (9pp) confirming the 1973 theory of Starobinsky and Churilov, the spinning gas in an accretion disc generates its own magnetic field which powers a wind of charged particles directed away from the black hole. The wind of charged particles transfers angular momentum from the inner regions of the disk outward in a twin jet phenomenon perpendicular to the plane of the accretion disk allowing angular momentum to be conserved, meaning to remain balanced or constant. This transfer of angular momentum outward slows down the spinning gas near the center, allowing gravitation to draw matter into the black hole. The magnetic field also causes turbulence and friction to build up within the disk. The friction heats up the gas to millions of degrees, causing it to glow brilliantly in the ultraviolet and X-ray bands. In Supermassive Black Holes large jets of plasma flow away from the accretion disc perpendicular to its center at almost the speed of light. These jets of plasma travel outward along the magnetic field lines which are twisted by the rotating accretion disk. It should be noted that the material which flows outward in the jets represents only a tiny amount of material extracted from the accretion disk. (Plasma, which is found in the accretion disk closest to the black hole, is a partially ionized gas, where a certain proportion of electrons are free, not being bound to atoms or molecules, unlike the gas form of matter. This permits electrical conduction of magnetic fields. Plasma is considered the fourth state of matter in addition to solid, gas and liquid.
Redshift Measurement of Quasars puts
The Age of the Universe at 28 Billion Years!
The process where matter enters a black hole from its accretion disk may be greatly expanded during the formation of quasars where a Supermassive Black Hole at a galactic Center accretes a huge amount of matter in the order of billions of stars. When two black holes combine or a stellar black hole enters a Supermassive Black Hole in a galactic center the process causes the emission of radio waves and even visible light. When hundreds of millions to billions of stars and enormous amounts of gas first combine to create a Supermassive Black Hole in the center of a galaxy the energy released is exponentially increased and is known as a quasar. In a quasar this radiation is emitted across the entire spectrum almost equally, from X-rays to the far-infrared with a peak in the ultraviolet-optical bands, with some quasars also being strong sources of radio emission and of gamma-rays. Quasars are the most visibly luminous objects in the Universe and are also the strongest energy source in the Universe. A quasar is simply an accelerated process of formation of a Supermassive Black Hole in an early galaxy. The release of gravitational energy by matter falling towards a massive black hole in the formation of a quasar is the only process known that can produce such high power continuously, energy far greater than the fusion process which powers stars. Quasars easily outshine their host galaxies. (The light we see is from the huge superheated accretion disk, which is greatly enlarged due to the high density of matter in such galaxies. Stellar explosions such as Supernovas and gamma-ray bursts can create the same level of energy, but only for a few minutes. Gamma ray bursts are generated by hypernova, which are simply very large supernova, the collapse of a stars with masses 100 to 200 times that of the sun. Contrary to the lies designed to create confusion, which appear on the National Geographic so-called Discovery Channel “How the Universe Works” programs, not all early galaxies possessed enough mass to produce a quasar. There is no evidence for example, that the Milky Way Galaxy, as claimed by Micho Kaku & Co. was a quasar! The Supermassive Black Hole at its center is far too small! And the mass extinction on Earth 440-450 million years ago was undoubtedly NOT caused by a gamma ray burst from a hypernova, but from the continental drift of a large landmass (Gondwana) into the south polar region causing a global temperature drop, glaciation and lowering of sea level which destroyed 60% of habitats around the continental shelves at a time when all life was confined to the seas and oceans. Evidence documenting this was found in deposits in the Sahara Desert.
All observed quasar spectra have red shifts between 0.06 and 6.5. Applying Hubble’s law to these red shifts, it can be shown that they are between 780 million and 28 billion light-years away, a measurement which is NOT due to gravitational lensing, although this has been reported for some extremely bright quasars. This is proof that the Universe itself is at least 28 billion years old! So the most recent “estimates” of the Hubble Constant and the actual age of the Universe by NASA, Wendy Freedman and company and the media (a privatized arm of the U.S. “intelligence community”) are obviously TOTALLY FALSE! (See below.) The process of quasar formation occurred regularly in the early Universe in the formation of galaxies with huge densely concentrated gas and stars. It should be obvious that the first galaxies to form in the Universe generally contained the highest volume and concentration of gas, which in turn created the highest concentration and densities of stars. The Supermassive Black Holes at the center of those early galaxies became quasars. Galaxies without such high densities of matter develop more along the lines of our own Milky Way Galaxy and Andromeda, for example. Formation of galaxies is still occurring but generally they do not become quasars because the volume and density of gas is insufficient. An exception is 3C 273 in the constellation Virgo which is only 33 light years away with a luminosity equal to 2 trillion times that of our sun or about 100 times the total light of the Milky Way. Their discovery by Maarten Schmidt in 1967 was early strong evidence against the totally discredited steady state theory of Fred Hoyle, and in favor of the Big Bang Theory. Blazers, incidentally are the same as quasars but have their perpendicular jets in direct alignment with our galaxy, while quasars have their jets pointed away in another direction.
As part of the escalating campaign of Big Lies, in March 2009 NASA made the totally disingenuous statement on a National Geographic Channel so-called “Naked Science” show that “while black holes are associated with galaxies we (who we?) do not yet know what that relationship is!” (!) And on May 17, 2010, Michelle Thaler of NASA disingenuously stated: “We do not know which comes first the galaxy or the Black Hole” (!) and further falsely stated that when 2 spiral galaxies collide the result is an elliptical galaxy “which does not spin!” This is another Big Lie and demonstrates a very systematized structure of lies. The truth is that the elliptical galaxy in this case is only a temporary structure. The Black Holes, which drove the 2 colliding spiral galaxies, combine and a larger spiral galaxy is formed. The motive for that feigned ignorance/Big Lie by the misnamed “intelligence community” is to try to obscure the documented reality that the matter of all galaxies is entering black holes as part of the ongoing contraction of the Universe, which begins shortly after the Big Bang and takes places simultaneously with the process of expansion and finally becomes dominant. As explained herein expansion of the Universe has slowed down enormously since the Big Bang and will be overtaken by the process of contraction until all mass in the Universe has again entered the final Black Hole, the so-called final Singularity in the Big Crunch. At that point there will be another Big Bang and another Universe will begin. In addition, NASA and other government propagandists have attempted to overemphasize the accretion disk/jet phenomenon and the huge energy produced as matter enters a black hole or quasar, almost to make it appear that black holes and quasars are “expelling” matter as much as drawing it in, virtually standing black holes on their head and falsely ascribing all sorts of false “observations” to black holes, in order to divert focus from the primary role of black holes as the mechanism or engine of contraction of the Universe and the beginning of the Big Crunch!
One example is the false claim by the fraudster, James Geach, hyped in the July 7, 2009 New York Times by the determined “intelligence community” propagandist Dennis Overbye, that black holes fueled so-called Lyman alpha “blobs,” glowing clouds of gas in the early universe. But that lie was immediately refuted with the obvious explanation that cold gas streaming into a protogalaxy would heat up and glow from the gravitational energy alone! (See: “Lyman Alpha Blobs as an Observational Signature of Cold Accretion Streams into Galaxies” by Mark Dijkstra and Abraham Loeb, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, June 5, 2009.) These fraudulent NASA/U.S. government propagandists hope that most viewers know absolutely nothing and will believe virtually anything that they are told by someone claiming to be a “scientist” or “professor” and that most people will not do their own research, or will remain at least confused and vulnerable to their next bizarre fantastical claim. That is why the information which appears here should be forwarded by email and networked in every possible way nationally and internationally in order to counter the U.S. capitalist dictatorship’s Big Lies. The objective of the capitalist dictatorship is to render the population more susceptible to their lies in every area including politics and economics, which also have little to no basis in reality. The capitalist dictatorship also resorts to the come on of “naked science” in order to try to sex-up their Big Lie propaganda in theoretical astrophysics, while simultaneously presenting some truthful “Naked Science” reports in other areas and in other National Geographic programs in order to help their Big Lies blend in.
In response to the heavy push on the so-called “History Channel,” etc. it should be noted that the Theory of the Big Bang was first proposed by Georges-Henri Lemaître, who had both a PhD in physics and was an ordained priest. Lemaître studied at the University of Leuven, the University of Cambridge, Harvard and MIT. The little read report was first published in 1927 in the Annales de la Société Scientifique de Bruxelles (Annals of the Scientific Society of Brussels) and later in Nature: G. Lemaître, The Beginning of the World from the Point of View of Quantum Theory, Nature” 127 (1931), n. 3210, pp. 706. Lemaître called it “the hypothesis of Primeval Atom” and also referred to it as “the Cosmic Egg exploding at the moment of the creation,” with the word “creation” obviously reflecting his religious bias. As explained above the Universe did not originate from a single point less than the size of a single molecule as falsely proposed by the string theorists, who now are pushing Lemaître. As explained above the end point of all matter in the Big Crunch is a Single Black Hole, the so-called “Singularity.” As mentioned all Black Holes have the same mass density, which is said to be infinite, and which vary only in actual mass depending on how many stars and how much nuclear material they contain. The only difference is the difference in mass, which is constantly increasing as matter changes from its energy form when entering a Black Hole according to m=E/c2, Einstein’s formula from the Special Theory solved for mass. See cited article in Nature, November 21, 2008. The Singularity contains the combined mass of all nuclear material from all stars and gas in the Universe. The designation: “Big Bang Theory” first derived from a derogatory reference to the theory of an expanding Universe by Fred Hoyle on the BBC in March 1949 over 20 years after it was first proposed. The truth as explained above and herein is that the processes of expansion and contraction of the Universe coexist from shortly after the Big Bang until finally the process of contraction becomes dominant and there is a Big Crunch followed by another Big Bang and formation of another Universe.
It is a fact that Lemaître applied Albert Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity to Cosmology, but was NOT a spearhead of religion supposedly leading physics as Lemaître is presently falsely being portrayed on the so-called “History Channel.” Lemaître also preceded Edwin Hubble in deriving what became known as Hubble’s Law and even calculated the Hubble Constant but was not able to prove the linear relation which Hubble did in 1929. Lemaître has rarely been given the credit he is due for first proposing the Big Bang Theory for 3 reasons: 1.) The theory of an expanding Universe was opposed at the time he first proposed it by Einstein and others, 2.) For political-religious reasons explained herein the capitalist dictatorship has always opposed the Big Bang Theory because the natural logic of a Big Bang implies a Big Crunch and a cyclic nature of the Universe rather than a single creation which leaves the most room for “a creator” and 3.) U.S. nationalism/jingoism, where the U.S. capitalist dictatorship always prefers that whenever possible credit be given to an American. Edwin Hubble was an American lawyer. Although Lemaître had received numerous Belgian and international scientific honors only recently have the capitalists been pushing Lemaître in order to focus on the fact that he was a priest and that his theory speaks of a moment of “creation.” The so-called “History Channel” focuses on this language in an attempt to inject the sophisticated form of neo-creationism/intelligent design also espoused by Francis Collins, Obama’s new choice for head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). See below. Both Michio Kaku and Stephen Hawking have also now identified themselves as neo-creationists/”intelligent design” advocates! See below.
The Hubble Constant is a calculation of the speed at which the Universe is expanding and is crucial in calculating the age of the Universe. Four methods have been used to estimate the Hubble Constant and age of the Universe. The most recent method employed by Allan R. Sandage, et al measures: 1.) the distances to Type 1a Supernovae explosions in distant galaxies and then 2.) confirms those measurements by comparing the relative luminosities of Cepheid variable stars as so-called “standard candles,” while Wendy Freedman’s NASA team uses Cepheid Variable stars alone, which is a lot less accurate. Freedman’s method especially is an easy method in which to either err or to deliberately falsify results as she and her NASA team have clearly done. (See below.) The typical errors in calculating the Hubble Constant include: 1.) “the universal, yet unjustified Period-Luminosity relation of Cepheid (variable stars), 2.) neglect of selection bias in magnitude-limited samples or 3.) the errors which are inherent to the adopted models, which cause most values of the Hubble Constant and corresponding estimates of the age of the Universe to be incorrect as explained in detail in the most comprehensive review which has yet been published, which also includes the Sandage team’s most recent calculation of the Hubble Constant to date of 62.3 +or–1.3, which is based on measurements to 279 galaxies: “The expansion field: the value of the Hubble Constant,” by G.A Tammann, A. Sandage and B. Reindl, Astron Astrophys Rev (2008), 8 July 2008, 15:289-331, DOI 10.1007/s00159-800-9912-y. ((Allan Sandage died on November 13, 2010.)
This value of the Hubble Constant corresponds to an age of the Universe of approximately 13.7 billion years, which should be sufficient to permit the Big Crunch. However even this method of calculation of the Hubble Constant, which as exhaustively explained and documented by Allan Sandage et al, is fraught with potential errors cited above, which Sandage takes account of and systematically avoids. As mentioned above Wendy Freedman and Co. on the other hand use only Cepheid variable stars in their “calculations” and deliberately include faulty (fraudulent) data in their calculations as explained to this writer personally by Allan Sandage, therefore making Freedman & Co.’s method of determination of the Hubble Constant even easier to falsify. Such data is systematically excluded by Sandage, et al., as explained above. In response to the withering but suppressed critique by Sandage et al, known primarily only to other astrophysicists who follow these matters, Freedman has published a slew of pathetic papers addressing such topics as “correction of errors involving optical extragalactic background light (EBL), sampling-induced errors, magnitude errors, and random and optimal sampling,” etc. where she always comes up with ridiculously high (fraudulent) values for the Hubble Constant. Fraudulent data was necessary for Freedman & Co. to reinvent the entirely fictitious so-called “dark energy,” Einstein’s “Cosmological Constant,” (“My greatest blunder!” See below), which is declared to be “the opposite of gravity” and which has no scientific explanation whatsoever, but is falsely proffered as “the reason” the capitalist dictatorship and its media (and textbook) propagandists now falsely state that the expansion of the Universe has unexplainably “speeded up,” a “finding” which violates all previous findings not to mention all known rules of physics including the General Theory of Relativity! In other words this finding is totally invented, totally fabricated, a Big Lie to end all Big Lies! All designed to achieve the political-religious-propagandistic objective of a single “genesis.” See below. Legitimate opposing viewpoints are simply ignored and in practice not permitted to be heard! How jolly!
Regarding the most recent results given above for the Hubble Constant, this writer would still prefer to accept Sandage’s previous calculation of 55 +or-5, which has been repeatedly established in papers from 1975, 1982, 1986, 1990 and 1995, although it may certainly be possible that the 62.3 +or-1.3 value is the most accurate and it is certainly can be argued that 55 +or-5 is not that far removed from the new figure. The reason for this caution is that Allan Sandage was 82 years old at publication and although he was 100% intellectually intact and in control of all of his faculties his name is listed second in the above paper indicating that he himself may not have collected the data used in the calculation giving 62.3 +or-1.3 for the Hubble Constant. This writer has not spoken or corresponded with the other members of his team, as this writer has, with Allan Sandage. Sandages’s team also often includes A. Saha who was not included in the above paper, so this writer can not rule out alteration of the raw data to give a falsely high Hubble Constant by certain personnel who might be bribed by the NASA forces in charge of the Key Project, which was set up determined to achieve a certain result come hell or high water. This issue is important enough to the capitalist dictatorship so that they would leave no stone unturned to tweak the results in their direction for reasons explained further below. In addition, we are reminded that the Redshift of some quasars actually puts the age of the Universe at 28 billion years! See above. Because of this fact and previous calculations of the age of the oldest stars which are in a similar range, it can not be ruled out that the computer program used for collecting light data from stars from modern telescopes in the “Key Project” may have been written in such a way as to deliberately give false values in order to increase the Hubble Constant and thereby reduce the age of the Universe as calculated by the “standard candles” method.
The U.S. so-called “intelligence community” organized the so-called “Key Project” in order to cover up the cyclic nature of the Universe from Big Bang to Big Crunch. The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) was built primarily for the “Key Project.” This is an important point. The capitalist dictatorship chose Wendy Freedman to lead the project rather than the obvious choice, Allan Sandage, the legendary, most preeminent and world-renowned astrophysicist as well as the number one authority on the Hubble Constant along with his internationally renowned group of astrophysicist colleagues. See above. The reason was that Sandage’s studies up to that point had shown the Universe to be “between 14 and 18 billion years old, depending on what is assumed about the mass of the Universe.” This corresponds to a Hubble Constant, which he and colleagues had repeatedly calculated to be 55 +or-5 as cited above. An older age and smaller Hubble Constant, of course, would mean that the Universe contained easily enough matter to permit the Big Crunch, which is the key point the capitalist propagandists want to discredit because that would rule out a single creation and make the existence of a god, for which there is no scientific evidence whatsoever, even more unlikely! This is the actual statecraft behind the “Key Project.” (See further below.)
Freedman’s initial claim that the Universe was only 8 billion years old was obviously fraudulent, as have been all of her subsequent “estimations.” All of Freedman’s estimations of the age of the Universe and the Hubble Constant have been designed to try to fraudulently invalidate (!) the Big Bang, the Big Crunch especially and the cyclic nature of the Universe in particular. The preposterous claim of an 8 billion year age is a direct attack on the Big Bang, which has been verified worldwide. In her initial unrestrained enthusiasm to falsify and misinterpret her own data (see above) Freedman forgot about the 1.) Red shift discovered by Edwin Hubble (see below) and 2.) the detection of the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is the residual effect of the Big Bang both of which exist as irrefutable evidence for the Big Bang origin of the Universe! In January 2003 Freedman was made the Director of the Carnegie Observatories located in Pasadena, California where Allan Sandage works thereby placing her above him as a maneuver to make her fraudulent estimates of the Hubble Constant appear more authoritative in the public eye!
Note that even AFTER the 1965 discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation by Penzias and Wilson and its confirmation by the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite in 1989 that its measurement produced a curve precisely matching a Planck curve, which most scientists have accepted as proof that the radiation is indeed from the beginning of the universe, the capitalist dictatorship has still made efforts to continue to try to deny the existence of the Big Bang, even publishing books with 466 pages (!) attacking the Big Bang such as the 1991 rubbish: “The Big Bang Never Happened” (!) by the totally discredited Eric Lerner. Anyone using simple inductive reasoning would immediately begin to smell a rat! Since the capitalist dictatorship and its media have not been able to refute the Big Bang they have now focused all their efforts in trying to refute the Big Crunch. The capitalist dictatorship has a long history of political meddling and sabotage in virtually all fields of scientific and medical research and a history of using scientific advances against the masses in order to control them and also to reduce the population according to their own perceived needs, e.g. from Bio-warfare to Bio-fuels (through enforced starvation, falsely portrayed as seeking “energy independence” and “clean energy.”).
NASA Propagandists Have Now Concocted the Fraudulent “theory of the
Big Rip” In Order to Try to Counter the Reality of the Big Crunch and
The Information which Appears Here now Found All Over the Internet!
NASA in a new propaganda blitz using their standard Big Lie technique in order to try to refute the information, which appears here and all over the Internet, has pushed back hard with the totally discredited claims on the National Geographic Channel beginning in March 2009 that 1.) “dark matter” forms a supposed “filamentous superstructure” of the universe from the very beginning of the Big Bang until the present 2.) the fictitious “dark energy” will supposedly eventually “become so strong” that it will overcome all 4 primary forces including the strong force, which holds quarks and gluons together to form protons, neutrons and other particles, so that that the entire Universe will then supposedly “fly apart ripping apart galaxies, stars, planets and eventually every speck of matter in a fantastical end to time” in what the fraudulent propagandist Robert Caldwell describes as “the Big Rip.” This is also known as the theory of the flat universe. There is no “filamentous superstructure of the universe held together by dark matter.” And phantasmagorical images of galactic superclusters do NOT prove the existence of a “filamentous superstructure” and are simply a photographic effect due to the enormous luminosity of such dense accumulations of stars. As mentioned above the great wall of galaxies is not due to a “dark matter superstructure” but is simply due to the irregularities in the Big Bang explosion, which was not uniform as in any explosion. Such brainwash already appears in the astrophysics textbooks of the capitalist dictatorship! We recommend that it be exposed as a Big Lie whenever and wherever it is encountered.
The capitalist cosmologists/propagandists have demonstrated that they can not coherently reply to any of the arguments advanced in this Materialist Analysis of Theoretical Astrophysics except through contrived, feigned ignorance, information overload and MORE totally outrageous, bizarre Big Lies, which require a religious-like faith (in the case of dark energy and dark matter, for example ) to actually believe them—their overall objective in the first place as explained here. So do not be intimidated by the doctoral degrees which they award themselves or the exalted positions held by these above-mentioned frauds in order to try to legitimize their lies and to try to control and monopolize this field as they try to do with all others. These false propagandists/ “cosmologists” keep up a truly relentless barrage of lies in the major media and even physics journals and on TV with a never ending stream of phantasmagoric images blending and cascading one into another to try to help prove their scripted Big Lies, for example, the existence of “dark matter,” which they laughably claim is so dominant that it forms the “superstructure of the universe” but which they supposedly have only been able to detect as “two tiny pulses of heat deposited over the course of two years…” New York Times, December 18, 2009, a frankly pathetic false “finding” which the article admits is “no proof” but “tantalizing” (?) an adjective carefully chosen to try to make it appear as if everyone were are all rooting to try to prove their Big Lie. The reality is that there is no “dark matter.” Claims on the National Geographic Discovery Channel and elsewhere in April-May 2010 that “gravitational lensing and cosmological expansion rates” have “confirmed” its existence are totally fabricated! Gravity, not dark matter, is responsible for ALL gravitational lensing and that is where it gets its name. And there is NO “large halo of unseen matter (an oxymoron!) extending beyond the visible stars.” But according to Michio Kaku & Co., “Dark matter is in a struggle with dark energy and dark energy wins in the end in the Big Rip!” Not a WORD about gravity! And according to Michio Kaku and the NASA propagandists, eventually stars will all simply “blink out and the universe will be dark…again!? The age of stars will be over!” Kaku just makes it up in a jumble as he goes along. Anything for his cause! But what is his cause? See below.
It can also be predicted that the capitalist dictatorship will take over the science, if they have not already done so, of the new Large Hadron Collider, the world’s largest and highest energy particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, when it finally goes on line in order to try to continue to concoct the existence of “dark matter” and “dark energy” as well as the “Higgs Boson,” the so-called “god particle,” which is reputed to be “the particle which may impart mass to all other particles after the Big Bang.” The Higgs Boson is a hypothetical massive scalar elementary particle predicted to exist by the Standard Model in particle physics. At present there are NO known elementary scalar particles in nature. There are numerous Higgsless models, which do not depend on the Higgs Boson or Higgs Field. The top contender presently is the Three-Site Higgsless model. Whether or not the Higgs Boson exists or does not exist, its importance has been completely overstated in any case, in order that in the event of its discovery the media may falsely claim to have “proved” the existence of “god!” In any case, the Higgs Boson has absolutely nothing to do with “god” and no reputable physicist has ever made such a claim. The capitalist dictatorship is desperate and reeeediculous! So do not be intimidated by their Big Lies.
Through brazen false arguments and bizarre false analogies these phony “cosmologists” who control the airways and media, have even attempted to up the ante and generate maximum confusion by trying to brainwash people into believing that the laws of physics and theoretical astrophysics, such as the Laws of Quantum Mechanics, the Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity, etc. are “not immutable” and are in a process of “constant evolution” supposedly like species of animals in Charles Darwin’s “The Evolution of Species.” The laws of physical science are thus directly compared to the evolution of species of animals! Einstein therefore supposedly only has “temporary relevance” giving virtually every kind of science fiction a basis in “reality.” (See: “Beyond Einstein,” Discover Magazine, April 2010). Einstein is also falsely quoted as believing in god: “learning to read the laws of physics is like reading the mind of god.” See comprehensive section on Einstein below.
The author of the Discover Magazine article moreover disingenuously announces: “physicists should not spin any theories that require the existence of things such as multiverses, that cannot be disproved.” This carefully contrived statement implies that because “multiverses,” etc. supposedly cannot be disproved these fraudsters do not have to actually PROVE any piece of science fiction currently being passed off as “science.” They imply that is the duty of genuine theoretical physicists to disprove every false theory used to bombard the public domain by the misnamed, so-called “intelligence community” led by heavily hyped characters such as Michio Kaku or Stephen Hawking. The Materialist Analysis of Theoretical Astrophysics disproves their primary concoctions and it is a rule of the Court that a witness caught in one lie in testimony does not merit any further credibility by the Jury. This is especially true in science where it is clear that, above all else, Kaku, & Co., are straining at the leash to inject confusion into basic physics and are forced to tell many lies in order to try to achieve their objectives. Their motives to create confusion are explained above. The title of the Discover Magazine article was incidentally borrowed from the very title of a 1987 book by “intelligence community” fraudster, Michio Kaku, wherein Kaku tried to popularize so-called “String Theory,” concocted in the effort to try to supplant Quantum Mechanics. See below. It should be noted that Kaku, who hides his specious, bogus so-called “Beyond Einstein science,” behind a phony slick and unctuously triumphal presentation, is equally at home passing off science fiction e.g. “parallel universes, time warps, time travel and the tenth dimension” as science as he is relentlessly fabricating false theories designed to compete with and supplant the natural laws of physics and to confuse as many people as possible behind a mantle of genuinely false knowledge. Based on only ONE non-cyclic Big Bang, Michio Kaku’s “String Theory” is thus a back door to Creationism! Michio Kaku now openly describes himself as a neo-creationist! See below.
There is no such thing as “Dark Energy”. And there was no “inflationary epoch” in the Big Bang, which supposedly “caused the Universe to expand faster than the speed of light.” It did not! The so-called “Theory of Inflation” which attempts to supplant entirely the standard model of the Big Bang with “dark energy” AKA “vacuum energy” is also a total fraud! (See below) Nor has the Universe suddenly increased its rate of expansion as falsely claimed by these frauds as supposed “proof of its existence.” Just the opposite! The rate of expansion of the Universe has continued to slow since the Big Bang! All previous observations have indicated that is the case! While the Red Shifts of the most distant galaxies do indicate they are receding much more rapidly than closer galaxies this is because their light originated closer to the time of the Big Bang when the expansion rate was greater, but that is not the situation today. It should therefore be noted that although we may be able to receive light from galaxies which started its journey near the beginning of star formation and galactic formation, that light does not portray the reality at this point in time of the galaxy which was the source of that light. The reality is that today most of the Universe is undoubtedly relatively uniform in its development today except where, for example, there are huge clouds of gas from super novae explosions or where there are huge accumulations of matter such as the Great Wall of galaxies, the latter of which formed due to the irregularities which occurred in the Big Bang just as in any other explosion. In other words the light from our own galaxy, the Milky Way, would appear to an observer from the most distant galaxies to be receding at the same rate that their light is receding from our own galaxy! This should be a no-brainer but is rarely if ever mentioned. The only viewpoint which is ever mentioned is from the Earth as if it were the center of creation. Which it is not!
The Universe is not open! Just like the Earth itself the spatial curvature of the Universe is NOT FLAT! It is CLOSED! In reality there are no “multiple universes,” which “pop out of Black Holes” or by any other explanation. A Universe arises ONLY from a Big Bang! Although mass is infinite in a Black Hole (see above), Critical Mass does not exist! Critical Mass is attained only in the Final Singularity, when all matter in the Universe comes together in one spot in the Big Crunch prior to the Big Bang. The point when Critical Mass is reached is the point when a Big Bang occurs! See above. This is why the Large Hadron Collider cannot reproduce either the Big Bang or even a Black Hole. The reason for this is that even a Black Hole can form only when a Blue Giant star of sufficient mass collapses. This can not occur in the Large Hadron Collidor no matter how high the energies attained or how “large” the collidor itself may be claimed to be!!
Stephen Hawking’s claimed existence of “exploding miniature Black Holes,” which “permit particles to leak out in a quantum process” (!), eventually causing Black Holes to “EVAPORATE” (!), due to the pretentiously designated, so-called: “Hawking Evaporation,” or to “finally explode entirely” is based on fraudulent “String Theory” related mathematics and is baseless nonsense. Note that so-called “Hawking radiation” has NEVER BEEN OBSERVED and is ENTIRELY FICTITIOUS! Hawking’s wild claims were based on the fact that on a visit to the USSR in 1974 the Soviet physicist Alexander Starobinsky told Hawking that according to Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, rotating black holes should create and emit particles. (!) Oh? But the truth is that in a Black Hole or “Singularity” the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and ALL LAWS OF PHYSICS DO NOT APPLY and DO NOT EVEN EXIST! Starobinsky WOULD have known that fundamental fact and it cannot be ruled out that in the middle of the Cold War he may have recognized that Hawking was such a nut-job ego tripper that he would fall for virtually anything in order to make a big splash for himself in physics. And the question immediately arises, if Starobinsky really thought he had made such a profound discovery why didn’t he come out with it himself? In any case there is no radiation whatsoever of any type emitted from any Black Hole itself! Nevertheless, such absurd and ridiculous claims are given credence in the media and given a heavy push on the phony “science” magazines and TV shows mentioned above and on websites which permit NO COMMENT!
It was also announced on the highly discredited “Naked Science” National Geographic (Discovery) Channel with NO PROOF WHATSOEVER and with no legitimate counter-arguments ever permitted, the totally bizarre claim that Michio Kaku’s “String Theory” is “the best explanation of the origin of the Universe,” which it most certainly is NOT! On that program Hawking and “String Theorists” absurdly stated: “the Big Bang occurred when gravity weakened” (!) because “after the Big Bang gravity (supposedly) entered the 7 to 9 extra dimensions (in “String Theory”) and was weakened.” Duh! Such rubbish! (!) Finally, after presenting one concoction after another for almost an hour falsely dressed up as “science,” the April 20, 2010 “Naked Science” program (which is to be repeated!), apparently in a pathetic attempt to try to save face and keep some semblance of credibility among the growing majority of those who see through their lies, concluded with the unexpected disclaimer: “There is only one catch! There is no proof for any of this!” Right! But since then there have been no more disclaimers of these relentlessly pushed Big Lies! Parenthesis added.
There is also no “time travel” in a practical sense either despite the phenomena of time dilation described in Einstein’s Special Theory and gravitational time dilation described in Einstein’s General Theory, which was actually confirmed in the Pound-Rebka experiment. And there are no “wormholes.” These fraudsters intone Einstein’s name by falsely claiming that there are “two valid solutions” to the General Theory of Relativity which contain “wormholes.” This is a Big Lie! Neither “solution” cited is actually valid! The first type falsely postulated, the “Schwarzchild wormhole,” which they also falsely designate with the label “Einstein-Rosen bridges” (!?), depends on a Black Hole, “which has no charge and no angular momentum!” But ALL Black Holes rotate and thus have angular momentum! (See above.) The second type, the so-called “traversable wormholes,” would require the existence of “exotic (non-baryonic) matter,” which does NOT exist and which itself would violate energy conditions specified in the General Theory and would require changing space-time topology and would require regions of negative energy, which also do not actually exist in the known Universe. At best this is all mathematical imaginings of those who want to be “the next Einstein.” Einstein himself realized that his later mathematical attempts to formulate a Grand Unified Theory were simply incorrect and were not leading in the right direction. In addition, there are no “strings.” “String Theory” is a mathematical attempt to try to refute, compete with and supplant, NOT EXPLAIN, the Theory of Quantum Mechanics, the foundations of particle physics which were established during the first half of the twentieth century by Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Albert Einstein, etc.! See below for the most likely ready solution to the Grand Unified Theory.
On July 22, 2010 on the so-called “History Channel” Michio Kaku brazenly also falsified the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle! That principle states simply that pairs of physical properties, such as position and momentum, cannot simultaneously be known to arbitrary precision. The more precisely one property is measured, the less precisely the other can be measured. In other words, the more you know the position of a particle, the less you can know about its velocity, and the more you know about the velocity of a particle, the less you can know about its instantaneous position. In his false presentation of “parallel universes,’ which also involved countless other falsifications of basic physics, Kaku stated that Heisenberg stated that one particle can be in two positions simultaneously! Heisenberg never ever even suggested that!
Recent Findings Document that the Mass of the Universe
Increases as Matter Enters a Black Hole and the Final Singularity!
This Finding Totally Refutes Infinite Expansion of the Universe
And “String Theory!” The Fact That Neutrinos Have Mass Also
Provides Further Basis For the Big Crunch!”
The false claim that there is supposedly insufficient matter in the Universe to permit the Big Crunch to take place is entirely refuted by 2 discoveries. Perhaps even more significant than the work on neutrinos discussed below is the paper published on November 21, 2008 in Science. More than 99% of the visible mass of the Universe is made up of protons and neutrons. Recent calculations of the mass of the nucleus found that matter, which is composed of protons and neutrons, which are in turn are composed of quarks held together with gluons by the strong force, normally exists as 95% energy, according to the formula from Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity: E=mc2! This provides further confirmation for the Big Crunch! Why? The reason, not drawn as a conclusion by the authors of the paper, is that in a Black Hole and moreover in the final Black Hole, the “Singularity,” that relationship would be 100% reversed, with all matter existing in the form of mass: m=E/c2. The mass of the Universe would therefore increase according to these findings as matter enters a Black Hole as energy shifts to its mass equivalent! (Science, November 21, 2008, Vol. 322, 5905:1198-1199 and 1124-1127. Obviously this is the precise opposite of what occurs in a nuclear explosion where matter is converted entirely to energy according to the equation E=mc2. On the other hand such tidbit reports as “Excess Particles From Space may Hint at Dark Matter,” (Science, Vol. 322, 5905:1173) are only red herrings meant to titillate, to keep attention diverted away from focusing on key findings of genuine significance. There is no such thing as “dark matter.” In another important point, the Second Law of Thermodynamics does NOT prevent the Big Crunch because 1.) the energy of the Universe is entirely converted to mass in Black Holes and the Final Singularity in accordance with Einstein’s equation solved for mass: m=E/c2 and 2.) ALL laws of physics break down and do not apply in a Black Hole! There is no exception for the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
The discovery that neutrinos have mass also provides a further basis for the Big Crunch. This fact was first reported on July 1, 1998 by a collaboration of 120 U.S. and Japanese physicists at the Neutrino 98 meeting in Takayama, Japan and submitted to Physical Review Letters. (By Super-Kamiokande Collaboration (Y. Fukuda et al.) Phys.Rev.Lett.81:1562-1567,1998.) Neutrinos have sufficient weight to allow the Big Crunch! The experiment measured the differences in mass of the three types of neutrinos to be 0.1 eV or greater. The group reported that the simplest interpretation of the solar and atmospheric results is that the heaviest neutrino has a mass of 0.1 eV. However, they reported that since oscillations between the 3 types of neutrinos depend only on the differences in mass it is possible that the masses of all three neutrinos are fully 1 eV or greater, but that it is the mass differences which are much smaller. (They allow for the “possibility.” How nice! They know that the majority of physicists do not simply automatically accept the interpretation which is first proffered.)
This makes the most sense and is of course suppressed for political reasons. (See below.) If the mass of the neutrino is 1 eV that would mean that neutrinos account for more mass in the Universe than all of the protons and neutrons put together easily supplying the supposed “missing matter” necessary for the Big Crunch. As mentioned the critical mass density required for the Big Crunch to occur is 1 x 10 to the negative 29th of a gram per cubic centimeter (approximately 5 hydrogen atoms per cubic meter), according to the calculation from the General Theory of Relativity. In addition, the fact that neutrinos have mass also provides the basis for the Grand Unified Theory which links the gravitational force described in the General Theory of Relativity with the strong and the weak forces and electromagnetism described in the Theory of Quantum Mechanics. Einstein struggled and failed to formulate this theory, but it has already been shown that at high enough energies electromagnetism and the weak force are the same force known as the electroweak force. It is theorized that if energies are increased even further and neutrinos acquire mass, which has now been fully documented, all the known forces will reduce to the same force thus providing the basis for the Grand Unified Theory. This high energy level existed only during the very early expansion of the Universe known as the Planck Epoch, which existed up to 10 to the negative 43rd seconds after the Big Bang, where the four fundamental forces — electromagnetism, weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force and gravitation — all had the same strength. After that point the energy level decreased and gravity separated from the other 3 fundamental forces and with the condensation of matter into the elementary particles (quarks, leptons, and gauge bosons) formed the so-called Standard Model of today’s Universe. These facts, while available, are de-emphasized by the capitalist dictatorship propaganda machine with the false claim that “no one—not even Einstein—has been able formulate the Grand Unified Theory,” in order to try to open the door to fraudulent “string theory.” The 1998 report that neutrinos have mass was blipped in the media and then neutrino research was de-funded worldwide and thereafter suppressed for a period of time. Wonder why?? It is time to employ some inductive reasoning, which is in fact scientific reasoning. (Note: in order to understand the relationship of the 4 primary forces which exist in the universe: the typical field strength of the strong nuclear force is 100 times the strength of the electromagnetic force, approximately 10 x13 times as great as that of the wea
February 27th, 2011 at 2:24 am
Part 2 of 3:
(Note: in order to understand the relationship of the 4 primary forces which exist in the universe: the typical field strength of the strong nuclear force is 100 times the strength of the electromagnetic force, approximately 10 x13 times as great as that of the weak nuclear force, and about 10 x38 times that of gravitation.)
The Big Crunch will arrive on schedule and another Universe will begin! Einstein once said that a theory of the Universe should be both simple and elegant. Hawking sounds like a total jerk when he states that the Big Crunch is “too neat” and he prefers the “Big Rip.” Whaaa? See below. Einstein would definitely be rolling over in his grave if he were made aware of today’s totally contrived “science” especially the attempt by these fakers to re-introduce his fudge factor, the so-called “cosmological constant,” which Einstein invented/fabricated to allow for a static solution to his equations and a static Universe, which he was later forced to admit was false after the discovery of the Redshift by Edwin Hubble, which occurs when light or any type of electromagnetic radiation from distant galaxies shifts toward longer wavelengths, the less energetic part of the spectrum, due to the Doppler effect. The Red Shift indicates that those distant galaxies are moving away from our galaxy, the Milky Way (and vice versa) and that the Universe was expanding more rapidly at that time than presently when some galaxies are now actually moving toward us. The Universe is also simultaneously contracting on another level as explained above. The Redshift in light from receding galaxies is proportional to their distance from Earth. That is Hubble’s Law.
The false assumption of a static Universe had prevented Einstein from predicting that the Universe was expanding. Einstein admitted that the “cosmological constant” was his “biggest blunder.” In December 1930 Einstein went to Cal Tech on a visiting professorship where he worked with Edwin Hubble and reportedly also apologized for his error. In 1998 the U.S. so-called “intelligence community,” directed their fleet of fake “cosmologists” and some opportunist and duped astrophysicists to try to pass off Einstein’s fraudulent cosmological constant as the entirely fictitious and admittedly totally unexplained so-called “dark energy,” (!) AKA “quintessence, “ which is supposedly responsible for a claimed “speeding up of the rate of expansion of the Universe,” which is NOT in fact actually occurring, and is now even proffered as a supposed reason for the Bermuda Triangle! This rubbish, as mentioned, has even been forced into advanced textbooks in astrophysics as supposed good coin. The reason for these wholesale falsifications of astrophysics is due to the capitalists’ desperation to establish a false basis to claim that the Universe supposedly had a single creation and that it will expand infinitely rather than collapse once again in the Big Crunch completing another cycle in an infinite number. The U.S. governments’ fictitious position is deliberately designed to try to allow for the existence of a “god” as “the creator.”
The reason that the capitalists have formed an alliance with religion is that the capitalists depend on religion, belief in god and the supernatural as important weapons of deception directed against the masses! This also helps explain the appearance of fraudulent so-called “string theory” which falsely postulates multiple Universes, eleven dimensions, rather than the 4 dimensions which actually do measurably exist. Stephen Hawking, the ego-tripping, media-hyped “cosmologist” is once again postulating supposed “wormholes from one Universe to another” as well as supposed “wormholes” from one end of our Universe to the other to permit time travel “faster than the speed of light” (both of which are completely refuted by the Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle not to mention Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity!). While Hawking temporarily retreated on the issue of time travel on being so reminded before recently re-embracing what he fully knows to be total nonsense, Heisenberg and other obstacles and impossible paradoxes preventing time travel are also brazenly ignored by others who are professional police-agent propagandists fully committed to such Big Lies of confusion such as the New York Times’ despicable Dennis Overbye and Nicholas Wade (Oy!), Brian Greene and the WBAI/CUNY huckster and self-described neo-creationist Michio Kaku, who claims to be an expert on everything, allowing him to cover up inter alia the documented fact that AIDS is Biowarfare by the U.S. Government Against Blacks and Gays primarily. Assuming the mantle of false authority, Kaku also tries to confuse his trusting, credulous, duped and even fawning listeners (including CCNY students!) on innumerable other issues. Kaku appears regularly on the BBC, Network TV “News” and elsewhere to push the new “scientific” fiction while steering false propaganda on astronomical events or physics research, the latter of which is largely controlled by the falsely labeled U.S. “intelligence community.” Note: so-called “Kerr spacetime” is just another string theory mathematical concoction.
Note that on June 10, 2010 on ABC World News with Diane Sawyer Stephen Hawking also openly defined himself as a new style neo-creationist similar to Obama’s new head of NIH Francis Collins, and Michio Kaku (see below), providing false, specious Templeton foundation (see below) reasoning in order to make it appear possible to reconcile “god” and science, when he stated: “What could define God is thinking of God as the embodiment of the laws of nature.” (Demonstrating the reach and determination of the misnamed “intelligence community,” to brainwash the masses, Hawking’s false message has even been plastered in NYC Subway cars in the form of “a personal choice!”) Although Hawking tried to cover himself: “There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works,” all of Hawking’s fraudulent “science” and adherence to “String Theory” lead right back to the existence of “god” as explained herein. But there is NO proof of the existence of “god” and WHO MADE “GOD?” Man!
In Yet Another Attempt to Try to Generate Confusion and Discredit
The Theory of the Big Bang/Big Crunch Infinite Cycle of the Universe
The Capitalist Dictatorship has Invented a Patently and Preposterously
Fraudulent Counter “Theory” designated “Conformal Cyclic Cosmology!?”
This Materialist Analysis of Theoretical Astrophysics, which among other things, comprehensively explains and documents the Big Bang/Big Crunch Infinite Cycle of the Universe was first published in 2008 and is updated on occasion in response to the unrelenting Big Lies used to cover up and distort astrophysical reality. That same year and indubitably in response to this very document which exposes the so-called “inflationary model of the Universe” as a deliberately contrived fraud, the capitalist dictatorship’s misnamed so-called “intelligence community” apparently decided to add another layer of lies in their attempt to trivialize and discredit the Theory of the Big Crunch/Big Bang Cycle of the Universe, while simultaneously tweaking its own “standard inflationary model of the Universe,” which it has meanly foisted on the scientific community and an unsuspecting world. The author of this new phony “theory” pretentiously designated as so-called “Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC!),” Robert Penrose, a knighted confidante of the British capitalist class and crony of the totally discredited hoodwinker Steven Hawking (see above), has concocted a laughably-fraudulent paper and a concurrently published criminally dishonest book. The paper appeared in December 2010 with the heralded finding of “families of concentric circles” with “anomalously low temperature variance,” within the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), which Penrose claims represent “Black Hole ENCOUNTERS (!), within bound galactic clusters in the previous AEON.” (Emphasis added.) Give us a break!
Already three groups of investigators have found that “the detection of the concentric anomalies was NOT statistically significant, in the sense that such circles would appear in a proper Gaussian simulation of the anisotropy of the CMB data.” Penrose and his collaborator V.G. Gurzadyan confronted with this reality were forced to admit that while the presence of individual circles in the CMB data was not statistically significant, they claimed to have found families of concentric circles, the presence of which cannot be found in the Gaussian simulation of the data. (!) Total Nonsense! See: Wekus IK; Eriksen HK (2010-12-07), arXiv:1012.1268v1, Moss A; Scott D; Zibin JP (2010), arXiv:1012.1305, Hajian A (2010-12-8), arXiv:1012.1656 and GurzadyanVG; Penrose R (2010-12-07), arXiv:1012.1486. (The Penrose book: “Cycles of Time,” Bodley Head Publishers 2010.) So just what is the primary objective, the actual motive for this false propaganda assault? The objective is to try to generate confusion and cause the much more widely known and understood Theory of the Big Crunch/Big Bang Cycle of the Universe to be supplanted in questioning minds, to the degree that that is possible, by the Penrose mathematical concoction: “Conformal Cyclic Cosmology,” and to make the acceptance of the cyclic nature of the Universe, which it contains and which is the target, dependent on the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the veracity of his claim of finding “families of concentric circles” in the CMBR. (!) When that deliberately false and preposterous claim is proved false on a less than fundamental and comprehensive basis, or is “disputed” on technical points (see above), then Penrose’s entire theory and its central thesis—that the Universe has a cyclic nature—and also the Big Bang/Big Crunch theory, its central target—is supposed to collapse like a straw man, in yet another example of this disinformation technique. (!) The Penrose book and theory of “conformal cyclic cosmology” is based largely on the Second Law of Thermodynamics (increasing entropy), which he deliberately fails to mention breaks down completely, just like all other physical laws, in Black Holes and the Final Singularity where all entropy is reversed. Penrose’s genuinely bizarre theory holds that prior to the Big Bang, Black Holes do not collide and combine all of the matter in the Universe, they merely “encounter” one another right along with their “bound galactic clusters” and “eventually evaporate.” (!) Penrose provides no evidence for this baseless claim. The truth is that by the time of the Big Crunch, A TERM WHICH IS DUTIFULLY NEVER MENTIONED, Supermassive Black Holes now at the center of elliptical galaxies would have accumulated ALL matter of their respective galaxies, a process which is currently ongoing! Galaxies themselves would have ceased to exist as such and would be replaced by super large Supermassive Black Holes. These would come together through the force of gravity, based on their proximity, finally in one spot (NOT a single point!) in the Big Crunch, which would result in another Big Bang at the point when critical mass is reached. See above. Nothing except matter itself from the previous Universe survives the Big Crunch/Big Bang cycle! Thus there could be no evidence of “Black Hole encounters from a previous (Universe)” in any way shape or form. But for Penrose the boundary between one Universe and another is “just a spacelike surface that can be passed across like any other.”
Despite Stephen Hawking’s False Claims
Time Travel is NOT Possible!
Normally the topic of time travel would not be covered to this extent, but this issue must be considered at greater length because Stephen Hawking is a high profile celebrity balloon being foisted on an unsuspecting public and provided a TV and media stage to promote his total nonsense by the U.S. “intelligence community.” The media is using genuinely hypnotic, phantasmagorical, digitally enhanced false presentations by Hawking and others on the National Geographic TV Channel and other channels in order to distract from the central facts of theoretical astrophysics as presented herein and in order to try to keep the masses confused from every conceivable angle. Because of what amounts to a provocation, namely the recent onslaught of Big Lie “science” bombarding the TV airways, it behooves this writer to further refute the lies being hawked by Stephen Hawking and his NASA cronies. Hawking falsely claims: “there are wormholes everywhere in the 3 dimensional world and they exist also in the fourth dimension, where they exist at one billion trillionth trillionth of a centimeter! Trust me!” Right! Hawking tells us that “wormholes form in the so-called ‘quantum foam,’” where supposedly he can avoid violating Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle and other laws and paradoxes which do not permit backwards time travel. See above. But Hawking cannot avoid the uncertainty principle and the paradoxes which prevent backwards “time travel” either by “wormholes” or by any other means! And he knows it! ”Quantum foam” is supposedly a description of subatomic spacetime turbulence at extremely small distances of the order of the Planck length. At such small scales of time and space the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle supposedly allows particles and energy to briefly come into existence, and then annihilate, without violating the law of conservation of mass and energy! But then Hawking bizarrely claims: “scientists will eventually capture and ENLARGE a worm hole a trillion times to be large enough for a space ship…to travel at 99% the speed of light…after 6 years in flight,” supposedly to get up speed. (See below.) A totally bizarre and ridiculous assertion in itself!
At the enlarged size we must assume then that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and all Laws of Physics and the paradoxes WILL once again apply and prevent backwards time travel. Presto, no backward time travel for Stephen Hawking! Hawking is finally forced to concede that going backwards in time is not possible because cause and effect would be reversed, which is not possible. In addition to this most obvious paradox of causality, two other irresolvable problems in backward time travel exist: 1.) Traveling backwards in time would also violate the law that the mass-energy of the Universe must remain constant, within the limits of the uncertainty principle. For example, a person traveling backwards in time would increase the mass of the universe at that point, which is not possible. 2.) Traveling backward in time would also cause a decrease in the Universe’s entropy, which always increases at a nonnegative rate. Forward time travel on the other hand generates no other paradoxes and is described by Special and General Relativity but is not practical in reality.
Forward time travel in a practical sense is also not really possible. Hawking, however, insists it is supposedly possible if in order to reach a speed close enough to the speed of light in order to achieve the objective, a rocket ship course is set for just a little off center of the Supermassive Black Hole at the Center of the Milky Way Galaxy (!?), or a course is set to travel around the Earth for 6 years finishing at 99% the speed of light (somehow), which would supposedly allow travel 100 years into the future. As noted previously, mass becomes infinite at the speed of light and even well before the half-way point is reached the increased MASS of Hawking’s spaceship would indubitably prevent its further acceleration even if primitive rocketry were replaced by a UFO-type engine. Hawking describes his “spaceship” as “HUGE, because of all the FUEL it would have to carry,” (Think oil companies drilling into the future!) and is actually pictured as the typical cumbersome, multiple-defense-contract, primitive rocket powered NASA-inspired aerodynamically-ridiculous, Star Trek-type science fiction movie vehicle! Never even a mention of a nuclear powered flying saucer with the electromagnetic anti-gravity engine, which would be required for any interstellar voyages! All things considered it is time to wise up! Stephen Hawking is NOT a genius in any sense of the word. His false propaganda musings also demonstrate that his general knowledge and even his scientific knowledge outside of mathematics is actually very, very limited! We are left to fawn over such nonsense.
A Further Note on Michio Kaku:
It is a rule of statecraft that a government control and operate its own “opposition.” In the United States, the center of world capitalism-imperialism, the capitalist dictatorship controls the leadership of all supposed “left,” “socialist” or “Communist” political groups and parties. In addition, the capitalists also control the leaderships of all conspiracy groups and single-issue groups where the solutions are always based on the number one Big Lie of capitalism, i.e. that capitalism can be reformed, which it cannot. Single-issue groups represent divide (and conquer) of various political issues/problems most of which are created or perpetuated by capitalism, none of which are properly connected and linked to the need for a Socialist Revolution in the United States. Kaku began his political career by being placed at the front of the single-issue Anti-Nuclear Movement. Kaku began his work in the “intelligence community” in the early 1960’s just out of high school as a mathematical whiz kid, by becoming a protégé of Edward Teller, the “father of the Hydrogen Bomb” and the Neutron Bomb, the latter which is designed to kill people primarily while leaving property (private property!) intact, the ultimate capitalist weapon.
A person or group is defined politically by what the person or group says and what it does not say and by what the person or group does and does not do. Unlike Stephen Hawking, Kaku’s words and actions, in addition to his history, clearly identify him as a political police agent provocateur. (See below.) Kaku worked with Teller at the Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley Radiation Laboratory, which is directly connected to both the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Kaku undoubtedly had top-secret clearance from Edward Teller and moved freely between all three and has stated that at the time he was involved with developing the next stage of nuclear weapons research with Teller. Kaku claims that in the early 1980’s he gave up a career in nuclear weapons design and was “attracted to the peace movement and anti-nuclear movement” supposedly “because of Pacifica radio programs” he heard in the 1960’s. Oy! Right! I don’t believe you!
The truth is that the U.S. “intelligence community” needed a young loyal, glib, supposedly “anti-nuclear” authority figure as a counter-insurgent (political police agent) to help keep the Anti-Nuclear Movement anti-Communist and help lead it to defeat and recruited Kaku, undoubtedly with Teller’s recommendation, immediately putting him in front of the demonstrations at Columbia University against the Triga Reactor on campus in the wake of the Three-Mile Island meltdown, his debut attended by this writer at that first demonstration. (When the U.S. Department of Energy converted the fuel in Triga reactors from uranium zirconium hydride to low-enriched uranium a meltdown became possible at the university setting, which had been virtually impossible previously.) Note also that there is an apparent difference between Michio Kaku and Stephen Hawking: Though their positions more or less coincide, Hawking is apparently motivated by personal aggrandizement and his desire to be awarded a Nobel Prize (for what Stephen…for COOPERATING?), while the media, an arm of the “intelligence community” provides maximum exposure to all of his fantastical, reactionary and genuinely unscientific theories/imaginings, in multiple full-hour TV shows on the “Discovery Channel,” for example. Michio Kaku also heads up the same full-hour TV shows but his reactionary political role on the other hand more easily identifies him as a highly motivated political police agent, whose background and objectives are explained above. They both play a negative role.
Almost immediately Kaku sold out his supposed anti-nuclear “credentials” by writing a 1982 book with the title “Nuclear Power: Both Sides,” (!) which presented arguments against nuclear power followed by false “arguments” for nuclear power in order to keep the option of nuclear power viable! The book does NOT emphasize the BOTTOM LINE OF NUCLEAR POWER UP FRONT,: namely that nuclear power produces permanently non-disposable nuclear waste which will eventually get back into the environment through ground water, etc! Nuclear waste can NEVER EVER be disposed of! Period! Thus, there can be NO VIABLE HONEST PRO-NUCLEAR POSITION! This is what Kaku soft peddles! On February 4, 2010 Obama, by Bush-style executive decree, ordered that a new nuclear reactors should be built using $54 billion of stimulus money under the Big Lie false claim that nuclear power, which produces the dirtiest, most dangerous and totally non-disposable nuclear waste, was now supposedly “clean energy.” (!) While the U.S. government-led “Anti-Nuclear Movement” remained silent! By executive decree Obama also ordered stimulus money to fund (non-existent) “clean coal” and drilling for oil off the U.S. coastline which has destroyed all marine life and completely polluted the nations beaches as the capitalist dictatorship has already done in the Gulf of Mexico! Demonstrating that the capitalist dictatorship has NO intention whatsoever of trying to reverse Global Warming its response has been to continue and intensify the drilling and mining for all fossil fuels, which is the reason Global Warming has occurred in the first place!
It should also be noted that Kaku was trained in the infantry and was all set to be deployed to Viet Nam just “when the war ended” in 1975, while his fellow inductees were sitting down on the wharfs in San Francisco and refusing to even get into the troop ships while a MUTINY broke out in Vietnam, which forced the total evacuation of all U.S. forces within days and hours, while our little patriot Kaku was all raring and ready to go and fight those dastardly Communists in Viet Nam. Anti-Communism remains Kaku’s primary political motivation. Kaku hides the fact that a million-strong Communist movement in the United States was the only thing which forced FDR to formulate the New Deal Social Programs, which the capitalist dictatorship under Obama is now trying to abolish in practice. In order to begin to abolish the function of Social Security, i.e. to keep older people alive, one of the first things Obama did was to terminate permanently for all practical purposes the Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) for Social Security on April 22, 2009, while previously forcing banks to accept $4.7 Trillion (!) for “bank bailouts” in order to divert that money from social programs, which is the same objective of Reagan/Bush /Obama Supply Side Trickle Down, Tax-Cut Economics. Pretending to “spar with the Republicans over how to revive the ailing economy” is designed to provide Obama “left” cover while hiding the fact that the only “solution” discussed, SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS, was designed as a trick to divert money from social spending. See: “The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed” by David Stockman, Reagan’s Economic Czar. Under the threat of a million-strong Communist Movement in the United States, Keynesian deficit spending of 37% of GDP was used by FDR during the New Deal and WWII created large-scale public jobs programs which in turn stimulated DEMAND, the engine of the economy. That alone lifted the U.S. out of the Great Depression and remains the only capitalist solution to the present Depression. Also needed is a Progressive Tax Structure, which will never happen under capitalism because of its One-Way Development Sequence. Instead the Bush Tax Cuts have been extended and Social Security Taxes suspended in order to get rid of Social Security.
On July 5, 2010 on BBC TV Kaku totally exposed himself as a neo-creationist similar to Francis Collins Obama’s new head of the NIH (see below) and Stephen Hawking! Kaku let his political-religious motives all hang out in a response to a BBC report about the Plank Telescope. Kaku falsely claimed that Plank maps showed “the speed of light was exceeded in the Big Bang explosion due to dark energy,” which would violate the Special Theory of Relativity and is a total lie (see above), then claimed that the Planck Telescope will be looking for evidence of “worm holes,” “multiverses“ and “space time foam” (AKA “Quantum Foam”) now heavily pushed by the discredited Stephen Hawking, NASA and Kaku in an attempt to supplant quantum mechanics with String and M-Theory. Although he tried to cover himself saying: “this is all controversial,” Kaku openly identified himself as a neo-creationist: “We want to find the explanation for the creation, the Genesis, of the Universe.” Hawking’s new claim of “spontaneous creation” is also a total fraud. The origin of matter is an unknowable! (See below.)
The misnamed, so-called “intelligence community” of the U.S.-led World Dictatorship of Millionaires and Billionaires is using Michio Kaku, his NASA cronies and apparently Stephen Hawking to try to take over physics and science from the inside and “the top” and make neo-creationism the default belief taught in physics and science courses in the schools, colleges and universities. In addition to trying to supplant Relativity and Quantum Mechanics the dictatorship is also attempting to supplant the Standard Model of the Theory of the Big Bang with the magically fraudulent, so-called “Theory of Inflation,” or “inflationary epoch,” which falsely depends on properties of elementary particles not accounted for in the standard big bang models, plus fictitious “dark energy.” Supposedly about 10-35 seconds after the Big Bang “dark energy,” which they interchangeably label “vacuum energy,” suddenly appeared from nowhere and as a consequence of this “vacuum energy” gravitation supposedly became “repulsive for a period of about 10-32 seconds.” (!) During this period the Universe supposedly expanded from a “single point smaller than an atom” or “a volume that was only a few centimeters across (!)” (take your pick) increasing its size scale by about a factor of 1050. (!) Totally ridiculous! There was NO sudden “inflation of the time-space continuum”! The purpose of this attempt to inject “dark energy sudden expansion” is to promote magical and superstitious religious belief—not science—and to fraudulently reduce the actual age of the Universe in accordance with the objective of the so-called “Key Project” to try to refute the Big Crunch and Big Bang/Big Crunch Cyclic Nature of the Universe. (See below.)
The Standard Model of the Big Bang is based on detailed estimations of temperature change, energy density and thermal equilibrium, statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics and relativity. Not violations of Relativity! The Standard Model of the Big Bang describes a sudden explosion/expansion during the first 3 minutes when matter was dominant but where elementary particles inter-converted with radiation according to Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity: E=mc2. That explosion/expansion continued during a period where radiation dominated, which lasted for 700,000 years, or “absolute time units,” during which the Universe was opaque. When the temperature fell from 100 million degrees Centigrade to 3,000 degrees Kelvin matter again became dominant and the Universe first became transparent to radiation. Actual star formation probably could not have begun before about 1 billion years. The reality is that the Big Bang could at no time have proceeded faster than the speed of light! See: “The First Three Minutes” Steven Weinberg 1977, Basic Books, New York. But even Weinberg considers “Genesis” to be an important issue and moreover displays virtually no knowledge or understanding of Black Holes supposedly and provides a false description of the Big Crunch, an explanation which he strongly discourages, and where Black Holes receive no mention whatever and presumably play no part. (!)
Apparently in reaction to having Michio Kaku & Co. exposed all over the Internet as a falsifier of basic theoretical astrophysics, etc., the misnamed “intelligence community” has given Kaku a huge media pump and put him front and center on U.S. government network news programs, where Kaku has made the brazen assertion that the Large Hadron Collider will “prove the existence of string theory and parallel universes”! Then on July 22, 2010, Kaku and his retinue on the “History Channel,” promising to “boggle your mind” (!) pulled out all the stops going for broke and coming on like exultant gangbusters, intensified their push of fraudulent “string theory” and now “membrane theory” (!) and their denial of Relativity (Special Theory and General Theory) and Heisenberg.
The Truth About Unidentified Flying Objects
UFOs (Flying Saucers) and Extraterrestrial Life:
At the risk of sensationalizing the Materialist Analysis of Theoretical Astrophysics this writer and many colleagues believe that is important to respond to and put into proper perspective the U.S. Government’s official position on: 1.) UFOs, and 2.) Extraterrestrial life, 3.) The consistently hostile portrayal of both by the media/entertainment industry, which is simply an arm of the U.S. Government’s dishonestly labeled brainwash operation known as the “intelligence community.” (See above.) This includes the most recent attack on “aliens” by Stephen Hawking, who is increasingly discredited among scientists but still heavily hyped by the capitalist dictatorship as he becomes more bizarre in his pronouncements, for reasons explained above. First of all, it is important to restate one of the fundamental Rules of Statecraft, namely that a government control and operate its own “opposition.” Within the capitalist dictatorship this applies not only to political parties and organizations as explained above but also to virtually every important issue and of course includes the hot topic of UFOs and extraterrestrial life. Note that despite an enormous effort to deny it the June 8, 1908 Tunguska explosion in Siberia was a nuclear explosion equal to 30 million tons of TNT and is further proof of the existence of UFOs. In addition, the cylindrical fireball made 2 right-angle turns and exploded at between 2 to 3 miles altitude, and at ground zero left fused particles of magnetite, germanium (used in semiconductors) and silicate globules with traces of copper (possibly from wire), cobalt and nickel, not present in meteorites or comets. Ground zero precisely resembled ground zero at Hiroshima. In addition, the enormous heat of the explosion melted the permafrost in the Taiga and created several small lakes. There was NO loss of life in the explosion apparently because those in the flying saucer knew the area was uninhabited. See the deliberately obscurely entitled “The Fire Came By” by Baxter and Atkins, Doubleday 1976. At 5:11 PM on December 9, 1997 over the uninhabited southern tip of Greenland another “fireball,” a nuclear powered UFO, exploded at about the same height as in Tunguska and was “so bright as to turn night into day at a distance of 60 miles, and can be compared to the light of a nuclear explosion in the atmosphere.” New York Times, December 19, 1997, Page A17.
It is a fact that ever since the film “The Day The Earth Stood Still” appeared in 1951 starring Michael Rennie, Patricia Neal and Sam Jaffe, where UFOs and alien life are portrayed favorably (see below), all portrayals by the capitalist dictatorship of alien life have been hostile and/or maximally dishonest. The reason is that the overwhelming majority of people on this planet already believe that UFOs exist and many have seen flying saucers themselves. But the U.S.-led world capitalist dictatorship will NEVER EVER officially acknowledge the presence of UFOs and will always deny their existence because by so doing they would be openly admitting that the present “civilization” on Earth is a low-level inferior civilization, which more advanced civilizations REFUSE TO MAKE ANY OFFICIAL CONTACT WITH! Acknowledging the existence of UFOs (flying saucers) would immediately also raise that crucial question of WHY the more advanced civilizations, which have solved the problem of space travel between stars, do NOT contact the governments of Earth. The reason is elementary and it is fundamental.
The Rule of Advanced Civilizations Never to Contact Lower Civilizations:
It is obviously a Rule of Advanced Civilizations never to make direct or official contact with a lower civilization defined as 1.) A civilization which has not advanced to World Socialism, which is the only way to permanently abolish the basis of all war on that planet as well as all threats to visiting civilizations and 2.) A civilization that officially denies the existence of UFOs and simultaneously expresses NOTHING but hatred, fear and hostility directed at UFOs and extraterrestrial life in its “popular culture,” e.g. films. 3.) A civilization which has not developed the nuclear powered electromagnetic anti-gravity engine which is used to power travel between stars. Obviously no advanced civilization which has visited Earth would even dream of making official contact with such a civilization which now fulfills ALL of the above criteria and represents nothing but potential danger to them. Such an advanced civilization could never share ANY scientific information with such a lower civilization, such as the mechanism of the electromagnetic anti-gravity engine because lower civilizations, which have not reached the stage of World Socialism are fundamentally based on war, mass murder, crime and subjugation to steal new resources and new markets to increase private profits, and would immediately turn around and attack the advanced civilization. This is a no-brainer and we have to give the advanced civilization credit for some brains. The government uses “Alien abduction” claims to discredit UFO reports in general but they may have some truth.
The United States government and other governments control virtually all information on UFOs. This includes virtually the entire Internet! With one exception observed by this writer, it is noteworthy that in this age of super high quality cell phone cameras with video capabilities, that there is NOT even one good photograph or video of a UFO publicly available. The exception was a short video, which appeared on RT Russian Television in the United States suddenly at the end of a news broadcast approximately 2 years ago (2008) and was BLIPPED one time only. The very clear video was of a UFO from a very short distance of no more than about 50 yards. There was no mistaking what it was and RT Russian Television provided no commentary. The Russian Federation was obviously tweaking their U.S. “partners” and naturally there was no comment by the U.S.
It is absolutely certain that all UFOs come from within out own galaxy because the nearest other galaxy is Andromeda, which is 2,500,000 light years away, a distance so great that it would completely rule out intergalactic travel. The descriptions of the extraterrestrials from the July 1947 Roswell, New Mexico UFO crash describe very thin humanlike individuals somewhat smaller than humans with bilateral symmetry and large heads. Other reports concur with this description. The reason that they are so thin is due to calcium loss from the bones over generations of space travel. These advanced civilizations undoubtedly also use suspended animation during their very long interstellar journeys and/or employ in vivo telomerase to permanently halt all aging. Evolution rules out entirely the fantastical forms of extraterrestrial life imagined by Stephen Hawking apparently inspired by other U.S. government-approved science fiction writers, including those who were responsible for the film “Independence Day,” etc. See below. Such increasingly crazed statements by people such as Stephen Hawking are thus also a direct attack on Evolution. Regarding speed of interstellar travel: mass becomes infinite as one approaches the speed of light. This would limit in a very practical sense the speed of interstellar travel to perhaps half the speed of light at most if that. That is still very fast and their actual velocity is probably much less actually. Those who set out on such missions from other planets know that they will never return because the distances are so vast. They are comparable to Lewis and Clark type exploratory expeditions. They would make their reports over the years, which would travel at the speed of light but would still take a long time to reach home.
Any and all supposed threats to “invade Earth,” “drain its resources” and/or “colonize Earth” are entirely false and fictitious. The movie “Independence Day” was made to refurbish U.S. patriotism/jingoism and incite hatred of all “aliens” and most certainly does not concur with the descriptions in all previous reports of UFOs and of extraterrestrial life dating back for millennia. Note that even the Back to Africa Movement of Marcus Garvey could never have been accomplished because of the huge increase in the number of Black people in the U.S. since the advent of slavery. Colonizing and taking over an inhabited planet is thus sheer total nonsense. The “attempts” by NASA, etc. to “launch space probes to contact aliens” are just going through the motions and are just another denial of the fact that UFOs have been documented to have visited the Earth for millennia according to primitive drawings on the walls of caves and later depictions in other societies. No advanced civilization would want to advertise its presence to lower civilizations because of the threat described above, so even the giant Arecibo Radiotelescope in Puerto Rico is unlikely to detect presence of advanced “aliens.”
The capitalist dictatorship uses every conceivable thing possible, even the threat of future invasions of aliens or rogue asteroids to try to generate the MASS PSYCHOLOGY OF CRISIS, which causes the masses to rally around and increase trust in the government no matter how oppressive and irresponsible it is, with the expectation that it will protect them. Incidentally, the strategy to divert even rather large asteroids has already been worked out in detail but is rarely mentioned in order to maintain as much fear and foreboding as possible, and simply involves detonating a nuclear device to the side of the asteroid, not on it, in order to divert it, not shatter it into multiple pieces, which would otherwise all be directed at Earth. Note that the so-called “War on Terror” is also designed to generate the Mass Psychology of Crisis in providing the pretext to maintain capitalism in its Final Stage of Permanent War and State Terrorism. If Islamic Fundamentalism did not exist it would have to be invented, because it is perfect for organizing and manipulating Mass Provocations as the pretext for the so-called War on Terror. Under Islam the only solution to U.S. aggression is a bomb NEVER Socialism. (See below)
On the other hand the capitalist dictatorship reveals that it has no intention whatsoever of protecting the World from Global Warming now at the stage of the Runaway Greenhouse Effect, as it steps up drilling for oil and destroys all life and ecosystems in the Gulf of Mexico, now a Dead Sea! At a point where the oil economy should have been ended and the fossil fuel industry shut down—which can only be done after a Socialist Revolution, the Obama regime, working with the Federal Court system which it pretends to “oppose,” has allowed deep water oil drilling to continue in almost 4000 other sites in the Gulf of Mexico (!) and has DECREED that later HE (Obama) will extend the same deep water drilling into the Atlantic Ocean all along the Eastern Seaboard where the seas are much rougher. If Obama was serious, which he is NOT, he would permanently stop all deep-water drilling on the basis of National Security! There will be more deep-water oil well blowouts. That is INEVITABLE! TIDAL POWER (tidalelectric.com), the only alternative energy source which can actually supplant fossil fuels for all uses except jet travel is never mentioned by Obama, Greenpeace (controlled, fake “opposition”) and the oil companies who propose wind and solar because they know those sources can not supplant oil! Mandating a change from incandescent to fluorescent light bulbs is NOT simply a case of going through the motions. The Obama Regime knows very well that the bulbs contain the poisonous element Mercury and are easily broken and will also increase the death rate and help to reduce the population, a primary objective of the Obama Regime. For example, Bush in his wildest dreams could never ever have pushed through the Obama “Healthcare Overhaul,” which was opposed by 58% of the American people and turns ALL of healthcare over to the insurance industry, while cutting $500 Billion from Medicare/Medicaid, the textbook definition of a scam, which is DESIGNED TO INCREASE HEALTHCARE RATIONING and bring people to an earlier death. End-Stage Capitalism is destroying the planet Earth while the masses presently remain neutralized. Capitalism is totally irresponsible and must be replaced by Socialism!
February 27th, 2011 at 2:25 am
Part 3 of 3:
The Statecraft: Why the Capitalist Dictatorship
Wants the Masses to Believe in God:
The bottom line is that the capitalists want the masses to believe in a god—any god—even though there is no scientific basis whatsoever to support belief in a god (Precisely the opposite!)—because, to the extent that they believe in god, those who do believe in god believe that what happens in the world, including both natural events and political events, happens according to god’s will! The reality is that natural events occur due to the natural laws of science, physics and evolution, and what happens in world political events is due primarily to the decisions and actions of the U.S.-led world capitalist dictatorship, which still dominates world events! In the mind of the believer, god and the capitalist dictatorship—the capitalist government—become one! The capitalist government becomes god in the mind of the believer! This is pretty strong stuff and is what Karl Marx meant when he described religion as the opiate of the masses. Such false belief in god blunts the thrust for revolutionary change. Revolutionary change requires an absolutely scientific, objective and logical analysis of political events, political contradiction and political history, in order to learn how to carry out effective social change, meaning Socialist Revolution here in the United States the center of capitalism and worldwide!
Michio Kaku and the So-Called “History Channel” Establishment
Cover Up the Fact that Einstein’s First 3 Papers in 1905
Were a Collaborative Effort With His Wife, Mileva Maric!
It should be mentioned that Michio Kaku and several others in typical sexist fashion in a 2-hour report on Albert Einstein on the so-called “History Channel” covered up through lies of omission the irrefutable fact that Einstein’s wife Mileva Maric made substantial contributions to Einstein’s first 3 papers in 1905, his miracle year, and that her name was on all 3 papers which were first submitted according to the Russian scientist, Abraham Joffe, who saw the signatures of both Einstein and Mileva Einstein-Marity (Marity is a Serbian form of Maric) on the original copies of the those papers. Maric’s name was later removed from all the originals to hide her contributions in keeping with the sexism of that time when women could not even vote and were deemed to be mere chattels. Mileva Maric’s contributions are specifically mentioned in 13 of the 43 of Einstein’s love letters to Maric, those which were not destroyed. Thirteen of those letters contained statements which referred to her research or to their ongoing collaborative effort. The most likely reason for the destruction of the other letters was of course to hide the fact that those 3 historic 1905 papers were in fact a collaborative effort. See: http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/mileva.htm and http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep4/ep4maric.htm as well as a very determined and disparaging attack of Mileva Maric at: http://www.esterson.org/milevamaric.htm, which is nevertheless refuted by the actual facts.
Later in 1914 when they moved to Berlin, and after Einstein had had his macho ego pumped up through the roof by Max Planck and others, Einstein actually tried to get Mileva to sign an onerous document, apparently a provocation designed to drive her away, which was rejected by Maric, which would have reduced her to a virtual slave in her own house! Kaku and the other “experts” of the establishment also cover up the fact that Einstein initially lacked the mathematics to formulate the General Theory of Relativity. Einstein had to be tutored in differential geometry for over a year by his longtime friend and colleague Marcel Grossman, who had attended the classes which Einstein had skipped, before he was able to formulate the mathematical proof of the General Theory of Relativity. The bottom line here is that Einstein was an intuitive astrophysicist, not an experimental astrophysicist and as such would undoubtedly have needed and benefited enormously from the relationship he had with his physicist wife, Mileva Maric, to confirm his ideas and to hear alternative points of view which the surviving letters from Einstein to Mileva indicate he incorporated into his first 3 papers from 1905. Einstein was not a god and had help all along the way.
The Fact that Einstein’s Brain Was Structurally Different Helped
But Was Not Determinative in his Contributions to Theoretical Physics!
The 1985 study of Einstein’s brain by Marian C. Diamond (see below) revealed that Einstein had more glial cells relative to neurons only in the left inferior parietal area, Brodmann’s area 39, where the difference was statistically significant. The parietal lobes of the brain form the association area of the brain. In this area Einstein possessed a significantly greater number of both astrocytes and oligodendroglia (oligodendrocytes) glial cells. Glial cells provide support and nutrition to the neurons, the brain cells—the grey matter. The number of glial cells increases with age given a normal blood circulation and increases up the evolutionary ladder. Astrocytes are the most numerous glial cells and fill the space between neurons by enveloping synaptic junctions in the brain, thereby restricting the amount of neurotransmitter molecules which have been released. Astrocytes have special proteins in their membranes which actively remove neurotransmitters from the synaptic cleft. In addition, Astrocytes also possess neurotransmitter receptors just like nerve cells, which allow them to most efficiently coordinate their metabolism with the neurons. Astrocytes also absorb extra-cellular potassium ions which build up as the result of neuronal metabolism, as well as absorbing other substances which can interfere with nerve cell function. They cushion the brain and permit a more complex brain structure as their numbers increase. Oligodendroglia cells, like Schwann cells in the peripheral nervous system, form myelin layers around the neuronal axons (fibers) which insulates the neuronal axons in the brain, and thereby participate in neuronal signal transmission. Larger numbers of glial cells supply more energy for neural circuits. Microglia, which function as phagocytes to remove the debris of dead or degenerating nerve cells and glial cells, were not included in the study. Supposed criticism of Diamond’s study, namely that Diamond and a colleague had previously discovered that a rat in an enriched environment developed more glial cells in each neuron than its counterpart in an impoverished area is totally irrelevant to her findings in Einstein’s brain.
Einstein’s Association Area Was 15% Larger Than Normal
The left inferior parietal cortex is part of the association area which was 15% larger in Einstein’ brain due to the fact that Einstein’s brain lacked a complete Sylvian (lateral) fissure, which in Einstein’s brain did not extend posteriorly past the horizontal Central Sulcus of Rolando, which in all brains separates the frontal cortex from the parietal association area. Normal extension of the Sylvian fissure posterior to this point separates the temporal and parietal lobes of the brain. The lack of the Sylvian fissure in Einstein’s brain significantly expanded his parietal association area, while decreasing the size of the temporal lobe involved with speech: Einstein did not speak until he was 3 years old and had difficulty forming sentences. (The inferior parietal region is responsible for mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement.)
The glial study was performed by Marian C. Diamond at the University of California (Experimental Neurology, Vol. 88, pages 198-204 (1985). The gross study of Einstein’s brain was only published in 1999 (!) in the Lancet, Volume 353, Issue 9170, Pages 2149 – 2153, 19 June 1999. In addition, this citation and all the authors: Sandra F. Witelson, Debra L. Kigar and Thomas Harvey are censored by Medline, Pub Med, etc. This article is not listed under any of the authors of the study and Internet search engines deliberately misdirect people to a letter in the Lancet which appeared only many months later: The Lancet, Volume 354, Issue 9192, Page 1822, 20 November 1999. The reason that these studies were published so long after Einstein’s death in 1955 was because his brain was so completely different in appearance and structure lacking the posterior extension of the Sylvian fissure. This finding had NEVER ever been reported previously in all the annals of anatomical literature. Because of the fact that it was only 10 years after the end of World War II when Einstein died it was feared that release of the autopsy findings of Einstein’s brain at that time would provide a further basis for anti-Semitism, with the cry going out that “Jews are not like other humans! They are aliens! Look at Einstein’s brain! It’s not the same as that of other people!” While it is true that Einstein may have had an advantage by his brain anatomy both at the histological and gross levels, it is very unlikely that he would have made his contributions without the input of Mileva Maric his fellow-astrophysicist wife and his friend Marcel Grossman as documented above.
The Gutkind Letter Documents that Einstein was an Atheist!
Einstein’s Response to Strong Criticism by Soviet Scientists
Documents that by May 1949 Einstein was a Communist!
Einstein revealed very clearly and in no uncertain terms he was an atheist in his January 3, 1954 letter to Eric Gutkind, the Jewish philosopher, who had sent him a copy of his book Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. The letter was sold for $404,000 at auction on May 15, 2008 by Bloomsbury Auctions in London and the relevant text was published in the British Guardian on May 13, 2008, and also in the New York Times on May 17, 2008. The published section states:
… The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything ‘chosen’ about them.
In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the privilege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one. And the animistic interpretations of the religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolization. With such walls we can only attain a certain self-deception, but our moral efforts are not furthered by them. On the contrary.
Now that I have quite openly stated our differences in intellectual convictions it is still clear to me that we are quite close to each other in essential things, i.e. in our evalutations [sic] of human behaviour. What separates us are only intellectual ‘props’ and ‘rationalization’ in Freud’s language. Therefore I think that we would understand each other quite well if we talked about concrete things.
With friendly thanks and best wishes
Yours, A. Einstein.
Many attempts have been made to falsely portray Einstein as someone who believed in god. The capitalist dictatorship media propagandists, and most recently especially the discredited professional liar Dennis Overbye, have been foremost in this effort. Even in the above-mentioned article in the New York Times Overbye tried to falsely attribute a belief by Einstein in “a personal god,” falsely stating that Einstein had said that he was “an agnostic” and “not an atheist.” This is entirely false! Einstein made no such statements and also never made the statement falsely attributed to him: “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” While Einstein’s did remark that “God does not play dice with the Universe” in response to Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, formulated by Heisenberg in March 1926, Einstein undoubtedly made that remark while his ideas on religion were still in formation. Einstein developed into an atheist and a Communist (Materialist). This is fully documented by Einstein’s own writings, and of course in the above letter to Eric Gutkind. See below!
In response to Einstein’s attempt to develop a theory of “One world Government” using the United Nations as a basis, Soviet scientists, Seigei Vavilov, A.N. Frumkin, A.F. Joffe and N.N. Semyonov wrote an Open letter in the Moscow New Times, November 26, 1947, criticizing “Dr. Einstein’s Mistaken Notions,” where they clearly explained that such a “one world government” would be simply a means by which all countries would submit to U.S. capitalist dictatorship. Einstein reacted to the very solid criticism by immediately writing a rejoinder to his Soviet colleagues entitled “A Reply to the Soviet Scientists” published in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, February 1948, where he lamely tried to defend his ideas and the United States. But by May 1949 Einstein had clearly done some re-thinking and completely reversed course! Einstein wrote: “Why Socialism” published in the Monthly Review, New York, (May, 1949) where he solidly backed Socialism and the Russian Revolution! Einstein finally showed that he understood that capitalism cannot be turned into Socialism and that a Socialist Revolution is necessary to create the change he envisioned. “Why Socialism” demonstrated that Einstein had begun to read Karl Marx, but unfortunately not Friedrich Engels’ Socialism: Utopian and Scientific or the works of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin), the architect and leader of the 1917 Russian Revolution, whose writings in The State and Revolution supplied most but not all of the answers to the practical questions Einstein raises at the end of the essay with regard to the Soviet Union: namely the problem of the bureaucracy. (See below for a brief explanation of this crucial problem and Analysis and Theses by this writer, of which this Materialist Analysis of Theoretical Astrophysics is only a small section, for a thorough consideration of the problems raised by Einstein and others.) No wonder Einstein was spied upon by J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI and no wonder Einstein was not permitted access to the Manhattan Project where the atomic bomb was developed, a project which he and Leo Szilard initiated with their August 2, 1939 letter to Franklin Delano Roosevelt recommending the building of an atomic bomb before the NAZIs did. All of the above-mentioned documents except the Einstein/Szilard letter are available in “Albert Einstein: Out of My Later Years” Revised Reprint Edition, Citadel Press, Secaucus, New Jersey 1956 and 1979.
The Question of the Soviet Bureaucracy under “Socialism” or “Communism.”
Einstein and all people want to know how to achieve a planned global economy based on human need not private profit. How do we limit or even abolish the bureaucracy? We first have to examine the real World View: Today we live in a world of nation states. All nation states are dictatorships of one class over another class, either the capitalist class over the working class or vice versa. (These are the only historically destined classes.) There is no “democracy” at the present time, not even for the capitalists. Capitalism has a dynamic of its own independent of the wills of the actual capitalists and capitalist politicians, which leads to Fascism, barbarism and finally the end of civilization. (See above.) Communism is a stateless society, which has never been practiced and can never be practiced until capitalism is abolished worldwide beginning with a Socialist Revolution at its center—the United States. Within the framework of the class dictatorship there can either be a hard or a soft dictatorship. The hard dictatorship of capitalism is known as Fascism, which has several historical variants. Today the United States is a military, bureaucratic police state, known as Rule by Decree (a form of Bonapartism), a step short of Fascism, which requires the organized support of the petit-bourgeoisie (the middle class), the organization of armed gangs with targeted scapegoats. U.S. leaders are Fascists because they support the ever-hardening capitalist dictatorship.
All Workers’ States are hard dictatorships in order to prevent internal and external attempts to restore capitalism. Stalin was not actually a Communist by practice. After being made General Secretary Stalin murdered Lenin by poisoning him (see detailed article by Soviet Academician Yegor Yakovlev in Moscow News, No 4 (3356), January 29-February 5, 1989), and murdered virtually all the living leaders of the Russian Revolution with the exception of Lenin’s wife whom he controlled. Thereafter Stalin rode the back of the Socialist Revolution and drew all his power from it and was compelled to defend it, but only to the extent necessary to keep himself in power. The class dictatorship which existed in the USSR was partly necessary in a world where world capitalism was waging a continuous war against it, and arose because of that existing global class war, but the dictatorship in the USSR was obviously unnecessarily overdone by Joseph Stalin and his political descendants. Even Lenin in his writings did not consider the reality that capitalism must be overthrown in its center, the United States, before actual Socialism and Communism can be achieved. In The State and Revolution Lenin describes how the bureaucracy is eliminated by direct election and immediate recall. But capitalism must be overthrown at its center before that is possible. At the point of overthrow of the capitalist dictatorship and the expropriation of all of their stolen wealth (the wealth of goods and services created by the Working Class) true democracy will finally exist. There will be no basis for the continued existence of the state which will begin to wither away, as explained in detail by Friedrich Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. Today that point is potentially closer than ever before despite the present widespread demoralization and brainwashing of the masses under capitalism. Please see previous analyses of this writer for the detailed explanation of the 1988 Soviet Surrender to the Threat of a Nuclear War (There was no “Collapse of the USSR!”) and how the Socialist Revolution should be organized and carried out in the United States. Capitalism offers a world with no future and now threatens the existence of all life on Earth.
The Scientific Basis of Atheism:
The Origin of Matter is an Unknowable!
The capitalist dictatorship would have the masses believe that there is no limit on humankind’s knowledge, that everything is knowable and that everything was created by “god.” But that is false; there is a limit on knowledge and there is no god. Because of the fact that we exist as part of the Universe we can not exit the Universe, stand outside it and declare that a god, much larger than we are naturally but of course in our own image, who naturally is usually white and always male, never female, created the Universe. The corollary is that the origin of matter is an unknowable! The false claim of supposed “wormholes” by the string theorists of course is a way to try to condition peoples’ minds to believe that they can do the opposite and exit the Universe, and is designed to set up the belief patterns for belief in god! (And while you’re at it, after you have exited the Universe don’t forget to check out “god,” he’s right over there. Right near that wormhole you just crawled out of, Michio Kaku!) Modern science has answered virtually all questions except one: the origin of matter. This is an unknowable. What is knowable is the cyclic nature of the Universe and the evolution of life, which is inevitable given basic necessary conditions. See below. Today religion and “god” continue to be invoked by the capitalist dictatorship to explain both the origin of life, matter and the existence of the Universe, rather than simply agreeing that certain things are unknowable. The reason is that the capitalist dictatorship uses religion to help control the masses as explained above.
The original basis for belief in god (multiple gods initially) and religion was due to humankind’s inability to explain natural events and life itself. Primitive society had to have an explanation for what could not yet be explained scientifically. The philosophy of antiquity was primitive, spontaneously evolved materialism (Engels), which found its expression in polytheism where various gods were invented in the minds of primitive peoples, which were thought to control different areas of life: There was a sun god, a moon god, a weather god(s) thought to control rain, thunder and lightning, a god for earthquakes, a god of the seas, a god for day, a god for night and in some societies a god to control almost every aspect of life. Polytheism however was incapable of clearing up the relation between mind and matter. As Engels explains: “the need to get clarity on this question led to the doctrine of a soul separable from the body, then to the assertion of the immortality of this soul, and finally to monotheism.” As humankind’s thought gradually advanced and natural events acquired scientific explanations, polytheism gave way to monotheism. The old materialism was therefore negated by idealism. But in the course of the further development of philosophy, idealism, too, has become untenable in a practical sense and has been negated by modern Dialectical and Historical Materialism, presently tightly suppressed by the capitalist dictatorship.
Prior to the development of modern materialism, which serves as the basis for this analysis, and existing simultaneously with its development, organized religion formed pacts with the existing power structures, pacts which have spanned the entire sequence of civilization from the primitive slave societies of Egypt, Greece and Rome to the feudalism-based monarchies of Europe to today’s rapidly hardening war-based capitalist dictatorship. When the French Monarchy and the nobility were overthrown in the French Revolution the Catholic Church was first rejected as a competing center of power but then embraced as indispensable by the bourgeoisie, which emerged victorious under Napoleon Bonaparte when it became clear that the peasantry, which had carried out the revolution could not organize or wield power. The bourgeoisie quickly realized that religion was necessary to help control the masses as under the Monarchy and signed the Concordat of 1801 that reestablished the Catholic Church in France but with reduced influence. This has continued into the modern day where the capitalist dictatorship uses the belief in god and religion to blunt the thrust for revolutionary change as explained above. NAZI Germany also signed the Reichskonkordat in 1933 with the Catholic Church and similar agreements with the protestant churches in Germany, which were an important step in international acceptance of the NAZIs. Today the capitalists work overtime to keep alive the belief in a “supreme being,” taking advantage of man’s arrogance and insistence to be able to explain everything. As mentioned above humankind cannot exit the Universe and is limited in this way.
In the same way the origin of matter is also thus unknowable. The scientific basis of atheism includes but is not limited to the knowledge of the Special Theory of Relativity, The General Theory of Relativity, The Theory of Quantum Mechanics, the Big Bang/Big Crunch Cycle of the Universe, the origin of life through the Primordial Soup Theory of Stanley Miller and Harold Urey and Darwin’s Theory of Evolution Through Natural Selection. This scientific basis of life and the Universe does not hold a place for a god. The capitalists’ propagandists try to keep the false idea of a god alive by claiming that science and religion are not incompatible. But they are entirely incompatible! There is no scientific basis for belief in a god and the religious Fascists know it very well. That is why they wage a continuous never-ending and ever-escalating battle against science in the classroom. The capitalists also front large organizations such as the John Templeton Foundation and the Stanford Templeton Research Institute for Nature, God and Science (STRINGS!) to try to reconcile religion and belief in god. The capitalist dictatorship has recently decided to push the theme of false unity of science and religion and belief in a god even more systematically with a TV series called “Closer to Truth: Cosmos. Consciousness. God,” which appears on the CUNY Channel, where they push the same disproved and discredited falsehoods already cited above such as “string theory,” “dark matter,” “dark energy,” “time travel” and “worm holes.” Good grief! Don’t be fooled for a second! This is simply creationism/intelligent design in disguise. It should be noted that the recent May 20, 2010 reported findings regarding the relationship of the 1% predominance of matter over anti-matter do not interfere in any way with this analysis or the Standard Model of Particle Physics.
As an example of the escalation of the attack on science and materialism by religion and reaction, the Obama Regime has appointed a Jesus Freak, a well-known evangelist/sophisticated creationism propagandist and vehement anti-materialist, Francis Collins, as the new head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which directs funding of the majority of medical/scientific research in the United States. Though he strongly denies it Francis Collins, who is a scientist, is also a NEO-CREATIONIST, who professes the most sophisticated form of INTELLIGENT DESIGN where he attributes all scientific laws and findings no matter how complex to “god”! (This is another example of the Law of Unity of Opposites, which in this case is weighted toward reaction.) Note that the courts have already decided the obvious, that “intelligent design” is simply a form of creationism in a highly publicized case: Kitmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp. 2d 707, M.D. Pa. 2005. Collins is also the author of “The Language of God,” which absurdly claims the Big Bang and evolution were created by “god” (!) and states: “science offers no answers to the most pressing questions of human existence.” (!) This is a very Big Lie! Officially the Director of the NIH supposedly has very little power with decisions about how to spend the $30 billion annual budget being made by a committee of scientists or by the 27 directors of the individual institutes and centers, but Collins was chosen BECAUSE of his religious beliefs not in spite of them in order to provide him a bully pulpit for his beliefs. NIH funding is ALREADY highly politicized with the most worthwhile projects routinely rejected while the most ridiculous projects receive full funding! And contrary to Collins’ claim, human illness and disease DO constitute “one of the most pressing questions of human existence.” Because of his religious orientation the capitalist dictatorship previously appointed Collins head of the Human Genome Project. Although his ideology did not prevent him from doing his job there, where there were NOT so many different funding choices as at the NIH (where they are also much harder to follow), his high position and bully pulpit so to speak puts him in the position of Hoodwinking Chief Advocate for his sophisticated form of neo-creationism/intelligent design! The Pope of the NIH!
Note that Collins has also written: “the claims of atheistic materialism must be steadfastly resisted.” But Collins provides no reason whatsoever why such materialist claims must be resisted. And even if the arguments for his claim were as plentiful as blackberries, Herr Collins would give us none of them. Collins presumably rejects all that is written above and herein because it exposes his superstitious ideology as a fraud! Collins also denies that the origin of matter is an unknowable, which it is. See above. Collins thus implies that HE can exit the Universe and see “god” and that “god” created the Universe when he states: “God stands outside of nature.” (!) How would he know? Collins appointment is one more example of the one-way dynamic of capitalism-imperialism. Never before has a creationism-propagandist, disguised or open, been appointed as head of NIH or to the Human Genome Project! The appointment of Collins represents an increase in reaction, an escalation in the capitalist dictatorships’ use of religion to befuddle the masses and emphasizes how important religion and superstition are to capitalist statecraft in order to keep the masses confused and brainwashed and further demonstrates the necessity for a Socialist Revolution in the United States!
Religious superstition can play no constructive role in either genuinely progressive thought or the process of organizing a Socialist Revolution in the United States. On the other hand the Socialist Revolution, while it does not support religion, permits no crushing of any religion nor does it not pit one religion against another as the capitalists do routinely as part of their strategy of divide and conquer, nor does it permit manipulating a religion to form the basis for the so-called “War on Terror,” the pretext used to keep capitalism in its Final Stage of Permanent War and State Terrorism. This is what the capitalists have done in Iraq and elsewhere as part of their strategy of divide and conquer. The future of religion will be determined by an open long-term debate over time in a revolutionary evolving society and the strength of scientific evidence in addition to the polemics carried out by proponents of all religions as well as the proponents of atheism and Dialectical and Historical Materialism.
NOTE: the following paragraphs precede the above paragraphs in the entire piece about Global Warming and are in the proper order as they appear in the Analysis and Theses.
The Runaway Greenhouse Effect has already occurred on Venus where all the CO2 is found in the 932 degrees Fahrenheit (500 degrees Centigrade) atmosphere. The water in the oceans of Venus, which were nearly the size of the oceans on Earth, all evaporated away very early because of the heat generated by the Runaway Greenhouse Effect caused by the fact that Venus receives 30% more sunlight than the Earth. The evaporating oceans finally boiled away completely after the temperature reached the temperature of the Venusian boiling point of water, the equivalent on Earth of a measly 212 degrees Fahrenheit—on its way to the present 932 degrees Fahrenheit! Once in the upper atmosphere ultraviolet radiation from the sun split the H20 apart into hydrogen, which disappeared into space and oxygen, which reacted with minerals on the surface and also disappeared from the atmosphere. The Evolution of Life is what prevented a Runaway Greenhouse Effect from occurring on Earth as it did on Venus! Life did not evolve on Venus because of the heat, with the consequence that there was no plant and animal life to absorb the gradual build-up of CO2 from volcanoes, the source of all carbon, which eventually formed the thick atmosphere which exists on Venus today, composed primarily of CO2 (96.5%) with the remainder nitrogen (3.5%) and other minor components expressed in a few parts per million, such as argon 70 ppm, carbon monoxide 17 ppm, helium 12 ppm, neon 7 ppm, plus a sulfuric acid cloud deck (sulfur dioxide—150 ppm) beginning at about 50 kilometers above the surface. In addition, there are only 20 parts per million of water vapor remaining from the huge oceans which once existed on Venus. On Earth the CO2 which was released into the atmosphere through volcanoes went into evolving vegetation and then animal life, which over hundreds of millions of years became deposited in the crust of the Earth as the fossil fuels coal and oil. There is no carbon found in the crust of Venus. That is how we know that life did not evolve on Venus! Today the frenzied burning of those fossil fuels here on Earth has resulted in having the huge amount of CO2 stored in them being released all at once into the atmosphere. The Earth’s carbon sinks, the Earth’s natural storage mechanisms for CO2—the rain forests other vegetation and the oceans—have a limit and are now being overwhelmed. As occurred on Venus billions of years ago, that process now appears to have reached the stage of the Runaway Greenhouse Effect here on Earth. Without a Socialist Revolution here in the United States, which is the only possible way to still reverse that process, the situation on Venus today will be the future of the Earth in the not so distant future. We are presently experiencing the beginning of that future. Life on Earth will become totally unlivable far before we arrive at the situation existing on Venus today.
The response of the capitalist dictatorship to the Global Warming and Runaway Greenhouse Effect has been to INTENSIFY the drilling and mining for fossil fuels, which is what has caused the Global Warming in the first place. The Obama Regime’s role is to go through the motions, try to assuage the fear of the masses and “fight climate change” with “cap and trade “ which simple perpetuates oil usage. While providing yet another false solution, so-called “fee and dividend” (see below), government-controlled false opposition figure James Hansen exposes cap and trade as a sham, “a market-based (capitalist) approach …which does little to slow global warming or reduce our dependence on fossil fuels,” but is designed to “allow polluters and Wall Street traders to fleece the public out of billions of dollars,” and “Because cap and trade is enforced through the selling and trading of permits, it actually perpetuates the pollution it is supposed to eliminate” pointing out that the total impracticality of cap and trade: “If every polluter’s emissions fell below the incrementally lowered cap, then the price of pollution credits would collapse and the economic rationale to keep reducing pollution would disappear.” Hansen’s scheme of “fee and dividend” calls for a gradually rising “carbon fee,” which would be the same as a value added tax (national energy sales tax) on all goods manufactured with fossil fuels. Which would then supposedly, according to Hansen, be “redistributed to the public.” (!) (New York Times, December 7, 2009) But Hansen wants us to believe in Santa Claus hiding the fact that the capitalist dictatorship is waging an accelerating economic war of extermination (“population reduction”) against the masses and would never RETURN a national sales tax! The capitalist dictatorship wants to impose a national energy tax in any case, which they have no intention of returning! (Billionaires pay only 27.9% on their first $106,800 of income and have drained us dry!)
The temperature on Earth does not have to rise very much to destroy all life. This may occur in a couple of hundred years at most if the fossil fuel industry is not shut down entirely. This is the reality which fake “opposition” figures such as James Hansen and Al Gore and Steven Chu deliberately hide, while they attempt to control the issue and lead it to defeat. As described elsewhere in the analysis of the Runaway Greenhouse Effect this process involves multiple positive feedbacks or vicious circles. The arctic sea ice normally reflects heat and light from the sun back into space, but this effect decreases as the ice is replaced by the darker sea water when the ice melts, which in turn absorbs more heat from the sunlight. This is known as the ice-albedo feedback or the ice-reflectivity feedback and is the most important feedback in the polar region. It was reported on NBC Evening News on May 13, 2009 that the polar ice may all be gone within 5 years. Because the North and South Poles act as thermostats for the planet removal of that thermostat may result in an abrupt increase in global warming making life much more difficult and increasing the melting of the ice on Greenland, raising sea levels much more rapidly.
In the 1951 science fiction/political film, The Day The Earth Stood Still, the Earth was visited by people in a flying saucer from a more advanced civilization which delivered an ultimatum at the end: “It is no concern of ours how you run your own planet, but if you threaten to extend your violence, this Earth of yours will be reduced to a burned out cinder. Your choice is simple: join us and live in peace, or pursue your present course and face obliteration. We shall be waiting for your answer. The decision rests with you.” The result of Earth being reduced to a burned out cinder is clearly not limited to war and peace or even nuclear war. Although it goes without saying that capitalism-imperialism, due to its internal dynamic as explained herein, automatically extends violence everywhere and even to outer space with its Star Wars Program, etc. (which has thankfully not yet been realized in practice), capitalism has also extended maximum violence to the environment, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico. The environmental reality, not science fiction, is that with the onset of the Runaway Greenhouse Effect the Earth is now on course to become a burned out cinder like Venus! Only a Socialist Revolution can avert this catastrophe! It is our right and it is our duty, according to The Declaration of Independence, to avert this catastrophe by ending the capitalist dictatorship in the United States through a Socialist Revolution.
The falsely labeled “Archaea” bacteria, tube worms, which have evolved to live at temperatures of up to 110 degrees Fahrenheit, and the hyperthermophilic bacteria, which have evolved to live at water temperatures of up to 239 degrees Fahrenheit will be the last life on Earth because of their ability to live at high temperatures.. (Incidentally, “Archaea” was falsely so-labeled in order to spread confusion in science and to try to undermine in one blow both Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and the irrefutable Primordial Soup Theory of Stanley Miller and Harold Urey of 1953, who demonstrated that the basic building blocks of life; amino acids, purines, pyrimidines and carboxylic acids can all be produced by running electrical sparks simulating lightning through the most-likely original reducing atmosphere of Earth composed of methane, ammonia, hydrogen and water vapor or steam. Later experiments by Miller demonstrated that the precise atmospheric mixture was not as important as the fact that it be a reducing atmosphere, meaning that it must contain NO free oxygen, because the compounds necessary for life, namely amino acids, purines and pyrimidines (required for the synthesis nucleotides required to form RNA and DNA) and carboxylic acids (required for the synthesis of lipids) cannot be produced in an oxidizing atmosphere! In addition, it has been reported that Jeffrey L. Bada, who was a graduate student of Stanley Miller, and Adam P. Johnson a graduate student at Indiana University visiting Bada’s laboratory on an internship, working with co-workers, have discovered 22 amino acids in the original samples from the Stanley Miller-Urey experiments, including 10 that had not been previously reported. (The Miller Volcanic Spark Discharge Experiment, Adam P. Johnson, Daniel P. Glavin, Antonio Lazcano and Jeffrey L. Bada, Science, 17, October 2008. page 404, Vol. 322, no. 5900, DOI: 10.1126 science. 1161527). See also The New York Times, October 17, 2008. In a 1996 interview Stanley Miller also revealed that he had been able to produce pyridines and purines by creating more concentrated pre-biotic “dry beach” conditions, which would have been present in lakes lagoons and beaches on the primitive Earth. From that point everything is very clear.
Natural Origin of Nucleotides Finally Solved while NASA Attacks Evolution!
As reported in the Nature Vol. 459 pp.239-242, May14, 2009 by Sutherland JD et al, the actual formation of ribosenucleotides proceeds from constituent parts of arabinose amino-oxazoline and anhydronucleoside intermediates rather than from free ribose and nucleobases, thus finally solving the problem of the natural origin of nucleotides. The starting materials for the synthesis were cyanamide, cyanoacetylene, glycoaldehyde, glyceraldehyde and inorganic phosphate, all of which are plausible prebiotic feedstock molecules. The conditions of the synthesis were consistent with potential early-Earth geochemical models as made clear in the study. Although inorganic phosphate is only incorporated into the nucleotides at a later stage of the synthesis, its presence from the start is essential as it controls 3 reactions in the earlier stages by acting as a general acid/base catalyst, a nucleophilic catalyst, a pH buffer and a chemical buffer, according to the study! In addition, because these reactions take place at moderate temperatures this study by Sutherland et al. supports the Primordial Soup theory of Stanley Miller and Harold Urey first proposed by Thomas Darwin himself, who in his 1871 letter to the botanist Joseph Hooker stated that he believed that life evolved “in some little warm pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts.” (!) Urey and Miller indubitably read this letter which motivated their work described above, which is ruthlessly ridiculed by the NASA creationists and their supporters and is not even mentioned by Nicholas Wade in the New York Times, May 14, 2008 reference article! Self-replicating RNA molecules are well known today and have been extensively studied and described in the major media and peer review journals. And DNA clearly evolved from RNA. There is no credible dispute. Problem solved. But the Big Lies just keep on coming!
NASA Has Genetically Engineered a Bacterium Forced to Grow With Arsenic
Substituted For Phosphorus as a Pretext to Make the Preposterous Claim that
Life Can EVOLVE NATURALLY with the Poisonous Element Arsenic in Order
To Falsely Justify Space Missions to Non-Life Bearing Celestial Bodies!
In an act of clumsy desperation, in a heavily-hyped paper in December 3, 2010 Science Express timed to appear on the same day as it was announced in the major media, e.g., The New York Times, where it was falsely announced as “a discovery,” NASA has proved (big deal!) ONLY that they can GENETICALLY ENGINEER a, bacterium, from the hypersaline and alkaline Lake Mono in California “with high dissolved arsenic concentrations (200uM!).” The bacterium which NORMALLY incorporates ONLY PHOSPHORUS into its DNA, RNA, proteins and cell membrane lipid structures while growing in that very lake, was genetically engineered to incorporate ARSENIC in these macromolecules by gradually increasing the concentrations of arsenic in the cell culture to astronomically higher levels (from 200 uM to 40 mM!) while totally eliminating PHOSPHORUS! This is called cell culture adaptation and was the genetic engineering method used by the U.S. Department of Biological Warfare to create the AIDS virus from the Visna-Maedi lentivirus (a sheep virus from Iceland), by gradually increasing the number of human T-4 lymphocytes in the cell culture of sheep T-4 lymphocytes. Actually the Visna-Maedi lentivirus was first adapted to bovine T-4 cells and then to human T-4 cells using this method, while being also fiendishly adapted to several other poor unsuspecting species (e.g., cats!) in order to give the false impression that lentiviruses are found normally in species other than ungulata (hoofed animals). They are not! This route can be proved through analysis of the proviral DNA for all 3 species!) Note that NASA’s genetically engineered bacterium in question, GFAJ-1, did NOT grow, much less EVOLVE starting with arsenic but with phosphorus and grew “considerably better” with phosphorus as the paper admits! A similar phony claim, scientifically disproved below, that life itself supposedly “evolved from submarine vents,” is also simultaneously hyped by same phony “experts”/provocateurs such as Michio Kaku on BBC TV and elsewhere. As proved below the falsely labeled “Archaea” itself represents an end point in evolution, not a beginning, and as demonstrated below could not possibly have been a starting point for the evolution of life. The New York Times article was written by professional liar Dennis Overbye in order to falsely shape the perception and significance of the NASA concoction, falsely claiming that the bacterium “Finds Arsenic Tasty and Delicious” (!) and ridiculously claimed a day earlier, December 2nd, that the genetically engineered organism “redefines life…using biochemical powers we have not yet dared to dream about.” Shudder! At the very end of the December 3rd NYT article contrary opinion appears, pointing out that the bacterium, GFAJ-1, is abnormally swollen to 60% normal size and hyper-vacuolated and the arsenate molecules that would make up the DNA backbone rather than phosphorus are unstable and would dissolve easily in water! But the Big Lie Technique is used to ram it home for NASA!
NASA also pushes the false “Theory of Panspermia” on the phony, so-called “History Channel” (July 2010) in order: 1.) to simultaneously attack evolution and 2.) to falsely justify primitive rocket trips to asteroids and other unlikely sources of life! In 1969 a carbonaceous meteorite fell in Murchison Australia which had a high concentrations of amino acids, about 100 ppm, found in the same pre-biotic experiments of Stanley Miller, proving that the early evolution of life is a constant which occurs throughout the universe given certain favorable conditions, NOT that life came to Earth from comets or asteroids from elsewhere—the so-called “Theory of Panspermia,” which is also fraudulently being passed off as a “theory of life.” Cosmic rays and the heat of entry into Earth’s atmosphere would have destroyed all life potentially surviving the near absolute zero temperature of interstellar or interplanetary space. The goal of these determined and deliberate falsifiers is to keep the masses confused on as many scientific matters and political matters as possible. Because a confused person cannot act! False analysis of one issue leads in turn to false analysis of another. In such a situation the masses are much more likely to think what they are told to think and to do what they are told to do by the capitalist dictatorship. Since 1969 incidentally numerous carbonaceous meteorites have revealed the presence of amino acids.
In falsely pushing “Panspermia” NASA, on the so-called “History Channel,” also claims that the water on Earth was delivered by asteroids and comets, a ridiculous assertion which is ruled out by isotopic and molecular ratio consideration. The solar system formed due to collapse of a large, cold slowly rotating nebular cloud of gas and dust into an accretion disk that defined the plane of the solar system. The terrestrial planets grew in this accretion disk bathed in a gas of Hydrogen, Helium and Oxygen (the latter from previous supernovae) with the dominant gas phases being H2, He, H20 and CO. There is a growing consensus never mentioned by NASA’s phony “experts” that terrestrial planets accreted “Wet.” What that means is that despite the fact that it was too hot for hydrous minerals to form, grains in the accretion disk did adsorb water vapor with multiple calculations using equilibrium thermodynamics showing that at least 2 Earth masses of water vapor existed within 3 AU (3 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun). The total amount of water in the Earth is approximately 10 Earth oceans, with most water being stored in minerals such as silicates. See: “Origin of water in the terrestrial planets” Michael J. Drake, Meteoritics & Planetary Science, Volume 40, Issue 4, Pages 515-656 (April 2005), pp. 519-527(9).
LIFE ALSO DID NOT EVOLVE AT SUBMARINE VENTS! Among the more recent false claims of evolution of life is the truly ridiculous claim that life supposedly “evolved at submarine vents” formed under the oceans where tectonic plates meet, for example the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. This Big Lie is being endlessly and relentlessly repeated on various phony “science” shows. But it is a fact that submarine vents don’t make organic compounds, they decompose them! These vents are one of the limiting factors on what organic compounds would exist in the primitive oceans. At the present time, the entire ocean goes through those vents in 10 million years. So all of the organic compounds are destroyed every ten million years. That places a constraint on how much organic material could accumulate. In addition, it also provides a time scale for the origin of life. If all the polymers and other compounds that evolve are continuously destroyed that means life would have to start early and evolve rapidly. Looking at the process in detail, it is clear that long periods of time would be detrimental, rather than helpful to this fraudulent, totally contrived and deliberately misleading so-called “theory” of the origin of life which was created, among other reactionary reasons (see below), in order to provide a false pretext for NASA to carry out extremely costly and entirely unnecessary and useless space ventures using the primitive form of space travel, rocketry, to outlying planetary satellites under the false pretext of “searching for life,” wherever there might be water (!) discovered by spectral analysis for example, in order to keep their jobs and obtain continued government funding and to serve as yet one more pretext to divert money from social spending. The NASA propagandists now ridiculously claim that “the only thing necessary for evolution of life is water because every drop of water on Earth contains some bacteria.” (National Geographic Channel, August 15, 2010). Note that on other shows shown simultaneously they absurdly try to supplant Evolution itself with Panspermia, while falsely pushing civilizations supposedly built on arsenic! (See above.)
The most recent bizarre “projects’ in this series are the Obama plans to send missions to asteroids (!) and trying to privatize—just like Bush—what should properly be part of the existing government, even after a Socialist Revolution in the United States! Privatization of government agencies reflects both the one-way dynamic of capitalism and its true inherent anarchy. Instead there should be a concerted attempt to develop (or back-engineer) the electromagnetic anti-gravity engine used by the UFO’s. This requires nuclear power and a structural material which is super-conducting at room temperature. That material exists and is known as the nanotube form of carbon, the hardest known material ever discovered, far harder than diamonds. (Note that the 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to 2 transplanted Russians for the discovery of a related carbon structure, graphene, with similar properties.) But it is highly likely that there is too much money invested in rocketry the most primitive form of space travel, which is backed by the oil industry, which has also just permanently destroyed the Gulf of Mexico from the bottom to the top for at least a hundred years while the oil industry demands to continue and expand deep water drilling!! This is further proof of the almost entirely one-way dynamic of capitalism, which is completely independent of the wills of the individual capitalists and politicians, a dynamic which leads to Fascism, barbarism and finally the end of civilization; and now with the advent of the Runaway Greenhouse Effect, the end of all life on Earth, which will not come in “a billion years when the sun expands” as falsely claimed but much, much earlier if capitalism is allowed to continue.
In the 1930’s a million strong Communist movement in the United States generated the pressure which forced Roosevelt to write the New Deal, 16 social programs which included the Social Security Act. Then and most recently on Public Television FDR was given credit for “saving capitalism.” From what? From a Socialist Revolution in the United States! It was that close! So the New Deal, which is just a dream today—instead we get the No Deal and the Bad Deal because there is now a zero Communist movement in the United States—was at that time actually just a BRIBE! So why did the Communist-led Working Class take that bribe? The reason was because of the deliberate misleadership of Josef Stalin. Stalin himself was not a Communist in practice. Stalin opposed taking state power in all votes taken even the night before the 1917 Russian Revolution. Stalin voted with Kamniev who always voted against. Stalin murdered Lenin, a fact which was known since the 1920’s, but only officially acknowledged by Gorbachev in a detailed article in the Moscow News, No 4 (3356) January 29-February 5, 1989 and killed the majority of the leaders of the Russian Revolution, some outright some through show trials. In addition to deliberately misleading the Working Class in the U.S. and throughout Europe, Stalin sent 50,000 Chinese Communists to their deaths before Mao Tse Tung finally stopped following Stalin’s directives. In 1943 Stalin ended the Communist International officially! So much for Stalin being a “Communist.” We need to build back a genuine Communist Party to a million strong and more. We need a Socialist Revolution here and now in the United States. For those who believe unnecessarily that they need a legal basis, the Declaration of Independence is actually a transitional document for a Socialist Revolution in the United States. In the final analysis all wars are won and lost on morale and every movement begins with the call. This analysis is part of that call.
William H. Depperman, Coordinator
United Front Against Racism
And Capitalism-Imperialism
New York, N.Y.
Revised February 25, 2011
April 1st, 2011 at 4:09 am
Many of these arguments are of great validity. They all have a “correct” hypothesis. The bottom line is, people, that there is no answer to this question. It is something that the knowledge of man will never obtain. Even if some godlike being tried to explain it to us, we would be physically unable to interpret it. This kind of knowledge is so unimaginable that if we tried to wrap our heads around it after being explained to us, they would literally explode. The argument that God is both the beginning and the end is the most plausible. If I was forced to give an answer, I would give you this, “God is the universe, he was the beginning and he will be the end. He did not just create the universe, he is the universe. He created himself and the very soil we stand on, and he created his creator.” Even one who agrees with this does not necessarily have to believe in a god. The only requirement is that they admit, undoubtedly, that we live in a universe.
May 6th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
I have read most of this discussion but not all of it because to be honest I was getting annoyed with the arrogance of some of you. I am a young man who like most of the western population i wasn’t sure of why we were here? how we are here? and i didn’t really put much effort into trying to find out. I then began trying to understand, i had already admitted to myself that there is no God, my rational behind my rather ignorant statement was ‘because there cant be, it is impossible.’
i thought like a lot of people do that there was a difference between science and religion, you chose one or the other. in the 21st century you should go with science really because our species most intelligent individuals are scientists so they know what is true. so looking at the science behind how we are here i found it was because of the big bang theory, but yes what came before the big bang theory? even the most intelligent human beings, the most sophisticated creatures on this planet do not even understand, the human brain cannot even comprehend infinity, our brain operates on being able to comprehend a beginning and an end. so i thought are we ever going to know? there must be some sort of explanation. then i looked at a history of philosophy book and got bored after a few pages because as interesting as it was these were just men trying to work out the wonders and mysteries of the world themselves. so i thought well lets think about god, a creator of all. i always assumed that the alot of the bible is just metaphors anyway, hidden messages for you to try and understand yourself. i dont think if god was real he would have expected us to believe the whole creating the heavens and the earth in a week and making man from dust. if this great creator has so much power why didnt he just make everything on day one? maybe god is telling us he did it in stages, these days being the evolution of the world, maybe the day he breathed life into man is the day we evolved human emotion, learned how to love, learned the difference between right and wrong and did not just do everything to keep this circle of life going. out of the millions of species on this planet is it just a fluke that we are the ones who question why we are even here? why dont we just find a woman, reproduce, protect our offspring and then die? thats what every other creature does why do you care how it all came about? do you think the love you feel for your wife, friends, family, children and those deep personal feelings you have that no-one else knows about, when you die does that love and those feelings slowing rot and decay with the rest of your body or do they die and disappear instantly?
i had barely any knowledge in either subject of science or religion so didnt really know where to get the answers from, i was not satisfied to just believe in a god because i have heard other people preaching about him or reading about him in a book which from the sounds of things sounds ridiculous, let there be light and making a woman from adams rib ha! how am i expecting to believe that so i am not going to pick up a bible. i need to see him to believe… because in human nature seeing is believing.. if i went to someone thousands of years ago ‘your skin is made from cells which broken down to a simple form are tiny little atoms, protons, neutrons electrons, the same as that tree, and that dirt, so you are essentially made of the same substance as a tree. would they believe us? no! because they cannot see it. now do we believe that? yes. because through a man made device the microscope we can now see photographic evidence of this and seeing is believing. so if god came down and showed us all, the scientist, the politicians, the non-believers, we would then all believe and do what he says out of fear of being damned and going to hell. surely that would work if he send someone down with divine powers, curing the sick, parting the sea, feeding 5000 people with 5 loaves of bread. then we would all believe no one could reject him then being we would have seen it with our own eyes, one of the 5 human senses that allows us to decide if something is real or not.
when i finally opened my mind realised that maybe one creator of all was not completely impossible, impossible to comprehend maybe but not impossible then thats when i started really looking for the answer. i picked up gods book, i couldnt find a full bible in my house but i found the new testament with a prereading plan to let you begin to understand then a two year reading plan to read the whole thing in small sections. i never expected to find the answers i was looking for, i opened the book as an atheist with an open mind but when you listen to jesus words, a man sent from a frustrated god to try and make people believe you understand, i spoke to god and he told me the meaning of life, which is so obvious now, i felt enlightened, i realised that all the time i thought that to find fulfillment i had to make as much money as i can or become famous or successful life about so much more than that but no matter how many times someone preaches it to you it doesnt work. god gave me a message, he understands in the 21st century it is now socially acceptable to say that you believe in god and those who do are laughed at by non-believers because it seems impossible because science has proven otherwise. arrogant man and his thirst for knowledge has destroyed this world. it is not as easy to find god or for god to find you but all you have to do is start asking the question, start looking for him in the one place where his words are documented and he will come and find you. do not be afraid to open your mind and ask the question because with all our years of research we still do not understand how this all was created and we will never understand because the human brain cannot comprehend it but our arrogance believes otherwise. this is a question of faith, and once you look for god and he finds you it all makes sense.
jesus told us that man just has to accept he will never know all (cant remember exact words)
we all know the difference between good and bad, right and wrong and dont think you are a good person because you have not killed a man, or raped a woman, because everytime you do a selfish act that hurts another persons feelings no matter how insignificant, you know deep down that it is wrong and so does god. we are here for a reason, otherwise all of our souls would be already in heaven, but there is evil in all of us to, and if you can life a life full of good and love then you will be ready.
jesus also said, ‘i have come to bring you fire, how i wish it was already kindled’
open your arrogant minds and starting asking the right question, the days of converting people of passing it is now up to you to look for god. this is not about someone trying to brainwash or trick someone into living a life a certain way because of fear. god is full of love and alls he wants is us to be the same, forget the man made rules and regulations of the different religions that are pushed onto people for this is why people are scared of religion because they will then have to follow rules or understand i was the same, when you find god you will understand what you have to do and it will only be acts of good.
apologies i have not spell checked this, grammar checked or anything because it is not important, take what you want from it. last week i was an atheist, i drank lots of beer, had sex with more than one woman, lied everyday but i asked the question, i asked god to come find me and he did.
May 7th, 2011 at 1:57 am
jesus stated that man just has to accept he will never know everything
May 8th, 2011 at 4:24 am
jonny, good point. Theorist point of view that something out of nothing triggers the big bang is absurb and if there were particles before the big bang that triggers the reaction, how did the particles came about? But rest assure, the debate will continues as men continues to use self-obsessed knowledge filled with pride in quest to prove that they are ALWAYS right. (And we only can pray that the real truth will come to them before they die)
May 12th, 2011 at 12:06 am
Wow What a discussion. What caused the big bang?
Impossible question to answer with the knowledge we have at the moment. Scientists discovered the sound of a big bang left over, and so, know there was a big bang.
I would have thought the fact that humans and other animals perhaps all living things have thoughts, feelings, emotions and dream would be a clue to us that theres more to us than physical realm.
May 12th, 2011 at 10:55 am
Come on guys, big bang is just a hypothetical assumption of what happened and not exactly happened. No one knows and why do you even care to know? Do you know how “tiny” you are? You are not even a speck of dust in the universe and you try to determine the origin point of time. Real funny…
May 12th, 2011 at 11:00 am
Actually come to think of it, I think most commenter are male. George Carlin was right about one thing. We have big ego issues that we believe nothing is too big enough we can’t handle—due to the inferiority we have on our dicks. Check this out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkhzHQO7jY
November 2nd, 2011 at 11:01 am
You cant go ahead and contrast this too god, Because god isnt a explosion, God would be a being that has all ways been, pure energy with all knowledge, Now your bing bang, was a reaction to something, SO what created it? dont try to piggy back off something that average Americans are stupid about.
And heres the 100% question that throws the big bang in the balance, WHy arent Humans evolving, WHeres there proof from Humans from monkeys that we evolved from them, wait there is none… oh ya, why are humans more complex and why are we the only beings capable of free will.. yep.. that generally throws science under the theory pick which it will always be because you scientist have no proof, just guess. what constantly keeps the earth sun every other planet in perfect distance and perfect rotation, a big bang calculated this? i doubt it ya.
December 14th, 2011 at 10:52 am
Maybe the right question would be – why was the universe created? If we know the reason for the creation we might have a chance to understand the how part.
December 21st, 2011 at 2:00 am
what was all around the big bang befor it went bang. if the big bang was the creator of all that exist then we cant say there was nuthing all around it befor it exploaded. what made the big bang.. if there was nuthing. if nuthing existed befor it went bang. that would be impossable. nuthing cant form anything. so that makes us say that the space existed befor the big bang it had to. or you can say god created all. if the big bang was the creator of everything that to would be false. because nuthing cant form the big bang. simple reason says space existed befor the big bang.
December 23rd, 2011 at 1:41 am
This is probably the best answer. No one will know and I will bet in a million years from today, no one will. There’s speculations, predictions, so-call physic theatrical horse shit, but no man wants to admit that they do not have the answer. So the best answer is to say all things came from nothing. You probably shouldnt listen to scientist or physicist so much. Get all these idiots to come down and find cure for deadly disease instead of spending wasteful money trying to solve universe question. Stop wasting time dreaming on what’s exactly is out there because you know why, you won’t find it.
December 30th, 2011 at 11:52 pm
So what do we know about the big bang hmmmm?
Well it is this it happened and here we are today. Thats it.
Now what do we know about black holes. It swallows everything in is site even light can not escape it.
So here is another curve ball how do we know that the big bang was not the result of aftermath from a black hole? Do we know what comes out through a black hole? No we do not. So this whole argument will go on forever why because science nor religion will ever come to an understanding what came first.