//
you're reading...
Islam & Science

Can something come out of nothing?

big bang

how it all began

A common Question by creationists if you ask me. This is probably the most common one therefore I will adress the question first.

According to a creationist: “something must be eternal (as we have “something” today and something cannot come from “nothing”, so there was never a time when there was “nothing”). Either the universe itself is eternal, or something/someone outside of and greater than the universe is eternal”

Time started with the existence of something. Eg, the big bang. Time is relative. There was no time before. The fabric of space time is explained by Einstien’s equation. Everything existed, existence means time. Nothing before the start of time.

I believe that we are making an all too human mistake of asking the wrong question.  “What came before the big bang?” or “where did the energy for the big bang come from?” Both innocent enough questions, but they both imply as if there was a time “before” the big bang. Think about it, The big bang was the event that created the fabric of reality, time included (space-time) Explained beautifully by Einstein’s theory relativity. There can be no “before”!

we as humans have always lived in an environment where an effect is preceded by a cause. We find it really difficult to grasp such concepts as Nothingness, Black holes, Infinity and things popping in an out of existence. In fact, we find it so difficult that we tend to assign an intelligent agent to these things. Someone all powerful and all mighty who created these things for us. It makes everything simpler and less stressful.

“Can energy be called god?”

Can energy be called god? First of all, if we were to call energy, “god”, we would have to call everything “god”. From waterfalls and skyscrapers to ant hills and eyelashes. Even the terrified child and lowlife who shot his parents in front of him for a few dollars, are “God” My question is, why? Why call it God? Why personify? Why even acknowledge it as sentient? The laws of the universe are grand, intricate and breathtaking. It has no need for sentience, nor for anything human. I don’t see the point of calling the universe/nature/energy/life etc, “god” The definition for the word “God” is http://tinyurl.com/Godmeaning . As you can see it has a pretty specific meaning, why attach it to things like energy and universe, that are completely different things? Seems to me like some mental remnant of the indoctrination of religion.

A creationist’s refutation to this:- “We know that the universe is not eternal, it had a beginning (as evidenced by its expansion). Therefore, God (the something/someone outside of the universe) must exist and must have created the universe. Einstein showed that space and time are related. If there is no space there is no time. Before the universe was created there was no space and therefore no concept of time. This is hard for us to understand as we are space-time creatures, but it allows for God to be an eternal being, completely consistent with scientific laws. The question “who created God” is therefore an improper/invalid question, as it is a time-based question (concerning the point in time at which God came into existence) but God exists outside of time as the un-caused first cause”

If there was an eternal being, so who created that? before space there was no time. There was nothing. This is clearly known if the person has researched into the theory of relativity without being indoctrinated by religion.

Another additional creationist argument that I will include here just for the sake of LULZ:-  The theory of evolution teaches that complex life-forms evolved from simple life-forms.To show that all life evolved from a single cell, which itself came from some type of chemical soup, there would have had to be massive genetic information gains”

No. Evolution started through a process called Abiogenesis. This process is widely misunderstood as:

Simple Chemicals ——> bacteria

But in reality complex chemical reactions take place, this is simplified as:

simple chemicals —–> polymers —–> replicating polymers —–> hypercycle —–> protobiont —–> bacteria

“The best that evolutionists can come up with to try to explain how this might have happened is to propose that it happened by mutations and natural selection. But mutations and natural selection do not show gain in information, just rearrangement or loss of what is already there — therefore there may be beneficial mutations without an increase in genetic information

Mutation leads to variation so there are variety of organisms in the ecosystem. The variety of organisms get ‘selected’ by nature over thousands and millions of years, the best organism survives. As mutations will be taking place simultaneously with natural selection there would be a variety of organisms in the system. This leads to Evolution. Evolution depends on conditions for survival such as climate, temperature, etc:

“Mutations overwhelmingly destroy genetic information and produce creatures more handicapped than the parents”

We’re not talking about harmful mutation.(they are more common but it does it mean that beneficial mutations do not take place). Mutation is used in industry for example in insulin production.

Mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organism’s DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology—all aspects of its life. So a change in an organism’s DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life.

Mutations are random.
Mutations can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful for the organism, but mutations do not “try” to supply what the organism “needs.” In this respect, mutations are random—whether a particular mutation happens or not is unrelated to how useful that mutation would be.

Since all cells in our body contain DNA, there are lots of places for mutations to occur; however, not all mutations matter for evolution. Somatic mutations occur in non-reproductive cells and won’t be passed onto offspring.

 ” Natural selection simply weeds out unfit creatures. Natural selection may explain why light-colored moths decrease and dark moths proliferate, but it cannot show that moths could ever turn into effective, totally different, non-moth creatures. Moths do not have the genetic information to turn into something that is not a moth, no matter how much time you give them. Nor could they evolve from something that was totally different from a moth”

Don’t forget, the evolution of an organism occurs in thousands or even millions of years. It takes time.


Enhanced by Zemanta
Advertisements

About maldivian

A simple guy

Discussion

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: