By Owen Waters
Science generally promotes the idea of a Big Bang, from which the universe is said to have literally exploded into life. The problem science faces with this theory is the difficulty that such an event would face in being successful in creating life.
In his book, The Life of the Cosmos, physicist Lee Smolin details the many variables which had to be exactly balanced in order for the universe to unfold into living order, rather than random chaos.
The mass of the proton, the strength of gravity, the range of the weak nuclear force, and dozens of other variables determine how a universe will unfold after a Big Bang. If any of these values had been just slightly different, the universe would have become a disorganized pool of hot plasma where galaxies and solar systems were unable to form.
In order to make a universe that supports life, the numbers have to be exactly right.
What are the mathematical chances of an accidental Big Bang producing a universe that produces life as we know it?
One chance in 10229
That’s one chance in 10 to the power 229.
To spell it out, that’s exactly one chance in…
10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Basically, not much chance at all!
What are the chances of an intelligent Creator getting the mix just right so that the universe can support life?
Well, we’re here aren’t we?
Now, Here’s What Really Happened at the Dawn of Creation
So much for the physics and its favorite tool, mathematics. But, to realize what really happened at the dawn of the Creation of the Universe, you need metaphysics to illuminate the path.
The real starting point of the universe was the Divine Love of the Creator.
This was necessary in order to contain what came next, the impetus for Expansion.
Today, the Expansion pressure slightly exceeds the magnetic containment power of the framework provided by Divine Love.
At our physical level of existence, this results in the steady expansion of our region of the universe at the speed of light, creating a constant flow of energy within that space at the speed of light.
The Nature of Energy
Physics defines energy as the potential for doing work but they don’t know what it is.
Spiritual metaphysics defines energy as compressed Divine consciousness.
**Source
“Science generally promotes the idea of a Big Bang, from which the universe is said to have literally exploded into life. The problem science faces with this theory is the difficulty that such an event would face in being successful in creating life.”
“Science” cannot “promote” anything. Science is a method for investigating the physical world.
“Science” isn’t facing a difficulty with “the Big Bang” either, but people, including them scientists who can think logically (and they do exist), do indeed face the difficulty that the Big Bang theory is absolutely unable to explain the existance of life.
Besides, it is utterly absurd, mainly because it is based on the underlying theory that 1) all that exist is what we can sense physically or measure with physical instruments – i.e. it rejects a priory the existence of the worlds of emotion, thought and spirit (higher levels of energy) and 2) there is no guiding or planning intelligence behind the manifested physical world. It is – in reality – pseudo-science.
Another good point is that the dominant theory of evolution of the species based on mutations and survival of the fittest is unable to explain the development of organs such as the human (or animal) eye. If this happened through mutations (as opposed to inteligent planning), the in between stages from “no eye”, or “organ only able to perceive the difference between light and darkness” to fully developed eye would be at a disadvantage in terms of survival to the beginning stages, and so the individuals would die out and the fully formed eye never manifest.
But Eartly science even today has dominant elements of religious belief – people “believe in science” – and the “scientists” very often do not think scientifically, thus the current absurd theories. Read my book, Novum Organum 😀 https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/bacon-novum-organum