h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi Josh,

Glad to see you finally got your articles through into the Edited Guide.

I'd just like to pick up on one point from this article - in a couple of places you make some generalisations, like:

"Many ancient cultures believed in a universe that was eternal or, at least, one created from an eternal substance. The science of the times echoed this concept, and the thesis was generally accepted until the last two centuries."

Can you give any examples of these 'many cultures'? You cite 2 in your article - Hebrew and Sumerian - but are there others? I don't know of flood legends among, e.g., Incas, Egyptians, Mayans, any African or European cultures, North American cultures ...

Also, what science echoed the static universe theory? My understading was that it's only in the last 100 years or so that science in general has said anything about the creation of the universe and that Steady State Theory is only a few years older than Big Bang Theory.

Of course, there have always been *individuals* who attempted to 'prove' the existence/non-existence of God with fairly simple logic. Perhaps I'm just putting in a false division between 'science in general' and 'scientists'.

Gif

"Can you give any examples of these 'many cultures'?"

Primarily it is a Greek idea; at least, that is the most famous place you will encounter it. The Ancient Greek creation myth tells of the universe creating the gods. This is in contrast to most religions today, which believe that God or gods created the universe. The Ancient Egyptians also believed that the universe was always in existence. They believed that all was chaos until the gods tamed the universe. Followers of Hinduism still believe a very similar account, and they have done so for thousands of years. I have heard that the Ancient Japanese, Chinese and Koreans had similar philosophies, but I can't back that up first-hand. The Hebrews are an exception: they believed that God created the universe from nothing. Around Jesus's time, a group of Hebrews known as the Sadducees (a sort of political party) who followed a lot of Greek philosophies, doubtlessly including that one.

"Also, what science echoed the static universe theory?"

Scientists simply assumed that the universe had always been here. You can imagine what an impact that would have on things like astronomy. Static universe also carries the idea of chaos becoming order. We see this in such prepostrous theories as spontaneous generation, which said that animals are created from items that are necessary for their survival. For instance, a fly came from rotting meat. The scientists who thought this up ignored the idea of two beings of the same species creating their young and embraced the idea of orderly beings coming from chaotic circumstances. And since the universe apparently had no beginning, scientists never bothered to wonder how, why, and by whom was the universe created. I think you mentioned that.

"Of course, there have always been *individuals* who attempted to 'prove' the existence/non-existence of God with fairly simple logic."

I've always believed that was a useless endeavor. To believe in God, or any god, for that matter, requires faith.

Im not critasising or any thing but the big bang did not start with nothing. There are three ideas on the creation of the big bang and only one says there was nothing before this. They are:
1) A lot of the matter present in the universe today was in a small cluster which the Big bang blew apart.
2) There was a universe before the big bang which collapsed in on its self and then the big bang took place.
3)There was nothing and space just erupted with matter.
I am on the side that God created the Universe don't worry and I will prove it.
It does not matter which one of the ideas above is right as it is known that when the big bang took place it was not a normal explosion. Infact the big bang was the opposite as it actually created matter as well. Which means there would have to have been a god to create this matter.
Adib

Hi Adib,

I'd just like to pick up on your last sentence. Saying that 'matter can't come from nothing so God must have created it' is what's called 'begging the question' since now you need to have God coming from nothing. You could say 'God existed forever' but then why couldn't matter have existed forever in its pre-Big Bang state?

I have always liked the idea you list as (2) below as it has a satisfying symmetry (universes 'pulsing' in Big Bangs and Big Crunches forever) but unfortunately evidence seems to be building against this idea. Currently (3) is gaining ground as it can be explained neatly in terms of 'higher dimensions' intersecting, or so they tell me. This would create a great deal of energy (which can be converted to matter) in a Big Bang type event. No God is required to be involved, or at least not directly.

Gif

There was no energy and only a little matter before the big bang nothing can come from nothing.
The every thing came from nothing is based on subatomic particles that so called appear from nothing in the vacuum of space.
This is false as what actually happens is the pats of space this happens has energy in it which is then transformed in to matter and a split second later it goes back to being energy.
As that whole theroy is based on subatomic particles coming from nothing which is false then there is no evidence for that type of creation of the universe.

Adib

Hi Adib,

On the other hand, if one of the pair of particles crosses the event horizon of a black hole during the time it exists, it cannot recombine with the other particle, and the other particle becomes permanent. (Unless they both fall into the black hole, obviously.) That is why singularities are not really black - they emit visible light radiation.

Vacuum fluctuations do not rely on there being some 'background' energy to vary. A zero can vary just as much as a one. I am not clear what you mean by 'parts of space having energy in them'. These particles always appear and disappear in any part of space - this is a basic prediction of quantum theory and a very well (if indirectly) observed phenomenon.

So I maintain that the 'nothing can come from nothing' idea is disproven, though I certainly accept your point that there is a difference in scale between the universe and a subatomic interaction!

btw, "There was no energy and only a little matter" - since the two are interchangable, if there was matter, there was energy. For example, any particle with mass will create a gravitational field. Any second particle in that field will have potential energy. Again, quantum theory does not observe any great difference between the two - just one of the ways it contradicts our everyday experience.

Gif

Thanks for the correction.
Adib