On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 20:57:08 -0400 George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
writes:
> dfsiemensjr@juno.com wrote:
> .....................
> > However, I will say dogmatically
> > that all scientific explanation will be in terms of natural
> events, just
> > as the scientific explanation of the Big Bang can only work back
> as far
> > as 10^-43 sec after the event. Calling the Big Bang "creation" is
> outside
> > of the scientific explanation.
>
> To the 2d sentence & 1st 1/2 of the 1st, yes. "Creation" in
> the strict sense
> is a theological term, & natural science deals with natural
> phenomena. But limitation
> of scientific explanation to t > 10^-43 sec is a statement about the
> current state of
> physics & may be made obsolete by an adequate quantum theory of
> gravity. Of course that
> will still not mean that physics can answer all our questions - such
> as why the
> pattern described by that theory is instantiated.
> Shalom,
> George
>
I stand corrected for not anticipating the unified field theory. But a
question remains in my mind. I understood that the Big Bang is a
singularity and that science cannot explain singularities. Does that mean
that we cannot get back to t=0? Or have I misunderstood? Or, to take a
different tack, if the eventual quantum gravity supports the "bubble" or
"manu universe" approach, would that mean that the Big Bang was not a
singularity?
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 24 2000 - 12:49:27 EDT