UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, June 05, 2016

What does the Big Bang have to do with UFOs?

I use the Big Bang theory [sic] to separate the wheat from the chaff; that is, if I hear or read a scientist (usually a physicist) or UFO buff proclaiming belief [again sic] in the BB theory, I discount them as a logical or profound thinker.

And also again I admit that I like Zoam Chomsky. Why?

In a comment for one of my Big Bang postings he provided one rational explanation for how the Big Bang occurred. (It involved multidimensions and branes).

My sporadic visitor, Terry the Censor, exclaimed that the Big Bang was not an ex nihilo event. He was wrong, as I counter commented.

(Terry reminds me of a drunk who staggers, after a long absence, into a bar of regulars, not knowing what drinks have been served or what fights have occurred. He throws a few punches and then leaves before getting cold-cocked by one of the regulars or the bar owner.)

All the foo-faw about what happened after the initial Big Bang event is okay with me: inflation, the creation of atoms and all the rest.

It’s the idea that an infinitesimal speck combusts spontaneously from nothing – ex nihilo – that irks, rationally.

Fritjof Capra in The Tao of Physics [Bantam Books, Toronto/NY, 1977] quotes astronomer Sir Bernard Lovell, about the Big Bang on page 183:

“There we have reached the great barrier of thought because we begin to struggle with the concepts of time and space before they existed in terms of our everyday experience. I feel as though I’ve suddenly driven into a great fog barrier where the familiar world has disappeared.” [Lovell, The individual and the Universe, page 91]

Now, I love Paul Kimball, always have and probably always will but when he says the Big Bang is “a fact” I cringe. Paul is brilliant, about almost everything, but in that he’s wrong, like Terry the Censor. The Big Bang is not a fact, but a theory or, as some say, an hypothesis.

I won’t discount Paul’s views on UFOs. His postings and films are the epitome of objectivity. But as for the Big Bang, he’s errant.

So, when someone comments here that they believe in the Big Bang, I scoff, as I do when a physicist shows up on television of in a book proclaiming the theory [sic] as reality.

RR

2 Comments:

  • A few snipets from Simon Singh's book:

    "Hence, 'quantum cosmology' offers various hypotheses that allow for the universe to have started from nothing for no reason. For example, a baby universe could have spontaneously emerged from nothing, possibly alongside a multitude of other universes, making it part of a multiverse. As Alan Guth, the father of inflation theory, put it: 'It's often said there is no such thing as a free lunch. But the universe itself may be a free lunch.'

    Singh continues, "Unfortunately, the scientific community has to admit that all of these possible answers, from rebounding universes to spontaneous quantum creation, are highly speculative and do not properly address the ultimate question of where the universe came from..."

    And this which Rich and I can relate to and chuckle about:

    "In his autobiography, 'Confessions,' written in about 400 AD, the philosopher and theologian St Augustine quotes an answer he has heard to the theological equivalent of 'What came before the Big Bang?":

    "What was God doing before He created the Universe?
    Before He created Heaven and Earth, God created hell to be used
    for people such as you who ask this kind of question."

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Sunday, June 05, 2016  

  • Ya gotta love that Augustine.

    Thanks, Tim.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 05, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home