Biblical - Scientific correlation

[Gordon]

I'm trying to put together a document showing that science does
indeed agree with the word of God. I would like to receive inputs
from anyone who can provide insight into such information. I am
working on the Genesis creation story presently, so please limit
any contributions/comments to this realm.

Here are some examples of the type of information I'm looking
for.

Day One;
Bible - Genesis 1:1 In the begriming God created the heaven(s)
and the earth.
Interpretation...there was a beginning, before which time the
earth (universe that we perceive) did not exist. At the time this
scripture was written, there was no concept of a universe out
beyond the sky. The sky was perceived to be the first level of
heaven, and all beneath the sky was the earth/universe that we
occupy.

Science - Big Bang Theory - Approximately 15,750,000,000 years
ago there was an actual beginning of the universe. At the time of
this beginning the entire multiverse was nothing but a
dimensionless point. With the occurrence of the Big Bang, this
point expanded into the multiverse in its present form, very
quickly. The ten dimensions of space and one of time that were
initiated with the Big Bang now form the earth (our three
dimensional space) and the levels of heaven (multiverse).

-----------------------------------

Bible - Genesis 1:2a And the earth was without form(,) and void;
Interpretation...at the very beginning there was no solid matter
(form - planets, stars, asteroids, etc.) and there was no empty
space (void) between any such objects.

Science - Big Bang Theory - Immediately after the Big Bang, the
universe was comprised of a quark soup. There were no particles
of mass (form) and there was no empty space (void)

----------------------------------

Bible - Genesis 1:2b And darkness was upon the face of the deep.
Interpretation ...the very early state of the entire creation
(the deep) was totally dark. Light had not yet been produced.

Science - Big Bang Theory - The initial quark soup mentioned
above did not/could not produce light. There was no light until
the quark soup converted into protons, neutrons, electrons, etc.
and matter began to form. The first matter to form was hydrogen,
and when hydrogen nuclei (protons) captured electrons the means
for radiating light was implemented.

[Paul]

Post by Gordon
I'm trying to put together a document showing that science does
indeed agree with the word of God. I would like to receive inputs
from anyone who can provide insight into such information. I am
working on the Genesis creation story presently, so please limit
any contributions/comments to this realm.

You might want to check out string theory (which would sharpen the "quark
soup" bits, among other things). I presume you're familiar with Paul
Davies' writings already. And, more recently, Francis Collins (head of the
human genome project) has just published a book called "The Language of God"
that may contain some useful material for you.

Have fun with your project!

In Christ,
Paul

[shegeek72]

Post by Gordon
Science - Big Bang Theory - Approximately 15,750,000,000 years
ago there was an actual beginning of the universe. At the time of
this beginning the entire multiverse was nothing but a
dimensionless point. With the occurrence of the Big Bang, this
point expanded into the multiverse in its present form, very
quickly. The ten dimensions of space and one of time that were
initiated with the Big Bang now form the earth (our three
dimensional space) and the levels of heaven (multiverse).

There was a recent show on PBS about the current thinking of the nature
of the universe(s) and string theory. There's speculation among the
scientific community, that's no longer considered "crackpot," that the
big bang was actually the result of two "branes" or dimensions (of
which they perceive are at least 11), intersecting each other and these
branes existed before our present universe.

Obviously, this brings up the question of where did the pre-big bang
branes come from?

Tara

[h***@geneva.rutgers.edu]

Post by Gordon
Science - Big Bang Theory - Approximately 15,750,000,000 years
ago there was an actual beginning of the universe. At the time of
this beginning the entire multiverse was nothing but a
dimensionless point. With the occurrence of the Big Bang, this
point expanded into the multiverse in its present form, very
quickly. The ten dimensions of space and one of time that were
initiated with the Big Bang now form the earth (our three
dimensional space) and the levels of heaven (multiverse).

Well, maybe. I should first note that I'm not a physicist. I majored
in physics in college, but that was a long time ago. However I spent
some time reading up on this in preparation for a Sunday School class,
and checked with one of our senior physicists to make sure I got it
right.

When I first ran into the Big Bang, it sounded like there was a
singularity at the beginning. This raises the obvious question of
where the singularity came from.

However scientists don't generally believe in singularities. Normally
when one occurs it means that you have reached the limits of your
model. In this case the problem is believed to be that the normal
models used in astronomy don't work for very small distances. So going
back in history, you eventually reach a point where theory breaks
down. The theory claims there's a singularity, but a more complete
theory would not have that problem.

One possible answer, as someone mentions in another posting, is
string theory. Among its other supposed benefits, it unifies very
large and very small. Thus in principle it's capable of dealing
with the region in history that otherwise turns into a singularity.

However it's far from clear that string theory is needed here. One
change that's occurred from the original naive singularity model is the
idea of "inflation." The idea is that for the first 10^-35 sec or so,
the universe expanded much more rapidly than later, driven by a very
peculiar mechanism in which gravity is repulsive. During this time the
universe expanded from 10^-32 cm to 100 cm. This idea is testable by
astronomy, and there appears to be a concensus that the evidence
strongly supports it.

However there's still a question of where the original 10^-32 cm of
matter came from. On that, as on the details of the inflation, there
is currently no real conclusion. But there are lots of ideas that seem
promising, ranging from spontaneous explosion of a very small region
in a "previous" universe to a continuing infinite inflation, with
universes as small regions of "normal" space "falling out" of the
inflationary process. Other speculations involve new universes being
created inside black holes, etc.

There have been some calculations suggesting that this overall process
can't have been going on forever, on thermodynamic grounds. Here's
where I get hazy, because I can't actually check the physics. However
a brief review of the literature suggests to me that these
calculations are based on assumptions that may well not be true.

At this point I would say that while there's a lot of uncertainty
among physicists, the best bet is that it will not turn out that our
universe simply came out of nothing. Most likely the origin of the
universe will turn out to be part of a larger process.

[Jack Crenshaw]

Post by shegeek72

Post by Gordon
Science - Big Bang Theory - Approximately 15,750,000,000 years
ago there was an actual beginning of the universe. At the time of
this beginning the entire multiverse was nothing but a
dimensionless point. With the occurrence of the Big Bang, this
point expanded into the multiverse in its present form, very
quickly. The ten dimensions of space and one of time that were
initiated with the Big Bang now form the earth (our three
dimensional space) and the levels of heaven (multiverse).

There was a recent show on PBS about the current thinking of the nature
of the universe(s) and string theory. There's speculation among the
scientific community, that's no longer considered "crackpot," that the
big bang was actually the result of two "branes" or dimensions (of
which they perceive are at least 11), intersecting each other and these
branes existed before our present universe.
Obviously, this brings up the question of where did the pre-big bang
branes come from?
Tara

IMO the business of branes is a fabrication. Since the very first hint
of a Big Bang, way back in Hubble's day, scientists have been struggling
with the notion that the Universe had a beginning. Atheistic scientists
much preferred the universe of infinite age, for two reasons. First,
any hint of a Creation suggests the presence of a Creator. Second, they
wanted to give, as Eddington put it, "time for evolution to happen."

It's this desire for infinities that leads to notions like a bouncing
universe: Big Bang follwed by Big Crunch, ad infinitum.

I expect that there must be _SOME_ scientific reason for suggesting
multiple branes, but I strongly suspect that it's no more than a device
to avoid facing the truth of Creation.

Jack

[Jack Crenshaw]

Post by Gordon
I'm trying to put together a document showing that science does
indeed agree with the word of God. I would like to receive inputs
from anyone who can provide insight into such information. I am
working on the Genesis creation story presently, so please limit
any contributions/comments to this realm.

...

I like what Hugh Ross has to say about the relationship between science
and the Bible. He suggests that there are two ways in which God reveals
His nature. One is His Word; the other is -- nature. Since God created
both, in the end they have to agree. If they don't seem to, we must be
misundertanding one or the other -- or both.

The "fight" between Science and Religion is a man-made one.

Have fun with your project.

Jack

[Gordon]

On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 03:21:07 GMT, Gordon
<***@DELETEswbell.net> wrote:

Thanks to all who have responded. You have provided a great deal
of insight and opened my mind to thinking along some new paths.

I would like to move on from the beginning, and try to show the
correlations between the Genesis story and what we call accepted
science.=20

Here's what I have pulled together for the next few verses of
Genesis. Comments...criticisms...
=20
Genesis 1:2c And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the
waters.
The word waters has many symbolic meanings throughout the Bible.
In general it means things that are of spiritual interest to God.
It can mean God's human people, the spiritual realm of God, or,
in modern scientific vernacular it could mean the all pervading
presence of God, throughout the multiverse. Think of God's
omnipresence as something like quantum entanglements which
communicate across space/time at trans-light speed=85the mind of
God. This can be conceptualized by thinking of the human mind,
which is comprised of some 100 billion neurons, each neuron
having from 1,000 to 10,000 synapses with other neurons. This
neural structure is the seat of human consciousness.

Something functionally similar, but infinitely superior to our
brain's neuron synapses, at the quantum level, could be the means
by and through which God is omnipresent. That is, his mind
extends throughout the multiverse, interconnecting in a
synapse-like manner, with each and every quantum level entity.
When the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, this
was in reference so some all-encompassing level of cognizance and
contemplation on God's part involving all things in the
multiverse that were of spiritual concern with God.
=20
Genesis 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light:" and there was
light.
Referring back to Genesis 1:2b, above, the formation of hydrogen
was the beginning of light. The original quark soup transposed
into protons, neutrons and electrons, which then formed into
hydrogen, and light sprang forth abundantly. There was light!
Indeed there was a super abundance of light. Energy, such as is
necessary for the formation of heavier atoms from hydrogen
(hydrogen fusion) as well as the fusion of the first heavier
atoms into progressively heavier atoms, progressed very rapidly.
The material formation of the multiverse was under way and doing
nicely!
=20
Genesis 1:4 And God divided the light from the darkness.
As described above, matter began to be formed. Random quantum
variations in distribution of this matter let to clumping under
the influence of gravity. These initial clumps then coalesced
into the precursors of stars. By this stage of the creation there
was empty (dark) space interspersed with clumps of light-emitting
mater (proto-stars).
=20
Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he
called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Light from our star, the sun, equates to day. The absence of
light from our sun equates to night. We must reconcile the
difference in our usual interpretation of the words evening,
morning, Day and Night, as used in this and similar passages. The
interpretation intended in these verses and in other such verses,
when spelled with a beginning capital letter, should not be
interpreted as 24-hour periods of time. The symbolic meaning here
seems to be a primary division or segment of an extensive time
frame. The solar system - sun - earth - moon - didn't reach a
mature level of development until the fourth Day.

The first day of Genesis 1 focuses upon the entire multiverse
(heavens and earth=85ten dimensions of space and one of time), from
an outside perspective. Cosmic background radiation (CBR)
indications of time dilation, in conjunction with available
cosmic and geologic evidence indicate that this first Day of
Genesis was approximately 8 billion years long, by our current
time scale.=20

The time scale of Genesis day one through day 6 follows a natural
log, e scale. This scale is found throughout nature. A seashell,
for example, follows this log, e scale in the geometry of the
shell's coils. The time scale of Genesis day one may be compared
to the opening at the larger end of a seashell. The following
days then are compared to the seashell's size as it diminishes
along the coil toward the smaller end.

The moment when stable matter formed=85the moment of quark
confinement=85occurred 0.0001 seconds after the big bang. Pure
energy from the big bang was transformed into the materials that
subsequently became 100 billion galaxies, each containing
billions of stars.

[s***@yahoo.com]

Post by Gordon
I'm trying to put together a document showing that science does
indeed agree with the word of God. I would like to receive inputs
from anyone who can provide insight into such information. I am
working on the Genesis creation story presently, so please limit
any contributions/comments to this realm.
so please limit any contributions/comments to this realm.

I will try to be as explicit as possible to address your point:

Any notion has its limitation outside which it makes no sense. The
notion of time is not an exception. Infinities can have different power
so for any infinite set you can find bigger infinite set so you have no
chance to define the God.

--sb

[Gordon]

Post by s***@yahoo.com

Post by Gordon
I'm trying to put together a document showing that science does
indeed agree with the word of God. I would like to receive inputs
from anyone who can provide insight into such information. I am
working on the Genesis creation story presently, so please limit
any contributions/comments to this realm.
so please limit any contributions/comments to this realm.

Any notion has its limitation outside which it makes no sense. The
notion of time is not an exception. Infinities can have different power
so for any infinite set you can find bigger infinite set so you have no
chance to define the God.
--sb

Stefan, I appreciate your input, and I wholly agree with what
you've said. However, I do think you may have misinterpreted my
intent. I am not trying to "prove" God. I am trying to show that
there is no conflict between true science and our understanding
of God.

For example, the Bible says, "In the beginning God created..."
and science says, "The big bang occurred." I contend that they
are both talking about the same event, but using different
expressions to convey the idea.

The Bible says, "And the earth was without form and void." i.e.
had none of either form or void. Science says, "There was no
form, (matter) or void (empty space). The entire multiverse
(heavens and earth) was just a dimensionless point.

Gordon