MennoNet.com

Hmm. Any thoughts on this article about the "god particle"?

No - much too deep for me- plus I have an awful headache tonight.

lesterb wrote:Hmm. Any thoughts on this article about the "god particle"?

It’s a little off - AIG has been on a crusade against an expanding universe for quite some time, and they’re cherry picking the evidence here to support their view. Russel Humphreys (author of Starlight and Time, a book I’d recommend reading) has a better answer to this problem.

Ultimately, stars that are very very far away are more and more red shifted, until eventually they can’t be seen at all, implying the universe is expanding at a rate that can even exceed the speed of light. I don’t see how this implies at all that God did not create the universe.

The article website is "down for maintenance" so I'll just shoot from the lip.

I think the main question is not whether the universe exists but whether it is self-existent. The answer is that it is not.

And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. Hebrews 1:3

haithabu wrote:
I think the main question is not whether the universe exists but whether it is self-existent. The answer is that it is not.

And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. Hebrews 1:3

I agree. I'd also like to add Romans 11:36
For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory for ever. Amen.

As to the article itself, I think it's important to understand that it's one part of a whole: that there is an ongoing discussion in science circles that, like any group, will go back and forth and eventually stumble on new perceptions from a creative collective of scientific thought.

Josh wrote:

lesterb wrote:Hmm. Any thoughts on this article about the "god particle"?

It’s a little off - AIG has been on a crusade against an expanding universe for quite some time, and they’re cherry picking the evidence here to support their view. Russel Humphreys (author of Starlight and Time, a book I’d recommend reading) has a better answer to this problem.

Ultimately, stars that are very very far away are more and more red shifted, until eventually they can’t be seen at all, implying the universe is expanding at a rate that can even exceed the speed of light. I don’t see how this implies at all that God did not create the universe.

Are creation.com and Answers in Genesis related to each other? Creation.com runs some material written by Ken Ham, but can't find anything on there that would indicate that the two are non-arms-length.

This, as in all areas of sceince and study, shows that we only know little and everything can change over, what seems like a small minuet change in understanding.

Everything does connect, but proving that is often difficult.

We exist. The universe exists. We are ye to figure out exactly how. I guess we just have to take it on faith.

lesterb wrote:Hmm. Any thoughts on this article about the "god particle"?

The mathematical models that describe the physical universe need to be refined. That's no surprise. I don't think one can conclude that "Therefore the science of how the universe started in a big bang is all in the dark" as the author of the article does.

Robert wrote:This, as in all areas of sceince and study, shows that we only know little and everything can change over, what seems like a small minuet change in understanding.

Everything does connect, but proving that is often difficult.

We exist. The universe exists. We are ye to figure out exactly how. I guess we just have to take it on faith.

I suspect that God is always going to leave us in the dark about enough things so that we will always need some faith. Who knows what will be what in ten years. The latest ideas are always the best ones yet, but a fairly high percentage of them don't survive in the long term (or even the short term, in some cases).

Here is a TED talk by Brian Greene. What do you think of this one?