j*******7
发帖数: 6300 | 1 Why We Know Our Universe, And Everything In It, Had A Beginning (Free Bible
Insert)
My career as a Cold Case Detective was built on being evidentially certain
about the suspects I brought to trial. There are times when my certainty was
established and confirmed by the cumulative and diverse nature of the
evidence. Let me give you an example. It’s great when a witness sees the
crime and identifies the suspect, but it’s even better if we have DNA
evidence placing the suspect at the scene. If the behavior of the suspect (
before and after the time of the crime) also betrays his involvement, and if
his statements when interviewed are equally incriminating, the case is even
better. Cases such as these become more and more reasonable as they grow
both in depth and diversity. It’s not just that we now have four different
evidences pointing to the same conclusion, it’s that these evidences are
from four different categories. Eyewitness testimony, forensic DNA,
behaviors and admissions all point to the same reasonable inference. When we
have a cumulative, diverse case such as this, our inferences become more
reasonable and harder to deny. Why did I take the time to describe this
evidential approach to reasonable conclusions? Because a similar methodology
can be used to determine whether everything in the universe (all space,
time and matter) came from nothing. We have good reason to believe our
universe had a beginning, and this inference is established by a cumulative,
diverse evidential case:
Philosophical Evidence (from the Impossibility of Infinite Regress)
Imagine a linear race track with a start and finish line. Now imagine you’
re a new police recruit and I’ve asked you to put on your track shoes and
step into the starting blocks for a physical training (PT) test. The finish
line is one hundred yards away. As you place your feet in the blocks and
prepare to run, I raise the starting pistol. Just before I fire it, however,
I stop and tell you to move the start line and blocks back six inches. You
reluctantly do that. Again I raise the pistol to the sky—only to command
you, once again, to move the line back six inches. You grudgingly comply.
Imagine this continues. Question: Will you ever reach the finish line? No.
Unless there is a beginning, you’ll never get to the finish. In a similar
way, time also requires a beginning in order for any of us to reach a finish
; unless time has a beginning, we cannot arrive at the finish line we call
“today.”
Theoretical Evidence (from Mathematics and Physics)
Albert Einstein’s calculations related to the general theory of relativity
1916 indicated the universe was dynamic (either expanding or contracting).
The notion of a static universe was so common at the time, however, that
Einstein applied a mathematical “constant” to his calculations to maintain
the unchanging, uniform nature of the universe he hoped for (he later
referred to this effort as “the biggest blunder he ever made in his life”
). Einstein’s calculations suggested the universe was not eternally old and
unchanging. Alexander Friedmann, a Russian mathematician working with
Einstein’s theories in the 1920’s, developed a mathematical model
predicting an expanding universe. This conclusion inferred the universe must
have had a beginning from which it was expanding.
Observational Evidence (from Astronomical Data)
Vesto Slipher, an American astronomer working at the Lowell Observatory in
Flagstaff, Arizona, spent nearly ten years perfecting his understanding of
spectrograph readings. His observations revealed something remarkable. If a
distant object was moving toward Earth, its observable spectrograph colors
shifted toward the blue end of the spectrum. If a distant object was moving
away from Earth, its colors shifted toward the red end of the spectrum.
Slipher identified several “nebulae” and observed a “redshift” in their
spectrographic colors. If these “nebulae” were moving away from our galaxy
(and one another) as Slipher observed, they must have once been tightly
clustered together. By 1929, Astronomer Edwin Hubble published findings of
his own, verifying Slipher’s observations and demonstrating the speed at
which a star or galaxy moves away from us increases with its distance from
the earth. This once again confirmed the expansion of the universe.
Thermal Evidence (from the Second Law of Thermodynamics)
Imagine walking into a room and observing a wind-up toy police car. The
longer you watch it roll, the slower it moves. You realize the car is
winding down—that is, the amount of usable energy is decreasing. It’s
reasonable to infer the car was recently wound up prior to your entry into
the room. The fact the toy car is not yet completely unwound indicates it
was wound up recently. If the car had been wound much earlier, we would
expect it to be motionless by the time we entered the room. In a similar way
, the fact our universe still exhibits useful energy—even though the Second
Law of Thermodynamics dictates we are on our way to a cosmic “heat death”
—indicates a beginning. Otherwise, and if the universe were infinitely old,
our cosmos should have run out of usable energy by now. We can reasonably
infer it was once tightly wound and full of energy.
Quantitative Evidence (from the Abundance of Helium)
As Astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle studied the way elements are created within
stars, he was able to calculate the amount of helium created if the universe
came into being from nothing. Helium is the second most abundant element in
the universe (Hydrogen is the first), but in order to form helium by
nuclear fusion, temperatures must be incredibly high and conditions must be
exceedingly dense. These would have been the conditions if the universe came
into being from nothing. Hoyle’s calculations related to the formation of
helium happen to coincide with our measurements of helium in the universe
today. This, of course, is consistent with the universe having a moment of
beginning.
Residual Evidence (from the Cosmic Background Radiation)
In 1964, two American physicists and radio astronomers, Arno Penzias and
Robert Wilson detected what is now referred to as “echo radiation”,
winning a Nobel Prize for their discovery in 1978. Numerous additional
experiments and observations have since established the existence of cosmic
background radiation, including data from the Cosmic Background Explorer
satellite launched in 1989, and the Planck space observatory launched in
2009. For many scientists, this discovery alone solidified their belief the
universe had a beginning. If the universe leapt into existence, expanding
from a state of tremendous heat, density and expansion, we should expect
find this kind of cosmic background radiation.
There are numerous, diverse lines of evidence pointing to the same
reasonable inference. As we assemble the philosophical evidence from the
impossibility of infinite regress, the theoretical evidence from mathematics
and physics, the observational evidence from astronomical data, the thermal
evidence from the second law of thermodynamics, the quantitative evidence
from the abundance of helium, and the residual evidence from the cosmic
background radiation, we quickly recognize the different nature of these
varied forms of evidence. That’s what makes the case so powerful. Just like
my criminal cases, when multiple divergent lines of evidence all point to
the same conclusion, you can trust you’re making a proper inference. The
evidence for the beginning of the universe is decidedly diverse:
I’ve briefly excerpted this case from one chapter in my new book, but if
you’re interested in the detailed summary of the evidence (and the reason
why this evidence points to an eternal first cause “outside the room” of
the natural universe), please read God’s Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective
Examines the Evidence for A Divinely Created Universe. In addition, if you
would like a printable FREE Bible Insert of this simple cumulative case
diagram, I’m offering it as this month’s FREE Bible Insert. Just visit the
home page at ColdCaseChristianity.com and click the Bible Insert link in
the right tool bar.
http://coldcasechristianity.com/2015/why-we-know-our-universe-a | J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 2 Wow！
Bible
was
if
even
【在 j*******7 的大作中提到】
: Why We Know Our Universe, And Everything In It, Had A Beginning (Free Bible
: Insert)
: My career as a Cold Case Detective was built on being evidentially certain
: about the suspects I brought to trial. There are times when my certainty was
: established and confirmed by the cumulative and diverse nature of the
: evidence. Let me give you an example. It’s great when a witness sees the
: crime and identifies the suspect, but it’s even better if we have DNA
: evidence placing the suspect at the scene. If the behavior of the suspect (
: before and after the time of the crime) also betrays his involvement, and if
: his statements when interviewed are equally incriminating, the case is even
| G*******h
发帖数: 185 | 3 没有说服力。
首先，选的跑道是直线，没有考虑时一个封闭的曲线情况，选封闭曲线得出的结论相左。
其次，最后一句是假定宇宙有终点的话，则必有起点。其实有终点和有起点一样难以证
明。
Philosophical Evidence (from the Impossibility of Infinite Regress)
Imagine a linear race track with a start and finish line. Now imagine you’
re a new police recruit and I’ve asked you to put on your track shoes and
step into the starting blocks for a physical training (PT) test. The finish
line is one hundred yards away. As you place your feet in the blocks and
prepare to run, I raise the starting pistol. Just before I fire it, however,
I stop and tell you to move the start line and blocks back six inches. You
reluctantly do that. Again I raise the pistol to the sky—only to command
you, once again, to move the line back six inches. You grudgingly comply.
Imagine this continues. Question: Will you ever reach the finish line? No.
Unless there is a beginning, you’ll never get to the finish. In a similar
way, time also requires a beginning in order for any of us to reach a finish
; unless time has a beginning, we cannot arrive at the finish line we call | b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 4
左。
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
突然又想起默示录中的一句∶
「我是「阿耳法」alpha 和「敖默加，」omega 最初的和最末的，元始和终末。」
莫非也是「一个封闭的曲线情况」的先驱？
二千年前便有人先洞悉天机？
【在 G*******h 的大作中提到】
: 没有说服力。
: 首先，选的跑道是直线，没有考虑时一个封闭的曲线情况，选封闭曲线得出的结论相左。
: 其次，最后一句是假定宇宙有终点的话，则必有起点。其实有终点和有起点一样难以证
: 明。
: Philosophical Evidence (from the Impossibility of Infinite Regress)
: Imagine a linear race track with a start and finish line. Now imagine you’
: re a new police recruit and I’ve asked you to put on your track shoes and
: step into the starting blocks for a physical training (PT) test. The finish
: line is one hundred yards away. As you place your feet in the blocks and
: prepare to run, I raise the starting pistol. Just before I fire it, however,
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 5 你也可以设计一个模型啊。我认为只是这么随便说说还真是不如原帖中的有说服力。
左。
finish
however,
【在 G*******h 的大作中提到】
: 没有说服力。
: 首先，选的跑道是直线，没有考虑时一个封闭的曲线情况，选封闭曲线得出的结论相左。
: 其次，最后一句是假定宇宙有终点的话，则必有起点。其实有终点和有起点一样难以证
: 明。
: Philosophical Evidence (from the Impossibility of Infinite Regress)
: Imagine a linear race track with a start and finish line. Now imagine you’
: re a new police recruit and I’ve asked you to put on your track shoes and
: step into the starting blocks for a physical training (PT) test. The finish
: line is one hundred yards away. As you place your feet in the blocks and
: prepare to run, I raise the starting pistol. Just before I fire it, however,
|
|
