Is there a creator? A scientific perspective
Part 1
Prof. Dr. Abdul Haque
(abdulhaque.com.pk)
It is a hot debate whether there is a creator, or there is no creator.
Neither can be proven directly.
This article is in two parts.
Part 1 covers the existing scientific knowledge assuming that there is no creator.
Part 2 covers the scenario assuming that there is a creator.
There is no creator
Let us assume that there is no creator and try to explain the creation of universe purely on the basis of existing scientific knowledge.
The existing theories/hypotheses are:
- Cosmic singularity:
The Big Bang theory is the prevailing undisputed scientific explanation of the origin and evolution of the universe. According to this theory, the universe started as a very hot and dense state, and then it began to expand and cool down.
There is general agreement that Bing Bang happened. Conclusive proof was obtained by the discovery of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) in 1964 [Ref 1].
In 2015, the Planck collabotation calculated that it happened 13.8 billion years ago [Ref 2].
But what was there before Big Bang?
At present, there is no definitive answer…… only speculations.
One hypothesis is called “cosmic singularity” derived from Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity and some mathematical models. It refers to a hypothetical state where the universe was infinitely hot, dense, and small, and where the laws of physics as we know them today, did not apply.
In fact, according to this concept there was “nothing” before the Big Bang. In other words, time itself started with the cosmic singularity, so the concept of what happened before the Big Bang is meaningless. This is because the cosmic singularity represents a point of infinite density and temperature where time, space, and matter were all compressed into a single point.
The cosmic singularity is just an assumption, and there is no way to directly observe or test it.
So, according to this hypothesis there was no matter, no energy, no space, and no time before the Big Bang. There was absolute “nothingness”. Then, something happened that caused a tiny point of extremely high density and temperature to appear out of nowhere. This point then exploded in a huge burst of energy and created everything we see today.
The obvious problems with this explanation are that it has no answer to following questions:
- How did something come from nothing?
- What caused the point to explode?
If time didn’t exist before the Big Bang, that would mean no events and interactions existed before the Big Bang, since time is measured by events and interactions.
If there were no events, no interactions before the Big Bang, what caused the Big Bang?
- Inflationary scenario:
Some scientists (including Alexei Starobinsky at Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics) have come forward with another explanation [Ref 3].
They say that a different kind of universe existed in a cold and empty state. This universe had a form of energy that filled the space and made it expand faster and faster. This energy is called the vacuum energy or the cosmological constant.
Eventually, this expansion became so rapid that it triggered a phase transition, which means that the nature of the energy changed. The vacuum energy turned into matter and radiation, and this created the hot and dense conditions of the Big Bang.
This is called the inflationary scenario, and it explains some features of our universe better than the simple Big Bang theory. For example, it explains why our universe is so flat and smooth on large scales.
However, it also raises some new questions.
- What was the origin of the vacuum energy?
- And what caused the phase transition?
Again there is no explanation available.
- Cyclic or ekpyrotic scenario:
Yet another scenario has been put forward.
It is said that some other kind of universe existed in a hot and dense state before this universe.
This universe was similar to ours, but it had different physical laws and constants. It also had cycles of expansion and contraction, like a bouncing ball. Each time it contracted, it reached a maximum density and temperature point and then bounced back into expansion. This is called the cyclic or ekpyrotic scenario [Ref 4].
It avoids some of the problems of the other two scenarios. For example, it does not require to explain the beginning or end to this universe.
However, it cannot explain:
- How did the physical laws and constants change from one cycle to another?
- How did the cycles avoid becoming chaotic and unstable?
Use of quantum mechanics makes this scenario even more complicated.
According to our current knowledge of physics, nothing can be predicted about what happened before about a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang [Ref 5].
…………
It is obvious that according to existing knowledge, it cannot be proved scientifically that there is no creator. Not only it cannot be proved, there is no evidence at all that can even point towards the absence of a creator.
Our knowledge is blank regarding what was before the Big Bang. We have a lot of vague assumptions, but no ways of testing them.
References:
- Penzias A.A., R.W. Wilson, and W. Aaronson. 1979. Bell Laboratories Record: 12–18.
- Astronomy & Astrophysics. 641. page A6.
- Starobinsky A.A. 1980. A new type of isotropic cosmological models without singularity. Physics Letters B.
- Justin K.,B. A. Ovurt, P. J. Steinhardt, and N. Turok. 2001. The Ekpyrotic Universe: Colliding Branes and the Origin of the Hot Big Bang. Physical Review D. 64 (12): 123522.
- First Second of the Big Bang. How The Universe Works 3. 2014. Discovery Science.