The Big Bang - Debunked (Ex Nihilo Model)

you are likely thinking that this has to be clickbait or Steve's lost his damn mind from the red shifting of celestial bodies to the Cosmic Microwave Background to Einstein's general relativity the Big Bang Theory has an enormous amount of evidence in his favor and indeed if you're thinking this you're absolutely right to be skeptical but as I'm about to make clear the conviction that the universe came from nothing is not justified this is the big bang debunked [Music] a few days ago I went to London to debate Blake janta on the award-winning unbelievable show which is hosted by the wonderful Justin Briley the argument we debated was the Kalam cosmological argument and one of our biggest disagreements were evolved around what exactly the Big Bang is and more importantly what we can fairly conclude from the evidence we have blake believes along with most theologians and laypeople and indeed many philosophers are not so savvy documentary writers that we now know with certainty that the universe came into existence from nothing creatio ex nihilo it turns out that the whole universe in fact originated about fourteen billion years ago and an event we've all come to know as the Big Bang we can deduce that a very long time ago the universe simply burst into existence an event called the Big Bang the universe is not eternal in the past but had an absolute beginning a finite time ago this is our infant universe everything that will ever exist everything that will ever happen all begins here the big bang theory states that the universe began as a hot and infinitely dense point and it is from this explosion this bang that all matter energy space and time were created while I and the majority of physicists and especially astrophysicists completely disagree it might be the case that the universe began to exist at the Big Bang but we certainly don't have sufficient reason to assert that we know that it did when we speak of the Big Bang we often have an image of a kind of cosmic explosion that created our universe and set space rushing outward but there's a little secret the Big Bang leaves out something pretty important the bang it tells us how the universe evolved after the bang but gives us no insight into what would have powered the bang itself but the fact is we are still totally clueless about what happened before the universe started to expand we use the phrase the Big Bang to refer to that earliest moment of the history universe where we don't understand what is going on it's a placeholder for our lack of understanding and hence that's the reason for this video if you're currently convinced that the universe came into existence from absolutely nothing then I hope that within the next few minutes I shatter your conviction because I care about you to do so let's look at the most compelling evidence in 1912 Vesto Slifer used a spectrograph to analyze the wavelength of celestial objects and found that while some are blue shifting or travelling towards us such as the Andromeda galaxy which was at the time known as the Andromeda nebula most are red shifting or travelling away from us that in 1916 Albert Einstein developed his theory of general relativity which when taken to his conclusion predicts that upon a time the observable universe had zero volume and infinite density much to Einstein's dismay in fact he outright rejected this conclusion and until later discoveries assumed a cosmological constant 11 years later in 1927 based primarily on Einstein's equations George's lemaître proposed an expanding model of the universe which he called the cosmic egg but the theory later received the pejorative titled the Big Bang from Fred Hoyle during the same time Edward Hubble with the aid of technological advancements demonstrated there was Slifer and the world thought were nebulae are actually entire galaxies and first he made our vision of the universe much much bigger and then in 1929 Hubble published and demonstrated what is now known as Hubble's law which states that celestial bodies rushing away from us are doing so at a speed directly proportionate to their distance and so a galaxy that is twice as far away as another is proceeding twice as fast while a galaxy that's ten times as far away is receding ten times as fast etcetera and fuss he proved that the universe is expanding and yes his discovery caused Einstein to abandon his cosmological constant moving on in 1932 Cole Jansky while investigating static interference with shortwave transatlantic voice transmissions accidentally discovered radiation emanating from the center of the Milky way indicating that everything within the Milky Way once coalesced and then some 30 years later in 1963 Robert Dicke inspired by Jansky theorized that if galaxies emanated radiation and almost all galaxies are moving away from each other then perhaps the universe itself is emanating radiation a prediction that was proven a year later by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson now the last piece of evidence that needs mentioning is the board goof for Lincoln theorem which states that almost all inflationary models of the universe will reach a boundary in the past and the reason this needs mentioning is because feasts like Blake and William Lane Craig have claimed it to be the CREM de la CREM proof that the universe was created from nothing the need for a beginning has been further solidified by the board Boothville Incan theorem which is so modest in its assumptions that its conclusion holds regardless of how you describe the earliest phase of the universe before Planck time I can also hold excuse me I can also hold excuse me it can also hold despite completely different physics within a multiverse the board Guth the Lankin theorem is independent of any physical description of that early beginning of the universe their theorem implies that even if the universe is just part of a wider multiverse of many universes even then the multiverse itself must have an absolute beginning but this simply isn't true and he's Alex goof himself saying as much in response to a question from Robert Lorenz Kuhn what happened before how did inflation start how did you whether it was a 10 to the minus 39 the second but you know what happened before that where are we well we still certainly don't know the answer to that question and inflation in fact makes it a particularly difficult question to answer because the gigantic expansion associated with inflation really from an observational point of view essentially completely erases and the evidence of what came before now of course I've been very terse in explaining these discoveries and their specific ramifications and so recommend that you learn more about the matter over time but notice that while they all screamed that the observable universe once coalesced into a miniscule hot dense state they do not scream that absolutely everything emerged from absolutely nothing sure they fit such a hypothesis but well let me approach this with an analogy consider any of all the explosions we've ever seen such as this one if we existed on a tiny fragment of this exploded bomb and were able to deduce by say the redshifting of nearby fragments that upon a time every fragment once coalesced into a hot dense state would we be justified in asserting that we know that the singularity emerged from absolutely nothing of course not we'd have to say we don't know what happened during the earliest state now this analogy isn't perfect I appreciate that as the fundamental forces themselves evidently merge at the Big Bang but I think it sufficiently gets my point across and that's the primary and perhaps only point I want to convey the answer to the question did the universe begin to exist is not yes the whole universe in fact originated about fourteen billion years ago the universe is not eternal in the past but had an absolute beginning a finite time ago it's we don't know we are still totally clueless about what happened before the universe started to expand it's a placeholder for our lack of understanding and so what this already collapses into is an equivocation fallacy there are two prominent concepts of the Big Bang one that posits that the universe expanded from an extremely hot and dense state which are here on referred to as the expanding model and another that posits that absolutely everything emerged from absolutely nothing which are here on referred to as than a Hilo model now as it currently stands that is with all of the scientific knowledge that we've acquired we are justified in saying that the expanding model is almost certainly true but we are not justified in asserting that the nihilo model is true in fact while we have hypotheses and theories to predict violations of the law of conservation of energy we've never seen such a violation and so as it stands everything is creatio ex materia everything is rearrangement of already existing matter anyhow as always thank you kindly for the view and an extra special thank you to my wonderful patrons and those of you who have donated via PayPal you are the fuel to this channels Big Bang the understanding of there's a beginning is based on general relativity and we know general relativity is not right the reason we know it's not right is because for one thing it predicts a singularity it predicts that things are infinite that we don't think of that can be true also general relativity is not compatible with quantum mechanics which we do think is right so basically we have a prediction of the universe began based on a theory we have no right to trust

Channel: Rationality Rules

Views: 187,149

Rating: 4.7609215 out of 5

Keywords: the big bang debunked, the big bang, william lane craig response, blake giunta, big bang explained, big bang theory, god and big bang, was the universe created, beginning of the universe, what created the big bang, what came before the big bang, rationality rules, stephen woodford, steve woodford, big bang debate

Id: NNdwt1gy5xM

Length: 10min 16sec (616 seconds)

Published: Sun Jul 29 2018

Reddit Comments

[u/geophagus]

The Big Bang doesn’t have anything to say about the origin of the universe. It describes the early expansion of the universe. That’s it.

[u/ThatScottishBesterd]

Why do so many idiots seem to think that some revolutionary scientific findings are going to be found by some jackass posting on youtube instead of inside legitimate scientific literature?

I'll believe that the big bang has been "debunked" when that is position supported by the peer reviewed data and not one second before.

[u/[deleted]]

The title is complete clickbait. The video does not actually debunk anything.

[u/ursisterstoy]

I should be clear the big bang occurred but there is little evidence that it came from absolute philosophical nothing. Since it came from something else like the Lawrence Krauss version of nothing or a multiverse the Kalaam Cosmological argument that everything that begins to exist requires a first mover doesn't apply to the universe. It was probably eternal but 13.8 billion years ago the part we can observe inflated rapidly probably due to quantum fluctuations. Not sure what set those in motion or if those have always existed. Just whatever happened before that led to the state for it to expand in space and time and as it cooled the laws of physics began to hold true while dark energy, space-time, dark matter, and baryonic matter came about due to the same quantum fluctuations that expanded it from a hot dense state. It wasn't an explosion like a bomb but rather a rapid expansion.

TL;DR: the big bang inflation model is correct but the everything from absolutely nothing has no backing. Everything is creation ex materia. Something existed which was rearranged or in a hot dense state which expanded and cooled so that we have the version of the universe we live in today. There may be multiple universes or just one but something was always there (energy and quantum fluctuations) which are arranged in a certain way for us without knowing for sure if any other universe would follow the same outcome. This idea about determining if all universes ultimately wind up the same or can end up in wildly different configurations was something found in a paper published just after Stephen Hawking died and the idea that philosophical nothing creates anything is a dead idea. Philosophical nothing doesn't exist. Outside the universe or multiverse doesn't make sense. If it is philosophical nothing outside the universe there is no outside the universe. That location doesn't exist.

[u/Syst4ms]

My point of view on the big bang is that it may well have come from nothing or been created by a deity for all I know. The thing is, singularities break causality, do there's no way we'll ever know.

[u/Ihateazuremountain]

its pretty obvious the big bang didn't create the universe, it already existed by itself

being a timeless thing, the human brain isn't good enough to understand such concept then goes into an endless hole that goes to nothing