When He specified, in A Brief History of Time,
"On the off chance that the rate of development one moment after the enormous detonation had been littler by even one section in hundred thousand million , the Universe world have rcollapsed before it at any point achieved its present size.." (p-121-126)
How finely our universe is designed...!!
The predominant dazzling laws of science control the Every edge of Universe.
In the event that there was a brains worked behind the innovation of Nikon 50mm f/1.8 focal point , then there is additionally a higher Designer behind the Human Eye that has significantly a bigger number of pixels than Nikon 50mm f/1.8 focal point, around 130 million pixels, in any case, just around 6 million of the eye's pixels are cones (which see hues), the staying 124 million simply observe highly contrasting.
Inestimable Accident and Chemical Accident are the two Scientific terms that depict the tumble and non-examples of overcoming adversity of Modern Scientists.
Where the whole Science have confidence in Law of Causality, not in Miracle or Accident
This is the reason The Atheist Scientist (Hawking) admitted,
"May be its unrealistic to detail the hypothesis of the universe in a limited number of statements....we and our models , re bot part of the universe we are depicting . In this manner a physical hypothesis is self - referencing like Godel's Theorem. One may , in this way , anticipate that it will be either conflicting , or fragmented. The hypotheses we have so far , are both conflicting , and deficient... a few people will be exceptionally frustrated if there isn't an extreme hypothesis, that can be figured as a limited number of standards. I used to have a place with that camp , yet I have altered my opinion. I'm currently happy that our scan for comprehension will never go to an ed , and that we will dependably have the test of new revelation. Without it , we would stagnate "
🌳🦉🌳
We require Einstein's hypothesis of relativity to clarify the crucial establishment of Space-Time. At the same time we require Quantum mechanics to portray the properties of sub nuclear particles , however both the speculations contradict to each other.
At that point String Theory came to limit their enmity. The Sting hypothesis endeavored to clarify the deportment of Electron integrating the quantum field hypothesis to consistency.
At the point when each one was so energized with the recently conceived Doctrines,
As it set up some solid ideas of Multiverse Theory.
In any case, Indians were not all that energize, similar to westerns, having the new idea to be specific "Multiverse" (which implies we are not the only one , various Universes exist at the same time)
Why, Indians were not all that energized as the Westerns were....??
Since Indians knew ,
पुरुषोऽण्डं विनिर्भिद्य यदासौ स विनिर्गतः ।
आत्मनोऽयनमन्विच्छन्नपोऽस्राक्षीच्छुचिः शुचीः ॥10॥
In the wake of isolating the DIFFERENT UNIVERSES, the immense all inclusive type of the Lord [Mahā-Viṣṇu], which left the Causal Ocean, the place of appearance for the principal puruṣa-avatāra, went into every one of the different universes, craving to lie on the made supernatural water .
Srimad Bhagwat 2.10.10
क्षित्यादिभिरेष किलावृतः सप्तभिर्दशगुणोत्तरैरण्डकोशः ।
यत्र पतत्यणुकल्पः सहाण्डकोटिकोटिभिस्तदनन्तः ॥37॥
Each UNIVERSE is secured by seven layers — sky (space), fire(energy), air(gaseous), water(liquid), earth(solid), Kala (Time), and Manas (Mind or Thoughts) - The physical states and the aggregate vitality makes false inner self — every ten times more prominent than the past one. There are incalculable universes other than this one, and despite the fact that they are boundlessly vast, they move about like molecules in You. Consequently You are called Infinite [ananta].
SB 6.16.37
(Both the vitality and matter are identified with each other , and these together make the Illusion or Maya...
How identified with each other....??
we know as temperature builds, the motor vitality of particles expands, which brings about increment in weight)
In any case, when western Scientists were made distinct inquiries on String Theory , 'Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac' the author of String Theory (He made basic commitments to the early advancement of both quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics) declared
"It is by all accounts very difficult to put the hypothesis on a sound scientific premise"
(Logical American , May, 1963)
Again , disillusionment among Scientists...
Realism can't demonstrate that there is no clever being behind the Universe , however again they demonstrated that the Universe isn't vexation and Independent.with dazzle powers of Nature. Be that as it may, the unrivaled examples of nature is outlined by an Intelligent being or Supreme Consciousness.
what's more, this is the reason Einstein said ,
"The most wonderful and most significant feeling we can encounter is in the impression of the enchanted. It is s shower of all obvious science....That profoundly passionate conviction of the nearness of a predominant thinking power which is uncovered in the understandable universe frames my concept of God and I am attempting to grasp a little piece of knowledge show in nature"
(The Life and Times of Einstein, R. Clarck, New York , 1971 , p-18-19)
🕯️🙏🕯️
ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पुर्णमुदच्यते
पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥
ॐ शान्तिः ॥ (Upanishad, Ancient Indian Text )
Meaning:
A: Om, That (Outer World) is Infinite (Full with Divine Consciousness); This (Inner World) is likewise Infinite (Full with Divine Consciousness); From Infinite comes Purna (From the Fullness of Divine Consciousness the World is showed) ,
B: Taking Infinite from Infinite, Infinite Indeed Remains (Because Divine Consciousness is Non-Dual and Infinite).
C: Om Peace, Peace, Peace.
.
"our universe is an insightfully arranged. this is the view from the physical science...the knowledge shows itself by influencing certain impossible circumstances to show up"
- B. D. Jefferson (Nobel laureates , CMOS innovation.)
🕯️🙏🕯️
For the present, I finish up this post with the incredibly curious Nasadiya Sukta from the most antiquated content of Humanity - the Rigveda [10.129] which features the journey of old Rishis to discover Origins of this Creation as well as that of GOD Himself-
At first was no Being neither Non-being,
There was yet no Air nor Sky spread.
So what was covering? Where was it exhibit?
Was Water there, in the incomprehensible profundity?
There was no Death, nor Immortality;
Of Night or Day there was yet no sign.
The One inhaled windless, self-maintaining,
Other than HIM was not much.
Murkiness was there, wrapping more Darkness,
And All was Water unclear, Dark.
The Cosmic seed was wrapped in the Void,
Ascending finally, by the energy of Thought.
In this starting, Desire took frame,
The primal seed, conceived of the Mind.
Carefully filtering, Existence from Non-presence,
Sages have discovered this in their Heart.
A Ray was extended over the Void,
Recognize what was underneath, and what above.
Bearers of seed were there and Mighty powers,
The following was Strength, and Creative-will above.
Who truly knows? Who can announce?
At the point when did it happen? How Creation went ahead?
Indeed, even the Devas came after its rise.
So who genuinely knows, Whence it was conceived?
He, from Whom this Creation Arose,
Did He mold it or did He not,
He, who studies it from the Highest Heaven,
He most likely knows or possibly He does not..!!
🍁🧘♀️☘️
Peddling's passing, Einstein's introduction to the world, and Pi Day: what does everything mean..?? who knows....!!
May the immense awareness accomplishes another material body in another measurements where Time and Space has distinctive meanings, where Gravity has autonomous sense...
(More data are furnished with Individual Images for information searchers)
What caused the Big Bang and created the Universe..??
Science deals with testable hypotheses, i.e. ideas that are falsifiable through prediction and experiment. As it is only possible to interact with the contents of the Universe, it is essentially impossible to ask a scientific question about what is external to the Universe, whether spatially or temporally (assuming either is even possible).
It is possible that if there are additional dimensions and mutliple universes that interact with the 4 traditional dimensions, then we may eventually be able to learn of things that were once external to the Universe. However, such ideas are currently not testable and so might be classified as applied mathematics rather than science.
In short, questions about events that were before or outside the Universe are not currently scientific questions, and likely never will be.
Wouldn't the Big Bang theory be considered a hypothesis and not a theory?
Wouldn't the Big Bang theory be considered a hypothesis and not a theory? In my research done by free will I realized that not much proof has acually been given of this major event in space.
Actually I disagree with that. I think that there is now a lot of evidence in favour of the Big Bang Theory. The difference between a hypothesis and a theory is according to my dictionary:
HYPOTHESIS implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation.
THEORY implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth.
I think that there is enough evidence for the Big Bang that it should be called a theory.
We can observe radiation left over from the Big Bang in the form of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and even see fluctuations in that from which it is believed the galaxies formed.
The expansion of the universe implies that at some time in the past everything must have been a lot closer together and hotter, which sounds a lot like the Big Bang to me!
In GR (General Relativity), there is a theory called the singularity theory which can be used to prove that there must have been a singularity (ie. a Big Bang) at some point in the past for every possible way we know to describe the Universe.
There is probably more evidence I could quote if I thought about it some more, but at least this will give you something to think about.
What was there before the Big Bang and what is there outside of our universe..??
We can define the universe as everything there is, so in that case there is nothing outside of it. We also say that space and time both started at the Big Bang and therefore there was nothing before it.
Another definition for the universe is the observable universe - which is the part of it that we can technically see. We cannot know what is outside of that (since we can't observe it), but we think that physics works the same everywhere and so we think that it should be very similar to the observable universe. We actually think that the universe might be infinite in extent, and so goes on forever, even though we can only see a finite part of it.
We can speculate in meta-physics or in religion about what was before the Big Bang, but again, we cannot use science to tell anything about it as physics as we understand it breaks down at that point.
How do we know if the universe will keep expanding forever?
There is really only one way for the universe to stop expanding: that is if there is enough mass in the universe for the gravity to overcome the expansion. The density of mass (amount of mass per volume of space) that is required to halt the expansion is often called the "critical density." If the universe is more dense than critical, the gravity of all the stuff in the universe will be able to overcome the expansion, causing it to stop, and eventually re-collapse. If the density in the universe is smaller than the critical density, then the expansion will continue forever.
It is very difficult to determine what the density of the universe is, because most of the matter in the universe doesn't give off light that we can see in our telescopes. But we can go out and measure how many galaxies are out there, and how fast they orbit each other (The more massive galaxies are, the faster they will orbit). This gives us a fairly good idea of the density. We can also try to directly measure how quickly the expansion is decelerating by measuring the expansion speeds of distant galaxies. This is also a very difficult experiment.
Update by Christopher Springob: Astronomers' understanding of this problem has changed dramatically since we first answered this question in January 1999. There's now convincing evidence that the expansion of the universe is actually accelerating, not decelerating. This cannot be due to gravity. It must be due to "dark energy", a repulsive force of empty space that counteracts gravity on large scales. (You can read more about this here.)
Assuming astronomers' interpretations of the data are correct, and the universe is indeed accelerating at an ever-faster rate, we still don't know what the ultimate fate of the universe is going to be because we don't know if the dark energy will always be repulsive. There are some models that allow for it to become attractive in the future, which would cause the universe to ultimately recontract. But if dark energy is real, then the density of matter will no longer have much impact on the final fate of the universe, because dark energy tends to win out over gravity in the long run.
What do Hindu manuscripts/texts say about multiple universes or a multiverse...??
What the Western scientists had discovered in the 19th century, and which our 21st-century eminent scientists
like Stephen Hawking and Dr Michio Kaku have now affirmed and corroborate, is a twice-told tale for the great majority of the Hindus. That there are multiple or
innumerable universes is no news to the Hindu who is learned in the Hindu scriptures. Not just one but
several Puranas, viz., Vishnu Purana, Srimad Bhagavatam, Padma Purana and Vayu Purana, and authoritative Hindu scriptures like Atharva Veda have spoken of the different universes.
Every universe is covered by seven layers
— earth, water, fire, air, sky, the total
energy and false ego — each ten times greater than the previous one. There are innumerable universes besides this one,
and although they are unlimitedly large, they move about like atoms in You. Therefore You are called unlimited
( Srimad Bhagavatam 6.16.37 )
क्षित्यादिभिरेष किलावृतः सप्तभिर्दशगुणोत्तरैरण्डकोशः ।
यत्र पतत्यणुकल्पः सहाण्डकोटिकोटिभिस्तदनन्तः ॥37॥>br>
kṣity-ādibhir eṣa kilāvṛtaḥ saptabhir daśa-guṇottarair aṇḍa-kośaḥ
yatra pataty aṇu-kalpaḥ sahāṇḍa-koṭi-koṭibhis tad anantaḥ
Every universe is covered by seven layers — earth, water, fire, air, sky, the total energy and false ego — each ten times greater than the previous one. There are innumerable universes besides this one, and although they are unlimitedly large, they move about like atoms in You. Therefore You are called unlimited [ananta].SB 6.16.37
Science and Sanatana Dharma:
At the outset, I would like to apologize to the discerning reader for using an absurd title, which implies that science and spirituality are mutually exclusive areas, while in actual fact they are two different aspects of one and the same reality. In modern times, there is a common tendency to regard physical science as constituting the entire field of scientific knowledge, and to dismiss anything that falls outside its limited domain as unscientific. This deplorable tendency of identifying a part for the whole betrays a frame of mind that is contrary to what is considered as scientific The main purpose of writing this article is to point out the need to include spiritual science as an integral part of a much broader field of scientific knowledge, and to indicate an appropriate means of achieving possible reconciliation between the two conflicting schools of thought.
According to the spiritually rich Vedic tradition, which is also the oldest religious and cultural tradition of mankind, every aspect of the secular or spiritual knowledge is one
of numerous manifestations of an eternal and omnipotent reality which the ancient seers designated as Brahman, our aim of life being to realize our oneness with this reality. It is therefore essential for us to make use of our secular knowledge in a manner that will help us to move toward this goal without hindrances. The spectacular advancement of physical science, which has helped us to understand the mode of working of Nature, offers us a unique opportunity to achieve this, provided we choose to utilize the results of physical science for the benefit of mankind. This is precisely where the spiritual science comes in to our rescue. The object of a genuine religion is therefore to complement the knowledge of physical science by providing it with a spiritual counterpart, to enable us to make the right decision and act accordingly. Consequently, a true religion must be equipped with all the essential features of being thoroughly scientific on spiritual matters, and should not be based on a mere faith that cannot be justified by critical reasoning. Similarly, a worthy follower of physical science should have a frame of mind that is ready to accept the idea of spiritual science, which has been vindicated by the teachings of a number of
spiritually enlightened beings who came to this world to show us the way to achieve spiritual perfection. A religion that is opposed to the concept of critical thinking fails to serve any useful purpose, just as an indiscriminate use of the results of physical science with no regard for the moral consequences is always counterproductive;
The ancient religion of the Vedas is exceedingly rich in its philosophical content, and is at the same time completely scientific in its outlook. It is capable of providing a sound basis for a reconciliation between science and religion as perceived by the modern mind. Religion, according to the vedic principles, is essentially a device for making us decent human beings, not an organized institution founded on a set of dogmas that are not open to intellectual scrutiny. Although the ultimate truth, according to the Vedas, cannot be arrived at with the help of reasoning alone, a spiritual truth is considered as one that does not contradict reasoning. There is a strong emphasis, therefore, on the need to purify our intellect with the help of a suitable spiritual discipline, so that we are able to make proper use of the faculty of reasoning. Incidentally, the vedic religion describes the highest state of spiritual perfection as vijnana, which means supreme scientific achievement..
The remarkable achievements in the field of physical science have created a sense
of weakness among people for this important branch of human knowledge. Incidentally, they have also paved the way for a group of pseudo-scientists who are eager to exploit the common sentiment in trying to promote ideas, born of their fertile imagination, as pieces of scientific truth. They seem to succeed in getting what they want not only by using the weight of their authority to the fullest extent, but also by adopting deceptive methods of presenting their views in the garb of science. This deplorable practice has created a mass of superstition, in the name of science, which is more dangerous than some of the known forms of religious superstition, since many of these spurious conclusions are becoming an integral part of the modern education system. The fact that these results fail to satisfy proper intellectual and scientific scrutiny seems to have escaped notice of the modern intelligentsia. One such absurd theory that has received a great deal of publicity in recent times will be briefly discussed in what follow.
The so-called big bang theory of creation imagines a vanishingly small particle with an infinitely large mass as the starting point of creation of the universe, the origin and location of this fantastic particle being considered as immaterial. All of a sudden, an equally fantastic explosion took place to disintegrate this particle, generating innumerable material entities with finite masses and densities, and marking the beginning of time and space. This theory evidently gives rise to several pertinent questions which its proponents are unable to answer. Even if we accept, for the sake of argument, the existence of the extraordinary initial particle, the occurrence of a spontaneous event such as the big bang, which requires an infinitely large supply of external energy, is totally unacceptable to the genuinely scientific mind. In the first place, it is impossible to have an effect without an appropriate cause, thereby violating the well established casual law for the occurrence of natural phenomena. Secondly, an event can be identified only within a pre-existent frame of time and space, and to suggest that it is the other way round is simply absurd. Thirdly, the occurrence of a random explosion can only result in a chaotic state with resonating disorder, and it is hard to imagine how an orderly steady state could emerge without the damping effect of an external agency. These remarks, which are by no means exhaustive, should be sufficient to indicate the pseudo-scientific nature of the theory.
The big bang theory is generally associated with another theory that is based on an extraordinary concept of the universe, which is imagined to have a finite radius, and to contain all the heavenly bodies within its boundary. The universe is also supposed to be radially expanding outward, presumably into another universe of no consequence. Thus, the universe is given a different connotation from its accepted linguistic meaning. The available astronomical data on the motion of distant galaxies, based on the relativistic Doppler principle, seem to suggest that these galaxies are moving away from us with a speed which is comparable with the speed of light. Assuming these observations to have a scientific validity, they seem to suggest a curious fact which needs to be addressed. If the universe had been expanding continuously with such a high speed for a considerable length of time, it could not have remained finite enough for astronomical observations to be possible on certain distant galaxies, thereby rendering the initial assumption invalid. This objection must be resolved in a satisfactory manner before the validity of the theory of expanding universe could be truly established.
(Dr. J. Chakrabarty, Florida State University)
Could there have been multiple Big Bangs at different places in the universe?
From what I understand, no one is sure why matter is not spread evenly in the universe or why it seems the universe is expanding faster than expected. Is it possible that there was more than one Big Bang or a series of little secondary Big Bangs causing matter to be spread haphazardly and giving space a boost in speed to counter gravity?
On large scales, matter actually seems like it is spread uniformly throughout space. On small scales, of course, it isn't - but that is due to the effect of gravity. If you imagine an a universe of infinite size where the density of matter is the same everywhere, all you need is a tiny fluctuation in density at a particular point and more matter will then be attracted to that point, so you can eventually go on to form a galaxy or cluster of galaxies around it.
We think there was only one Big Bang (in our observable universe, at least) taking place everywhere simultaneously because the evidence we see is that everything in the universe (on large distance scales) is moving away from everything else. If there were multiple Big Bangs, then presumably you would see some faraway galaxies moving towards each other, or at least a more complicated relationship between the distance of objects we see and the speeds at which they appear to be moving away from us.