The Evidence Explained

Learning Intentions: By the end of the lesson you will be able to… 1.Explain in detail at least two piece of evidence to support the Big Bang theory. 2.Have though about possible strengths and criticisms of the Big Bang theory. 3.State at least two strengths and two criticisms for the Big Bang theory.

Is there any evidence? Scientists would argue that there is physical evidence for the Big Bang: 1.Redshift effect of galaxies (The Expanding Universe) 2.Cosmic Background Radiation Heat (CMB) 3.Relative Abundance of the elements

1. Redshift effect Edwin Hubble discovered that light coming from distant galaxies was all shifted towards the red end of the spectrum. This meant that things in the universe were moving apart from each other.

2.Cosmic Background Radiation two astronomers, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, found that radio reception had a noisy fuzz associated with it (white noise). The fuzz seemed to be coming from every point in the universe and was measured as having a temperature of -270 degrees. Physicists agreed this was leftover ‘heat’ in the form of radiation, which was still cooling from the Big Bang.

3. Relative Abundance of the elements The Universe today contains the elements, the basic atomic and chemical building blocks for everything that exists. The amounts for these (their relative abundance) in the universe today points very strongly towards a particular process of their ‘creation’ in the past- evidence points towards the Big Bang. E.g., the proportionate of Hydrogen in the Universe today is exactly what you would expect if the Universe had been started off by the Big Bang

What caused the Big Bang? In physics, the Big Bang requires no other cause than the laws of nature BUT, did the laws of nature come into existence before the Big Bang? If so, where did they come from? OR did they come into being at the moment of the Big Bang? If they did, how could they have caused it?

Turn to the backs of your jotters and write down an explanation of what happened during the big bang.

Strengths of the Big Bang theory You could link it with Christian beliefs- if you don’t believe the Big Bang “just happened” you could argue that God caused it. It offers a rational explanation for something which occurred by definition without anyone there to observe it. There is a strong scientific basis for the theories from a variety of fields of scientific enquiry

What are some of the criticisms of this argument? In groups of four: Try to come up with at least two possible criticisms of the Big Bang theory. You have 5 minutes!!!

Criticisms Based on circumstantial evidence It’s so complex that it is not a useful way for ordinary people to understand how the universe began Does not offer any explanations as to the meaning and purpose of human life or our place in the Universe

Textbooks: Read pages Answer INT 1 questions and INT 2 questions on page 111

Two Views of the Big Bang 1.Big Bang theory is wrong, Genesis is right 2.Big Bang theory is right, Genesis is wrong

Big Bang theory is wrong, Genesis is right Most people don’t understand the theoretical ‘evidence’ behind the Big Bang There are a lot of assumptions in scientific method The theoretical calculations could be wrong

The Bible does not mention a Big Bang. Creationists would argue God created the world in 6 days. If science challenges your beliefs, you need to hold onto your faith, no matter how convincing the arguments are ‘Creation Research society’- “Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historic facts”, e.g., Noah and flood

Creation Scientist Movement “The Bible is the written word of God...It is the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct.”

Big Bang is right, Genesis is wrong Many scientists would argue that although their calculations cannot ‘prove’ the Big Bang, they are as close as you can get without physically witnessing it. More reliable argument than saying ‘God’ created the universe A piece of writing written long before the rise of modern science explaining the origins of the universe shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Richard Dawkins- having faith in the creation of a Universe by a God is behaving in a way where your mind is so open that your brain is in danger of falling out. Further evidence will be found Interpretations of the evidence are not blind subjectivity, they are the best interpretations of the available evidence

Compatibility of the two views: ‘Hartle-Hawking theory’- the Universe came out of nothing It could be argued that this is similar to the Christian view: God created the world out of nothing Creation Scientists- believe in the theory of ‘Intelligent Design’- uses scientific evidence to support the view that God created the Universe and challenges the scientific evidence that there’s no need for a creator

Their explanations may be different, but not necessarily contradictory (NOMA concept- science explains how, religion explains why) Perhaps science explains the physical elements of the beginning of the Universe while religion explains the spiritual ones. Creation by God is perhaps outside the scope of scientific enquiry Christians can accept the Big Bang if they are prepared to accept that the Biblical creation story isn’t literally true

Perhaps science and the Big Bang explains the mechanics of the beginnings of the Universe while Christian beliefs explain the meaning and purpose behind it all.