No Possibility of God

[night912]

Gravity would never allow a big bang to happen. It didn't happen.

Why not? It may appear that gravity would not allow metal to be 100ft off the ground, and yet, there are airplanes made of metal that can be off the ground, even beyond 100ft.

If all matter in the universe came from one rapid expansion then all the matter in the universe would be found in an expanding sphere with an empty area at the center. That's not what we see. Galaxies are fairly evenly distributed across the universe.

The universe expanded, not move from one place to another. The universe consist of matter. So, if using the expanding sphere analogy where the universe is the sphere, so everything that sphere is made of is the shape of the sphere. The sphere would not be the sphere if not for all of the contents that it's made up of.

Think of the universe as an inflated balloon. The whole inflated balloon is made of matter. There no part of it that is "nothing." The rubber "boundary" and air inside that boundary is all matter.

And, the increasing speed of the spread of galaxies does not fit with the idea of a big bang.

How so?

Also, this idea of the universe being 13.8 billion light years old is entirely based upon the fact that we can only see 13.8 billion light years with our current telescopes. The James Webb space telescope is going to throw that number out the window. I hope Stephen makes it that long to see it. EDIT: Oh, I guess he's dead already. Darn it.

No. The fact of the matter is that you are dead wrong. Nobody will ever make it to see that because it's impossible. No scientists that I am aware of has the idea that the universe is 13 billion light years old. You are actually the first person that I heard of that has that idea. The measurement of distance cannot replace the measurement of time. Not every peices of information are considered as "facts" and whatever you said above is certainly not a fact. It's what you would called, "false information."

Thanks for playing Mr. Hawking, next time stick to what you know.

Actually Hawking did stick to what he knew. He played well and knew that we cannot use the measurement of distance to replace the measurement of time.

Thanks for playing Super Universe, but I suggest you stick to what you know about the universe, which is that it's just a part of your name. And from the evidence that was observed, you should leave the cosmology studying and explaining to the actual cosmologists. At least to the ones who knows the difference between the measurement of distance(light years) and the measurement of time(years).

And just in case you are still confused about the age of the universe, I'll tell you. The estimated age of the universe is approximately 13 billion years old. And the estimated observable size of the universe from the widest edge to edge is somewhere around 93 billion light years.

 

[Yazata]

Hawking wrote. "For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."

Hawking seems to not be aware that most philosophical theology (not just Christian) holds that God exists outside time and space.

Has science finally provided an answer to the age-old question of God's existence?

No.

Is Hawking wrong about time?

Maybe. However the bigger problem here is his seeming ignorance about theology. (A subject that was probably beneath his contempt.)

Or, is there some workaround which allows God to exist/create in a timeless state?

Of course.

In fact, according to Hawking, nothing existed prior to the Big Bang and it is perfectly ok to accept that.

Except I expect that Hawking would have interpreted his "nothing" rather flexibly, to include things like his beloved mathematics of theoretical physics that he probably expected to provide him an explanation for all of reality. All of that abstract mathematical stuff seems to be timeless as well.

 

[lukethethird]

Hawking wrote. "For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."
Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe | Live Science

So time didn't exist before the Big Bang?
There seems a lot of certainty that prior to the BB time did not exist at least by people certainly smarter than me.

Has science finally provided an answer to the age-old question of God's existence?
Is Hawking wrong about time?
Or, is there some workaround which allows God to exist/create in a timeless state?

In fact, according to Hawking, nothing existed prior to the Big Bang and it is perfectly ok to accept that.

God existed outside of time and space, yeah, that's it, that's the ticket, God existed outside of time an space, yeah, that's it.

 

[night912]

Except I expect that Hawking would have interpreted his "nothing" rather flexibly, to include things like his beloved mathematics of theoretical physics that he probably expected to provide him an explanation for all of reality. All of that abstract mathematical stuff seems to be timeless as well.

Well, you expect wrong because Hawking wasn't, literally or figuratively, doing any gymnastics with the word "nothing" when he said that "nothing existed prior is to big bang." And mathematic and physics isn't timeless. Both of them exist within time.