From time to time, I am running into news about another theory on origin of the Universe in my news feed on Facebook. Sometimes those theories are just ridiculous, sometimes – insane. And, even if you will look it up on Wikipedia, for some reason, you will find not one, but lots of different theories on origin of the Universe. Even though currently the Big Bang theory the most recognized, nevertheless, as well as the other theories, it does not completely satisfy humanity. But why so? Why then so many theories exist, why media is trying to make a news on each of them? The answer lies just beneath the surface: that is like that just because this topic is really popular, because question about origin of Universe is really important to humankind.
“Here’s a smart one” – you can say, “captain obvious, of course, this question is popular and everyone would want to know the answer for it, get back on topic! And you still didn’t answer: why there are so many theories?”
Universe is not eternal
Yeah, why so many theories? It looks like you just can say that Universe is eternal and always existed and the question will become irrelevant. And some atheists already did that. For example, Bertrand Russel. But, there is an obvious problem: Universe is not eternal and infinite. Not just laws, but postulates of material nature does not allow Universe to be eternal. Those are laws of conservation, which state that something cannot arise from nothing and the opposite has yet to be proven. And second postulate of thermodynamics, according to which, sooner or later, our Universe will definitely face, at least, a “heat death”. And laws of cause-effect relations, that make it clear, that every effect has its cause. Nobody can trespass them. There are attempts to circumvent second law o thermodynamics, using statements that Universe is infinite and, this way, it contains infinite amounts of high-potential energy. But those are statements that are impossible to prove, an even more so, disprovable by plain observations like, for example, “photometric paradox”. Cause if Universe would be eternal and infinite, we would see all the sky with same brightness as average brightness of stars, in other words, we would just simply get burned! “Photometric paradox” is solved by the fact that Universe is thought to be young and existent for a limited amount of time, which allows us to conclude: limited by its own maximal speed, light from the distant stars just did not reach us yet. But this solution disproves eternity of Universe, even if you would assume that it is infinite! And if Universe is not eternal, then it had its beginning and its cause. All we need is to find that beginning and cause.
Any finite essence requires a cause
And that is where we get tons of different theories and hypotheses. But why there is no single acceptable theory that would solve it all? I will answer this question for you right now. It is because every theory that excludes eternal Prime cause is doomed for failure. The thing is, that, concluding from natural knowledge, “natural light”, as Rene Descartes said, any finite essence requires a cause, which, in the end, will lead us to eternal Cause, which does not require a cause, because it is eternal by its own nature and has no beginning or ending. That is exactly why humanity cannot be satisfied by all those theories, and even by most accepted one, the theory of Big Bang. Even if you would base on this theory, you would still be left with a question: “Where did singularity, which generated the Universe by its explosion, come from?” If Universe has a definite, calculated age it means, that it is not eternal and requires a cause concluding from the fact that something non-eternal cannot emerge from nothing.
Here I might be asked to prove existence of eternal and eternity. Even more so, nobody ever observed or even had an ability to observe infinite (let us keep in mind our own limits, like, for example, limits of the speed of light), not to mention – eternal. How then can we prove this? Here I thank God and a great philosopher Rene Descartes for another idea I got from his “Meditations on metaphysics”.
Concept of eternal and infinite is generally accepted, obvious and inherent for us
It is all simple: nobody has seen eternal, but concept of eternal and infinite is general, obvious and inherent for us. If not for the concept of eternal, nobody would have thought of a question like “Where did Universe come from?” There would be no concept of infinite number; geometrical straight line would not have existed. Where from do we know that world is not eternal, if we did not see anything eternal? Have you ever thought about it? Exactly, the realization of non-eternal and limited gives us an idea of eternal and infinite! As soon as we realize our limitedness we postulate eternal and limitless, cause what is the base for our understanding of our own limitedness, if not a comparison of our own self and all the material world with some concept of eternal and limitless, which is inherent to us!
It is the same as mountain, which is unthinkable of without a valley. As soon as we think of a mountain, we automatically assume existence of a valley. Same thing applies here: as soon as we realize limitedness of something, we automatically assume that there should be something eternal and infinite, which we are comparing with!
Even the fact, that question “where did Universe come from?” is coming to people minds; even existence of theories of its emergence, already means that eternity does exist, other way, nobody would ask this question and try to figure out those hypotheses and theories. This question itself postulates eternity! Idea of eternity is inherent to you like an inalienable knowledge of your mind. That is why we ask this question dealing with non-eternal essence.
Ascertaining finiteness of something is like saying: “here is a mountain”, and if there is a mountain – there is a valley, because those two concepts are inseparable. By saying “mountain”, we already pointed out existence of valley. By realizing finiteness of something, we are postulating eternity or, other way, we would not realize finiteness of things, in our mind, we are comparing all the things to infinity and eternity and say: “It is finite, it is limited, it is non-eternal”, this way unambiguously pointing out a fact of existence of infinity and eternity as self-evident.
Nobody comes up with an idea of searching for a beginning of geometrical straight line
Largely due to very existence of theories of emergence of the Universe we can be sure, that eternity is real, or other way, those theories would not have existed, they would be just pointless. And if eternity is real and finite Universe is real, then there is something eternal is real, some eternal entity, which, being eternal, has no beginning or ending and was a cause of finite Universe. Eternal is free from searching for cause exactly due to its nature. Nobody comes up with an idea of searching for a beginning of geometrical straight line or to find out what is the biggest number! Asking question like “Where did eternal come from?” is as pointless as asking: “Where is the beginning of strait line?” It is obvious, that eternal does not require a cause and has no beginning and no ending.
That is why the most correct and obvious answer to the question of “Where did Universe come from?” is that it, being finite, has eternal Primal cause, which is non-material by its nature and not bound by laws of nature as matter is. It is simple and elementary.
I am purposefully not saying that this Primal cause is the God, even though I am writing words “Primal cause” from a capital letter, cause I myself, am confident that it is God, but based on the fact, that we are dealing with eternal entity, it is too early to state that it is exactly a God. Let’s, for now, just go with the fact that everything that is finite, and Universe in general, has its beginning and cause that is based in eternal Primal cause, which nature lies in the fact that it is non-material in the sense that we are viewing known matter.
Interesting subject. The Big Bang, or some variation of the Big Bang, is the predominant theory of the beginnings of our universe. I agree that God is the Prime Mover. However, what comes immediately after that first primal second is what scientist are very concerned about. God created matter and, proably, time in the same instant, but what scientific principles are left out of the equation.
I will not be around when we travel through space, but i would certainly like to be.
Did you know that Big Bang theory now most predominant only because laws of nature deny in anyway eternal Universe? Atheists would like better to have eternal Universe for excluding God, but it can’t be.