Check users, creationist, Administrators
22,649
edits
Cosmological argument: Difference between revisions
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
→BGV theorem
m (→BGV theorem) |
m (→BGV theorem) |
||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
:''Main Article: [[Borde-Guth-Vilenkin singularity theorem]]'' | :''Main Article: [[Borde-Guth-Vilenkin singularity theorem]]'' | ||
The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin singularity theorem (or BGV theorem) was developed in 2003 by three leading cosmologists; Arvind Borde, Alan Guth and Alex Vilenkin. Subsequently in recent years since, the BGV theorem has become widely respected and accepted within the [[physics]] community.<ref name="wlcnt">William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland, ''The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology'' (Blackwell Publishing 2009), pg. 142</ref> The theorem is based on, what Alan Guth calls a "well-known fact", something traveling on a geodesic (made of light, straight structural elements) through an expanding universe becomes redshifted.<ref name="natureofnature">Bruce L. Gordon and William A. Dembski, ''The Nature of Nature: Examining the Role of Naturalism in Science'' (Intercollegiate Studies Institute 2011), pg. 498</ref> | The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin singularity theorem (or BGV theorem) was developed in 2003 by three leading cosmologists; Arvind Borde, Alan Guth and Alex Vilenkin. Subsequently in recent years since, the BGV theorem has become widely respected and accepted within the [[physics]] community.<ref name="wlcnt">William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland, ''The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology'' (Blackwell Publishing 2009), pg. 142</ref> The theorem is based on, what Alan Guth calls a "well-known fact", something traveling on a geodesic (made of light, straight structural elements) through an expanding universe becomes redshifted.<ref name="natureofnature">Bruce L. Gordon and William A. Dembski, ''The Nature of Nature: Examining the Role of Naturalism in Science'' (Intercollegiate Studies Institute 2011), pg. 498</ref> Words like expansion and contraction of the universe have to do with "congruences of timelike geodesics (the potential trajectories of test particles)."<ref name="2003paperpg1">A. Borde, A. Guth and A. Vilenkin, ''Inflationary space-times are not past-complete'', Phys. | ||
<ref>Peter Coles, ''Routledge Companion to the New Cosmology'' (Routledge 2004)[http://books.google.com/books?id=BgNGWVr5yhIC&pg=PA202#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> Borde, Guth and Vilenkin | Rev. Lett. 90 151301 (2003), pg. 1[http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0110012]</ref> Important to the 2003 finding was the assumption of a single congruence "with a positive average expansion rate throughout some specified region."<ref name="2003paperpg1"/> Discovered by Edwin Hubble (1889 – 1953) expansion of the universe has become a law. According to [[Hubbles law]]; "The apparent recession velocity of a galaxy v is proportional to its distance ''d'' from the observer: ''v=H<sub>0</sub>d'', where the constant of proportionality ''H<sub>0</sub>'' is known as the Hubble constant." | ||
<ref>Peter Coles, ''Routledge Companion to the New Cosmology'' (Routledge 2004)[http://books.google.com/books?id=BgNGWVr5yhIC&pg=PA202#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> Borde, Guth and Vilenkin follow an imagined observer back into time by way of a "timelike or null geodesic", which according to Guth will be blueshifted within a universe obeying Hubbles law. Under some circumstances the blueshift will reach "infinite rapidity" or the speed of light within a "finite amount of proper time (or affine parameter)".<ref name="natureofnature"/> Along this trajectory with an affine parameter shows that such trajectory is "geodesically incomplete."<ref name="natureofnature"/> | |||
It is by this groundbreaking and widely respected scientific theorem that demonstrates the beginning of the universe, or premise 2 of the kalam cosmological argument. | It is by this groundbreaking and widely respected scientific theorem that demonstrates the beginning of the universe, or premise 2 of the kalam cosmological argument. | ||
