Cosmological Warfare

       Copernicus' real revolution was to break the Aristotelian principle that the stars were embedded in a heavenly sphere that drove the universe. Once the Earth moved through space the need for gravitas was broken. Infinite space became possible. Stars were no longer fixed in the underside of the heavens. They were scattered throughout an infinite space. The universe was no longer a finite system but one of infinite scope and eternal existence. The need for a Prime Mover was altered to that of a gifted watchmaker who created a system, wound up the mechanism and then watched it tick. Copernicus' discovery as presented by  Modern Materialism:        

       1.  Sun is the center of our universe - Earth holds no special status

       2.  Earth revolves on its axis - Universe is eternal

       3.  Earth moves  - Steady State Theory of Cosmology

       4.  Earth's annual trip around the sun is responsible for seasons

       5.  No creation - evolution of species

By the beginning of the 20th Century materialist philosophers had dispensed with even the need for a Deity. All that existed were material objects and supernatural intervention was not needed for creation. The Steady State Model of Cosmology was the accepted expression of an infinite and eternal universe. When Einstein presented his General Theory of Relativity in 1915 the concept of an infinite universe was so strongly accepted in the scientific community that he added a Cosmological Constant to bring the theory in line with the Steady State Theory of the universe (i.e., an infinite and eternal universe ).

     Another physicist, George Lemaitre chose to ignore the addition of the Cosmological Constant and used Einstein's original theory to hypothesize an expanding universe. He reasoned that if the universe were expanding it had been smaller yesterday and still smaller a year ago. Extrapolating this backward to its beginning Lemaitre proposed a dynamic universe that was expanding from a “primeval atom.” To explain the present universe he speculated that the stars had been squeezed into a super compact atom that contained all current matter. The discovery of cosmic radiation was seen as evidence of the original breakup of this super atom.

     However since there was no observational data to support Lemaitre's contention that the universe was expanding the “dynamic evolving model” received very little respect. Einstein's Theory of Relativity and the use of the Cosmological Constant provided a mathematical system that supported a static, eternal universe. It wasn't until 1923 when Edwin Hubble identified Cepheid variable stars in the Andromeda nebula as a part of a separate galaxy that astronomers began to understand the true scope of the universe. Prior to Hubble's discovery The Great Debate in astronomy raged over whether observable nebulae were in our galaxy. Larger and better telescopes were allowing scientists to turn smudges into stars - millions of stars. Six years later in 1929 Hubble used spectroscopy, the analysis of different wavelengths of light, to determine the position of stars relative to Earth. Spectroscopy is the analysis of light. Similar to the Doppler effect, light is stretched as it recedes from us. Stars that were moving away from us would have more light in the infrared spectrum (i.e., red spectrum).

Similarly light is shortened, moved into the blue spectrum, if the object is moving closer to Earth. The majority of the stars and their respective galaxies were moving AWAY. Not only were the stars moving away from us but the very fabric of space - the universe itself was expanding!      Hubble's data on what is called the “Red Shift” represents a significant change in our understanding of the scope of the universe ( The Big Bang p. 270). Einstein went to the Mt. Wilson Observatory where Hubble worked with a 100-inch telescope.

     Would seeing bring believing? In February of 1931, Einstein renounced his use of the cosmological constant and endorsed the expanding universe concept. Einstein found Edwin Hubble's observations convincing.      While many astronomers were rethinking their assessment of the universe, the scientific establishment was not prepared to abandon the view that the universe was eternal and infinite. In fact, they noted several problems with the expanding model. The observations Hubble used to indicate galaxies were receding also indicated that the universe was approximately 2 billion years old. However the geologic dating of Earth’s rocks indicated an age of 3.4 billion years. 

     The new theory faced an embarrassing situation. The Earth was older than its theoretical universe.     As the view of space expanded through the use of better telescopes astronomers were able to see not only deeper into space but back in time. We continue to be amazed by the stunning images from the Hubble Space Telescope. We can sit in our homes, click a few buttons and casually select among images of vast galaxies beyond our own, black holes gobbling up stars and supernovas spewing forth massive streams of matter. What most of us don’t think about is that we are not only looking at distant objects but that these objects are chronometers. Light travels at a specific speed (i.e., 186,000 miles a second) therefore by calculating a distance you are also calculating time. The distance to a star can be used to calculate an accurate measure of time (i.e., how long it took for the light to reach Earth). This is how astronomers were determining the age of the universe. While Lemaitre's theory of a dynamically evolving universe had solved one problem, the universe was expanding, it had yet another problem. He had proposed the initial starting point as a single, super massive primeval atom. His theory stated that “The atom world broke into fragments, each fragment into still smaller pieces. . . . two hundred and sixty successive fragmentations were needed in order to reach the present pulverization of matter.” (The Big Bang p. 309).

     While Hubble's data provided support for Lemaitre's theory of an expanding universe it did nothing to provide a means for the creation of the elements. According to Lemaitre theory, all the elements were present within an initial massive atom. Although the hypothesized primeval atom would be highly unstable and fragment into lighter atoms the debris resulting from the fragmentation would settle in the middle of the periodic table. Lemaitre's universe would be dominated by very stable elements such as iron. His top-down approach would not create our universe, which is dominated by hydrogen and helium. The following chart shows the relative abundance of the elements in the universe.

                                   Abundance of Elements

       Hydrogen 72%           Helium 25%            Metals 3%

(Creator and the Cosmos p.32)

     Astronomers consider any element other than hydrogen and helium as metals. In other words, hydrogen and helium account for almost all the atoms in the universe (humanity as a carbon based life form is a rarity). Any theory, which proposes to offer plausible cosmology (theory of the origin of the universe ), has to account for the presence of specific elements in their current abundances.

Hot Creation Event:

     The next piece of the puzzle came from the efforts of a nuclear physicist, Dr. George Gamow. Dr. Gamow sought to explore the first moments of the universe. Instead of using Lemaitre's super atom, Gamow’s theory built the universe through nucleosynthesis- the formation of elements by nuclear fusion. He believed a massive nuclear explosion could produce the abundance of hydrogen and helium, as well as, the heavier elements that are essential for life, as we know it.

     The laws of physics are very rigid. Nucleosynthesis can only occur within a short window of time and temperature. The early universe theorized by Gamow was so hot and energetic that the protons and neutrons were moving too fast to combine. Only as the universe cooled would nucleosynthesis become possible. As the temperature dropped so too did the opportunity for nuclear reactions. The window of opportunity for the creation of elements, via nucleosynthesis, could only take place when the universe was cooler than the trillions of degree of the initial moments and hot enough to bond protons and neutrons (i.e., millions of degrees). The complexity is increased by the fact that neutrons are unstable. Free neutrons have a half-life of approximately ten minutes. During this brief span half of them disappear and another half in the next ten minute. Less than two percent of the original neutrons in the universe would exist only one hour after creation, unless they were trapped in a stable nucleus such as helium. Gamow and his graduate student Ralph Alpher spent three years working on an intricate set of calculations. Their resulting paper presented a hot creation event that would generate hydrogen and helium consistent with the current abundance's. Alpher had done much of the mathematical work, but he had to defend his research as the culmination of his doctorate. Given the topic  and the publication of their paper his doctoral defense became a nationally covered event.

     The comment that received headlines was that the primordial nucleosynthesis of hydrogen and helium took only 300 seconds. The headline in the Washington Post read “World Began in 5 Minutes” (April 14, 1948) (The Big Bang p. 322). Gamow and Alpher believed that the initial fireball was the crucible that created not only hydrogen and helium but all the remaining elements. However subsequent years of effort failed to provide a means to generate heavier atoms (i.e., carbon, calcium, iron, oxygen).

Cosmic Alchemy

     The scientific community was in an awkward state. Hubble's data had been carefully checked and accepted as accurate. The universe was expanding. Even Einstein had recanted his use of the Cosmological Constant. However, the dynamic evolving model still had problems. The stars could not be younger than the Earth and both the expansion and steady state theories had to find a means to create the elements. It was not until 1952 that an astronomical breakthrough helped to clarify the situation. Newer and larger telescopes allowed astronomers to see deeper into space. It was discovered that there were two generations of Cepheid stars. Walter Baade recalculated Hubble's math on the distance to the red shifted Cepheid stars and the distances were twice as large. Therefore the universe was twice as old as Hubble's original calculations. The new data solved one of the problems of the expansion theory. The stars were now slightly older than the Earth.

     As a carbon based life form that breathes oxygen we are living breathing evidence that the heavier elements were created. Knowing that extremely high heat was needed to create heavier elements Sir Arthur Eddington put forth a possibility. "I think the stars are the crucibles in which the lighter atoms are compounded into more complex elements” ( The Big Bang p.385). However even this theory was highly speculative. Stars generate a few thousand degrees at the surface and a few million at their core. While this may sound hot enough to cook anything the creation of neon atoms requires a temperature of 3 billion degrees and silicon would require 13 billion degrees. If Eddington's star furnaces were to be used as the factories for creating the heavy elements there would have to be billions of them exquisitely tuned to turn out each of the elements. Any environment that evidenced such extreme temperature, 13 billion degrees, would also convert all the neon into silicon. Since no stars burned at these temperatures the idea of nucleosynthesis appeared to be a dead end. The two theories (i.e., Steady State and Expansion) had reached a stalemate. Both appeared to have an explanation for the expansion of the universe but neither could explain the current abundance of elements. That is until Dr. Fred Hoyle began exploring the life cycle of stars. Dr. Hoyle was a strong advocate of the Steady State Theory. To account for the expanding universe he stated that particles were continually being created between the galaxies. A static universe was continuing to expand by virtue of this continuing creation. Hoyle's theory also had to explain the presence of heavy atoms and he began exploring Eddington’s suggestion. Hoyle knew that no normal star produced the extreme temperatures needed for the fusion of heavy atoms. With this as a given and the discovery of a second generation of Cepheid stars Hoyle began exploring the end of a star's life.

While cosmologists were arguing about how the universe began, other astronomers and physicists had developed a detailed understanding of a star's life cycle. Once a star ignites, its equilibrium is maintained by a delicate balancing act.

The mass of the star exerts a powerful gravitational force, which attempts to collapse the star in on itself. The outward pressure of heat generated by the star's nuclear furnace acts to counterbalance the gravitational force. As the star begins to use up its fuel the temperature of the star cools. As the temperature cools the outward pressure lessens and gravity begins to win the battle. The star contracts and the increased pressure causes the core to heat up which in turn increases the temperature and re-establishes equilibrium. In the initial stages of the burn pattern a star’s furnace converts hydrogen into helium. Once the star has used up its supply of hydrogen the star is destabilized. The core would contract - squeezing the central furnace and helium would begin to undergone fusion into heavier elements. Cooking the helium would give off more energy as it was fused into heavier elements. The hotter furnace would re-stabilize the balance between the core and the force of gravity.      Working its way through the elements the star would fuse heavier and heavier elements and release more energy to stave off the crushing force of gravity. This cycle of contraction and re-stabilization could occur several times but it would only stave off the inevitable. There is a limit on the star's ability to transmute its fuel. Iron is the most tightly bound element (twenty-six protons). Energy must be added to the process rather than released to continue to create still heavier elements. Once the star has processed its fuel into an iron core its ultimate death spasm will result in the star imploding. This implosion ejects a massive shock wave of debris seeding the universe with heavy elements. The first generation of stars would have seeded the universe with heavier elements, which would have given the second generation a core of elements to build still heavier elements.

     The naming of star populations reveals a scientific progression related to their discovery. Population I stars are NOT the most recently created stars. They were the first to be discovered. Beginning with our own sun - thus the label Population I star. Population II stars are the most plentiful. However, the Population III stars are the oldest. These were the first stars to form after the Creation Event. Forming about 500 million years after the universe began the majority of the first stars were super massive. The universe was still relatively compact at this time so the stars had lots of material to work with. Because of their super massive size they burned more quickly and exhausted their fuel within a few million years.

     Marcus Chown in his book The Magic Furnace describes the cosmic alchemy. “In order that we might live, stars in their billions, tens of billions, hundreds of billions even, have died. The iron in our blood, the calcium in our bones, the oxygen that fills our lungs each time we take a breath - all were cooked in the furnaces of the stars which expired long before the Earth was born” (p. 389). Some might like to think of us as composed of stardust, while a cynic would conjure up nuclear waste. Before we move away from the subject of cosmic creation of the elements it is important to explain a little more about the complexity. Please watch the following presentation on the creation of elements, it is only 3 and a half minutes.

The creation of elements presentation is well done with excellent visual effects. However like many PBS specials, the information is what I call “Lite Science.”  There is accurate information concerning how the elements were created but it is not a full presentation. The fusion process that converts hydrogen into helium is responsible for the vast majority of the sunlight that warms Earth. However it is only one of seven different processes needed to produce the elements.

     The second element-building process involves the fine tuning of the properties of three separate atomic nuclei. In the video the scientists casually remark that 3 helium atoms fuse and carbon is formed. In fact, the inability of scientists to find a way to “create” carbon had been a major stumbling block. The triple-alpha process in which three helium nuclei stick together to create carbon requires very specific conditions and properties. The existence of the 20 or so heavy elements essential for life (e.g., carbon, oxygen and iron ) are all dependent on the fine tuning of three separate atomic nuclei plus the special properties of a stellar nursery, red giant stars. The first atomic nucleus is beryllium-8. For years beryllium's instability had been a major stumbling block to the forging of carbon and all the heavier elements. In reality, its fleeting existence is actually a blessing. If beryllium-8 were more stable it would readily transform all its helium into carbon. Such a rapid transformation would destabilize the star and it would explode. A large amount of carbon might be created however it would stop the process of creating heavier elements such as calcium, magnesium and iron.

The second nuclei that is fine tuned is carbon-12. For the triple-alpha process to work and thus for human beings to exist carbon-12 had to possess an excited state exactly equal to the combined energy of a beryllium-8 nucleus and a helium-4 nucleus. The combined energy is 7.3667 MeV (megaelectronvolts) which is just below that of carbon-12 (7.6549 MeV). The temperature of a red giant star however is just high enough to boost the energy of motion of the two nuclei to above the critical threshold. For the creation of carbon there had to be a precise plan involving critical thresholds, a star with just the right conditions and temperature and one final "element".      Once a carbon-12 nucleus is formed in the core of the red giant it is bound to be struck by another helium-4 nucleus. This would lead normally to the formation of oxygen-16 which would seriously deplete the carbon supply. However since we all breath oxygen it would not be good to make very little oxygen. The conditions in the red giant star and the resonance must be delicately balanced to provide the abundance of elements that humanity needs. “Fortunately” God had a plan. The combined energy of a carbon-12 and helium-4 is 7.1616 MeV. The energy state of oxygen-16 is 7.1187 MeV which is extremely close but just below that of carbon. The temperature conditions in the red giant can add the energy of motion to reacting nuclei but it cannot subtract. SO by the narrowest of margins carbon was created.  Dr. Hoyle found the fine tuning of carbon to be so significant that he issued one of his more famous quotes. “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature." 

       The third building process is fairly straight forward. It takes carbon and creates heavier elements by adding helium nuclei or alpha particles. It is therefore referred to as the alpha process. Which makes it possible to make oxygen-16, neon-20, magnesium-24 silicon-28, argon-36, and calcium. The temperature requirements to bind these heavier elements escalates rapidly. The temperature range varies from 100 million to a billion degrees.   While the ease of production is increased the process is also selective and skips many of the heavier nuclei. 

       The problem in creating heavier nuclei is not one of temperature. It doesn't require a hotter oven to bake up more of the elements. The constraint is the increasing electrical charge. When that charge becomes large, alpha particles are repelled so violently that no amount of temperature or cooking can force the nuclei into contact or stick them together. The only way to move forward in the creation of elements is to add particles that are unaffected by the electrical charge of the nucleus. 

     The fourth and fifth building processes are neutron build-ups.  In the S-process (slow process) an appropriate "seed" either from the iron-group or a light element is pelted with neutrons. However as its name indicates this process is extremely slow with only one neutron being added every 100,000 years. This occurs in red giant stars which process a range of heavy nuclei including barium and zirconium. The R-process (rapid) pelts its "seed" with neutrons at a rate of approximately one a second.  This is believed to occur in the fury of supernova explosions. The R-process accounts for some of the heaviest elements such as uranium and thorium.

     The R and S processes although capable of making many of the heavier elements could not produce all of the remaining elements. Some of the remaining elements contained rare isotopes with relatively few neutrons such as; tin-112, platinum-190, and mercury-196. The only way to explain these proton rich elements was a sixth building process that was capable of adding protons to the seed nucleus. Dr. Hoyle and his colleagues labeled this the P-process for proton capture. Given that it required a hydrogen-rich environment and temperatures of over a billion degrees it was proposed that this occurred within the blast of a supernova. Each of these 6 building processes involves assembling elements in a series of steps. The final and seventh process is quite different. It is called the "equilibrium process" in which abundances magically "freeze out" in the midst of a flurry of nuclear reactions. In this nuclear build-up process the nuclear reactions are so fast that a steady state is reached in which every nuclear reaction is perfectly balanced by its opposite. Consequently the mix of elements does not change with time - the freeze out.  Dr. Fred Hoyle and three other colleagues wrote what is called the “B-squared-FH” proposal - a monumental paper of over 104 pages explaining all seven processes. The acronym is taken from their initials: Margaret and Geoffrey Burbidge, Fred Hoyle and Willy Fowler. (Magic Furnace: pp. 175-192).

        In a cosmic irony, Fred Hoyle, a strong champion of the Steady State Theory, named his opponent. In a series of BBC lectures in 1950, titled “The Nature of the Universe ”  Dr. Hoyle christened the opposition  as The Big Bang Theory.  He meant the label as one of derision because he believed it impossible for such a beautifully elegant universe to have been derived from what he thought of as a big explosion 

    The two theories, Big Bang and Steady State, had clearly drawn lines, which centered on the formation of the universe. Both could explain the expanding universe as well as the presence and abundance of the elements. However, the Big Bang Theory had a very specific and testable hypothesis. Gamow and Alpher had predicted that if there had been a super hot creation event there should be a residual afterglow.

The Glow:

     The Big Bang Theory hypothesized that as the universe cooled after the initial extreme heat a primordial light (afterglow of the initial spark) has been expanding through the universe. The Big Bang Theory speculated that the universe had expanded by a factor of approximately a thousand. Therefore, the primordial afterglow should have stretched to roughly one millimeter, placing it in the radio region of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Visible light is only one part of the electromagnetic spectrum. The continuum includes gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet, infrared, microwave and radio waves.  It was not until after WWII that astronomers began to explore the sky with radio telescopes. The use of radar had not only detected enemy planes but galaxies that produced radio waves a million times more powerful than those of the Milky Way. Two radio astronomers, Drs. Penzias and Wilson, were working to make a sweep of the galaxies to assess the presence of radio galaxies. Their equipment however was plagued with a constant background clutter. They checked every lead, tube, and re-sealed every possible source of vibration and still they could not stop a background noise that was detectable in every direction.

     Penzias and Wilson had detected the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) radiation. Their telescope measured the faint afterglow of a massive hot creation event. What they registered as cosmic background radiation (i.e., heat) was a temperature of 2.728 degrees Celsius above absolute zero. The first results from COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer) in 1990 showed that the universe matched that of a perfect radiator, dissipating virtually all its available energy. The fact that the Cosmic Background Radiation was so extremely low and consistent convinced astronomers that the creation event had been extremely hot and long ago (15 to 20 billion years ago). Dr. Hugh Ross uses the example of an oven to illustrate the concept of heat radiation. If an oven had been heated to a very high temperature, turned off and then the door opened the heat would radiate into the room. If in turn this oven were surrounded by thermometers and all of them read a very low temperature then this event must have occurred a long time in the past. The temperature measurements from COBE provided evidence for a hot origin billions of years in the past. The cool and uniform temperature of the cosmic background radiation shows that the universe suffered an enormous degradation of energy, typical of a large explosion. Energy degradation is measured by a quantity called entropy. Entropy describes the degree to which energy in a closed system (one in which new energy is not being added) disperses.

     A burning candle is a good example of a highly entropic system, one that efficiently radiates energy. It has a specific entropy of about two. Only very hot explosions have much higher specific entropies. The specific entropy of the creation event is about 1 Billion - an enormous number. Supernova explosions, the most violent and entropic event currently occurring in the universe have specific entropies a hundred times less. At its maximum brightness a supernovae can outshine an entire galaxy of a 100 billion stars. The Creation Event was Awesome. While the temperature and the consistency of the background, radiation helped to prove the hot Big Bang Theory it could pose a problem. If the universe was too smooth (i.e., consistent) how could the stars, the galaxies and eventually clusters of galaxies form?  The results from the COBE in April of 1992, provided this last element. The refined measurements showed an irregularity in the background radiation at one part in 100,000. Galaxies formed in the eddies of the initial explosion. Since this initial assessment additional measurements on differing wavelengths from different sources have all verified the slight fluctuation that is essential. There has been a major paradigm shift.

BIG BANG IMPLICATIONS:

         1. Singularity -a unique one time event

         2. Simultaneous beginning of time, as we know it, matter energy and space

         3. Ex nihlio - out of nothing.

Before the Big Bang, the Beginning, there was no big black velvety space where rocks were rolling around accreting into anything.

Theological Implications:

         1. There was A beginning - predicted 3,500 years before COBE in Genesis

         2. Since there was a beginning there had to be a Creator

         3. The universe was created from nothing

         4. The Creator is transcendent and exists outside of His creation – He is Not a part of it

         5. The Creator is timeless- He existed before the universe He created

         6. The Creator is powerful and AWESOME.

RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

William Lane Craig, the theologian who spoke on the You Tube video on Cosmological evidence is a Powerful proponent of the Kalam Argument for the existence of God. Website www.reasonablefaith.org Access to his numerous books and presentations.

Big Bang: The Origin of the Universe, Simon Singh, Fourth Estate, New York 2004.

This is an excellent historical retracing of the battle between the Steady State Theory of Cosmology and the development and eventual triumph of the Big Bang Theory. It also explains what each theory predicts and the Universe it describes.

The Creator and the Cosmos, Hugh Ross, Nav Press, Colorado Springs, 2001.

A very readable explanation of current astronomical discoveries and the fine-tuning of the Universe. Dr. Ross uses a style of writing that uses examples to bring abstract concepts into concrete daily experience.

Guide to Understanding Creation – Holman Quick Source, Mark Whorton & Hill Roberts, Holman Publishing, Nashville Tenn. 2004.

This book surveys every major issue relating to theology and the science of creation. This includes proofs that the universe was created and designed by God. Whorton and Roberts provide discussions of the compatibility of Genesis with major theories of modern science.

The Magic Furnace: The Search for the Origin of Atoms. Marcus Chown, Vintage Press, London, 1999.

A very interesting read – treats the search as a great detective story. A clear introduction to the physics and astronomy underlining creation.

DVD:

Case for a Creator Lee Strobel presents 6 session investigation of the scientific evidence that points toward God; Fine Tuning, Biochemistry, DNA and origins of life.

Back to Top