It is fascinating how so many people want to pin down when in the world things have happened. We are often presented with dates as if they are incontrovertible--this time and no other. But how do we know when something happened?
Time is a huge issue in the study of both the hard and soft sciences. How do you determine the age of an object, whether it is a star, a rock, or a leather shoe? Most of us consider that time is a constant thing that just keeps ticking away at the same rate wherever you are. It is actually unbelievably complex and time has to be considered astronomically, geologically, and historically to see how the science in each area affects our conclusions in other areas. For that reason, we are going to take each area and discuss it separately.
First is the physics of time that we see in light. Light is the only thing that really indicates the passage of time. The sun rises, it sets--we have a day. The moon waxes and wanes--we have a lunar month. The sun rises at its furthest point south--the winter solstice--and rises at its furthest point north--the summer solstice--and back again--and we have one year. How do scientists who tell us that the universe is 13.7 billion years old come to that conclusion? Because of light. Space is so vast that it is measured in light years--the distance light travels in a year. It is possible for astronomers to measure the light from stars to determine how far away it is. What they have calculated is that the light at the farthest distance from earth started 13.7 billion years ago.
To explain how there are 13.7 billion years of light in
space while the Bible accounts for only about 6,000 years of history
will take some explaining. Bear with me.
Dr. D. Russell Humphreys, physicist, in his book Starlight and Time explains Einstein's theory of General Relativity. We think of E=mc(squared) when we think of Einstein's theory of Special Relativity. He came up with General Relativity eleven years later. General Relativity says that the closer an object is to a gravitational center, the slower time goes. That doesn't mean that the perceived time slows down--one second is still one second for the person experiencing it--but time goes relatively faster the further away from the center of gravity something is. (If you want to see how this works, watch the movie Interstellar.) This phenomenon has been proven by comparing the atomic clocks at Greenwich, England (sea level) and the National Bureau of Standards at Boulder, Colorado. The clock in Colorado, one mile farther from the center of the earth, goes five microseconds faster than the one in England. When they take atomic clocks up in airplanes into zero gravity, the difference is even more noticeable. [Humphreys, p. 104.] It is rather complicated, but Edwin Hubble used Einstein's General Relativity when he looked through a telescope and saw that the light in certain galaxies was shifted to the red side of the spectrum, what are called "red shifts". It is the Doppler effect; waves get compressed as an object comes closer and get stretched out as they move away. This applies to all waves; we just don't usually notice it with light because on earth we don't have enough space to observe them with the naked eye. However, in space we can see that light waves get pushed to the high frequency (blue) end of the spectrum when an object is coming toward us and stretched to the low frequency (red) end when an object is moving away. [Sarfati, p. 151] The assumption of Einstein's theory of General Relativity is the first part of figuring out time and when the universe began. We just saw that it predicted the results that were exhibited in the clock experiments. The Big Bang Theory requires in addition a belief (and I do mean belief) in the Cosmological (or Copernican) Principle which says that there is no edge and no center to the universe [Humphreys, p. 18]. Evolutionists look at space and see the galaxies evenly distributed around us and there are only two conclusions possible: 1) there is no edge or center to the universe, or 2) we are at the center of a universe that has boundaries. Jonathan Sarfati, in Refuting Compromise, quotes Edwin Hubble: "Such a condition [these red shifts] would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe . . . But the unwelcome supposition of a favored location must be avoided at all costs . . . it is intolerable . . . moreover it represents a discrepancy with the [Big Bang] theory because the theory postulates homogeneity" [Sarfati, p. 148]. Most laymen think the Big Bang Theory means there was a single point and that exploded and led out to the edge of the universe, but it actually, with the help of the Cosmological Principle, means no center and no edge. The Cosmological Principle says the universe exploded from every point at the same time to the same extent [Sarfati, p. 147], requiring the addition of another dimension [Humphreys, p. 17], which is beyond the comprehension of most of us ordinary mortals. However, the Cosmological Principle is not science; it is philosophy. It doesn't predict anything and it can't be disproved or proved (the definition of science), unlike General Relativity. There is no science that requires us to accept that the universe has no center and no edge. Why is this such a big deal? Because that means that the alternative, that the universe does have a center and an edge, is a viable perspective. If that is the case, what does that mean for Biblical creationists?
No matter which direction we look out into the cosmos from earth, we see the same amount of stuff: about the same number of celestial bodies, the same amount of empty space, the same amount of light shifted to red, as well as other factors. Now, I am not saying we are in the precise center of the universe, but if even our solar system is in the center of the universe, the red shifts of light will still be the same in every direction from earth.
Back to Einstein's theory of General Relativity: Stephen Hawking explained how this works in A Brief History of Time paraphrased by Dr. Humphreys. He explained that if an astronaut were approaching a black hole and the engineers at Houston were watching through a telescope, with every second ticking on the astronaut's watch, Houston's clock would go increasingly fast--first an hour for a second, then a day for a second, and so on [Humphreys, p. 27]. This is how we get lots of time in space and a little time on earth.
From a Biblical standpoint, when did this happen? Dr. Humphreys has several scriptures that would support the idea of an expanding universe.
"Then God said, let there by light in the expanse of the heavens . . let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens" (Genesis 1:14-15). Humphreys emphasizes "in" to demonstrate that the expanse is not just the daytime sky--it is interstellar space. (I am condensing considerably and for more detail, please refer to Dr. Humphreys' book, Starlight and Time.) Also, God, "Who alone stretches out the heavens" (Job 9:8). This idea is repeated several times in scripture--check out your concordance!
Dr. Humphreys points out that both scripture and General Relativity--in a bounded universe that was was smaller in the past (he says fifty times smaller)--would result in one of two possibilities: a black hole or a white hole. Yes, a white hole is a concept, just an unfamiliar one. Both have a singularity at the center and an event horizon, "an intangible spherical border . . .This is the point at which light rays trying to escape a black hole bend back on themselves; it is also where time is massively distorted" [Humphreys, p. 23]. A black hole contracts to its singularity, while a white hole expands to the point where the singularity disappears. What do we see in nature today? We see light moving away in the red shifts, not closing in in blue shifts as it would in a black hole. That would indicate that, even if creation started with a black hole, the last function before the world as we know it was a white hole.
Is this consistent with the Bible? Yes. The first four days of creation are completely consistent with an expanding universe. Most creationists interpret the description of the earth at the beginning as there being something God created first and then He worked from there. "The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters" (Genesis 1:2). Humphreys theorized that all matter was in an immense ball of water over two light years across that all matter in the universe came from, and it was in the center of space about 450 million light years across. All of creation was in a black hole--the singularity was at the center of the ball of water and the event horizon was at the edge of space. At the beginning of time, the gravity at the center of that ball would be so intense it would break the water down into its component parts: electrons, protons, and even smaller. Then, as the white hole did what they are theorized to do, space would expand and those atomic particles would begin to condense like water vapor on the outside of a glass of iced lemonade and coalesce into other elements such as minerals and gases. It collapses to its singularity--massive energy, or the light of Genesis 1:3: "Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." Interestingly, he suggests that the gravity of the black hole keeps the light inside the black hole until the gravity is so intense that light cannot reach the surface of the event horizon. That gives you the light being divided from the darkness. He also discusses angular momentum which would cause rotation; thus, the twenty-four hour day of Day One. Humphreys doesn't have a scientific explanation for the mechanism that turns a black hole into a white hole, but he admits God may have directly caused the change, just as he directly caused the creation of matter and space in the first place. Humphreys has scientific explanations for the next processes, but for those of us for whom that is a bit much, practically speaking, the white hole starts spewing out all its matter and energy (the opposite of a black hole sucking in everything). As the gravity decreases and the atomic particles have more space around them and cool off, they form the different elements. He points out something I had never observed before: God does not declare Day 2 as good; every other day is good, but not Day 2, implying that Days 2 and 3 were part of a single process. Day 2 is the coalescence of the heavier atoms of the earth at normal earth gravity while the expanse keeps spreading out to get ready to make the celestial bodies (waters above and below). Then, Day 3, while the "waters above" keep heading out into outer space, the waters of the earth keep solidifying to form earth and rock and God brings forth plants. [Note: some people ask whether the plants wouldn't die from cold before the sun was made on Day 4. However, the inside of a black hole is unbelievably hot and the radiant heat still in the earth would be enough to keep the plants alive till the sun was made.] Then, God declares it good because it took two days to form the earth and it is now done. Day 4, the atomic particles out in space are zipping away from the center of gravity to form stars, planets, nebulae, etc. [Humphreys, pp. 74-79].
All of that was to get us back to Einstein's theory of General Relativity! Since the closer to the center of gravity we are the relatively slower time goes, and the farther away it is from that center of gravity, the faster time goes, if the earth is roughly the center of the universe, the time would go the slowest here. (Humphreys admits it may have moved since creation, and even if we are not the center, but in the neighborhood of the center, considering the size of the universe, we would still be just next door, astronomically speaking) [Humphreys, p. 99]. So, the stars at the far end of the universe are running away from the center, which Humphreys says has no scientific limitation on speed according to General Relativity. In six rotational days, the event horizon may have gone to the end of the universe.
This explains why it is completely possible for there to be 13.7 billions years of light at the edge of the universe, while there are only about six thousand years of history on earth!
Stay tuned for the next step in time: Geological time and radiometric dating.
1. Humphreys, D. Russell; Starlight and Time; Master Books; c. 1994.
2. Sarfati, Jonathan; Refuting Compromise; Master Books; c. 2004.
No comments:
Post a Comment