Actually...if you want to get more complicated...there's a strange theory that proposes this isn't the first universe...and it goes a little something like this:

A previous universe expanded to its maximum size...nothing was left to encourage expansion, it ran out of matter. Eventually, it collapsed and was drawn back into a "singularity"(as Alan called it) and initiated expansion, yet again.

I didn't make that up...it came from a book so don't yell at me...I know that theory has got as many holes as Swiss cheese...but something to think about nonetheless...

Good article Alex...

~Zoo

I don't know a whole bunch about science, but I think sometimes it works with relgion instead of against it. I have faith but its cool to learn about theories that help it along.

I like swiss cheese... sometimes.

Capt. over and out!

'So, the universe is accelerating, curved and open, what does that mean? It means Newton was wrong on a universal level because somewhere out there in the whole entirety of the universe, spontaneous creation is occuring.'

This is where your friend's explanation loses me, jeblackstar. Matter is flying apart at an accelerating rate, okay, but why should that suggest this idea of spontaneous creation?
Incidentally, Newton WAS wrong on a universal level; that's basically where Einstein's relativity comes in.

Interesting article Alex. Now you're giving me something to think about.

Shaun, you just have to try and make things more difficult don't ya?

~carebear~

God does not play dice with the universe...

Shortly before Sir Issac Newton’s death in 1727 he said to himself: “I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.”

In Sir Issac’s profound possibly last words spoken some 278 years ago wisdom for us can be found today. Academia would have you kids believing that the words of your professors and their peer scientists are supposed to be taken as “gospel” or “cast in stone”. All of you seem to speak in absolutes rather than caveating or couching your words with IMO or IMHO. You parrot things of the “little boy” minds of mainstream science.

Take for example the latest finds of the ESA regarding Saturn’s moon Titan. It is proving to be an enigma for the planetary scientists who were so sure of their theories. Things they thought about the universe have been overturned by empirical data. Sir Issac was not so pedantic. He realized that mainstream Christianity was also incorrect in its assumptions about God (and still is) and performed an exhaustive search for the truths about God. (I.e. he proved that the Catholic dogma of "trinity" was bogus and very un-Christian).

He looked to the very book some of you choose to overlook as your mentors tell you, albeit incorrectly, that it is not a scientific book and full of contradictory myths (i.e. Holy Bible). How blind they are and now they try to lead you. Ever heard of the blind man leading another blind man? What happens to them? Read Matthew 15:14 for the answer.

If you wish to read an amazing scientific essay from God in His "users manual textbook" for us, read what God said to an Arabic man name Job and his ignorant highly critical friends starting at Job 1:1 to 42:17. I know it’s a lot of reading but there is a part around 38th chapter that will "knock your socks off". There you will see an amazing Old English (King James Version) essay on earth sciences, astrophysics, gravity, biology, etc. How could a simple-minded man from Egypt (I.e. Moses) around 1473 BC know this type of technical data? There is even a section in Job about the spherical roundness of our planet long before Pythagoras who lived about 540 to 500 BC postulated it (i.e. “He has described a circle upon the face of the waters, To where light ends in darkness.” - Job 26:10). Then there is Isaiah who in the 8th century BC said under God’s inspiration: “There is One God who is dwelling above the CIRCLE of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers.” (See Isaiah 40:22)

So you see it is good to research things on your own rather than believing that your august teachers are infallible. This is where organized Judeo-Christianity lost its way in the 4th century AD and science in rejecting that antiquated erroneous “root-causality error” model. Akin to “throwing out the baby with the bath water”!

Ok, to postulate the infinite about "who started what" is an intrinsic reason how we are NOT evolved animals with no intelligent creator and with no future hope. This is the empirical proof you desire, hiding in plan sight! Namely YOU! Also it stands to reason (or basic human logic) that any “created” system of things (or reaction as you so deftly put it) has to start at its beginning with a system that was NOT created. Omnipotence is the “missing link” you all seek. An extraterrestrial (i.e. above the earth) Great Omnipotent Deity (G.O.D.) has to be the reverse and forward infinite “link” which causes everything to “be”. In other words "no beginning and no end".

But you may ask: "What did He do before He created everything?". That question is in and of itself what PROVES the existence of God. As how could something so random and chaotic with "no missing link fossil evidence of itself" ever postulate such a complex neuron-synaptic born interrogative? Can a dolphin or a pig do that? So what’s the answer to the question of the ages? In my humble opinion the answer MAY be found in mathematic discoveries of August Ferdinand Möbius (1790-1868) - albeit unknown to Mr. Möbius. Look it up...

IMHO time does not exist. Time is an instinctive concept of the sentient mind. Animals are cognizant of it out of divinely programmed instinct. We can do that as well as ponder the infinite nature of that mental concept. IMO time can not be manipulated, bent, or curved, as it doesn’t exist. Hence Einstein may be wrong. The NASA experiments with Cesium clocks in jets may have another explanation that Newton postulated above as being like little boys playing by the seashore. The brilliant professor Dr. Ron Mallet at UCONN.edu will soon realize the folly of his so-called ring-laser time machine sooner than later…

Spooky

PS – Here’s something to ponder about Einstein’s “curved space” explanation for gravity: “If gravity can be explained by saying that space-time continuum is bent or curved and a sphere rolls around down towards the center. Then I still ask the very simple question 'what’s pulling on the sphere'? And don’t say gravity!”

My theory? Just like positive and negative ions, particles and anti-particles, north and south poles of magnetic flux, there may be sub-atomic particles liked gravitons and anti-gravitons, which attract and repel just like magnets. Boeing Aircraft has proven that you can BLOCK or shield gravity. Little boys at the seashore???

Your article sucks