How the Origin of the Universe Points to the Existence of God

Summary

The speaker, a former art student turned cop, uses an analogy of crime scene investigation to discuss the origins of the universe. He argues against the infinite age of the universe, citing the Big Bang cosmology as evidence for a universe with a beginning. He critiques alternative explanations like redefining time, cyclical universes, and the Multiverse theory, pointing out their logical inconsistencies and lack of scientific support. The speaker suggests that a non-spatial, non-material, and atemporal 'Big Banger' could explain the universe's origin.

Takeaways

• 🌌 The speaker argues that the universe had a beginning, a stance supported by scientific evidence rather than religious scripture.
• 🕵️‍♂️ Drawing from experience as a former police officer and art school graduate, the speaker emphasizes the importance of evidence and its origin in solving cases, which is analogous to understanding the universe's origin.
• 🔍 The speaker uses the example of a crime scene to illustrate how the presence and origin of evidence can be crucial to understanding an event, which is related to understanding how the universe came to be.
• 💥 The Big Bang cosmological model is presented as the standard scientific explanation for the universe's origin, positing that it began from nothing.
• 🤔 The speaker challenges the idea that 'nothing' can produce 'something', suggesting that the origin of the universe must be non-spatial, non-material, and atemporal.
• 🧐 The script discusses various alternative explanations for the universe's origin, such as redefining time, cyclical expansion and contraction, and the Multiverse theory, but finds them lacking in evidential support.
• 🔧 The speaker critiques the logical inconsistencies in the Multiverse theory, pointing out that it requires an external source to create universes, which doesn't explain the origin of space, time, and matter.
• 📚 Reference is made to renowned physicist Stephen Hawking and cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin, indicating a consensus among scientists about the universe having a beginning.
• 🚫 The speaker rejects the idea of an 'eternal environment' as an explanation for the universe's origin, arguing that it must be something beyond space and time.
• 🤨 The script highlights the importance of critically examining evidence and the logical soundness of explanations, whether in a courtroom or in cosmology.
• 🌟 The overarching theme is the search for a rational, evidence-based explanation for the universe's origin, suggesting that a non-material, all-powerful entity could be the answer.

Q & A

What is the main argument presented in the script regarding the age of the universe?

The script argues that the universe is not infinitely old and that it began to exist, based on scientific evidence rather than religious scripture.

What is the significance of the foam rubber in the crime scene analogy?

The foam rubber is used as an analogy to illustrate the importance of understanding the origin of evidence in a crime scene, which parallels the importance of understanding the origin of the universe.

What is the Big Bang cosmological model, and why is it significant?

The Big Bang cosmological model is the standard model in physics that describes the universe as having a beginning. It is significant because it supports the idea that everything, including space, time, and matter, came into existence from nothing.

According to the script, what are the implications of the Big Bang cosmology on the nature of the universe's origin?

The Big Bang cosmology implies that the origin of the universe must be non-spatial, non-material, and atemporal, as it brought space, time, and matter into existence.

What does the script suggest about the logical consistency of the Multiverse theory?

The script suggests that the Multiverse theory is logically inconsistent because it requires an external source to create the universe, yet it struggles to define what that source is without resorting to space, time, or matter.

What is the role of the 'Big Banger' in the context of the script's argument?

The 'Big Banger' refers to the cause or entity that brought all space, time, and matter into existence. The script argues that this entity cannot be part of space, time, or matter itself.

How does the script address the idea of redefining time to avoid the conclusion of a cosmic beginning?

The script critiques the idea of redefining time by pointing out that such redefinitions do not hold up under scientific scrutiny and do not address the evidence supporting a cosmic beginning.

What is the script's stance on the cyclical universe theory?

The script argues against the cyclical universe theory, stating that current scientific evidence does not support it, and that the universe is not slowing down but rather speeding up in its expansion.

How does the script use the concept of 'empty space' in the context of the Multiverse theory?

The script critiques the concept of 'empty space' as a precursor to the Multiverse theory, pointing out the logical inconsistency of starting with space to explain the origin of space.

What is the script's argument against the idea that virtual particles in empty space can create universes?

The script argues that starting with virtual particles in empty space to explain the creation of universes is logically inconsistent because it presupposes the existence of space and matter to begin with.

How does the script relate the concept of an uncreated creator to both theists and atheists?

The script points out that both theists and atheists believe in an uncreated creator, whether it is God or an eternal quantum environment or Multiverse generator, which raises questions about the nature of this uncreated cause.

Outlines

00:00

🚀 The Origin of the Universe

The speaker begins by discussing the origin of the universe, emphasizing that it did not exist infinitely long but had a beginning. They reject the use of scripture and instead rely on scientific evidence to support this claim. Drawing an analogy to a crime scene investigation, the speaker highlights the importance of understanding the origin of evidence. They argue that the Big Bang cosmological model, widely accepted in physics, supports the idea that the universe came into existence from nothing. Noting the views of cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin and physicist Stephen Hawking, the speaker suggests that the concept of 'nothing' is crucial to understanding the universe's origin and that space and time are not 'nothing' but rather something that requires an external cause for its existence.

05:00

🤔 The 'Big Banger' and Alternative Explanations

The speaker delves into the question of what could have caused the Big Bang, asserting that it must be non-spatial, non-material, and atemporal. They critique various alternative explanations offered by atheists, such as redefining time, cyclical universes, and the concept of a Multiverse generator. The speaker points out the logical inconsistencies and evidential problems with these theories, such as the need for an external source in the Multiverse theory and the impossibility of starting with space and time to explain the universe's origin. The speaker also addresses the idea of an 'Eternal environment' and the logical fallacies in the argument that an environment can produce something from 'nothing' if it already contains space, time, and matter.

10:01

💡 The Logical Inconsistency of Multiverse Theory

Continuing the critique of alternative explanations, the speaker focuses on the Multiverse theory, which posits an external environment that produces an infinite number of universes. They challenge the logical consistency of this theory, questioning the nature of the environment that would allow such a process. The speaker uses a quote from physicist Lawrence Krauss to illustrate the problem, pointing out that the theory's reliance on an environment filled with virtual particles and 'empty space' is self-contradictory since space and matter are part of what the theory is trying to explain. The speaker concludes that theories like the Multiverse are logically inconsistent and do not provide a satisfactory explanation for the universe's origin.

Keywords

💡Big Bang cosmology

Big Bang cosmology is the prevailing model of the observable universe from the earliest known periods through its subsequent large-scale evolution. It describes how the universe expanded from an initial state of high density and temperature, and offers a comprehensive explanation for the origin of the universe. In the video, the speaker emphasizes that this model, supported by physicists, suggests that everything came into existence from nothing, which is a critical point in the discussion about the universe's beginning.

💡Origination

The concept of origination refers to the beginning or the point at which something comes into existence. The speaker uses this term to discuss the importance of understanding how and why evidence appears in a particular setting, such as a crime scene or the universe itself. Origination is central to the video's theme as it challenges the idea of the universe having a beginning and the implications of that for what could have caused it.

💡Evidence

In the context of the video, evidence is used to refer to the observable facts or information that serve as a basis for reasoning or argument. The speaker, with a background in law enforcement, emphasizes the importance of evidence in establishing the truth about a case or, in this case, the origins of the universe. Evidence is key to the argument that the universe had a beginning, as opposed to being infinitely old.

💡Space-time

Space-time is a four-dimensional continuum that combines the three dimensions of space with the one dimension of time. It is a fundamental concept in the video, where the speaker discusses the beginning of the universe, including all of space, time, and matter. The video argues that since space-time is part of the universe, whatever caused the universe to come into existence cannot itself be spatial or temporal.

💡Aristotle

Aristotle was an ancient Greek philosopher whose works have been highly influential throughout the centuries. In the video, the speaker quotes Aristotle to illustrate the concept of 'nothing,' stating that 'nothing is what rocks dream about,' to emphasize the philosophical understanding of the term and its relevance to the discussion about the universe's origin from nothing.

💡Non-spatial, non-temporal, non-material

These terms describe something that exists outside the physical dimensions of space and time and is not composed of matter. In the video, the speaker uses these terms to describe the characteristics of the 'big banger,' or the cause of the universe's existence, arguing that it must be something beyond the physical realm since it is the origin of space, time, and matter.

💡Cyclical universe

A cyclical universe is a hypothetical model in which the universe undergoes endless cycles of expansion and contraction. The speaker in the video critiques this idea, stating that the current scientific evidence does not support it, as the universe is not slowing down but rather accelerating in its expansion, making the concept of a cyclical universe problematic.

💡Multiverse

The multiverse theory suggests that our universe is one of an infinite number of universes that exist. The speaker in the video points out the logical inconsistencies of this theory, particularly the issue of what the environment or 'pot' that generates these universes is like, and how it can be considered 'nothing' when it contains the very elements that are being explained away.

💡Logical inconsistency

Logical inconsistency refers to a flaw in reasoning where a conclusion or statement contradicts one of the premises. The speaker uses this term to critique the multiverse theory and other alternative explanations for the universe's origin, arguing that they fail to provide a coherent and consistent explanation for the existence of space, time, and matter.

💡Uncreated creator

The term 'uncreated creator' is used to describe a being or force that exists eternally and is responsible for the creation of the universe without itself being created. The speaker discusses this concept in the context of the definition of God from a theistic perspective and contrasts it with atheistic views that also posit an eternal cause for the universe.

💡Lawrence Krauss

Lawrence Krauss is a physicist mentioned in the video who has written about the concept of the universe originating from 'nothing.' The speaker uses Krauss's ideas to highlight the problems with the multiverse theory and the notion of an eternal environment that produces universes, pointing out the logical inconsistencies in such explanations.

Highlights

The universe is not infinitely old and has a beginning, a concept supported by scientific evidence rather than religious scripture.

The importance of understanding the origination of evidence, illustrated through a crime scene example involving foam rubber.

The analogy of a crime scene is used to emphasize the significance of the origin of the universe in the context of the Big Bang cosmological model.

The Big Bang cosmology is the standard model in physics, which posits that everything, including space, time, and matter, began from nothing.

The concept that space is not 'nothing' but 'something', challenging the traditional Big Bang narrative.

The necessity for a 'big banger' that is non-spatial, non-material, and atemporal to explain the origin of the universe.

Critique of alternative explanations such as redefining time, cyclical universes, and the idea of an eternal environment.

The logical inconsistencies in the Multiverse theory, which requires an external source but struggles to define the nature of that source.

The acknowledgment by skeptics and atheists of the need for an uncreated creator or cause for the universe.

The argument that any explanation for the origin of the universe must be logically consistent and supported by evidence.

The critique of Lawrence Krauss's interpretation of 'nothing' as a 'boiling bubbling brew of virtual particles', highlighting its logical flaws.

The assertion that starting with space, time, and matter to explain their origin is logically inconsistent.

The presentation of the case for a non-material, all-powerful entity as the most plausible explanation for the universe's origin.

The importance of distinguishing between evidence-supported theories and those that are not, in the context of understanding the universe's beginning.

The comparison of defense attorney strategies in criminal trials to the tactics used by those arguing against the evidence of the universe's origin.

The emphasis on the need for a clear and evidence-based understanding of the universe's beginning, beyond mere speculation or reinterpretation of terms.

Transcripts

starting at the very beginning we're in

a

universe that has a beginning did you

know

that the universe is not infinitely old

the universe began to

exist and we know that not just from

scripture in Genesis 1 forget about that

we're not going to use any Scripture to

make our case tonight we're just going

to use the science that's available to

us now I can tell you in every crime

scene and by the way if you take spend

nine years in art school like I did

before I became a cop

the only thing you really can do with

that nine years of art school is you can

illustrate your own book okay

so you're going to see that I'm using

illustrations from the book which I

Illustrated just for the sake of you

know because I could

basically I once had a case at a crime

scene where when I got there there was a

piece of foam rubber next to the body of

the victim it was from 1988 and for

years nobody could figure out what this

foam rubber was but I knew that this was

the key to the entire case why because

how the foam rubber gets in the room is

critically important was it did it

belong to the victim did she bring it in

with her did it belong to the restaurant

where the murder occurred had it been

there all along did it start off in the

room or did this come into the room when

the suspect came in the room if it's the

last one well that's a piece of evidence

I'm interested in it turned out that yes

the suspect was a guy who used to wear

boots but he would never untie his boots

and when he would take his boots on and

off he eventually wore out the cuff at

the back of the boot and on this night

as he was bending down to take the

victim's money the rubber foam from the

cuff of the boot popped

out and he left it there so now I have

an origination of a piece of evidence I

now know what caused it and finally if I

went did I did a search warn at his

house 30 years later for his entire life

he's been wearing shoes like that and

taking them off that way and every shoe

he owned had the same pattern of wear so

it was a powerful explanation for what

caused the F so why a piece of evidence

is in the room is important to me how it

begins to appear in the room is

important to me this idea of origination

is in critically important and here

we're going to look at something before

we can even start talking about evidence

in the room we have to ask the question

how did the room get

there the room in this case is the

universe it turns out there is very good

physical evidence that demonstrates we

are in a universe that has a beginning I

have an entire chapter on this and

because I love you guys I'm not going to

talk about it tonight I'm just going to

show you the kinds of scientific

philosophical evidence in very different

categories that all point to the same

conclusion and that conclusion is that

we are in a universe that came into

being from nothing that's not my

position as a theist that is the

position of physicists who are doing

this work and that's why the standard

cosmological model in physics physics is

called the Big Bang cosmological

model now why it's called that I don't

want you to get hung up on Big Bang

sometimes as Christians we do big bang

does not dictate a certain age of the

universe and big bang does not also

dictate that evolution is true you can

reject Evolution even theistic Evolution

and you can reject a a given age of the

universe yet still hold the Big Bang

cosmology because the one thing the Big

Bang cosmology teaches from a science

perspective is that every

came into existence from

nothing that's

huge and the most skeptical atheists

already recognize this Alexander venin

who's at TS University is a Russian

cosmologist says it this way with the

proof now in place cosmologists can no

longer hide behind the possibility of a

past Eternal Universe there is now no

Escape they have to face the problem of

a cosmic

beginning and even Steph Hawking writes

it this way Hawking and Penrose together

wrote several volumes here he says

almost everyone now believes that the

Universe in time

itself had a beginning at the Big

Bang wow think about that for a second

big bang cosmology the standard

cosmological argument a standard

cosmological model argues that

everything began from nothing and when I

say everything I mean all space time and

matter wait a minute space space is not

something space is nothing no space is

something time is something and of

course matter is something well if space

is something and it's not nothing what

is nothing Aristotle put it this way

nothing is what rocks dream

about that's what nothing is space is

something and I'm not uncomfortable with

big bang cosmology why because we know

that big bangs require big

bangers

right and the question of course is what

is this big banger well I can tell you

one thing it bangs all space time and

matter into

existence according to the science and

if that's the case the thing that bangs

all space time and matter into existence

cannot itself be space time or matter

because the beginning of that stuff is

the beginning of our universe so

whatever this big banger is it has to be

a

non-spatial non-material atemporal

Banger what could that be now atheist I

my book I spend a lot of time talking

about the Alternatives I'm not just

going to give you the explanation from

outside the room I want to show you

every explanation from those folks who

want to describe it from inside the room

and I'll show you why they don't work

but tonight because I love you guys I'm

not going to kill you with that but I

want to show you one thing for sure if

you work criminal trials you recognize

something when defense attorneys argue

against you and they're you have the

truth and I've even had cases where

after they argued against us for 8 weeks

we convicted the guy and at sentencing

he confessed to the entire crime so

clearly the entire time the defense

attorney was arguing against the truth

and when they're doing that they're

doing it usually in one of three ways

one they're going to argue something

that's not supported by the evidence or

two they're going to redefine the

terminology to make it easier to let him

let them go or three they're going to

make some kind of logical flaw

it turns out the same thing happens with

explanations from inside the room

against the kind of evidence I'm showing

you so for example this is from the book

some people will say why why can't what

maybe we're wrong about the nature of

time if we redefine what we mean by time

we can avoid the beginning of time okay

that's one possible approach some people

will say well couldn't the a universe be

expanding but not from nothing maybe

it's expanding and Contracting

cyclically and we just happen to be in

an expansion period right now which

makes it look like the universe came

from nothing but it could be contracted

and then expanding again the problem of

course is that the science does not help

their case because there's not enough

mass and gravitational forces to cause

the the the vual as a matter of fact the

universe is not slowing down in its

expansion so it can recollapse it's

actually speeding up in its

expansion or maybe we've got an issue

maybe there's a larger Eternal

environment by the

way

everyone atheists and theists alike are

looking for the first Eternal cause of

the universe have you ever had any

someone say to you well if you believe

in God who created

God well no no the definition of God

from our perspective is the uncreated

creator of everything so when you're

asking who created the uncreated Creator

that's a silly question by the way you

atheists also believe there's an

uncreated Creator some of you believe

it's a Quantum environment from which

universes emerge some of you believe

there's some kind of Multiverse

generator that creates an infinite

number of universes but regardless

whatever you say it is you believe it's

Eternal so here's the problem with these

kinds of solutions they keep you in the

room for sure but they have evidential

problems so for example if you try to

redefine time like Hawking is done he'll

even admit if you go back to the way

time really is his theory falls apart

not only that if you're talking about a

cyclical Universe this is not supported

by evidence but there is this Theory out

there that seems very provocative to

some people and it's called Multiverse

Theory there's an environment out there

that's producing an infinite number of

universes ours is just but

one but the thing that's creating this

universe is something guess what it's

something external to our universe so

this theory about Multiverse Theory

right away concedes that you have to

have an outside Source that's creating

the universe

the problem with this theory is that

it's logically inconsistent for a number

of reasons I'll just give you the

clearest one what is the Multiverse

generator what is this environment like

that the Multiverse generator is

in think about this this is what

Lawrence Krauss says about this he's a

physicist at Arizona State University he

wrote a book called Universe from

nothing he was on Steven coar show the

old show okay and he was interviewed and

this is what he said about this

environment with this Multiverse

generator he says you know physics has

changed what we mean by nothing empty

space is a boiling bubbling Brew of

virtual particles popping in and out of

existence if you wait long enough that

kind of nothing will always produce

particles those particles could then

grow into universes what if there's like

a big pot of boiling water that bubbles

are emerging in each one's a universe it

emerges without a cause and becomes a

universe and there's an infinite number

of these really well what's the pot of

water like

remember it can't be space time or

matter because that stuff begins at the

beginning of our universe but he says

that environment is wait a

minute he says it's empty space well no

Stephen or uh Lawrence it can't be space

you're space is going to be created as a

result you can't start with space to get

space then he says well there's virtual

particles so they have some form of

energy in the wait a minute no no

Lawrence you can't start with space and

matter we're trying to describe how

space and matter got here then he says

well if you wait long oh great so now

you've got time too so what he's

basically saying is if you start with

space time and matter you can get space

time and matter well no duh that doesn't

help us it's logically inconsistant and

you see this a lot in this kind of

thinking but of course if there is

something out there that's all powerful

non-spatial atemporal non-material that

could begin this that would explain all

of it I don't