WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE?
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 82

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE? By David Prentice, M.Ed., M.A.S.T. PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 71 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE? By David Prentice, M.Ed., M.A.S.T. Email [email protected] ?. ?. ?. HOW DO YOU K NOW WHAT YOU K NOW? Or at least what you think you know?. ?. ?. ?. WHAT MOST PEOPLE THINK:. Evolution is science. Creation and Intelligent Design

Download Presentation

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE? By David Prentice, M.Ed., M.A.S.T.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE?

By David Prentice, M.Ed., M.A.S.T.

Email [email protected]


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

?

?

?

HOW DO YOUKNOW WHAT YOU KNOW?

Or at least what youthinkyou know?

?

?

?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

WHAT MOST PEOPLE THINK:

Evolution is science...

Creation and Intelligent Design

are religion.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

EVOLUTION:

Initial Disorganization

with later increase in complexity and unlimited diversification.

Not just change, but change in the

direction of increasing complexity.

Simple to Complex.

T

I

M

E

Evolutionary “Tree”

All life came from one simple cell


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

CREATION:

Initial Complexity

with later deterioration and

diversification within limits.

Not just change, but change in the

direction of decreasing complexity.

Complex to Simple.

T

I

M

E

Creationist “Forest”

All life came from multiple complex ancestors.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “KNOW” SOMETHING?

1. Personal Experience

through the five senses.

I know a bee sting hurts;

I know how to ride a bike.

2. Reliance on Authority.

I know the sun is 93

million miles away;

Jesus loves me, this I know,

for the Bible tells me so.

3. Logic.

I know 2 million + 2 million =

4 million, even though I’ve

never counted that high.

I know I have a brain, even

though I’ve never seen it.

4. Feeling or Intuition.

I know she’s the one for

me; I know God has called

me to the ministry.

6. Bluffing (lying) - you try to persuade

others for an ulterior motive.

You should buy these tickets from me

because I know this team is going

to the Super Bowl this year;

I know this car will give you years

of faithful service!

5. Wishful Thinking (you

really want it to be true)

I just know I’m going to

win the lottery!


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

1. Define the problem. What do you want to know?

(E.g. “Does music affect how plants grow?”)

2. Gather information about the subject.

(AUTHORITY)

3. Formulate a hypothesis.

4. Devise a way to test the hypothesis.

5. Observe the results of the test. (EXPERIENCE)

6. Draw a conclusion (INDUCTIVE LOGIC) and report

your results so others can repeat the test.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

REASONS TO BELIEVE OTHERS WHO TRY TO

PERSUADE US OF WHAT THEY “KNOW”

IS IT BECAUSE:

(1) They claim to havepersonal experience, OR

(2) They appeal to an authority we trust, OR

(3) We have checked out their logic and

found it trustworthy?

OR are we willing to trust their (4) intuition,

(5)wishful thinking, or (6)bluffing?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Present +

Repeatable +

Observable

= SCIENCE

Past +

Non-Repeatable +

Eyewitness Account

= HISTORY

Past +

Non-Repeatable +

No Eyewitnesses

= BELIEF


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE:

1. No living person haspersonal experience.

2. There are no eyewitness accounts except theBible, which is unacceptable to skeptics.

SO HOW DO WE “KNOW” ABOUT THE BEGINNING?

ThroughLOGIC ONLY.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THE TWO TYPES OF LOGIC

1. INDUCTIVE.

Look at many phenomena and try to discover a pattern that points to a general principle. Inductive logic tries to determine the most reasonable (most likely) conclusion.

This is the heart of the scientific method.

2. DEDUCTIVE.

Start with general principles accepted as true and apply them to specific cases.

Deductive logic tries to establish absolute truth, i.e., the conclusion MUST be true.


Science until the middle ages

“SCIENCE” UNTIL THE MIDDLE AGES:

Based on the deductive logic of the ancient Greeks,

who believed that logic always leads to truth.

Testing was unimportant to them.

Most famous Greek philosopher:

Aristotle (inventor of the logic still used today),

whose ideas were taught as fact for about

2,000 years throughout Europe,

west Asia, and Africa.


Examples of incorrect conclusions based on faulty logic

EXAMPLES OF INCORRECT CONCLUSIONS BASED ON FAULTY LOGIC

“Scientific” ideas of Aristotle TAUGHT AS FACT in European Universities for 2000 YEARS:

1. The earth is the center of the solar system.

Falsified by Copernicus.

2. Heavier objects fall faster.

Falsified by Galileo.

3. All objects possess an innate tendency to come to rest.

Falsified by Newton.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

“PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT”

Honest scientists will not claim to have absolutely proven ANYTHING (even the Law of Gravity!) using the scientific method.

All we can legitimately say is that every

time we have observed something in

the past it’s always worked the same

way, so we expect that it will continue

to work the same way in the future.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

CONTRASTING LOGIC

The conclusions of INDUCTIVE logic result

from examination of observable phenomena

(a posteriori). They are testable and open to modification.

The premises of DEDUCTIVE logic may come from inductive conclusions, or they may

just be statements accepted as

self-evident(a priori). They are

not necessarily the result of testing.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE:

There is no way to repeat the beginning of the universe. We have to look at circumstantial evidence to see what seems to be the most reasonable explanation.

Anyone who claims to know absolutely what happened is not following inductive logic; they must be using DEDUCTIVE logic only.

But can there be problems with deductive logic?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

CONVERSES IN LOGIC

If I am at Mount Everest,

then I am at the highest mountain in the world.

TRUE.

THE CONVERSE:

If I am at the highest mountain in the world,

then I am at Mount Everest.

ALSO TRUE.

A converse is reliable ONLY

if there is an exact one-to-one match

between the “If” and “Then” parts - a biconditional (“if and only if”).


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

INVALID LOGIC

If I am at Victoria Falls,

then I am at one of the largest waterfalls in the world.

TRUE.

THE CONVERSE:

If I am at one of the largest waterfalls in the world,

then I am at Victoria Falls.

FALSE. (not reliable)

A converse is NOT reliable

if there is more than one possibility.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

PROPER LOGIC FLOW

AT ONE OF THE LARGEST WATERFALLS

IF AT NIAGARA FALLS

IF AT VICTORIA FALLS

IF AT ANGEL

FALLS

IF AT KAIETEUR FALLS

IF AT OTHER

LARGE WATER-

FALL


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

The Invalid Logic of Evolutionary Exclusivism

If I am at Victoria Falls,

then I am at one of the largest waterfalls in the world.

TRUE.

THE CONVERSE:

If I am at one of the largest waterfalls in the world,

then I am at Victoria Falls.

FALSE. (not reliable)

If evolution is true, then the universe and life would exist.

TRUE.

THE CONVERSE:

If the universe and life exist, then evolution is true.

FALSE. (not reliable)

All teaching of “evolution only” in schools rests on the

invalid use of a logical converse.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR THE UNIVERSE

UNIVERSE EXISTS

THEISTIC EVOLUTION CORRECT

YOUNG-EARTH CREATION CORRECT

ATHEISTIC EVOLUTION CORRECT

OLD-EARTH CREATION CORRECT

SOMETHING

ELSE CORRECT


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

DEDUCTIVE LOGIC AND SYLLOGISMS

If P is true, then Q is true.(Major premise)

P is true.(Minor premise)

Therefore, Q is true.(Conclusion)

live on earth

then Q

live in U.S.

live in La.

if P

if live in New Orleans

To represent a syllogism graphically, anything inside the inner circle (“if”) is automatically

inside the outer circle (“then”).

Syllogisms can also be

chained (transitive logic).


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

EVEN WITH CORRECT LOGIC, FALSE PREMISES CAN LEAD TO FALSE CONCLUSIONS.

All dogs bark. (Or, “If an animal is a

dog, then it barks.”)

Fido is a dog.

Therefore, Fido barks.

Not

if

Fido

is

a

Basenji!

Basenjis

do

not

bark.

If any oneof our premises is wrong, then our conclusion is unreliable.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

POSTULATES - Statements that are taken as self-evident and accepted without proof.

Euclid’s Parallel Line Postulate says that for any line, there can be only one parallel line through a point not on the first line.

Point not on the first line

Only one parallel line

First line

BUT IS IT REALLY SELF-EVIDENT?

Lobachevskyan and Riemannian geometry say that space is curved,

so there is no such thing as an infinitely long straight line in the

sense that we understand “straight.”

One says space is negatively curved so that there are an infinite number of parallel lines through a point not on a line.

The other says space is positively curved so there are no parallel lines. All lines

intersect at infinity.

EACH OF THE THREE IS THE BASIS OF A DIFFERENT

VERSION OF GEOMETRY, BUT NONE CAN BE PROVEN.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

BASIC PREMISES OF EVOLUTION AND CREATION

EVOLUTION:

CREATION:

1. Everythingmust beexplainable by purely natural processes.

a. Atheistic evolution: There is no God.

b. Theistic evolution: Since the Big Bang,

God’s involvement with nature has

been trivial.

Known as eitherNATURALISM,

MATERIALISM, OR ATHEISM.

  • A supernatural intelligence created the universe. Though most things are explainable by natural processes,some things may not be.

  • This is as far as Intelligent Design goes. (The intelligence could be the Flying Spaghetti Monster!) Creation specifies that the intelligence is God.

LIKE THE POSTULATES OF GEOMETRY, NEITHER SET OF PREMISES CAN BE PROVEN. THEY MUST BE ACCEPTED BY FAITH AS SELF-EVIDENT.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

MATERIALISM: NO GOD ALLOWED!

"We take the side of sciencein spite ofthe patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of the failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories,

because we have aprior commitment, acommitment to

materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we areforced by oura priori adherence tomaterial causesto create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that producematerial explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how

mystifying to the uninitiated.

materialism.

Moreover, that materialism is anabsolute, for wecannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

Richard Lewontin, The New York Review, Jan. 1997


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

NECESSARY CHARACTERISTICS

GOD

1. Only seen by what He does -

INVISIBLE.

2. Established natural laws, so

is not subject to those laws -

SUPERNATURAL.

3. Preceded the universe -

ETERNAL.

4. Influence extends throughout

the universe -OMNIPRESENT.

5. Directly or indirectly responsi-

ble for everything that has ever

happened -OMNIPOTENT.

6. Nobody made Him -SELF-

EXISTENT.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

IF THERE IS NO GOD, THEN WHAT?

What if there is no God? Then the universe would have to be the result of a series of forces, processes, and events operating with no particular purpose for billions of years.

We could call the whole series “evolution,” “quantum fluctuation,” or “accident.” Let’s use the term “Random Chance,” with the understanding that it represents the whole multibillionyear series of forces, processes, and events.

Let’s see the characteristics that Random Chance would have to have.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

NECESSARY CHARACTERISTICS

GOD

1. Only seen by what He does -

INVISIBLE.

RANDOM CHANCE

1. Only seen by what it does -

INVISIBLE.

2. Established natural laws, so

is not subject to those laws -

SUPERNATURAL.

2. Established natural laws, so

is not subject to those laws -

SUPERNATURAL.

3. Preceded the universe -

ETERNAL.

3. Preceded the universe -

ETERNAL.

4. Influence extends throughout the universe -OMNIPRESENT.

4. Influence extends throughout the universe - OMNIPRESENT.

5. Directly or indirectly responsi-

ble for everything that has ever

happened -OMNIPOTENT.

5. Directly or indirectly responsi-

ble for everything that has ever

happened - OMNIPOTENT.

6. Nobody made Him -SELF-

EXISTENT.

6. Nobody made it -SELF-

EXISTENT.

There is no possibility that some Godlike entity does NOT exist.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

IS ALL TRUTH SCIENTIFICALLY

PROVABLE?

Okay, prove scientifically that you love your husband / wife / mother etc.

Likewise, our inability to prove there is a God does not mean He does not exist;

our inability to prove there is not a God does not mean He does exist.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

WHAT MOST PEOPLE THINK:

Evolution is science...

Creation and Intelligent Design

are religion.

But in what way is believing in the IMPOSSIBILITY of Intelligent Design

any more scientific than believing in the

POSSIBILITY of Intelligent Design?

Either way it’s a matter of philosophy, not science.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

BASIC PREMISES OF EVOLUTION AND CREATION

EVOLUTION:

CREATION:

1. Everythingmust beexplainable by purely natural processes.

a. Atheistic evolution: There is no God.

b. Theistic evolution: Since the Big Bang,

God’s involvement with nature has

been trivial.

1. A supernatural intelligence created the universe. Though most things are explainable by natural processes,some things may not be.

2. God is powerful enough to useany method he chooses, including instantaneous creation.

2. Since there could be no other natural

processes besides evolution, evolution

is theonly possibility.

LIKE THE POSTULATES OF GEOMETRY, NEITHER SET OF PREMISES CAN BE PROVEN. THEY MUST BE ACCEPTED BY FAITH AS SELF-EVIDENT.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

EVOLUTION: Natural Processes Only!

“... the theory of evolution itself [is] a theory universally acceptednot because it can be

provedby logically coherent evidence to

be true but because the only alternative,

special creation, isclearly incredible.”

D.M.S. Watson, “Adaptation,” Nature, Vol. 123 (1929), p.233

"Even if all the data point to an intelligent

designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science because it isnot naturalistic."

Immunologist Scott C. Todd in a letter to Nature

magazine, Sept. 1999


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

How many non-barking dogs does it take to show that maybe Fido doesn’t bark?

This is why materialists fight so hard against Intelligent Design. If there is even one thing that can’t be explained by natural processes, then their fundamental premise is false!


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

BASIC PREMISES OF EVOLUTION AND CREATION

EVOLUTION:

CREATION:

1. Everythingmust beexplainable by purely natural processes.

a. Atheistic evolution: There is no God.

b. Theistic evolution: Since the Big Bang,

God’s involvement with nature has

been trivial.

1. A supernatural intelligence created the universe. Though most things are explainable by natural processes,some things may not be.

2. God is powerful enough to useany method he chooses, including instantaneous creation.

2. Since there could be no other natural

processes besides evolution, evolution

is theonly possibility.

3. Since evolution has never been seen in

human history, it must be very slow. The

universe and earthhave tobe billions of

years old.

3. Creation does not automatically require

a specific age.

a. Recent Creation: The earth is prob-

ably less than 10,000 years old.

b. Gap Theory & Progressive Creation:

Because evolutionists must know

what they are talking about, the earth

has to bebillions of years old.

LIKE THE POSTULATES OF GEOMETRY, NEITHER SET OF PREMISES CAN BE PROVEN. THEY MUST BE ACCEPTED BY FAITH AS SELF-EVIDENT.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

BASIC PREMISES OF EVOLUTION AND CREATION

EVOLUTION:

CREATION:

4. The Flood.

a. Recent Creation:One worldwide

flood.

b. Gap Theory: Two worldwide floods.

c. Progressive Creation: No worldwide

flood.

4. Because a worldwide flood would cut

billions of years off the time needed to

produce the fossil record, there can

never have been a worldwide flood.

5. Similarities between living things are

due to common ancestry or chance.

5. Similarities between living things

belonging to different kinds are due to

common design.

LIKE THE POSTULATES OF GEOMETRY, NEITHER SET OF PREMISES CAN BE PROVEN. THEY MUST BE ACCEPTED BY FAITH AS SELF-EVIDENT.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

DO SIMILARITIES

SHOW COMMON

ANCESTRY?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

BASIC PREMISES OF EVOLUTION AND CREATION

EVOLUTION:

CREATION:

4. The Flood.

a. Recent Creation:One worldwide

flood.

b. Gap Theory: Two worldwide floods.

c. Progressive Creation: No worldwide

flood.

4. Because a worldwide flood would cut

billions of years off the time needed to

produce the fossil record, there can

never have been a worldwide flood.

5. Similarities between living things are

due to common ancestry or chance.

5. Similarities between living things

belonging to different kinds are due to

common design.

6. Scientists are the final authority in

everything. Which scientists? The ones

that agree with you!(At least until they

change their minds next week.)

6. Authority.

a. Recent Creation: The Bible is the final

authority in everything.

b. Gap Theory: The Bible is the final au-

thority on most things, except the age

of the earth and the origin of death.

c. Progressive Creation: The Bible is the

final authority only on some spiritual

matters.

LIKE THE POSTULATES OF GEOMETRY, NEITHER SET OF PREMISES CAN BE PROVEN. THEY MUST BE ACCEPTED BY FAITH AS SELF-EVIDENT.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

So, back to our first question:

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

1. Define the problem. What do you want to know?

(E.g. “Does music affect how plants grow?”)

2. Gather information about the subject.

(AUTHORITY)

3. Formulate a hypothesis.

4. Devise a way to test the hypothesis.

5. Observe the results of the test. (EXPERIENCE)

6. Draw a conclusion (INDUCTIVE LOGIC) and report

your results so others can repeat the test.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Things to Which We Can Directly Apply the Scientific Method:

Phenomena we can directly observe and test.

  • Chemical composition or magnetic fields of bodies in the solar system. We can analyze either by close flybys or actual landings.

  • Positions and motions of planets, moons, etc. – direct telescope observation.

  • Radiation output, etc. – direct measurements.

  • Distance to stars up to about 50 light years away – calculated by parallax.

  • Chemical composition of the photosphere of sun and stars – spectroscopic analysis.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

SPECTROSCOPIC ANALYSIS

Each element’s unique arrangement of electrons produces a pattern (spectrum) of colored lines as its electrons jump between higher and lower energy levels. Lines are bright as the electrons emit energy or dark as they absorb it.

Above: Black and white graph of the spectrum of hydrogen.

Below: Emission spectra of three common elements showing colors.

Emission spectrum of Hydrogen

Emission spectrum of Fluorine

Emission spectrum of Oxygen


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT’S IN A STAR?

•In a laboratory, we see an emission

spectrum of bright lines against a

dark background.

•However, the interior of a star is so hot that the electrons are knocked completely away from the atoms. (This is called a plasma.) The star’s light is NOT from electrons jumping between specific energy levels, so it is a continuous white light.

•Light from the interior must pass through the star’s outer regions (its photosphere) on its way to us. This part of the star is not as hot, so some of the atoms do have electrons.

•These electrons absorb specific colors as they move to higher energy levels.

•What we see on earth is like a pho-

tographic negative. Instead of an

emission spectrum of bright lines

against a dark background, we see an absorption spectrum of dark lines against a bright background. This enables us to identify elements present in the star’s outer layers.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Things We Cannot Legitimately be as Confident About:

Phenomena for which we have indirect data, but we cannot directly observe and test.

  • Interior structure of stars and planets. Since we cannot directly see inside we devise models. However, we must recognize that the models may need to be revised.

  • Meaning of anomalous red shifts. We directly measure the shifts, but we must then interpret what they mean. Are all red shifts due to linear motion? Could gravitational / relativistic red shifts be involved?

  • Presence of planets around distant stars. We measure a tiny amount of “wobble” in the starlight, which we then interpret to mean that an orbiting object is pulling the star. Are there other possibilities?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Possible Explanations for “Wobble” of Starlight

Red Shift Varies

BROWN DWARF IN ORBIT

MEASURE-MENT ERRORS

PLANET

IN ORBIT

PULSATION OF STAR

UNKNOWN FACTORS

Can we be absolutely certain?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THINGS WE CANNOT TEST (Deductive Logic Only):

Phenomena we cannot directly observe, for which we devise models that we also cannot directly test.

  • Origin of the matter and energy that comprise the universe

  • Underlying geometry of the universe

  • Age of the universe

  • Mechanisms involved in a Big Bang

  • Mechanisms of galaxy and cluster formation

  • Origin of the solar system and its parts


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Origin of the Elements

1 2

HYDROGEN HELIUM

1 4

345678910

LITHIUM BERYLLIUM BORON CARBON NITROGEN OXYGEN FLUORINE NEON

7 9 11 12 14 16 19 20

1112131415161718

SODIUM MAGNESIUM ALUMINUM SILICON PHOSPHOROUS SULPHUR CHLORINE ARGON

23 24 27 28 31 32 35 40

192021222324252627282930313233343536

POTASSIUM CALCIUM SCANDIUM TITANIUM VANADIUM CHROMIUM MANGANESE IRON COBALT NICKEL COPPER ZINC GALLIUM GERMANIUM ARSENIC SELENIUM BROMINE KRYPTON

39 40 45 48 51 51 55 56 58 59 64 65 70 73 75 79 80 84

373839404142434445464748495051525354

RUBIDIUM STRONTIUM YTTRIUM ZIRCONIUM NIOBIUM MOLYBDENUM TECHNETIUM RUTHENIUM RHODIUM PALLADIUM SILVER CADMIUM INDIUM TIN ANTIMONY TELLURIUM IODINE XENON

85 88 89 91 93 96 99 101 103 106 108 112 115 119 122 126 127 131

5556727374757677787980818283848586

CESIUM BARIUM HAFNIUM TANTALUM TUNGSTEN RHENIUM OSMIUM IRIDIUM PLATINUM GOLD MERCURY THALLIUM LEAD BISMUTH POLONIUM ASTATINE RADON

133 137 178 181 184 186 190 192 195 197 201 204 207 209 210 219 222

8788104105106107 108 109

FRANCIUM RADIUM RUTHERFORD- DUBNIUM SEABORGIUM BOHRIUM HASSIUM MEITNERIUM

223 226 IUM 261 262 263 264 265 268

H He

Li Be B C N O F Ne

Na Mg Al Si P S Cl Ar

K Ca Sc Ti V Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Ge As Se Br Kr

Rb Sr Y Zr Nb Mo Tc Ru Rh Pd Ag Cd In Sn Sb Te I Xe

Cs Ba Hf Ta W Re Os Ir Pt Au Hg Tl Pb Bi Po At Rn

Fr Ra Rf Db Sg Bh Hs Mt etc.

La-Lu

57- 71

Ac-Lr

89-103

57

LANTHANUM

139

89

ACTINIUM

227

La

Ac

5859606162636465666768697071

CERIUM PRASEODYM- NEODYMIUM PROMETHEUM SAMARIUM EUROPIUM GADOLINIUM TERBIUM DYSPROSIUM HOLMIUM ERBIUM THULIUM YTTERBIUM LUTETIUM

140 IUM 141 144 147 147 152 157 159 162 165 167 169 173 175

90919293949596979899100101102103

THORIUM PROTACTIN- URANIUM NEPTUNIUM PLUTONIUM AMERICIUM CURIUM BERKELIUM CALIFORNIUM EINSTEINIUM FERMIUM MENDELEV- NOBELIUM LAWRENCIUM

232 IUM 231 238 237 244 243 247 247 251 252 257 IUM 258 259 260

Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho E Tm Yb Lu

Th Pa U Np PuAmCm Bk Cf Es Fm Md No Lr

90 elements are known to occur on earth. Elements 43, 61, and 93 and above (shown in red) are known only in artificially manufactured form, though #43 is seen in some stars.

We need to explain the origin of the 90 naturally occurring elements.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Naturally Occurring Isotopes

Name of Isotope Atomic Number Mass Number Protons Neutrons

hydrogen-1 1 1 1 0

hydrogen-2 1 2 1 1

hydrogen-3 1 3 1 2

helium-3 2 3 2 1

helium-4 2 4 2 2

NONEXISTENT5

lithium-6 36 3 3

lithium-7 3 7 3 4

NONEXISTENT8

beryllium-9 4 9 4 5

boron-10 5 10 5 5

boron-11 5 11 5 6

carbon-12 6 12 6 6

carbon-13 6 13 6 7

carbon-14 6 14 6 8

nitrogen-14 7 14 7 7

nitrogen-15 7 15 7 8

oxygen-16 8 16 8 8

oxygen-17 8 17 8 9

oxygen-18 8 18 8 10

etc.

A Big Bang could not produce any element heavier than Lithium.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

WHY SUCH A BIG DEAL?

Somewhere around 99% of the observed matter in the universe consists of H-1 and He-4. There are only a

few possible ways to combine two of these atoms.

•Two H-1 nuclei (two protons) cannot stay together without the presence of at least one neutron. (There is no such thing as He-2.) Even then, He-3 comprises only 0.000138% of the Helium known.

•A H-1 and He-4 nucleus together would have mass 5. Oops, it doesn’t exist either.

•Two He-4 nuclei would have a mass of 8, but that doesn’t exist either.

A Big Bang would have expanded too fast to combine more

than two particles at a time, and there are no other com-binations of two. We are blocked at every turn when

trying to make heavier elements out of the two

elements that would have been present in a Big Bang.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Problems with Synthesis of Heavier Elements in Stars

Once all the hydrogen in the core of a star is used up, the star is supposed to experience a “helium flash” in which

it suddenly fuses two helium nuclei into Be-8, three into

C-12 (“triple-alpha”), and four into O-16.

THREE PROBLEMS:

(1) Be-8 decays instantaneously and would be unavailable as a building block for heavier elements.

(2) The process has never been seen. Even if it did occur, it would be undetectable. There is no evidence that it has ever happened. It is an a priori assumption needed for materialistic evolution to be true.

(3) Atomic nuclei are so tiny that the chance is extraordinarily small for two to collide, let alone three or four.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Problems with Synthesis of Heavier Elements in Supernovae

Supernovae are believed to reach temperatures thousands of times hotter than normal, high enough to synthesize the rest of the elements. These elements are supposedly flung into space, then recycled into new stars.

TWO PROBLEMS:

(1) The earliest stars should have been composed of nothing but hydrogen and helium. However, we have never seen a single metal-free star, even among the very “oldest” ones.

(2) Since gravity drops off by the square of the distance between objects, it would be far too weak to pull the parts back together into a new star. The material should just float through space. No evidence here either - just a desire to have materialistic evolution be true!


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

IS EVOLUTION FALSIFIABLE?

The most fundamental assumption of evolution is that everything must be explainable by purely natural processes.

But what if something can’t be explained by natural processes?

YES IT CAN!

We make up a story then use faulty logic to say,

“Because we can make up a story, therefore our story must be true.”

The Story of the Supernovae and the Elements

Once upon a time there was a big supernova. It produced many atoms of heavy elements, but they were spreading throughout space. Then a second supernova took place light-years away. The shock wave from the second supernova traveled trillions of miles and pushed the expanding cloud from the first supernova back together into a ball. It became a new star that now had heavier elements. The process repeated over and over, spreading heavy elements to every single star we’ve ever seen.

The End.

Do you believe that a shock wave from trillions of miles away can

make an expanding cloud collapse into a ball? Do you believe

every observable star in the universe would be affected?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

The Origin of Fried Eggs

WAS THERE A COOK,

or...

did a supernova release

a burst of energy

that

bounced off a satellite...

hitting a chicken that

exploded

and

sent a superheated

egg sailing onto a plate?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

OCCAM’S RAZOR:

“Entities Should Not Be

Multiplied Beyond Necessity.”

A principle of logic that can be paraphrased as,

“The simplest explanation

that fits all the facts

is usually the best.”

Not a hard and fast rule, but a good guideline.The fewer stories you have to make up, the better.

(K.I.S.S.!)


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

A Priori Assumptions of

Materialistic Cosmology

1. Everythingmust beexplainable by purely natural Processes.

a. Atheistic evolution: There is no God.

b. Theistic evolution: Since the Big Bang, God has had little

involvement with nature.

2. The earth cannot occupy any special place in the universe. (The Cosmological Principle)

3. In order to explain the earth’s apparent position somewhere near the center of the universe, space must not be three-dimensional. It is four-dimensional and curves back on itself.

4. Four-dimensional space has no center or edge. It is unbounded.

5. Space is defined by the presence of matter. Where there is no matter, there is no space.

None of these is provable. They are accepted as self-evident.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Relativity - Non- Euclidean Geometry

Classical Physics - Euclidean Geometry

B

B

A

A

The universe does not expand through 3-dimensional space because the universe is space. There is no “outside” because “outside” indicates a place in space, which does not exist past the edge of the expanding universe. Space expands, but points A and B keep their same relative positions.

According to classical physics,

if the universe expanded it did so

through three-dimensional space. Points A and B move apart through space.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

FOUR DIMENSIONAL SPACE

Imagine a 2-dimensional ant trapped inside the surface of a piece of paper. He has no concept of “up” or “down.” Even if the paper is curved into a sphere, he has no way to know it because he can only see

his immediate area.

Big Bang cosmology says that we are the ants, but we don’t know it because we are trapped inside the 3-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional “hypersphere.”

Space is curved, but we can’t detect it.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

UNBOUNDED SPACE

A 2-dimensional ant confined to the surface of a sphere could

never reach the center or the edge because from

his perspective the surface hasno center

or edge. To him, it isunbounded.

If space is a 4-dimensional

hypersphere, we are confined

to its 3-D surface. We can

never find the center or the edge

because neither exists. 4-D space

would have to be unbounded.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

THE COSMOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE

No matter where the ant goes, things look pretty much the

same in any direc- tion. There is no

referred frame of reference.

Likewise, Big Bang theory

assumes that no matter where

in space we go, things on a

large enough scale will look

pretty much the same in

any direction.

This is philosophy, not science.If

there is a preferred frame of reference,

the big bang and some (not all!) parts of the theory

of relativity are wrong.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

2 Types of Evidence Used to Support the BIG BANG:

1. of Starlight

Red Shift

2. Cosmic Microwave Back-ground Radiation (CMB)


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

SO WHAT’S A “RED SHIFT”?

Reports of the universe expanding are based on colors (wavelength) of light from stars shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. Almost all astronomers interpret this as a Doppler shift due to the stars moving away from us.

Actual wavelength of star’s light

Normal absorption spectrum

“Red-Shifted”

absorption spectrum

Seemingly stretched-out wavelength due to motion away from us - exaggerated for purpose of illustration

“Blue-Shifted”

absorption spectrum

Seemingly compressed wavelength due to motion toward us - exaggerated for purpose of illustration


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Possible Explanations for Red Shifts

Red Shift Exists

DOPPLER EFFECT

GRAVITA-TIONAL EFFECT

TRANSVERSE EFFECT

RELATIVISTIC EFFECT

UNKNOWN FACTORS

Would we even know how to interpret a Doppler shift if space is four-dimensional?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

QUASARS: A BIG LITTLE PROBLEM!

Quasars are extremely bright, but their rapid pulsation indicates that they are relatively small. Because of their high red shifts, they are believed to be among the most distant objects in the universe.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law says energy output is proportional to an object’s surface area and the fourth power of the temperature.

There is no known way an object as small as a quasar could get

hot enough to be so bright if it is really billions of light years away.

NASA photos of a quasar supposed to be 1.5 billion light years away

Either we are wrong about the Stefan-Boltzmann law, derived from observation, or else we are wrong about the meaning of red shifts for at least these quasars. How can we be sure about the meaning of red shifts for anything, then?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

QUANTIZED RED SHIFTS

If the universe is the result of a Big Bang, then stars

and galaxies near us should have very low red

shifts, while those far away should have high shifts.

For objects in between, there should be

a continuous distribution of red shifts.

THERE IS NOT.

Red shifts occur in discrete intervals

calculated at about 72 km/sec.

Evolutionary astronomy has

no explanation for this phenomenon.

Some Intelligent Design advocates point out that the quantization of red shifts would make senseif the earth were near the center of a 3-dimensional

(non-Big Bang) universe.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

10

5

0

Number of Galaxies

10

5

0

Number of Galaxies

62 64 66 68

Distance in M Light Years

62 64 66 68

Distance in M Light Years

QUANTIZED RED SHIFTS

If the universe expanded uniformly

through 3-dimensional

space, an observer not

near the center would

see a continuous

range of red shifts

determined by the

distance of each galaxy emitting light. About 2 million light years from the center, the distribution of red shifts should look something like this:

However, an observer

near the center

would see red

shifts in dis-

crete intervals.

The distribution

would look some-

thing like this:

This is exactly what we see.

It looks like the earth is near the center of the universe!


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

A CHALLENGE TO MATERIALISM: Come up with an alternate explanation for the quantization of red shifts.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

2 Types of Evidence Used to Support the BIG BANG:

1. of Starlight

Red Shift

2. Cosmic Microwave Back-ground Radiation (CMB)


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Energy Level of the CMB

The present energy level of the CMB is

about 2.73 degrees above absolute zero.

•At the time of the Big Bang, theory says that the temperature would have been billions of degrees. Matter and energy would have been freely changing back and forth.

•As the fireball expanded, the matter and energy would have cooled like the gases in a refrigerator.

•After 300,000 years matter and energy would have “decoupled” so that the energy went right through matter without affecting it.

•The energy level of the radiation would have been about 3000K at the time.

•In order to explain the change from 3000K to 2.73K, we have to say that the energy was absorbed by the fabric of space as it expanded.

This, too, requires expanding 4-dimensional space.

It is not possible in 3 dimensions.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Distribution of the CMB

Computer generated image of cosmic microwave background

radiation released by NASA in 1992 based on COBE data.

The image is deceptive. The “hot spots” are greatly exaggerated due to computer manipulation. The CMB isalmost perfectly uniform,to within 30 parts per million.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

A Possible Factor in the CMB: Blackbody Radiation

Wavelength distrib- ution of the CMB, 2.726 degrees above absolute zero. (Based on COBE data.)

Under laboratory conditions, such a distribution usually indicates “blackbody radiation” caused by objects emitting energy at the same rate they absorb it. Could space dust be contributing to the CMB?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

INFLATIONARY MODEL

To account for the “Horizon Problem” – the discrepancy between the smooth background radiation and the “lumpy” distribution of matter -- many believe that there was an inflationary period between 10-43 and 10-34 sec-onds after the Big Bang during which space expanded

at 1020 times the speed of light and lumps formed.

Thisis incompatible with the Law of Conservation of Momentum and Newton’s 2nd Law of Motion.There is no known physical cause for the expansion to speed up and then slow down again-- only an a priori assumption needed for the Big Bang to be correct.

Inflation is also insufficient to account for the amount of clustering observed. With the amount of matter known in the universe, it would take60 billion years to reach the present level. (Hence, the invention of “dark matter.”


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

COLD DARK MATTER

There is nowhere near the amount of matter needed to pull together galaxies, galaxy clusters, and so on.

In order to hold to materialistic Big Bang cosmology, we have to believe that 90 to 99% of the matter in the universe is invisible.

As alternatives, some have proposed String and Texture theories. These depend on the existence of “Higgs Fields,” hypothetical force fields that appear and disappear as necessary to make the mathematics of a Big Bang work.

Isn’t the Scientific Method supposed to be based onOBSERVATION?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

The Origin of Fried Eggs

WAS THERE A COOK,

or...

did a supernova release

a burst of energy

that

bounced off a satellite...

hitting a chicken that

exploded

and

sent a superheated

egg sailing onto a plate?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Conservation of Angular Momentum

Any rotating object possesses a property known as angular

momentum. As the object’s diameter increases, its

speed of rotation decreases in order to conserve angu-

lar momentum. As the diameter decreases, the

speed increases.

Suppose a galaxy were only a billion miles in

diameter, and rotating at only one mile per hour.

If we move back through time toward the Big Bang, it

must have been smaller and smaller. Since it had all its

angular momentum from the beginning, it had to be

rotating faster and faster. At some point shortly

after the Big Bang, it would have had to be rotating far

faster than the speed of light.

According to the observations of physics,

this is a physical impossibility.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

PROBLEMS WITH “LITTLE BIG BANGS”

If there were several “little big bangs” that interacted with each other, this could overcome the problems of conserva-tion of linear momentum and angular momentum.However,

1. Each singularity would be the result of a quantum fluctua-tion. The results of such fluctuations should be random and unpredictable. Yet we see the same types of matter and energy everywhere we look throughout the universe.

2. The Big Bang says that there was nothing outside the explo-sion, not even space. Space is 4-dimensional. However, “Little Big Bangs” would have occurred at many different locations, meaning that space already existed before they exploded. Space would have to be 3-dimensional.

3. We must discard the First Law of Thermodynamics over and over, each time one of the smaller singularities appeared.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

The Most Fundamental A Priori Assumption of Materialistic Cosmology:

Everything must be explainable by purely natural Processes.

But there are no KNOWN natural processes that might have produced matter and energy, or that might have caused the singularity to explode, or that might have caused inflation, or that might have caused clustering, etc.

We can choose to believe in unknown NATURAL processes, or unknown NON-NATURAL processes.

Either way, it’s a step of faith!


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

HOW ABOUT THE SOLAR SYSTEM?

Can we explain its origin by known natural processes?


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

COMPOSITION OF THE PLANETS

The standard scenario for the origin of the sun and planets is the collapse of a planetary disk. If this is the case, the chemical composition should be similar throughout the solar system.

Mercury

Venus

Earth

Mars

Saturn

Jupiter

Neptune

Uranus

However, NASA space flights tell us that each planet is made of a mix of elements different from all the rest and from the sun.

This is incompatible with the “planetary disk” hypothesis.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

ANGULAR MOMENTUM

The sun possesses 99% of the mass in the solar system, yet

the planets possess 98% of the angular momentum.

Mercury

Venus

Earth

Mars

Saturn

Jupiter

Neptune

Uranus

There is no known way that a rotating disk of gas and dusk could distribute its angular momentum so unevenly.

This, too, is incompatible with the “planetary disk” hypothesis.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

ORBITS OF THE PLANETS

Each of the planets orbits the sun

in a different plane.

•Pluto, Mercury, and earth’s “twin,” Venus, are the

most inclined with respect to our own orbit.

•Venus rotates backward from the rest; Uranus rotates almost perpendicular to its orbit.

•At least 11 moons orbit opposite their mother planet’s rotation.

•The moons of Uranus orbit almost perpendicular to the rest of the solar system.

This, too, is incompatible with the “planetary disk” hypothesis.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

COULD THE PLANETS HAVE BEEN CAPTURED BY THE SUN’S GRAVITY?

Suppose you had a turn-

table with a magnet

at the center and

nine individual-

ly adjustable

rotating rings.

Could you roll

a steel ball

bearing onto

the turntable

and get it to or-

bit byexactly

balancing the mag-

netic force with the

outward momentum?

Got one in orbit? Now

do it 8 more times,

one for each pla-

net,without dis-

turbing the

first ball.

Got your 9

planets in

place? Now

do it about 4

dozen more

times, one for

each moon.

BUT

WAIT! You have to do it

in 3 dimensions, not two!

Even with all our technology, there is no way we could put together an arrangement as complex as the solar system.Yet it is supposed to be the product of Random Chance.


What do we really know about the universe by david prentice m ed m a s t

Back to our first question:

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE?

Not very much! Most of what we think we know is deductive logic, based on a priori assumptions.

Are you willing to examine your assumptions to see if they make sense?


  • Login