Doesn't it take Faith to believe that the Universe began 13.5 billion years ago?

Question

So what if there's a scintilla of reasoning and empiricism behind it. It all depends on faith that the Red Shift implies a Big Bang, when all of everything, black holes and all, dark matter and light, was compressed into a "Singularity" the size of a pinhead?
I'm not asserting that any Fairy GodFather just "Poofed it" into existence, but there are still axiomatic assumptions that you have to accept, each step. No, it's not based on some "sacred book", but none of us were there to witness what REALLY happened, were we.? ;-)

Answer 1

It does take faith. "Facts" can be misrepresented, ignored, misunderstood, or simply not observed. What makes a fact a fact? Usually the authority of the persons claiming it, and their ability to argue for it. We have to trust the people that make these claims, especially if 'we' (the general public) do not know enough about science to know better.



Granted most of mainstream science is good theory.



Science is not absolute truth, and has never claimed to be. 100 years from now, science could be completely different, and if past is precedent, it will be completely different.



Finally, science is language - it can only exist and be discussed with language, which is it's limitation as a human construct.



Frankly I could care less what science has to say about origins of the universe and such. For one, I think the issue is just too big and hard for mortals to truly understand, and is probably best left to the realm of poetry and mysticism. Science should find cures for cancer and more efficient modes of production and transport, and all those nice things.

Answer 2

For some, to some degree, yes it may take faith to believe that the universe began however many billions of years ago. Important points though:



1. Those suggesting this age of the universe are not claiming it is THE truth. Aside from the numbers being revised from time to time, this is not a matter of knowing some great and sacred TRUTH. It's just part of a continually developing understanding of reality that has come through study of our surroundings (aka science).



2. If the universe is that old, fine. It really doesn't matter much to the average person. Religious beliefs *do* matter, because if they were true, they would indicate a whole different paradigm of reality that has been unobserved so far, and because they are being used in attempts to control the masses and generate widespread fear.

Answer 3

No.



The same technology that makes your computer work is the very same technology that enables us to determine (roughly) that the universe is "at least" that old. We may never know the exact age or what caused the universe to exist, big bang or not, but "some" facts about the universe "are" discernible and knowable, and from these facts we can use our superior powers of conjecture, intuition, extrapolation, math, and observations to discern other facts by sheer the sheer logic of cause and effect.



So...



Some things make logical sense, like protons and electrons and such all busy around the nucleus of an atom, and that the universe appears to be expanding (sort of like but not quite) an explosion of some kind, even though that may not be exactly what we're talking about, blah blah blah.



But it's not faith.



It's reason and sensibility and facts.

Answer 4

Given this kind of argument, even direct observation wouldn't be enough. That still leaves the argument about whether or not we experience things as they are, and so some axiom must always be accepted to believe anything. That reduces knowledge to an impossibility, and thus fails to account for the things we do seem to know.



So, what this turns out to be is equivocation on the word "faith." While no theory can completely close the gap and produce 100% certainty, scientific levels of certainty are more than enough to say we "know" something. Nothing like the faith of a religious person is needed to accept the most plausible explanation of the data we have.



Put simply, no, this does not require faith.

Answer 5

Since the speed of light is finite, looking out in distance is effectively looking back in time.



We can see back as far as 13.7 billion lightyears, almost all the way back to the Big Bang, and there are an enormous number of details that can be observed. The evidence for the Big Bang and for a 13.7 billion year old Universe is extensive and self-consistent --- essentially the entire intellectual content of modern astronomy, which would fill an entire library, if you care to research it.



The 3000 or so professional astronomers in the world spend their time looking for flaws in the data and in the theory, because that way lies professional success. The current standard model is, in fact, quite robust.

Answer 6

As an organic chemist I have a good science background but I still find portions of the realm of cosmology stretching the limited ability of my mind to comprehend.

I do have faith in my fellow scientists to fill in the gaps for me.

I often pity the layman trying to get his head around such things.

Some just shrug their shoulders and move on, others say goddidit.



RScott

Answer 7

Redshifts are only part of the picture, there's also the observed quantities of hydrogen and helium, as well as the CMBR predicted by the Big Bang model in the late 1940's and observed int he mid 1960's. Also General Relativity requires a universe either be expanding or contracting, and our universe certainly isn't contracting.



But, don't take anyone's word for it. Study physics and cosmology yourself.

Answer 8

Taken to a logical conclusion by that kind of reasoning most of the convicts in prison should be released because "none of us were there to witness what REALLY happened, were we.? ;-)"



We make tentative conclusions based on the most reasonable explanation of the credible evidence, when more credible evidence comes available or a more reasonable explanation is presented the previous tentative conclusions are examined, and if found lacking rejected.

Answer 9

No faith, it is the best model so far. All rational people know well that the standard model is flawed, has inconsistencies and is getting worse. A new standard model will appear in due course.

If the age is drastically recalculated I will not be bothered

Answer 10

Whether you know it or not, you are attacking the process of inference itself. If inference fails, then the whole human enterprise fails because we base much of our lives on inference.



In case you are interested, the expansion of the universe is only one type of evidence for the big bang. There is also the cosmic microwave background radiation, the power spectrum of the CMB, the high degree of isotropy of the CMB, harmonic variations in irregularities in the CMB, and the relative amounts of hydrogen, helium, and lithium in the present-day universe.



Do you really know that your mother was your mother? After all, you were in no condition to identify her when you were born.

Answer 11

It depends how you define faith. If you define faith purely as a strong conviction then we all have faith in many things. However, having faith in something because of empirical evidence is not the same as having faith in something despite a lack of such evidence (or even evidence to the contrary).

Answer 12

It does not take faith. It takes an understanding of the mathematical processes behind the observations. I have confidence that when one scientist makes a claim, other scientists who find the subject interesting will attempt to verify the claim. If mistakes are found, they will be pointed out by someone. That's just how science works.

Answer 13

Correction, 14.5 billion years ago.



Big Bang theory is not only good science it also fits in with religion just fine.



The universe contains all space, time, and matter. We know that the universe had a beginning so therefore time had a beginning. In order for the universe to be created, something outside must act on its own to bring it about (something within the universe creating the universe is just bad logic). The thing that created the universe must be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial - i.e. God.

Answer 14

You are overlooking some massive points.



1 - There is evidence that it began 13.5 billion years ago

2 - There is no evidence of any kind that any god exists

3 - If new evidence comes to light, science will happily come to a new consensus instead of blindly clinging to ancient dogma, unlike the religions

Answer 15

No, not at all. Does it take faith to believe something disturbed the surface of a lake when you see a set of concentric rings emanating from a common point?

Answer 16

Perhaps the ultimate catch 22 there! Even in believing one should believe in nothing, one is still "believing". So the answer is yes. Big bang theory is a belief system, not unlike any other.



An Atheist BELIEVES in nothing, LOL. Still a belief system.



Rock on!

Answer 17

Yah, but you said the "F" word. You are supposed to say FACT, not FAITH. You see, many of the born experts here think that faith is only a liturgical word.

Answer 18

It takes Faith enhanced with evidence. When you see 2 black dots on a white sheet your common sense states that there is a straight line between them, not a twisted curve.

Answer 19

You're equivocating the word faith. Faith in something demonstrated is not like religious faith.

Answer 20

Not when there is solid evidence to back it up. Faith isn't required.

Answer 21

Doesn't it take faith to know that the sun will rise tomorrow?

That your goldfish won't sprout wings?

That I'm not a computer program?

Answer 22

Nope.



The Big Bang is visible in radio waves. We have maps of the energy. http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/