The Big Bang...the creation and birth of the universe. At least according to some scientists. The Big Bang is a theory, never proven or confirmed, but in a sense is its on story and possibly a borderline myth. However, the science behind it, and the logical thinking involved, makes me personally believe that in no way is it a myth. A myth tends to have supernatural, or supreme-like, characters...the Big Bang Theory does not. It's backed up by scientific proofs.
A quick rundown of the Big Bang is the idea that the universe is always expanding and at about 13.8 billion years ago (considered the age of the universe) after it's first expansion, the universe cooled at such a rate that it allowed the formation of atoms. Gravity caused these atoms to bundle up and essentially form clouds which ended up colliding and "banging" into each other, causing incredible increases in heat. Eventually, gravity again caused the formation of these particles, and the universe began to cool. With the cooling temperatures, these clouds of particles began to become more dense and ultimately grew into stars, galaxies, etc. From there, each "cloud" began to form structures like Earth and the Sun, and the chemistry of life soon followed.
Now back to the underlying question of whether or not the Big Bang can be considered a myth. My answer: NO. What really is the backbone of my reasoning is the mere fact that this theory is backed by scientific facts, not stories or legends that include these supernatural or supreme-like characters. There's no G-d like character(s) mentioned, like the Navajo's creation story, or any of the stories mentioned in the Creation PDF. There's no Adam and Eve...nothing. Perhaps there is a supernatural being that did allow this to happen, but despite my Jewish background, I am a firm believer in science over religion. So in summation, I do not believe that the Big Bang can be considered a myth because science, not a story, backs it up.
No comments:
Post a Comment