TruthMuse wrote:
stephen_33 wrote:
I get the feeling you're evading my question so here's the simple & scientific explanation for why rocky planets could not have existed before many hundreds of millions of years had passed:
Rocky planets such as Mercury, Venus, Mars & Earth are comprised of a host of marerials made from heavier elements - Silicates, Iron Oxide, Aluminium compounds etc. But these are formed in stars, especially exploding stars. When we look back to the earliest time in our Universe these elements are absent and we see only Hydrogen & Helium.
There is no reason to believe that planets existed from the beginning.
And when did the elements form?
Heavy elements in the universe began forming within the cores of the first stars, billions of years after the Big Bang, when lighter elements like hydrogen and helium were created in the early universe; most heavy elements up to iron are produced through stellar nucleosynthesis within stars, while the heaviest elements are thought to form during the explosive events of supernovae and neutron star mergers.
Key points about heavy element formation:
-
The Big Bang produced only the lightest elements like hydrogen and helium.
-
As stars formed, nuclear fusion within their cores created heavier elements up to iron.
-
When massive stars explode as supernovae, they release large amounts of heavy elements into space.
-
Recent research suggests the heaviest elements are likely formed in the collisions of neutron stars.Y
I know this isn't about Evolution, of course. But Big Bang and Evolution always seem to be intertwined for some odd reason. (Maybe because both fly in the face of Young Earth. Not sure.)
So, I am starting this thread, hoping it will be fruitful.
Do you think when the universe began, it began in a tiny little dot, with everything in it, and if so, why? Couldn't it have just as easily started looking like a mature universe with planets and stars fully formed?
Well, we have looked back 13 billion years, and the galaxies and planets were formed then. So, there is that much. But the stars and galaxies were much younger. And much more densely packed, And no evidence of and heavy elements yet. So, we couldn't say "fully formed." But there, yes.
What was before that? No way we will ever know, probably. Nobody had "turned the lights on" yet. There were no stars. So, we cannot see any further back.
So, your theory might have some merit. Two problems though:
So, so far, the BB theory is the only theory getting its major predictions right. Putting it in the drivers seat, for the time being.
You looked back 13 billion years. Did you use a TARDIS or some time machine? Suggesting the universe was younger in the past is not much of a revelation; saying galaxies were much younger again is not much of a revelation. The trouble you have is you do not know how it all started; you are looking at what you see in the here and now and drawing conclusions about whether this or that continues the way you think. No one disputes the universe expansion, so going backward would mean it is more compact, but how far back should we go before we reach the beginning? Do you know what it looked like when it started?
You don’t need a TARDIS, silly.
It takes light eight and a half minutes to reach Earth from the sun. So when you look at it, you are seeing it where/how it was right and a half minutes ago. (TARDIS not included.)
When you look at a star ten thousand light years away, you are seeing it how/where it was ten thousand years ago.
When you look at a galaxy 10 million light years away, you are seeing it how/where it was 10 million years ago. (Very few galaxies that close.)
But when you look at a quasar 13 billion light years away, you are seeing it how/where it was 13 billion years ago.
We would love to look back further. Sadly, there has only been light that long.
But if the Atheists had their way, the Steady State model would still be on the table. Unfortunately them, as the evidence came in, the Universe definitely not eternal. It had a beginning.
There was a First Cause.
And no, nobody agrees yet what that First Cause was. We only know there was one. And about when. Roughly 13.8 billion years ago.
Which is why Science retains its credibility. It is very upfront about this is what we know, this is what we don’t know.