A Different Perspective on Big Bang
This article text is part of our book: “Academic Proof of the Creator Visual/Interactive Book (New Perspectives from the Treatise of Nature)” Click Here for Book Page
With a different look at the Big Bang, the probability of the formation of the existing universe, in its current form, is studied. Moreover, the probability of the formation of a universe, which makes life possible, by chance is analyzed.
Let’s have a look at the probability of the existence and the continuation of the Universe. Now i would like to ask you to have a look at the galaxy pictures that you must have seen many times, this time very carefully. As we will ask you a very serious question over which we would like you to think…
Please read carefully each and every sentence we have placed between the pictures. (You can enlarge more by clicking on each image.)
I wonder if this magnificent universe, which is just like being decorated from one end to another with 300 billion fascinating galaxies, each of which contains on average 300 billion starts, looks like a mass of matter that was scattered around as a result of a big bang?
Do you think, the formation of orderly galaxies, the concentration of matter in certain places and formation of starts, and the sensitive balance of the solar system, do all these things look like as if they have come into being as a result of this awesome explosion?
Normally, after such a big explosion it is expected that matter is scattered in the space randomly and not to concentrate in certain places and to form orderly systems.
According to the second law of thermodynamics; in everything that can be observed, there is a continuous tendency to transform from orderliness to disorder by giving out energy. The formation of orderly systems and complex living beings without any external intervention is therefore contradictory to the second law of thermodynamics
 H. Blum, American Scientist, Vol. 43, p. 595, 1955.
Besides, it is obvious that explosions scatter the matter and put them in a disorderly state, whereas a very different result came out in a mysterious manner after Big Bang. The matter was concentrated and led the way to the formation of galaxies.
Imagine, a wheat silo was bombed and rather than being scattered around casually, the wheat is gathered in certain locations and put into the bales and sacked one on the top of another! If this is an abnormal and unexpected situation, then the current situation of our universe is much more surprising and unexpected result than this example.
But this is the reality just before our eyes. The question that should be asked is the following: What conclusion will you deduce from this situation?
There are two opposite forces that came into existence with Big Bang, that is, the force of the explosion that trying to separate the materials from each other and the force of gravity trying to pull the material together. With the balancing of these forces, the visible universe came into existence.
If the force of gravity outweighed its opposite, then the universe would collapse in itself; if the explosion were more powerful than, the material would be dispersed away without having a chance to get united.
I wonder, how sensitive is this balance? How much difference in the speed of explosion would have prevented the formation of the visible universe?
A well-known math professor from University of Adelaide Paul Davies made long calculations in order to answer that question and he has reached to surprising conclusions. According to Davies, if the speed of explosion that came after Big Bang had been even slower by one-billionth (1 over 1018), then the visible universe would not come into existence. He says the following: “The speed of the explosion of the universe was determined with an unbelievably sensitive precision. Therefore, Big Bang is not an ordinary explosion, but rather a formation which is calculated and regulated carefully at all points.”
 Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1984, p. 184
Of course, such a delicate adjustment can’t be explained by a coincidence taking place randomly and it manifests that it is the design of a power working consciously. Paul Davies, although he is a materialist physicist, accepts this reality as following:
“It is difficult to object to the idea that the existing structure of the universe, which is sensitive even the smallest numerical changes, was formed by a very meticulous consciousness. These sensitive numerical balances existing even in the basic structure of the universe is a strong evidence for accepting the existence of a cosmic design.”
We wonder: what else do we want as evidence?
 Paul Davies. God and the New Physics. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983, p 189