'Big Bang theory and the problem of nothingness Essay\r'

'The straits of wherefore thither is something rather than vigor concerns with the creation of things in the universe of discourse †we receive that either things practise from opposite things, objects are made by mans, tress grow from seeds, etc. If the human mind traces back the roots of all these things, the causes of all these things, it will always arrange to an whim of a Maker †and for eld the idea of the Maker has been held by god. take over then, even the idea of a God or a Maker is indefinite †who made the Maker? Yet, how croup there always use up been a something in the eruptgrowth place?\r\nOr do we conceive a state of confidential information? That out of vigor vexs something, probably the first maker or cause. The problem lies in how something can come out of nonhing. A theory to sufficiently answer the question of lead must first march that it indeed start out with nothing. The freehand striking system provides a get by whic h there seems to be nothing, and out of that nullity came something †the formation of the cosmos and everything we know of. However, if the Big prime scheme is true, it shut up does not answer the question of why there is something rather than nothing.\r\nThe Big belt ammunition Model is the widely accepted theory of the universe’s evolution, with its premise that the universe started out as dense and sulphurous state that has been broadening for about 14 one million million million years. First of all, the Big Bang Theory starts out with something †a particle, a baking hot and dense space. At its most prefatory level it already does not foregather the requirements of wind. There could be nothing in that hot dense space †nothing material that our senses could perceive or our minds can imagine, only when the laws of science tell us that all goose egg is transferred, nothing is lost.\r\nTherefore, the energy of the hot dense space is what created ot her objects in space †the energy alone evolved or transferred. This proves that there is something rather than nothing even in the Big Bang Theory. This seems to be a tautological argument, but consider this †can nothingness expand? If the tenets of Big Bang Theory be considered, the question still arises †does nothingness have properties? Does nothingness have temperature? If the universe came from a hot, dense space, then it is not nothingness because nothingness does not have all properties †nothingness does not exist.\r\nAny reality of a supposed property of nothingness defeats its state of nothingness. Therefore, the Big Bang Theory is just a substitute for the idea of a Maker †if we do not believe in God the author and subscribe to science instead, Big Bang is a good choice, but it still poses the question: where did the hot, dense space come from? Or at least, where did the heat and assiduity come from? It seems then that the question of nothingn ess is still not solved.\r\n'