The Big Bang will be in Trouble if the Conservation Laws are Invoked

[Guest guest]

The Big Bang will be in Trouble if the Conservation Laws are Invoked

 

 

 

Sir Isaac Newton

 

 

Newton ’s three laws of motion are well known in scientific literature. The

first one is called the law of inertia. According to the first law an object at

rest tends to remain at rest and an object in motion tends to remain in motion

with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an external

force.

 

The second law is the one most people are familiar with in the science courses

and is know as law of force. According to the second law, the acceleration of an

object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of

that force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional

to the mass of the object. The same can be expressed as a = F/m.

 

Constant velocity is called speed but acceleration is the change in speed or

change in the velocity of an object. So if the velocity is described with the

symbol ‘v’ then acceleration is the change in ‘v’ with respect to

time‘t’. In calculus it is described by ‘d’ differentiation, i.e.,

differential symbol ‘dv’ over ‘dt’ and we can express the acceleration

as a = dv/dt. This indicates that acceleration is the change in velocity per

unit change in time. Also, since v=dx/dt, where x = distance, a = d2x/dt2,

acceleration is directly proportional to distance traveled. Thus when we drop

something from a building — say a penny, the penny is at rest (a = 0) when we

are holding it in our hand but when we drop it, it immediately begins to

accelerate due to the force of gravity acting upon it. As it continues to move

downward (increasing x) it will move at increasingly higher acceleration.  If

that penny should hit someone on the head it

may kill him/her depending on what acceleration it has reached. Normally, if we

drop a penny on someone’s head it won’t cause any damage. But if we drop it

from a high distance and it falls on the head that same penny can crack the

skull and kill the person. Thus it is to be concluded that it is not the penny

which is responsible for killing the person, rather it is the acceleration.

 

The third law states that for every action there is an equal and opposite

reaction. According to Newton ’s third law, whenever two objects interact with

each other both of them apply forces upon each other. The interaction can be

possible when, the objects are in physical contact with each other or they are

physically separated. Thus forces in general are classified as contact forces

and action-at-a-distance forces. Frictional/resistance force, tensional force

and normal force are the contact forces and on the other hand, gravitational

force, electrical force and magnetic force are the action-at-a-distance forces.

 

A devotee asked a question to His Holiness Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami (BMP),

Ph.D. of Bhaktivedanta Institute, in the weekly Satsanga on 3rd of August, 2008:

“What is the purpose of Newton ’s first law? Is it not true that first law

is just a natural conclusion of second law? The second law states that F=ma.

According to the second law, if the force ‘F’ is zero then the acceleration

‘a’ is zero, and if the acceleration ‘a’ is zero then the force ‘F’

is zero. Thus can we accept that the first law is a special case of second law

and there is no need to mention it separately?†BMP explained the various

details in answering this question and said that Newton ’s first law is more

than just a special case of the second law. The first law describes a negative

force and thus is a negative law. According to first law if we don’t apply

enough force to a body, it won’t move. The first law is not merely applicable

to zero force but it

includes forces which are not sufficient to generate change in the speed/rest

of a body. The first law tells us what force is needed to change the speed of a

body, or what resistance has to be overcome. If the mass is too big as compared

to the applied force then the force will be negated and thus can be called a

negative law since it explains the negation of force. For example a small meteor

can hit the earth with appreciable force but it may have no effect on the speed

of the earth.

 

It is also sometimes explained in the scientific literature that that Newton

’s first law establishes the inertial frame by which we measure acceleration.

That becomes important when we talk about, say, movement inside an airplane. If

we drop a ball from our hand sitting in an airplane, and if the airplane is

accelerating, the ball won’t drop. It will move backwards at first, i.e. it

will move horizontally. Hence, apparently it is violating Newton ’s law of

gravity. Thus we must know what the inertial frame of reference is, since

without that Newton ’s law may not be properly applied.

 

Hence the first law is essential and can’t be replaced as a special case of

second law. First we must know the inertial frame of reference and then we can

know about the accelerating frame of reference. We know from Einstein’s

general theory of relativity that Newton ’s laws are not valid at very high

velocities approaching the speed of light, or for very massive bodies. This is

because of the Lorentz transformation SQRT(1 – v2/c2)-1 that becomes very

important when v à c, where c is the speed of light. Thus Newton ’s laws have

to be replaced by Einstein’s equations.

 

The devotee further asked the question, “Does the concept of inertia create

the notion of will that a body posses? Materialists argue that the sense of

‘I’ and instinct of survival are nothing but the manifestation of inertia, a

simple property of a body of matter.†BMP explained that organic matter is a

spontaneously acting dynamic system. Matter is considered inert and doesn’t

spontaneously move. What is causing matter to come to a state of spontaneous

dynamic equilibrium? In other wards a living body is violating the inertial laws

by moving and maintaining its ‘self’ against the environment. It is

violating the law of inert matter. That is why we don’t expect that matter

would give rise to life. The living body is not only a dynamic system but it is

exchanging matter with the environment – taking matter in through a boundary

and similarly eliminating matter.  Inert matter is not expected to exhibit this

type of spontaneous dynamic

behavior.

 

We don’t know how we could interpret the dynamic equilibrium of living

organisms with inertia. Inertia refers to the property of matter to remain in an

unmoving state, or even if it is moving how it can establish any dynamic

equilibrium without assistance. Sometimes it is argued that a living organism

wants to continue living, so life has also a conservation principle similar to

matter. It is the property of matter to conserve itself, so life has also the

property of conservation.

 

We also agree with that. The conservation principle of life is known as sat in

Vedic literature. But that would mean that the living organism will not die.

Then, how can scientists explain the conservation of life at the death of a

living organism?

 

 

 

Big Bang Model

 

We know the conservation law of matter – matter can neither be created nor

destroyed. Of course applying Einstein’s theory in the case of matter we can

transform matter into energy and energy into matter, i.e., E=MC^2. So

conservation of matter means it can’t be created or destroyed but it can be

transformed. Thus the destruction of both energy and matter can’t happen at

the same time. Here is a big problem. Where does this energy and matter come

from if it can’t be created? The Big Bang will be in trouble if we show that

the matter and energy are somehow created. Thus it seems to violate some very

fundamental principle of physics – conservation of matter and energy.

 

But as we mentioned, for life, if the conservation principle holds there, then

how can scientists explain death. And how can they explain the creation of life?

How can they explain that from non-life, life comes and again from life,

non-life comes? This seems to violate any law of conservation or inertia that

materialists may invoke.  We accept that life is a separate principle (atma)

from matter and thus can be conserved. But modern science has not yet advanced

to this point.

 

 

You can download this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga at  

 

 

 

You can listen this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga at  

 

You can browse year/month wise Streaming Satsanga MP3s at:

http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/ .

 

 

 

Timing of weekly Satsanga: 6:00 PM India time, Every Sunday.  

 

 

You may visit http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/ to know the details about

joining process for the online “Weekly Satsangasâ€.

 

 

 

 

All Glories all Sadhus, Guru and Vaisnavas.

 

 

 

Thanking you.

 

 

Your humble servants

Purushottama Jagannatha Das &

Sushen Das 

Contact Number: +91-9000088290

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subscribe to Satsanga Mailing List 

 

 

 

 

 Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 

Share files, take polls, and make new friends - all under one roof. Go to

http://in.promos./groups/