Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T00:24:35.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Narlikar's “Creation” of the Big Bang Universe was a Mere Origination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Adolf Grünbaum
Adolf Grünbaum*
Affiliation:
Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh
*
†Send reprint requests to the author, Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260-6125, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Grünbaum (1989, 374, 390), I objected to Narlikar's (1977, 136–137) designation “event of ‘creation’” for a supposed first cosmic instant t = 0, which he imports into the big bang cosmology of the general theory of relativity (GTR). Narlikar (1992, 361–362) does reject a theological construal of the “creation”. But, endeavoring to justify his secular creationism, he now points out that, in the GTR, the usual derivation of matter-energy conservation from Hilbert's stationary action principle cannot be extended to include the putative first instant t = 0. Narlikar reasons that this “breakdown” in the derivation of energy conservation at t = 0 qualifies the putative initial event as the “creation event”. I argue that this inference is multiply fallacious.

Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 60 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 638 - 646
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barrow, J. D. and Tipler, F. J. (1986), The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bonnor, W. B. (1969), “The Problem of Evolution in General Relativity”, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 9: 439–444.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1989), “The Pseudo-Problem of Creation in Physical Cosmology”, Philosophy of Science 56: 373–394.10.1086/289497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1990), “Pseudo-Creation of the Big Bang”, Nature 344: 821–822.10.1038/344821b0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1991), “Creation as a Pseudo-Explanation in Current Physical Cosmology”, Erkenntnis 35: 233–254.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1993), “Theological Misinterpretations of Current Physical Cosmology”. In progress.Google Scholar
Narlikar, J. (1977), The Structure of the Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Narlikar, J. (1988), The Primeval Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Narlikar, J. (1992), “The Concepts of ‘Beginning’ and ‘Creation’ in Cosmology”, Philosophy of Science 59: 361–371.10.1086/289675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pius XII (1952), “Modern Science and the Existence of God”, The Catholic Mind 49: 182–192.Google Scholar
Stachel, J. (1993), “The Meaning of General Covariance: The Hole Story”, in Earman, J. et al. (eds.), J. Earman et al. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. In press.Google Scholar
Tipler, F. J. (1987), “Achieved Spacetime Infinity”, Nature 325: 201–202.10.1038/325201c0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torretti, R. (1979), “Mathematical Theories and Philosophical Insights in Cosmology”, in Nelkowski, H. et al. (eds.), H. Nelkowski et al. New York: Springer, pp. 320–335.Google Scholar
Torretti, R. (1983), Relativity and Geometry. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Torretti, R. (1984), “Kosmologie als Zweig der Physik”, in Kanitscheider, B. (ed.), Moderne Naturphilosophie. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, pp. 183–201.Google Scholar