Kiongozi,let me re-ask you in this way
In your frame of reference,which theory is best candidate for explanation of Universe's orgin?
Big bang Theory or special creation,and if is BBT then why?
Its not that i dont know what i am answering,i know, thats why my answer is like a blue print for you to answer yourself,,what do you think might have been the cause of the universe in an infinite void(nothing)?let me help you then putting the dots together,
Hawking’s core argument appears to be as follows
(1) Causes must precede their effects in time
(2) There is no time prior to the beginning of time (the origin of the universe)
(3) Therefore, the universe cannot have a cause
Extensionally he argues:
(4) Theism requires that God be the cause of the universe
(5) The universe cannot have a cause
(6) Therefore, theism is false
meanwhile,
According to Special Creation theory, all the different forms of life that occur today on planet earth, have been created by God, the almighty. This idea is found in the ancient scriptures of almost every religion. According to Hindu mythology, Lord Brahma, the God of Creation, created the living world in accordance to his wish. According to the Christian belief, God created this universe, plants, animals and human beings in about six natural days. The Sikh mythology says that all forms of life including human beings came into being with a single word of God. Special creation theory believes that the things have not undergone any significant change since their creation.
The theory of Special Creation was purely a religious concept, acceptable only on the basis of faith. It has no scientific basis.
Special Creation is a myth.
sticking with the definition of nothing,
Could nothing have existed in the past? No. If it existed in the past, then some event must have taken place to end it. An event would be impossible in nothing, so nothing could never have existed because we do, and as our universe now exists, nothing can never exist in the future either. Why could an event not happen in nothing? Because apart from the obvious that there is nothing to happen, an event would create and require a moment in time. There can be no time in nothing as relativity describes time as just another dimension.
As for Time, without it nothing must have always existed, it can not havea beginning or end because either would create a moment in time. It would in reality be meaningless to ask how long nothing has existed and how long it will continue to exist, it would be eternal and unchanging. Again, because we exist, nothing could not have had an existence because the creation of the universe would have required a significant change, thus contravening an unchanging nothing.
So far then we have discovered that by using the simple definition of nothing as being an infinite void we have placed the following conditions on it:-
(1) It must be timeless.
(2) It must have always existed and could not have been created.
(3) It is unchanging.
(4) Nothing else can exist.
(5) It is unable to create anything.
So Hawking is right?Yes!
nothing is an infinite void,
nothing else can exist except for the universe that is contained within it.
So What does it mean to say the universe was always there? We believe it started with the Big Bang, but can we say the Big Bang was always there? This doesn't seem logical to me, it needed to have actually come into existence at some point, even the very term 'big bang', suggests a beginning. Let's step back a little and look at the creation of the Big Bang from the viewpoint of a 'perfect observer' in nothing. At the moment of creation what would our 'perfect observer' see? Nothing at all! The universe is self contained, nothing at all can escape from it into our nothing, our observer would notice no change whatsoever! As no detectable change at all has occurred from the viewpoint of nothing, and no change could ever be detected regarding the expanding universe, no 'real' change has occurred, (It may help here to visualise the Big Bang as an infinitely small event in the unimaginable vastness of an infinite void. In other words, a singularity, as indeed it is believed to have been.), therefore our definition of an unchanging timeless nothing is still valid. A quick (!) read of Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" you clarify my point about nothing escaping from the universe and the Big Bang starting as a singularity.