The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief

I just finished reading through The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief,edited by Tom Flynn. OK, it’s about 900 pages, but it consists of short articles, many which are quite interesting, so it goes fast.

One gripe I have, though, is that the final revisions to the proof of my contribution seems to have been overlooked. As a result, there are a couple of small errors. OK, they’d only be noticeable to a physicist, but nonetheless, I’m slightly disgruntled. So if you want the proper entry for UNIVERSE, ORIGIN OF THE, AND UNBELIEF, please check out this version on my web site.

About Taner Edis

Professor of physics at Truman State University

  • bpabbott

    A subtle but not minor correction …

    “The Big Bang theory came to dominate cosmology in the second half of the twentieth century. In an expanding universe like ours, general relativity demanded that a singularity should exist back in time––not only was the universe once extremely hot and dense, it was infinitely so at the Big Bang. The Big Bang was, in fact, when the [observable] universe began.”

    We might even say the moment we refer to as the big bang, is that moment when observation began … at least observation at our distant vantage point in space-time.

    While we are unable to see beyond this point in our past, unable to gather evidence of the universe’s earlier state, it is erroneous to assume there was nothing.

  • TOR Hershman

    Here’s a lill’ YouTube film that’ll take less time than the book

  • Taner Edis

    bpabbott: “A subtle but not minor correction …”

    Um, that’s not a correction. That seems like a mistake. The standard big bang model has our spacetime begin at the big bang, not just the observable universe. Adding inflation to the picture (so that the observable universe is just a tiny portion of the whole lot) doesn’t change this.

  • Pingback: looky

  • Pingback: Occhiali Da Sole Ray Ban Wayfarer Rb2428 Lente Chiara Nera Corni