Buzsaw writes:
By the same token we creationists can't explain how the supreme designer/creator from whom all energy comes has eternally existed. At least our hypothesis leaves no problem with 1LoT which states that no energy is created or destroyed.
If the 1LoT states energy can't be created then it violates E=mc2.
Are you not sure it is
your understanding of the 1LoT that violates E=mc2?
Upthread there are explanations as to the current and possibly eternal unknowability of what happened before or what caused the singularity, even why it may be difficult to say what was before, what is outside, or what created spacetime.
Some have even suggested the question has no meaning, similar to the question, "who were god's parents?" may have for you.
Abe: And btw, doesn't your statement strongly imply that your BB theory is not falsifyable and therefore not scientific? Don't you people keep telling us creos that unless our hypothesis is falsifyable it's not scientific, or have I got that wrong?
First, it's not 'my' theory as I had no role in creating it and it is a disparaging moniker first used by the detractor Fred Hoyle.
There is evidence used in support of various models of cosmology and some previous models have fallen into disrepute because they were not supported by the evidence. But as you should know by now, that is how science works.
Maybe God said "let there be light" and science explains what happens after to those who are curious and can deal with a higher level of uncertainty as opposed to others who are obviously uncomfortable with uncertainty, curiosity, and perhaps even 'knowing' God.