How did the basic elements in the universe come into existence? Men have invented theories of self-origination which have been disproved by scientific facts. In Part 3, we now turn our attention to evidence contradicting three other theories. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.
CONTENT: Origin of Matter: 3
Other Origin of Matter Theories: In addition to the Big Bang, there are other theories floating around
Steady State Theory: Its inventor later repudiated it
Oscillating Universe Theory: Just as foolish as the others
Inflationary Universe Theory: Everything in a pin point
Conclusion: The sorry state universe
Page numbers without book references refer to our book, ORIGIN OF MATTER, from which these facts are summarized. An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the set of books this Encyclopedia is based on, only 164 statements are by creationists.
In 1948, working with two other theoreticians, *Fred Hoyle, a British astronomer, devised the steady state universe theory. According to this concept, galaxies are continually disappearing while new ones are constantly appearing. Totally new matter is constantly inventing itself out of nothing! At the same time, other matter—entire constellations—are disappearing! Like the Big Bang theory, it was a theoretical idea without any evidence to support it.
Seventeen years later (1965) Hoyle made a public statement, repudiating his theory as unsupported by the facts and totally false. He listed five scientific facts disproving it (radio sources too dense; redshift measurements; amount of background radiation; helium to hydrogen ratio too high; structure of elliptical galaxies).—pp. 44-47.
The oscillating universe theory was devised by *George Gamow, the research scientist and prolific science-fiction writer who, a few years earlier, had promoted the Big Bang as the only correct concept of origins. According to this idea, when the universe finally runs down, another Big Bang will get it going again. The difference is that the first Bang is matter exploding out of nothing, while subsequent Bangs will result from matter contracting down to a single point, and then exploding outward again. As usual, there is no evidence, just theory.—pp. 47-48.
Here are several points which specifically disprove this theory, which, because it provides a perpetual continuity of "bangs," is now widely believed by many theoreticians:
 Running out of hydrogen. Robert Jastrow, a leading scientist, explained that the theory is impossible since hydrogen, once used up, can never be restored.—p. 48.
 Stop and reverse. The theory requires that all matter stop traveling outward, change directions, and go backward. But there would be no reason for this to happen.—p. 48.
 Leaving its gravitational field. The center of gravity, by that time (assuming an expanding universe), would be on the outer perimeter of the universe, not at its center—so there would be nothing to draw it back to where it theoretically came from.—p. 48.
 Not enough matter. There is not enough matter in the universe to cause it to collapse inward.—p. 48.
 Getting to the point. Matter would not all rush to a common center and stop right there at a single microscopic dot. Like the other theories, this is science-fiction foolishness.—pp. 48-49.
This new idea imagines that the universe (including all space and time!) began as a single infinitesimal particle, composed of all the matter in the universe!
But no one has figured out how it all got in there, where it came from, how it exploded, or how it developed into our present universe.—p. 49.
Worthless theories. Scientists themselves have written that all these origin of matter theories are meaningless.—p. 49.
Violates natural law. These theories violate known, unchangeable laws of matter and physics. Especially powerful is the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics. (That is covered in detail in The Laws of Nature vs. Evolution.) Because of those laws, all theories of matter, stellar origins, and evolution are totally impossible. Disorganized matter can never change itself randomly into highly organized materials, systems, or life forms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics, alone, refutes all possibility of any evolution of matter or living species.—pp. 49-50.
The Sorry State Universe. Thoughtful scientists admit that, if evolutionary theories of the origin of the universe were true, life would be purposeless and a continual misery.—pp. 50-51.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
To the next topic in this series: SCIENTISTS SPEAK ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF MATTER