How the Universe was Made and How it Works

Recently, Stephen Hawking came up with a theory that states it was imperfection that has given the universe its shape. He came up with this idea because after the Big Bang all matter in the universe should have been evenly distributed and the equilibrium caused by the force we know about and see now, it should have stayed in equilibrium as countless equally distanced and equally sized particles for ever.

He reasoned that there had to be at least 4 spots in the universe that were not conformant to the laws of physics, that for some reason these spots were not equally distanced, or equally charged. This slight imbalance would then cause particles to begin moving together and clumping into stars and planets and asteroids and gas clouds that fill the universe now.

He offered no explanation of what might have caused this imbalance, except that since the universe exists as we know it, it must have occurred. So his only evidence of this event is that the universe is here as we know it. The whole universe is a huge piece of evidence, but this circular logic really does not satisfy what caused the imbalance and puts our understanding of the creation scientifically no closer to being certain than it was.

Stephen Hawking’s has a daunting challenge; he believes that it is necessary to explain creation without the need for a creator. At some point, no matter how clever his theories they will always leave room and come to a point where there is some kind of ambiguity of how it all got started. His and all others of his ilk will continue to produce theories that try to push this ambiguity farther and farther back in time, and closer and closer to the moment of creation, but they will never quite get there.

Many scientists believe it is their job to describe all science, and everything we know about; matter, space, and life, scientifically, which to them means without the need for a creator, or more accurately; God. They are at this point content to call the Big Bang the origin of everything, and see no need for there to be a God or anyone else to ignite that Big Bang, it just happened. So they have successfully pushed this ambiguity to just an instant before the Big Bang. Before that was nothing, and from nothing came everything.

Yet we have not discovered one physical law or example anywhere that shows any possible scenario that can produce anything from nothing. In fact, the opposite is true, from something, we usually get less than we had before, order goes to chaos, unless acted upon by an out side force. This is a fundamental law of energy and everything else.

The Big Bang defies this law at the moment of its origin, something must have been there to organize that explosion from before, if only milliseconds before its start. Contrast that with the simplicity of the creation story, where this ambiguity is replaced with God. At that point, that millisecond before creation, it is God that is that force acting on everything to bring it to order. Whether it was a Big Bang, or a simple blink into existence in the form we now know it, God fulfills this law of thermodynamics, there is no ambiguity.

But was the universes created in the form we now know it? According to science and the bible on this point there is agreement, no it was not. Scientist have written thousands of books trying to describe the creation of the universe, the bible gives only 31 sentences to it. Yet it is so carefully written that in these 31 sentences we can test and try all scientific ideas with it.

Thirty one sentences against millions of sentences, by stating that God created everything, the bible simplified everything to need just 31 sentences, and the writer confidently got on with the rest of the story. Science meanwhile continues to write more and more volumes of books and none of them able to come up with an explanation that removes the ambiguity of that moment slightly before everything suddenly existed.

I don’t have time to go over the millions of sentences written by scientists, and why would I? None of them have been able to remove the ambiguity of the origins of everything; they just push it around and move to different points.

I said Science and the bible agree on one major point, so let’s start there. The universe was not created in the form we know it. “In the beginning the heavens and the earth was void and without form” both the bible and scientists agrees on this point. There is disagreement between them with the bible claim that God created it all.

“And God said let there be light” Scientists agree that light is the ultimate evidence of energy; just not that God has anything to do with it.

Now bible scholars and religious types and scientists have a serious issue dividing all of them from one another, and that is the six days mentioned in the bible that it took God to create everything. Science seems to have evidence to the contrary, scientist use terms like billions of years, and the bible, less than a week.

This where it gets tricky, the word used in the original language for day is the same word used for stage, or step, or order of events within a given topic. Like building a house, stage 1 dig hole, stage 2 build foundation , and so on. So it does not necessarily mean a 24 hour period.
And we will notice that it is not until the fourth day that the sun, moon and stars are created and even states at that moment that they should be used for signs, and to measure days and years. Yet even after the fourth day, it does not need to be a literal day, because Moses, the writer speaks of in Deuteronomy 7 “the days of old” and the “years of many generations” two separate time periods.

But then why does the bible say the evening and the morning were the first day? Why evening, then morning, it seems backwards, that would be the first night, not day, and since the sun was not yet created, so it could not have been a solar day. But to many bible believers a day is a day is a day. I think this position is what causes many people to disregard the Genesis account and take it as not credible.

But still the bible says the evening and morning were the first day, or does it? The Torah word for evening used in Genesis 1: 5 is “Vayechi Erev” which literally means chaos, mixture, disorder, it is where the word for evening comes from, when things get dark, vision is hindered and things loose their order. And the Torah word used for morning is “boker” which means the opposite; things become orderly, able to be discerned. So here we see God as the one acting on disorder to bring it to an organized form, from evening to morning, from chaos to control.
Where science differs on this point is that they say things went from chaos to control without being acted on by an outside force, defying their own laws of thermodynamics. The Biblical account fulfills this law with God and that is the only difference between them.

But there is a difference in the way the first day and the rest of the days are numbered, the first day is actually referred to as “day one” “yom echad” but is often translated as the first day, which is comparative, and day one is absolute. A subtle difference, but does not do justice to the cosmic message that the original text is trying to convey. The rest of the days are referred to as second day and third and so on; correctly translated from the original text.

“And the evening and morning were the second day” and so on. This is actually a comparative statement, things did not flux from order to disorder and then back to order, the simply continued to become more organized. During step one, or day one, things began to organize, then during the second step, or day, identifies where God applied special direction to his creation for that day. The morning of day one was as organized or disorganized as the evening of the second day, it is comparative, or as scientists would say; relative.

A seeming contradiction in the Genesis account is that on the third day God created all vegetation on the earth, while he had not yet created the sun or the moon. But there was light, and this cosmic glow must have been the means by which this vegetation grew, and this day could have been hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years long. Since as yet there was nothing to govern the length of a day in any form; that would not come until the fourth day. But even the fourth day is not necessarily a day as we know it, for it is “the days of old” according to Moses, not the “years of generations” that we live in now.

But back to the third day, this explains why we have evidence of so much vegetation having been present on the earth. The vast amounts of coal, natural gas, top soil, and other byproducts of decaying vegetation that are evidence of this vegetation having been in existence for a lot longer than recorded in biblical history of the “years of generations” talked of by Moses. All that stuff was a product of “the days of old”.

God said “Let there be light” sometime during day one. Before this it says there was darkness. The original word used here for darkness was “chohech” which means black fire, or black energy so powerful it can not be seen, and remains disorganized. It is also used to describe the absence of light, i.e. darkness in verse 4 of Genesis.

“And the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” Now the word used for water was “mayim” which also means the building blocks of everything, this is another ancient meaning for this word. This could mean atoms or even subatomic particles not yet organized into any useful form. Or it could mean water, or it could mean both. Moses was not trying to be a physics professor; he was simply stating the Genesis of everything, but his words were carefully chosen to be all true and accurate.

Remember he only devoted 31 sentences to a subject that today has millions if not billions of sentences devoted to, and yet are unable to describe a theory that does not defy the their own laws of thermodynamics at one point or another. Moses remained faithful to all the laws of thermodynamics and did not need any more words to try to cloud any ambiguity.

Now here is an interesting tidbit, early on the third day God causes all the waters on the earth to be gathered together in one place and to let dry land appear. Why did he have to do that? Does not water naturally find its own level? Well, now it does, but before then, it did not. What was it God did here? It seems like he created gravity, for it is gravity that keeps the water off the dry land. Now you could say it was ice, and that God melted the ice, but Moses had a word for ice, but he chose not to use it, instead he used the word for water, or again the building blocks of everything, but here I think he meant water.

Now this brings us to an interesting point in the development of the universe. Remember the earth was void and without form at the beginning? But here we see in this simple verse that the earth is beginning to take shape. Two things actually occurred at this point, one was either “time” was created, or “time” had reached earth from the point from where “time was created, or originated geographically in the universe.

That’s right, time was created, and it did not exist while the earth was void and without form, for it is time that causes gravity to exist, and it is gravity that gives all matter its form. It was this very problem that Stephen Hawking’s was addressing with his theory of there needing to be an imperfection in the distribution of particles after the Big Bang. Gravity would hold all the particles in a state of equal tension between each other and never could they combine to form stars and planets.

But without the force of gravity the particles would clump together because of their varying static charges. Iron being very sensitive to electromagnetic forces would clump together first, this is probably why most celestial bodies have an iron core. Then all the other forms of matter would build on top of that. But they would be in formless shapes, lob sided and random because all the charges would be of different strengths.

It was not until the crushing force of gravity came along that any equilibrium was developed in these shapes; the orbs we see in the universe to this day.

However gravity we will discover is not a force at all, but rather a product of matter and time interrelating with one another, or rather, matter absorbing time. Scientists know that all matter distorts time, they have not realized that it is absorbing time, and like water over a water fall, it accelerates as it goes over the top of the falls. Time and matter are the same way, and that is how gravity works, we are simply carried by the flow of time towards the huge mass of matter called the earth. Scientists also know that all matter exhibits gravity, which is because all matter absorbs time; in direct proportion to its mass.

This occurs because “time” has a speed limit; time is the limiting factor in the release of energy, and the rate energy return to entropy, not the speed of light. Light may have no measurable speed, it may be either infinitely fast, or have no speed whatsoever and appears one end to its other instantly. However we can only observe it at the speed of time, which appears to be what we call the speed of light. However it may have a speed somewhere in between, and if it does, then time will pass at a different rate while exposed to light. This may be why fruits and vegetables ripen quicker if kept in the dark, if that is true, then light has a significant impact on the speed of time.

However it also shows that time has no effect on the order of events, and more time may have flowed past one person than another, but you would not notice anything unusual. Astronauts for instance, are exposed to great speeds, and are far from the event horizon of the earth’s gravity, which is the absorption of time by the planet, actually live in a slightly different time period then those who have never been to space, but you would never know it because time has no dominion over actual events.
Time is just like water flowing in a river, if you and a friend are standing in the river, the water might flow at different rates past each of you because you are both standing in different spots, but you will not change actual position in relation to each other at all, unless one of you decides to move yourself.

Now why does matter absorb time? Well, it has been observed that speed changes time, (distorts) as described in Einstein’s theory of relativity. When objects approach the speed of light, (which science will soon discover is actually the speed of time) time changes as necessary to satisfy the famous equation E=MC squared. So speed affect the passage rate of time, and most dramatically when that speed reaches or exceeds the speed of time. (At this time known as the speed of light)

Within every atom are subatomic particles, one such particle called a luxon, is said to travel around inside the atom at the speed of light (time) but if the speed of time is the limiting factor on how fast of a speed we can measure, then we have no way of telling if it is travelling any faster than that. Unless we can measure the amount it affects the rate or speed of time, or observe the effects it has on time. It should distort time at a rate that satisfies E=MC squared.

Now what I am claiming is that the luxon particle or other similar behaving particles with in each atom, due to their tremendous speed, acts like little spools that wind time up, absorbing time into every atom. It may be this very thing that gives the atom its power. Now this force from a single atom is very small, and weak, much weaker than the magnetic forces within the atom.

Scientists have been looking for the strong and weak forces in the atom for years, and have a conundrum, the strong force we know, magnetism, and if it was magnetic attraction within each atom that caused gravity, it would smear us out like butter onto the face of the planet, it is way too strong. So they are looking for a weak force, one that will tie all the theories of physics together and satisfy all the laws of thermodynamics and physics that have been proven to be true. So far they have all been very unsuccessful.

This is because gravity is not caused by a force at all. It is simply the effects of the flow of time into matter. Like a huge freighter ship and a dingy floating down the same river, each would travel at the speed of the river current, regardless of size. We have the same effect with gravity; everything falls at the same speed. (in a vacuum)

Another issue scientists have with this weak force is why it is so far reaching and yet so weak? As weak as gravity is compared to the other forces, how does it affect planets millions or even billions, and trillions of miles apart from each other? Well if it is a current, and not an actual force, it explains it perfectly.

Time is like a river current, say a river has a waterfall at one end, if you swim too close to the waterfall you will not be able to overcome the current, it will pull you downstream and over the falls. However a few miles up stream, you are able to swim and overcome the current much easier, and farther upstream still, the effect of the current may be barely noticeable as you swim, yet a leaf flowing very slowly by identifies that the river still has a current. Gravity is the same way, and Gravity is Time, or more accurately the flow of time.

Mathematically this works perfectly, Gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable to the object or person experiencing it. That’s why acceleration is measured in G-force. Now to calculate the G-force of any object you need to know 3 things, the speed change amount, and the amount of time it took to obtain the change in speed, and the rate of speed change that earth’s gravity causes to a falling object.

This calculations assumes that time is a constant thing, that a second is a second is a second. And relatively, a second is a second is a second, but in terms of absolute time, it is not; time ebbs and flows. So therefore it is possible that if you could know the absolute value of a second, and it could be changed since it no longer is a constant value, then we could calculate and find that a motionless object can exhibit acceleration.

That is what we feel everyday, the acceleration of a motionless object; the surface of the earth. The earth surface is not rushing up against us it stays the same size. If it was then in a short time the surface of the earth would be travelling faster than the speed of light/time. Not likely, but possible, everything could be expanding at that rate, you, me, the universe, but God would not do it that way, he rested on the seventh day, he did not stay busy causing the universe and everything in it to keep growing in that manner. Besides he is cleverer than that.

Now on the fourth day we read that God created the sun and the moon. Science and the Bible disagree on this point, Science believes the stars came first, yet the bible says different here. It also states that he made the stars also. Now this statement in Genesis rings true when you consider that on the third day time and gravity were created. Matter began clumping together at a tremendous rate with tremendous force, and the planets and sun and the moon and the stars began to take their shape.

With the creation of time, the original glow of the creation moment would begin to fade and pass, it was this glow that kept all the plants alive on the earth, and as it dimmed, the sun formed, fueled by the tremendous force of gravity-time and the nuclear furnace ignited into the sun that we know. And this happened with the stars also. By the time the third day was over, and on the fourth day the amount of time it took to complete the stars and for the nuclear furnace to ignite to pass and the stars formed.

Then on the fifth day all the creatures in the sea were created in their own image, and filled the seas with life. And all the birds and every living thing that moves. Now Darwin may say different, but I do not want to waste my time on his foolishness. I think I have established the proof of the presence of a creator already, and so I think any intelligent person given the choice to decide who to believe would take the word of the creator rather than Darwin.

Then on the sixth day all the rest of the creatures on the planet were made, including man. Male and Female he made them, and the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Now again how long was this day? It could have been thousands of years long, and so many generations may have passed on this day. Another thing that happens on the sixth day is that it is the last day that has an evening and a morning.

Remember that evening here means chaos, and morning less chaos. Or relatively speaking, evening means some control and order, and morning means more control and order. But the seventh day has no evening and no morning, God rested, he no longer had his hand in his creation organizing it into higher and higher states of organization, but rather it states that he is finished.

The end of the seventh day is not mentioned in the text, it may be continuing to this day, I don’t know. But the “days of old” which refer to the 6 days of creation, can be thought of as the titles of chapters in book, and “years of generations can be thought of as the words written in each chapter of that book. So we maybe living in the seventh day, and we are the words being written in that chapter. Or not.

And that is the genius of Genesis.


This is a difficult concept to grasp, but God is eternal, and so he exists outside of time, yet he does exist and dwells in that environment. Thing still happen there, and he does what he does there, and this is why he describes himself as “I am”. He perhaps exists in a type of absolute time that is beyond our comprehension.