Beyond the Big Bang

Tonight I attended a talk by science journalist and author Simon Singh at Darwin College in Cambridge University on the development of the Big Bang theory. I’ve seen Simon talk before and he’s a very entertaining speaker using, among other things, electrocuted gherkins and backtracked Led Zeplin to illustrate the science behind the Big Bang.

As a biologist and journalist I often find myself debating with theists on the origin of life but rarely the origin of the universe. So I was interested to learn that the idea for the Big Bang was originally suggested by George Lemaitre a brilliant physicist and Roman Catholic priest. It’s not easy to say if Lemaitre supported the idea of an expanding universe because it fit into the biblical idea of a created universe, but it nevertheless gained support from scientists and the Catholic church alike. I guess that’s why physicists don’t have to put up with the same religious backlash biologists have to despite that, even by Singh’s own admission to me after the talk, the Big Bang has far less evidence to support it than evolution.

But that might be about to change. A new idea is gaining ground that the universe never began but repeatedly expands and contracts. Already the Catholic church has come out in opposition to it. Although, quite rightly, it has its critics among scientists too. It’s originator, Neil Turok of Cambridge University, has a bet with Stephen Hawking to see which idea, a Cyclic or Big Bang universe, will eventually prove correct.

Depending on who collects physicists and biologists may soon be in the same boat.