Michael Cremo - Human Devolution - A Vedic Alternative To Darwin's Theory

The Big Bang theory grew out of observations that the universe appears to be expanding. In the 1920s, astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered that light coming to us from distant galaxies was shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. The more distant the galaxies, the larger the red shift. Toward the red end of the spectrum, light waves become longer. So the wavelengths of light coming from these galaxies had been stretched. If the galaxies were moving away from us, that would explain the stretching of the light waves. Imagine a paddle boat in an otherwise still lake, with the paddle turning at a certain fixed rate. You are observing the boat from the shore. If the boat was anchored and held its position, the waves would come toward you at regular intervals. But if the boat started moving away from you, then the waves reaching you would be coming in further apart, even though the paddle on the boat was still turning at the same fixed rate. The wavelength of light coming from receding galaxies would get longerin the same way. And that is what scientists actually observe. The wavelengths of light are stretched. Scientists also say that the Big Bang theory predicted the temperature of the cosmic microwave background radiation. The cosmic microwave background is the heat left over from the initial superheated expansion of the universe billions of years ago. Furthermore, scientists say that the Big Bang theory predicts the abundances of hydrogen, deuterium and helium that we observe today in the universe.

There are many critics of the Big Bang theory. Among them is astronomer Tom Van Flandern, who has compiled a list of twenty principal problems with the Big Bang theory. These do have to be taken into account. To some, these problems suggest that the universe did not expand from an initial small state, as most cosmologists now believe. They suggest a steady state universe. To me, the current problems with the Big Bang theory suggest only that the expansion of the universe from a tiny seedlike form cannot be completely described without taking into account God and His powers. Aside from that, many elements of the Big Bang theory correspond to accounts of the origin of the universe found in the ancient Sanskrit writings of India.

Here is a brief summary of the Vedic account of the origin of the universe, taken from the Shrimad Bhagavatam and the Brahma Samhita. Beyond time and space as we know them, Maha Vishnu floats in cosmic slumber upon the waves of the Causal Ocean. From the pores of the Maha Vishnu emerge numberless universes in seedlike form. When Maha Vishnu glances upon these seedlike universes, energizing them with His potencies, they begin to expand in a flash of golden light. Within each universe, ele-ments are gradually formed beginning with the lighter ones and proceeding toward the heavier. While this is happening the celestial bodies are formed. And the universe continues to expand. The universes exist for the length of one breath of the Maha Vishnu.The universes come out from His body when He exhales and reenter his body when He inhales. The length of one breath is estimated to be 311 trillion years. Within this vast period of time, each universe continuously undergoes subcycles of manifestation and nonmanifestation lasting about 8.6 billion years each.

Both the Big Bang cosmology and the Vedic cosmology posit a sea of transcendental energy existing before the material manifestation of universes. Some cosmologists propose that universes expand from white holes and contract into black holes. White holes spit out universes, black holes eat them up. The Vedic version also proposes that universes expand from and contract into holes, the skin holes of Maha Vishnu. Both accounts propose that there is an initial period of rapid inflation. Both accounts propose an initial burst of light, or radiation. Both accounts propose that the universe goes on to expand. Both accounts involve many universes.

When the Big Bang theory was originally presented to my guru, Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, he was opposed to it. His disciples presented it to him as an explosion of an original lump of matter, with no involvement by God. Of course, a simple explosion like that could not produce the universe we observe. But that was not an accurate picture of what the Big Bang picture actually says. When more realistic accounts of the theory were reported to him, he was more favorably inclined toward them. He accepted the principle of an expanding universe, as can be seen in a conversation with disciples that took place in Los Angeles, on December 6, 1973 (Conversations 1989, v. 6, pp. 228–229).

Bali mardana: Prabhupada, when the universes are emanated from the body of Maha-Vishnu, they begin to expand.

Prabhupada: Yes, yes.

Bali mardana: Is the universe still expanding?

Prabhupada: Yes. . . .

Karandhara: While the exhaling is going on, the universe is expanding . . .

Prabhupada: Yes.

Karandhara: In the inhaling, the universe is contracting.

Prabhupada: Yes.

And in his commentary on one of the verses of Shrimad Bhagavatam (3.29.43), he stated that “the total universal body is increasing.” The entering and reentering of the universes into the body of the Maha Vishnu is described in Brahma Samhita (5.48), which characterizes the Maha Vishnu as an expansion of God “into whom all the innumerable universes enter and from whom they come forth again simply by His breathing process.”

Nevertheless, the Vedic expanding universe cosmology is distinct from the modern materialistic Big Bang cosmology in that the substance of the Vedic universe emerges from God, as one of His energies, and the further deployment of this energy is accomplished and controlled by God. In the following discussion, I will show how careful examination of the modern Big Bang cosmology leads one toward the same conclusion. The argument takes this basic form: even if one assumes, as modern cosmologists do, that the origin and development of the universe are to be explained solely in terms of the interaction of various kinds of matter and physical forces, then one is led to the conclusion that the finely tuned nature of these interactions implies a cosmic intelligence behind them. Once that conclusion is reached, we may then have to go back and reevaluate the initial assumptions of the modern Big Bang cosmology, and we may be warranted in making substantial changes in those assumptions, so as to bring the Big Bang cosmology and the Vedic cosmology into sharper agreement. In my discussion of the Big Bang cosmology, it may appear that I am accepting its assumptions as fundamentally correct. But I am simply saying that if, for the sake of argument, we accept the assumptions underlying the current state of Big Bang cosmology as correct, then certain conclusions follow. It would not be practical for me, however, to qualify each and every reference I make to Big Bang cosmology in this way.

The anthropic Principle

Hundreds of years ago, most astronomers believed the earth was the center of the universe. Then the astronomer Copernicus introduced the idea that the earth rotated around the sun. Astronomers adopted what they called the Copernican Principle, the idea that the earth and its human inhabitants do not occupy any special place in the universe. But in the twentieth century astronomer Brandon Carter proposed that our position is to some extent special, returning to some degree to the previous view, which is also found in the Vedic cosmology. In order for humans to exist as observers, said Carter, we have to find ourselves in a certain position in a universe with certain characteristics. Carter (1974, p. 291) called this the anthropic principle. For one thing, according to current ideas about cosmology, the universe would have to be of a certain age in order for there to be human observers—about ten billion years old. According to current theories, it would take that long for successive generations of stars to convert helium and hydrogen into the heavier elements, such as carbon, one of the main ingredients of organic life. In an expanding universe, the size of the universe is related to its age. This means, say modern cosmologists, that we should expect a universe capable of supporting carbon-based human life to be at least ten billion light years in diameter, and our universe is of that size, according to currently accepted observations and calculations (Barrow and Tipler 1996, p. 3). I do not necessarily agree with the exact size and age estimates given for the universe by modern cosmologists and note that these are constantly changing.