Humphreys' Cosmology: A Brief Summary

The study of cosmology can be difficult for the layman to follow, because the written works of astrophysicists and cosmologists are often heavily interspersed with advanced mathematical and technical explanations.

However, I believe that every such (well-studied) scientist has a fundamental view of how the universe was formed, and a basically understandable explanation for various phenomena in the universe. It is possible for the layman to extract this information from their writings, as long as the writers are honest about what they believe. And is necessary for the layman to do this, because otherwise he cannot really understand what the differences are between one cosmology and another. Understanding these differences are important, because it helps us to understand what the essence of these debates really are.

It is my goal, over time, to provide brief summaries of the cosmologies of various scientists, creationist and otherwise. I start here with Dr. Russell Humphreys, physicist and creationist. I selected him first simply because his work, Starlight and Time, was close at hand.

I have attempted to represent him as accurately as possible, and so I have included afterwards an extensive selection of quotations from his book supporting my assessment. These are his views as presented in Starlight and Time (Master Books, eighth printing) which is copyrighted 1994.

I was looking for his positions in regard to ten issues: 1) astronomical distances; 2) the limitations of the universe (or lack thereof); 3) General Relativity; 4) the age of the universe; 5) the expansion of the universe; 6) the existence of black holes; 7) the existence of white holes; 8) microwave background radiation; 9) the red-shift phenomenon; 10) the formation of the universe.

Regarding estimates of astronomical distances:

In contrast to some creationists, Humphreys believes that astronomers' estimates of the distance to far off objects are fairly accurate, and generally correct within a factor of two.

Regarding the limitations of the universe:

Humphreys argues that the universe is bounded, or has limits. This is in contrast to the belief that the universe is infinite in size.

Regarding General Relativity:

Humphreys states that General Relativity (GR) is a well-established theory confirmed by a large amount of experimental evidence. GR plays a very important role in his understanding of how the universe was formed.

Regarding the age of the universe:

The primary purpose of his book is to provide a possible solution to the "distant starlight" problem of creationism. He attempts to demonstrate that, because of GR, it is possible for the universe to be only thousands of years old from the relative reference frame of earth, while billions of years could have passed for distant objects within their relative reference frames.

Regarding the expansion of the universe:

Humphreys believes that the universe has expanded by a factor of at least 1000. It is an important part of his understanding of the formation of the universe that the cosmos has expanded, rather than contracted.

Regarding black holes:

He states that black holes are a direct prediction of GR, and that astronomers have ample observational evidence for the existence of black holes.

Regarding white holes:

He states that white holes are also a phenomenon allowed by GR, and proposes that the boundary of a white hole played a part in the formation of the universe and explains some of the characteristics of the universe which we see today.

Regarding microwave background radiation:

Humphreys sees microwave background radiation to be a result of the "stretching of space" that occurred when God formed the universe. The wavelengths of heat waves were "stretched out" as a relativistic consequence of this stretching of space.

Regarding red shifts:

The red shift phenomenon is considered to be a result of the expansion of space during the fourth day of the Biblical creation week. Light waves were stretched out relativistically and their wavelengths were shifted.

Regarding the formation of the universe:

A literal reading of the six days of creation from the book of Genesis is considered to be an accurate historical record of how the universe was formed. He provides a "possible scenario" in the second chapter of his book which attempts to fill in some of the more specific details of the event. You will need to read the chapter yourself to get all the details. Basically, though, he suggests that God starts with a enormous sphere of water as his "deep" (Genesis 1.2) and throughout the Creation week he rapidly expands 3D space. Meanwhile, an event horizon (GR) is rapidly shrinking. When God forms the stars and other galaxies on the fourth day of creation, the expansion of space and shrinking of the event horizon allows billions of years of aging to occur in galaxies distant from the earth, and causes some of the phenomenon we observe today such as red shifts and microwave background radiation.

And now, the quotations:

Some laymen pondering this question wonder if the astronomers' estimates of distances might be greatly in error. I don't think so. Astronomers have have dozens of methods for estimating such distances, all of which generally agree with on another. . . .I am convinced that the large distances are generally correct, at least within a factor of two or so. (page 10)

What if we begin our calculations with the opposite assumption, equally scientifically valid, namely that matter in the universe has a center and an edge (is bounded)? This makes more common sense and is also Scripturally far more appropriate. When we feed in this, plus the same observations, into general relativity, quite a different cosmology falls out. (21)

General relativity (GR) has been well-established experimentally, and is the physics framework for all modern cosmologies. According to GR, gravity affects time. Clocks at a low altitude should tick more slowly than clocks at a high altitude--and observations confirm this effect, which some call gravitational time dilation. (11)

What this new cosmology shows is that gravitational time distortion in the early universe would have meant that while a few days were passing on earth, billions of years would have been available for light to travel to earth. It still means that God made the heavens and earth (i.e., the whole universe) in six ordinary days, only a few thousand years ago. But with the reality revealed by GR, we now know that we have to ask--six days as measured by which clock? In which frame of reference? The mathematics of this new theory shows that while God makes the universe in six days in the earth's reference frame ("Earth Standard Time," if you like), the light has ample time in the extra-terrestrial reference frame to travel the required distances. (13)

In a bounded universe, clocks in different places can tick (or register time) at drastically different rates. So which set of clocks is the Bible referring to in Genesis 1, or in Exodus 20:11, when it says that God made the universe in six ordinary weekdays? . . . .God's intention was to define time in terms of the earth's rotation and the earth's motion around the sun, thus speaking of periods of time in our own frame of reference. This is quite reasonable in a book intended to be understood by people of widely different cultures and degrees of scientific knowledge. Therefore, it looks as if the Bible is telling us that God made the universe in six days E.S.T.--Earth Standard Time. (29)

The shrinking event horizon reaches earth early on the morning of the fourth day [of the creation week]. During this ordinary day as measured on earth, billions of years worth of physical processes take place in the distant cosmos. In particular, gravity has time to make distant clusters of hydrogen and helium atoms more compact. (37)

I am convinced that the observations indicate that the universe has indeed expanded significantly, by a factor of at least one thousand. (21)

Black holes are more than just theoretical concepts. They are, first, direct predictions of general relativity, which is backed by a great deal of experimental evidence. In addition, most astronomers are convinced they have observational evidence of possibly three star-sized black holes, and very strong evidence for another one, millions of times larger. As huge quantities of matter fall towards such black holes, copious amounts of energy are given off. The giant one, recently discovered, is at the center of the galaxy M87; astronomers know of no cause other than a black hole to explain what they observe.

Black holes can be very small or very large--it all depends on the amount of matter packed within a given radius. The combined gravitational force of all the mass inside a black hole is so strong that light rays cannot escape--hence the name. (22-23)

The event horizon of a white hole would be a one way boarder which permits only outward motion through itself. Matter and light waves would have to move out of a white hole, but they could not go back in. Since the diameter of an event horizon is proportional to the amount of matter inside it, the event horizon would shrink as matter passes through it and out of the white hole. . . .[Black and white holes] are a consequence of the best knowledge we have today about gravity. The equations of GR permit, but do not demand, the existence of white holes today. (24-25)

The visible universe was once inside an event horizon. This means it was once either within a black hole or a white hole. We have seen that if it were a black hole, it would be contracting, which is not indicated by the evidence. Therefore:

The visible universe was once inside a white hole. It may, however, have commenced as a black hole before expansion started. . .If the universe is not much bigger or much denser than what we can directly observe right now. . .an event horizon can no longer exist. This means that the event horizon has shrunk to zero radius sometime in the past, meaning that an expansion of space continued at least until the white hole ceased to exist.

So from all the physics and astronomical data we now know, we can draw a straightforward conclusion: If the universe is bounded, then sometime in its past the universe must have expanded out of a white hole. (25-26)

Day Two [of the creation week]. . .By direct intervention. . .God begins stretching out space, causing the ball of matter to expand rapidly, thus changing the black hole to a white hole. He marks off a large volume, the "expanse" ("firmament" in the KJV) within the deep, wherein material is allowed to pull apart into fragments and clusters as it expands, but He requires the "waters below" and the "waters above" the expanse to stay coherently together.

Normal physical processes cause cooling to proceed as rapidly as the expansion. Heat waves are stretched out to much longer wavelengths as a relativistic consequence of the stretching of space. Eventually these stretched-out waves will become the cosmic microwave background radiation. (34-35)

Early on the fourth morning [of the creation week], God coalesces the clusters of atoms into stars and thermonuclear fusion ignites in them. The newly-formed stars find themselves grouped together in galaxies and clusters of galaxies. As the fourth day proceeds on earth, the more distant stars age billions of years, while their light also has the same billions of years to travel to the earth. While the light is on its way, space continues to expand, relativistically stretching out the light waves. . .and shifting the wavelengths toward the red side of the spectrum. Stars which are now farthest away have the greatest redshift, because the waves have been stretched the most. This progressive redshift is exactly what is observed. (37-38)