scholarly journals Urgensi Filsafat dalam Ilmu Falak dan Relevansinya bagi Kehidupan Beragama Masyarakat

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 107
Author(s):  
M. Anzaikhan

Philosophy is known as the mother (root) of science. Obviously, all scientific disciplines stemmed from the mind (thinking) start with philosophy. During its development, however, science independently detached itself from its philosophical identity. Similarly, it also occurred in astronomy, which practically seems to split into various branches. Therefore, this research aims to reveal the substance of the philosophical essence in the discipline of astronomy. To this end, the study seeks to find out how philosophy contributes to astronomy, not only in its role as the theoretical framework but also as the practical orientation. This research was in the form of a qualitative method, whose reference sources were based on literature studies. The findings suggest that philosophy has prominent roles for science since in astronomy, the origins of universe formation such as nebula and the big bang theory are also discussed. In philosophy, the creation of the universe was previously studied by philosophers centuries ago, long before the BC (Before Christ) calendar was discovered. Moreover, the solar system, eclipses, prayer entry times, Islamic calendar, the calculation of ‘qibla’ direction, and such were discussed in philosophy in a similar fashion as well. Astronomical terms were also consistently mentioned in depth by philosophers long before astronomy was acknowledged. In fact, some of the astronomers are also philosophers. Thus, it is effectively helpful to study astronomy through philosophy to fully comprehend it. In conclusion, when the philosophical foundation about the conceptual of astronomy has been solid, it will strongly impact on determining the right policy for the socio-religious life of the community. If the substance of philosophy and science are in perfect harmony, it will produce an ideal formula for more contextual and moderate religious policies. AbstrakFilsafat dikenal sebagai induk ilmu pengetahuan, semua ilmu yang memainkan peran akal (berpikir) tentu berawal dari filsafat. Pada perkembangannya, ketika ilmu itu mampu berdiri sendiri, maka ia melepaskan diri dari identitas filsafat. Begitu juga dengan ilmu falak yang secara praktis seolah berdiri sendiri dengan berbagai cabang-cabangnya. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk merefleksikan pentingnya esensi filsafat dalam disiplin ilmu falak. Adapun masalah yang diangkat adalah bagaimana filsafat itu berkontribusi bagi kajian ilmu falak bukan hanya dalam dataran teoritis namun juga dapat memberikan sumbangsih yang lebih luas pada orientasi praktis. Design penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif dengan sumber referensi berbasis kajian pustaka. Temuan sejauh ini, menunjukkan bahwa peran filsafat sangat vital bagi ilmu falak, pada kajian Ilmu Falak membahas asal-usul penciptaan alam semesta seperti teori nebula, big bang, dan teori lainnya. Dalam Filsafat, penciptaan alam semesta sudah dibahas oleh para filosof alam bahkan berabad yang lalu sebelum tahun masehi ditemukan. Begitu juga ketika membahas sistem tata surya, gerhana, masuknya waktu shalat, kalender Islam, penentuan arah kiblat dan masih banyak lagi. Bila dikaitkan dengan filsafat, jauh sebelum Ilmu Falak lahir filsafat sudah membicarakan term terkait muatan ilmu falak secara lebih intens dan mendalam. Bahkan, tidak sedikit tokoh ilmu falak juga seorang filosof. Maka, sangat efektif jika mempelajari Ilmu Falak dimulai dari kajian filsafat agar pemahaman terkait muatan Ilmu Falak dapat dicerna secara orisinal. Kesimpulannya, ketika landasan filosofis terkait muatan Ilmu Falak sudah solid, maka itu sangat berpengaruh dalam menentukan kebijakan yang tepat bagi kehidupan sosial-beragama masyarakat. Dengan menyinergikan substansi filsafat dan Ilmu Falak   maka akan menghasilkan formula ideal terhadap kebijakan beragama yang lebih kontekstual dan moderat. 

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 97
Author(s):  
I Ketut Donder

<p><em>The Vedas have various concepts and theories about the creation of the universe. Vedic concepts are accepted by revelation, while Vedanta theories are created through contemplative research on macrocosms and microcosms. Creation theories in Vedanta, are: Manah theory or the theory of Virat, this theory states that the universe created from the mind of God. The second is the theory of Sabda, this theory states that the universe is created from the Voice of God, this theory is similar to the Big Bang theory. Other theory is the theory of Apah, this theory states that the universe came from water, and there are also many other theories. These theories seem to be compatible with modern scientific theories. This shows that the Vedic teachings have been an inspiration for scientists.</em><em></em></p><em>The Manah theory, sabda theory, Apah theory, and other theories are embedded by Hiranyagarbha theory. This theory states that the human mind, the mind of the cosmos, and the human mind, historically-theo-cosmologically, have a very close relationship. Hiranyagarbha theory that became the foundation of Hindu Cosmology describes that before the universe was created, there was an element of astaprakriti, the eight subtle elements without size (tan matra). The eight supernatural elements are buddhi (intellect), manas (mind), ahamkara (ego), akhasa (ether), vayu (air), teja (fire), apah (water), and pritivi (land), all within the warehouse. The universe is called Hiranyagarbha. Based on the Hiranyagarbha theory, the creation of the macrocosm begins with the consciousness of God, then moves the mind of God (Manas) connected to the manas that is on Hiranyagarbha. After the macrocosm, humans were created, then the mind of God, the mind of the cosmos, and the human mind have connectivity with each other. Therefore, do not ever think negative about anything.</em>


1999 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM LANE CRAIG

John Taylor complains that the Kalam cosmological argument gives the appearance of being a swift and simple demonstration of the existence of a Creator of the universe, whereas in fact a convincing argument involving the premiss that the universe began to exist is very difficult to achieve. But Taylor's proffered defeaters of the premisses of the philosophical arguments for the beginning of the universe are themselves typically undercut due to Taylor's inadvertence to alternatives open to the defender of the Kalam arguments. With respect to empirical confirmation of the universe's beginning Taylor is forced into an anti-realist position on the Big Bang theory, but without sufficient warrant for singling out the theory as non-realistic. Therefore, despite the virtue of simplicity of form, the Kalam cosmological argument has not been defeated by Taylor's all too swift refutation.


Author(s):  
William Hasker

The doctrine of the creation of the universe by God is common to the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam; reflection on creation has been most extensively developed within the Christian tradition. Creation is by a single supreme God, not a group of deities, and is an ‘absolute’ creation (creation ex nihilo, ‘out of nothing’) rather than being either a ‘making’ out of previously existing material or an ‘emanation’ (outflow) from God’s own nature. Creation, furthermore, is a free act on God’s part; he has no ‘need’ to create but has done so out of love and generosity. He not only created the universe ‘in the beginning’, but he sustains (‘conserves’) it by his power at each moment of its existence; without God’s support it would instantly collapse into nothingness. It is controversial whether the belief in divine creation receives support from contemporary cosmology, as seen in the ‘Big Bang’ theory.


Author(s):  
Matthew Y. Heimburger

The Big Bang theory is a scientific model of the universe that posits a state of dense, centralized matter before the current, observable expansion of the universe in one giant explosion. While ‘the Big Bang’ was a phrase first used somewhat facetiously by British astronomer Fred Hoyle in 1949, it rested on earlier theories and observations by George Lamaitre, Albert Einstein, and Edwin Hubble. The implications of Big Bang theory have been far-reaching. For some, the Big Bang’s suggestion of a ‘beginning of time’ lent itself to familiar religious teleology. For others, it provided a rigid, mechanistic model of the physical world, which in turn affected ideas in the social sciences and humanities. This is not to say that Big Bang theory was a ‘grand unifying theory’—even in the 1920s, the rather precise predictions of Einstein’s theories of relativity conflicted with the conclusions of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle and quantum mechanics. Still, the idea that the physical world exists due to the violent expansion (and subsequent contraction) of matter suggests a rather small place for humanity in the larger scheme of things. There is little room or need for free will in such a system—at least when it comes to matters of large-scale significance. Today, the Big Bang often stands as a euphemism for debates over God and human determinism in the universe, and lends itself to philosophic traditions such as nihilism and existentialism.


Author(s):  
Helge Kragh

The presently accepted big-bang model of the universe emerged during the period 1930-1970, following a road that was anything but smooth. By 1950 the essential features of the big-bang theory were established by George Gamow and his collaborators, and yet the theory failed to win recognition. A major reason was that the big-bang picture of the evolving universe was challenged by the radically different picture of a steady-state universe favoured by Fred Hoyle and others. By the late 1950s there was no convincing reason to adopt one theory over the other. Out of the epic controversy between the two incompatible world models arose our modern view of the universe. Although the classical steady-state model was abandoned in the mid-1960s, attempts to modify it can be followed up to the present.


1990 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. 459-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Williams

During an interview in September 1986, some three years prior to seeking political asylum with his wife at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, Fang Lizhi was asked how he felt about the progress of political reform in China. Fang responded, “I must start with cosmology in answering this question.”Fang's linkage of politics with cosmology – a branch of astrophysics concerned with the origins of the universe – must seem peculiar to those who know him only as a human rights advocate and critic of the Chinese Communist Party. Yet this was no idiosyncrasy on Fang's part. Fang's life and published work from the early 1970s to the present leave no doubt that his emergence as the symbolic leader of China's democracy movement is deeply rooted in his experiences and outlook as a scientist.Fang's personal universe began to expand in 1972, when he and his colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) published a paper in Physica entitled “A Solution of the cosmological equations in scalar-tensor theory, with mass and blackbody radiation.” This innocuous-sounding article met with a furious response from leading theoretical circles of the Party. Fang et al. had broken a long-standing taboo by introducing the Big Bang theory to the Chinese physics world. Insofar as the Big Bang contradicted Engels's declaration that the universe must be infinite in space and time, Fang's paper was tantamount to heresy.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoping Hu

This article presents a new theory on redshift of light from celestial bodies. Lately it has been found that the Hubble constant calculated from different methods discord so much that calls arise for new physics to explain. Also, in addition to many unsolved puzzles like dark matter and source of expansion force, we shall show in this article that the current theory of redshift implies a few hidden, unreasonale assumptions. By assuming photon has temperature and its thermal energy is fully converted to wave energy, this article shows that photon can have a new redshift called Temperature Redshift, which not only is more significant for remote stars or galaxies, but also better fits the observational data, including those used in Hubble constant calculation. As such, if true, this new theory not only adds to our new understanding of photons, but may totally change our current understanding of the Universe, i.e., the Big Bang theory.


2019 ◽  
pp. 84-92
Author(s):  
Nicholas Mee

We now know the universe began with the Big Bang 13.8 billion years ago, but for several years debate raged between the supporters of the Big Bang theory led by George Gamow and supporters of the Steady State theory led by Fred Hoyle. Hoyle showed that the elements were synthesized in the stars, not in the Big Bang as Gamow believed. But Gamow’s colleagues Alpher and Herman predicted the existence of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) created immediately after the Big Bang. The CMB was discovered by Penzias and Wilson and this provided the crucial evidence that the Big Bang theory is correct. The CMB has since been studied in detail by a series of space probes.


2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 56
Author(s):  
Zifeng Li

<p class="1Body">Analyzes the Big Bang theory, recession of galaxies, Hubble's law, multi-dimensional space, curved space and black hole in modern cosmology and points out that these six theories are all baseless and irrational, contrary to classical science. Promotes the use of plain view of the universe - the materialist view of space–time-mass-energy to study the universe. The observations and understanding of the universe are very limited now. Cosmology should be realistic, not based on irrational models.</p>


LOGOS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-45
Author(s):  
Leo Agung Srie Gunawan

The problem of the universe having a great mystery encloses the big question about its origin. To answer the origin of universe, generally, there are two approaches, namely faith and science. The main question has to be replied: “What do the differences and the similarity of them?” The approach of faith bases on the inquiry of “who causes the existence of the universe”. This approach states that the origin of universe was created by God and hence, it was formed by God from a nothingness (creatio ex nihilo). This is known as the theorem of creation. Furthermore, the scientific approach is grounded on the research of “how the universe was formed in the beginning”. This oncoming being explained by the Big Bang Theory, which is continued by the Big Crunch Theory, asserts that the origin of universe came from the prime matter which exploded incredibly in a such a way that the formation process of the universe took place (the singularity). This is well-known as the theory of evolution (the cosmological evolution). In conclusion, the scientific approach explaining the process of creation and the faith one answering the actor of it are complementary.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document