Cosmology has become rational
again.
Genesis 1:1 |
‘in the context
of known physics, however, Vilenkin and Mithani conclude that, whatever way you
look at it, the universe cannot have existed forever so must have had a
beginning. According to Vilenkin, quantum theory has a solution because it
permits something to pop out of nothing. So the next question surely is: where
did the laws of quantum theory come from?’
It might be added that the agency which led to the reality we know also led to sentient beings with concepts of meaning, curiosity, love, truth, beauty and justice.
Update added 19 January 2013: Since the New Scientist article it has been announced that the idea of a quantum foam has been more or less abandoned. Space-time is, as Einstein predicted, continuous. This means the concept of quantum particles popping into and out of existence is not valid, according to the latest quantum physics.
Update added 19 January 2013: Since the New Scientist article it has been announced that the idea of a quantum foam has been more or less abandoned. Space-time is, as Einstein predicted, continuous. This means the concept of quantum particles popping into and out of existence is not valid, according to the latest quantum physics.
Previous posts
Infinity, eternity and cosmology
and
Eternity and thermodynamics
have drawn attention to why the concept of an infinite or eternal material universe is untenable and outside the realm of logical thought – something which leading cosmologists have appeared unable or unwilling to accept. I find this mystifying. Is it because they don’t want to have to admit that some agent, i.e. God, must have created what has a beginning? Yet there is no comfort for them in proposing an eternal universe, because they still have to explain why there is anything at all – something rather than nothing. Even a universe without a beginning would have existence rather than non-existence. (NB: the holy concept of Eternal Life is outside the realm of physical materialism - this is a state of being outside the man-made constructs of time and space. In Christianity it starts in this life and survives physical death.)
Infinity, eternity and cosmology
and
Eternity and thermodynamics
have drawn attention to why the concept of an infinite or eternal material universe is untenable and outside the realm of logical thought – something which leading cosmologists have appeared unable or unwilling to accept. I find this mystifying. Is it because they don’t want to have to admit that some agent, i.e. God, must have created what has a beginning? Yet there is no comfort for them in proposing an eternal universe, because they still have to explain why there is anything at all – something rather than nothing. Even a universe without a beginning would have existence rather than non-existence. (NB: the holy concept of Eternal Life is outside the realm of physical materialism - this is a state of being outside the man-made constructs of time and space. In Christianity it starts in this life and survives physical death.)
Georges Lemaitre |
So what do we have?
2. At the instant of creation the point-sized universe was preternaturally fine tuned for the evolution of sentient beings. Many physical constants were tuned to many decimal places to be just right for life. See A universe built for life; but how much life?
3. Intelligence is present in evolution (e.g. in the extraordinary
machine intelligence within the 'junk' DNA of a cell's nucleus and the cytoplasmic organelles surrounding it, and in the cognitive processes in a wide range of life forms).
On top of this philosophers of monotheistic religion point
to a fourth aspect of reality: that the end result of the evolution of the
universe and life is a being with concepts of truth, love, justice and beauty
together with a relentless desire to seek these out. Collectively this points
to a conclusion which many in the modern world seem afraid to admit.
There is even a fifth factor to
upset the old fashioned materialist scientist, which is the emerging
realisation that there are epistemological limits to what science can deduce or
infer even about the natural order. No matter how long we keep searching we
will never find all the answers. This is not just a belief. Ironically, it
emerges from logical analysis itself. Logic has proved its own limitations by
the process of logic. See, e.g., The non-local universe: the new physics and matters of the mind by Nadeau and Kafatos; and my previous posting Are some scientists from the planet Vulcan? and Chimpanzees and a free lunch.
All five factors need to click in the mind of the average
specialist scientist. Once they do science can advance within a framework of
clarity and reality and, I maintain, attract more young people into what could
again become a noble and exciting profession.
See also Striking the knowledge barrier
John
author, 2077 AD
See also Striking the knowledge barrier
John
author, 2077 AD