God and the Multiverse November 25, 2012. An Orderly, Rational, Comprehensible, Beautiful Universe. Conclusions
Introduction Sessions PowerPointsavailable on-line at: www.stjohnadulted.org/multiverse-home.htm Nov 4: Introduction. A Universe with a Beginning Nov 11: A Multiverse with a Beginning Nov 18: A Universe Finely Tuned for Life Nov 25: An Orderly, Rational, Comprehensible, Beautiful Universe. Conclusions.
Primary References 4. An Orderly, Rational, Comprehensible, Beautiful Universe. Conclusions. Stephen M Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith. University of Notre Dame Press, 2006. ISBN-13: 978-0268021986. Robert J Spitzer, New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2010. ISBN-13: 978-0802863836 Paul Davies, The Goldilocks Enigma: Why Is the Universe Just Right for Life? Mariner Books, 2008. ISBN-13: 978-0547053585. Paul Davies, The Mind of God. The Scientific Basis for a Rational World. Touchstone, 1993. ISBN-13: 978-0671797188.
Almighty and everlasting God, you made the universe with all its marvelous order, its atoms, worlds, and galaxies, and the infinite complexity of living creatures: Grant that, as we probe the mysteries of your creation, we may come to know you more truly, and more surely fulfill our role in your eternal purpose; in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Book of Common Prayer, page 827. For Knowledge of God s Creation
Introduction
Introduction Goals To show how discoveries in modern astronomy and cosmology are: compatible with a belief in a creator God, can be most rationally explained by a creator God who deliberately created a universe or multiverse that would be fruitful of life.
Introduction Week 1: A Universe with a Beginning Observational cosmology has firmly established, from multiple lines of evidence, that our universe began 13.7 billion year ago in an event called The Big Bang. The past is finite;there is a past limit to physical reality
Introduction Week 1: A Universe with a Beginning St. Thomas Aquinas This scientific confirmation of a beginning to the universe empowers the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God (The second way of St. Thomas Aquinas, 1224-1274, based on the idea of causation): 1. Everything we see in this world is caused. 2. Nothing can be the cause of itself. 3. There cannot be an infinite regress of causes because the universe has a beginning. The past is finite. Therefore: 4. There must exist an uncaused first cause not of this world 5. The word God means uncaused first cause not of this world. 6. Therefore, God exists.
Introduction Week 2: A Multiverse with a Beginning There is not a shred of observational evidence for any physical reality beyond the universe we see, the universe that began with the Big Bang. There are however some physical theories that allow for (although do not require) other universes or alternative universes, not directly observable from our own other universes: that could have given rise to our own universe, whose existence would mean the Big Bang was not truly the beginning of all of physical reality.
Introduction Week 2: A Multiverse with a Beginning Our observable Universe + these unobservable other or alternative universes = The Multiverse
Introduction Week 2: A Multiverse with a Beginning We considered all the serious Multiverse scenarios: Level I Multiverse = Quilted Multiverse Bouncing Multiverse The Eternal or Chaotic Inflation Multiverse The String / M-Theory Landscape Multiverse Braneworld Cyclic Multiverse = EkpyroticMultiverse We found all these multiverses require a beginning because of considerations of thermodynamics (the buildup of entropy) and /or the Borde-Vilenkin-Guth Theorem. There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine including the giant machine we call the universe or multiverse. This requirement for a beginning means a Multiverse also empowers the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God.
Introduction Week 3: A Universe Finely Tuned for Life We looked at the Teleological Argument for the existence of God: the world looks like it was deliberately designed for a purpose. Formally: 1. Human artifacts (for example, a watch) are products of intelligent design. 2. The universe resembles these human artifacts. 3. Therefore: the universe is (probably) a product of intelligent design. 4. But the universe is vastly more complex and gigantic than a human artifact. 5. Therefore: there probably is a powerful and vastly intelligent designer who designed the universe.
Introduction Week 3: A Universe Finely Tuned for Life Results from modern cosmology empower the Teleological Argument for the God s existence, for the laws of physics seemed incredibly fine tuned or adjusted to give rise to a universe that would be fruitful of life (= the so-called anthropic coincidences ) One example of an anthropic coincidence we looked at: the natural modes of vibration in a carbon atom nucleus seemed deliberately designed to make it possible for helium to be fused into carbon, oxygen and heavier elements elements critical for life as we know it. Fusion of three helium nuclei into a carbon nucleus = Triple Alpha Process.
Introduction Week 3: A Universe Finely Tuned for Life
Introduction Week 3: A Universe Finely Tuned for Life Fred Hoyle, 1915-2001 The man who discovered this, the atheist Fred Hoyle who derisively had coined the term Big Bang because the idea of a beginning to the universe seemed to smack of religion was so stunned by this apparent fine-tuning of the modes of vibration of the carbon nucleus that he lost his atheism. He later wrote: Would you not say to yourself, Some supercalculating intellect must have designed the properties of the carbon atom, otherwise the chance of my finding such an atom through the blind forces of nature would be utterly minuscule. A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellecthas monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.
Introduction Week 3: A Universe Finely Tuned for Life We looked at the only other explanation for the apparent finetuning and signs of design in the laws of physics a multiverse consisting of an unimaginably enormous array of universes, each governed by a variation in the laws of physics, causing most to be abortive, sterile places and invoking Ockham s razor, suggested the most rational, most satisfying explanation for the fine-tuning is the existence of an unimaginably powerful and intelligent designer, consistent with God.
Introduction This Week: An Orderly, Rational, Comprehensible, Beautiful Universe This week we will look at some additional questions, questions science is unlikely ever to be able to answer or explain: Where do the laws of physics come from? [or] Where do the meta-laws of the Multiverse come from? Why is there any order at all, why not just chaos? Why should the laws of physics that lead to a universe fruitful of life and of conscious, intelligent beings (ourselves) also be laws that those conscious intelligent beings: can comprehend? find to be aesthetically beautiful. What gives fire to the law of physics; what gives palpable reality to the potentiality they describe?
Introduction This Week: An Orderly, Rational, Comprehensible, Beautiful Universe Then we wrap up everything up from these past 4 weeks to conclude that the best, single, most rational explanation for all of it is a creator God who deliberately created a universe or multiverse that would be fruitful of life.
The Laws of Physics
The Laws of Physics Order in Nature Orbit of the Moon Around the Earth Electrons orbiting the nucleus of an atom If we study the world around us, we see order, striking regularities: The orbits of the planets and their moons are simple geometrical shapes; their motions display precise mathematical rhythms. Patterns and rhythms are found within atoms. Bridges and machines behave in an ordered and predictable manner. These regularities are clearly real; they are not merely patterns imposed on nature by our minds. Physicists, discerning these fundamental patterns, have found they can be best distilled and expressed using mathematics. Have come to regard them as laws that do not merely describe, but govern the universe. They are the eternal, bedrock truths upon which the universe is built.
The Laws of Physics Order in Nature Newton s Universal Law of Gravity Remarkably, these mathematical distillations of the regularities seen in nature have allowed us to uncover new things in nature, often things we never suspected: Newton s law of gravity, for example, gives an accurate account of planetary motion, but it also explains the ocean tides, the shape of the Earth, the motion of spacecraft, and much else. Maxwell s Theory of Electromagnetism went far beyond a description of electricity and magnetism, by explaining the nature of light waves and predicting the existence of radio waves. Study and formulation of the truly basic Laws of Physics have revealed deep interconnections between different physical processes, connections that we otherwise never would have discerned or even guessed. Maxwell s Equations of Electromagnetism
The Laws of Physics Properties of the Laws Many of the properties that physicists attribute to the Laws of Physics are properties that theists commonly attribute to God. The Laws are Universal and Perfect. The Laws apply unfailingly everywhere in the universe and at all epochs of cosmic history. No exceptions are permitted. The Laws are Absolute. The Laws do not depend on anything else. They do not depend on who is observing the world, or on the actual state of the world.
The Laws of Physics Properties of the Laws The Laws are Eternal. The Laws do not change in time. This timeless, eternal character of the laws is reflected in their expression as timeless, unchanging mathematical structures. The Laws are Omnipotent. Everything that exists is subject to the laws. Nothing escapes them. They are all-powerful. The Laws are Omniscient (in a loose sense). Systems in the world do not have to inform the Laws of their current situation in order for the laws to govern them. The Laws seem to already know their situation.
Einstein s Equations of Special Relativity Einstein s Equation of General Relativity (replacing Newton s Theory of Gravity) The Laws of Physics Nature of the Laws So what is the true nature of these Laws? In what sense do they exist, and where do they exist? Most scientists think of the laws as something out there that they are discovering, something transcendental. A related question: all of the fundamental laws are expressed in mathematical form. What is the nature of mathematics? Where do mathematical forms and structures exist? Galileo: The great book of nature can be read only by those who know the language in which it was written. And this language is mathematics. English Astronomer James Jean (pioneer in the study of stars): The universe appears to have been designed by a pure mathematician. Many mathematicians also think of themselves as discovering mathematics forms and structures that exist out there, forms and structures that exist in a transcendental realm.
The Laws of Physics Platonic Nature of Mathematics Plato, 427-347 BC The idea that mathematics forms and structures exist out there, in a transcendental realm was the view of Plato (427 347 BC). Plato is most famous for his theory of Forms or Ideas: All triangles have in common participation in the Form of the Triangle that exists in a divine, eternal, simple, indissoluble, unchanging, selfsubsisting reality, existing outside space and time (= the Platonic realm). Furthermore: All beautiful things have in common participation in the Form of the Beautiful; all good things have in common participation in the Form of the Good that exists in the Platonic realm.
The Laws of Physics Platonic Nature of Mathematics Roger Penrose, 1931 - Many mathematicians are Platonists. The Oxford mathematical physicist Roger Penrose writes: Mathematical truth is something that goes beyond mere formalism. There often does appear to be some profound reality about these mathematical concepts, going quite beyond the deliberations of any particular mathematician. It is as though human thought is, instead, being guided towards some eternal external truth a truth which has a reality of its own, and which is revealed only partially to any one of us. Examples that inspired Penrose to adopt Platonism include: the system of complex numbers, which he feels has a profound and timeless reality. something called the Mandelbrot set.
The Laws of Physics Platonic Nature of Mathematics Benoit Mandelbrot, 1924-2010 The Mandelbrot Set was discovered by Benoit Mandelbrot in 1980. The set is produced by the incredibly simple iteration formula: z n +1 = z n2 + c where z and c are complex numbers and z 0 = 0. The Mandelbrot set consists of all the points on a complex coordinate graph for which the function z 2 + c doesn t diverge under iteration.
Zooming in and exploring one small section of the Mandelbrot Set, using the computer: The Laws of Physics Platonic Nature of Mathematics from YouTube video Mandelbrot Zoom by M. Eric Carr / NorthlightComputing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gew8xpb1ara)
The Laws of Physics Platonic Nature of Mathematics Mandelbrot Set zoom-in image from: http://www.misterx.ca/mandelbrot_set--- Thumb_Print_of_God.html Roger Penrose writes: The complete details of the complication of the structure of Mandelbrot s set cannot really be fully comprehended by any one of us, nor can it be fully revealed by any computer. It would seem that this structure is not just part of our minds, but it has a reality of its own.... The computer is being used in essentially the same way that the experimental physicist uses a piece of experimental apparatus to explore the structure of the physical world. The Mandelbrot set is not an invention of the human mind: it was a discovery. Like Mount Everest, the Mandelbrot set is just there.
The Laws of Physics Nature of the Laws of Physics We are faced with deep and profound mysteries: The Laws of Physics seem to be eternal, bedrock truths upon which the universe is built. They are universal, perfect, absolute, eternal, omnipotent and omniscient in their scope. They seem to physicists to exist out there in some transcendent Platonic realm. The Laws appear to be encoded in mathematic forms and structures, and these mathematic forms and structures also appear to exist in some transcendent Platonic realm. How can these mysteries be explained?
The Laws of Physics Nature of the Laws of Physics Michelangelo: The Creation of the Heavens (detail), 1508-12, from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel For a Christian, a satisfying explanation is: The Platonic realm where mathematical forms and structures exist is the realm of God. The laws of physics seems universal, perfect, absolute, eternal, omnipotent and omniscient in their scope because they rooted in and crafted by God, the creator of the universe. If the idea of God is rejected, then the existence of both the Laws of Physics and the mathematical structures in which they are encoded become profound and unanswerable mysteries. Where do they come from? Who sent the message? Who devised the code? How could something that seems so obviously to belong to the realm of the mind just simply be there freefloating?
Why Are the Laws of Physics Intelligible to Us?
Intelligible Laws Why are the Laws Comprehensible? Neil Armstrong on the Moon, Apollo 11 mission, July 1969 Human beings have come to understand the world, at least in part, through the processes of reasoning and science. We have methodically explored our physical world as well as mathematics, and by so doing have unraveled some of the hidden cosmic code, the Laws of Physics, the subtle tune to which nature dances. There is nothing in the Multiverse explanation for why the universe appears designed to produce life that requires that life have such a deep level of involvement, such a deep level of connection with the Laws of the Universe / Multiverse.
Intelligible Laws Why are the Laws Comprehensible? That is: there is no obvious reason why we humans should be capable of comprehending the fundamental Laws of Physics that undergird the universe. If there is no God, if we are products of a mindless evolution, merely creatures formed in a jungle crucible of dog eat dog natural selection and survival of the fitness, what evolutionary purpose was served by our ability to comprehend higher mathematics or discern quantum mechanics? If Windows XP involved 45 million lines of source code, Mac OS X 86 million lines of source code, wouldn t you expect that any cosmic code that undergirds the operation of the universe would most likely be incomprehensible by any finite intelligent being?
Intelligible Laws Why are the Laws Comprehensible? Michelangelo: The Creation of Man, 1508-12, from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. A Christian can speculate God deliberately designed the universe with laws that would be comprehensible to the conscious, intelligent beings (us, for example) that the universe was designed be fruitful of, because God wanted those creatures, intended to reflect God s image and likeness, to have some understanding and appreciation of the creation, an understanding and appreciation that they could share with the Creator.
Why Are the Laws of Physics Aesthetically Beautiful to Us?
Beautiful Laws Beauty, a Guide to Discovery in Physics Not only are the Laws of Physics comprehensible to humans, but theoretical physicists those who spend their lives studying the Laws describe the laws as aesthetically beautiful. It is widely believed among scientists that beauty is a reliable guide to truth, and many advances in theoretical physics have been made by the theorist demanding mathematical elegance of a new theory. Einstein, when discussing an experimental test of his general theory of relativity, was once asked what he would do if the experiment didn t agree with the theory. He was unperturbed at the prospect. So much the worse for the experiment, he retorted. The theory is right!
Beautiful Laws Beauty, a Guide to Discovery in Physics Paul Dirac, 1902-1984 Paul Dirac, the theoretical physicist whose aesthetic deliberations led him to construct a mathematically more elegant equation for the electron, which then led to the successful prediction of the existence of antimatter, echoed these sentiments when he judged that it is more important to have beauty in one's equations than to have them fit experiment. Roger Penrose, the mathematical physicists, describes creative work in physics as the creative mind breaking through into the Platonic realm to glimpse mathematical forms which are in some way beautiful: He cites beauty as a guiding principle in much of his mathematical work. Countering a view of mathematics as cold, dry, and rigorous discipline, he notes: Rigorous argument is usually the last step! Before that, one has to make many guesses, and for these, aesthetic convictions are enormously important.
Beautiful Laws Elegance and Beauty of Maxwell s Equations As a college sophomore physics major at Rice University, when we finished a year of study of Maxwell s four equations that encoded all the phenomenon of electromagnetism, it seemed very appropriate to: celebrate the elegance and beauty of those four equations, an elegance and beauty that we could now appreciate to some degree, acknowledge the ecstatic high many of us now felt, in the manner our physics professor proceeded to do: He raised a large banner displaying the four equations before the amphitheater of physics students, to the finale of the Overture of 1812.
Beautiful Laws Why are the Laws Beautiful? Michelangelo: The Creation of Man, 1508-12, from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. A Christian can speculate God deliberately designed the universe with laws that would be comprehensible and beautiful to the conscious, intelligent beings (us, for example) that the universe was designed be fruitful of, because God wanted those creatures, intended to reflect God s image and likeness, to have some understanding and aesthetic appreciation of the creation, an understanding and aesthetic appreciation that they could share with the Creator.
What Gives Fire, Reality to Mere Possibility?
Giving Reality to Possibility What is the Source of Being? The Laws of Physics prescribe the behavior of the fundamental constituents of the universe. But does knowing the Law, the prescription, the cosmic code, explain: the existence of the universe, that fact the universe is that the universe has being? The Laws of Physics, the cosmic code only describes possibility, potentiality. It is the software that prescribes the behavior of hardware. It is the dream of a possible world. What gives the hardware being / palpable reality? What makes the dream real?
Giving Reality to Possibility What is the Source of Being? Perhaps someday science will find the Final Theory of Everything, the entire cosmic code that prescribes the behavior of everything in the universe. Such a Final Theory of Everything will still only be: the code or law for how things behave, software that prescribes the behavior of hardware, the dream of a possible world that has somehow become real. It can never answer the questions: What gives being to the things? What makes the hardware? What turned the possible world into a real world?
Giving Reality to Possibility God as the Source of Being? A Christian however does have an answer: the things, the hardware, the possible world become real the universe has been created, made real, and is continuously sustained in being by God.
Putting It All Together
Putting It All Together Summary of the Problems Week 1 & 2: The Universe had a beginning (before which there was nothing). A Multiverse (if real) must have a beginning (before which there was nothing). Yet from nothing, comes nothing. What then could have caused the Universe / Multiverse to begin? Week 3: How do we explain that the Universe appears to be incredibly fine-tuned as if designed -- to be fruitful of life? This Week: How do we explain that the Laws of Physics are both comprehensible and aesthetically beautiful to the life the universe appears designed to produce? This Week: What gives fire to the Laws of Physics; what gives palpable reality / being itself to the potentiality they describe?
Putting It All Together The Best Explanation The best explanation, the only explanation that can answer all questions is: a creator God who deliberately created a universe or multiverse that would be fruitful of conscious, intelligent life, agod who wanted that conscious, intelligent life, intended to reflect God s image and likeness, to have some understanding and aesthetic appreciation of the creation, an understanding and aesthetic appreciation that they could share with the Creator.
Putting It All Together The Best Explanation A common objection is: but who created God? What caused God? In our realm of reality: (1) the universe has a beginning (= before the beginning there was nothing) (2) from nothing comes nothing, (3) everything has a cause that is not itself;everything is dependent or contingent on something else ŁWe have an intractable problem explaining why there is something (the universe) and not nothing The only way out of this intractable problem is to hypothesize a different realm of reality where (1) and (3) don t hold. It is perfectly logically coherent to say God the creator is in a realm of reality where (1) There is no beginning. (3) God s cause lies within God s self.
Putting It All Together The Best Explanation This then is the description of God that Natural Theology (the name for what we ve been doing these past 4 weeks!) has led us to: a creator God who deliberately created a universe or multiverse that would be fruitful of conscious, intelligent life, agod who wanted that conscious, intelligent life, intended to reflect God s image and likeness, to have some understanding and aesthetic appreciation of the creation, an understanding and aesthetic appreciation that they could share with the Creator. Such a God is fully consistent with God revealed to us in the Scripture, with God revealed to us in Jesus, The Christ, Our Lord and Savior.