Physics: Scientific God Answering “Scientific” Atheists

I’m sure we’ve all encountered atheist who say, “I am a person of reason and science, not of superstition”. Granted, not all atheist (or agnostics) coincide with this idea, but a great many do. This essay is written from a strictly scientific point of view to defend theism. Prepare for a crash course in physics (doing my best to keep it in laymen terms). For theistic apologetics against atheism using philosophy and Scripture, please see article God of Atheist.

Big Bang

Refuting Singularity Theory or existence from immemorial ad infinitum of mass

This is the collision and fusion or reduction and expansion of non-organic matter in the production of anthropic terrain. Anthropic is the ability to sustain life. Before we move into life, we’ll discuss the background, the beginning, or cause of matter. Many scientist promulgate that matter existed immemorial ad infinitum. This is not fathomable in the law of physics, because to be self sufficient is to be perfect, which means that a singularity (which is infinite) has nothing it is contingent on. To be perfect means it is made of a single thing so that it does not rely on a co-adherent for its own existence or vitality and it must be indivisible, lest it wouldn’t be a singularity. But to do so, it has nothing to separate from itself (i.e. I am made of flesh and blood, therefor I can not give a rock out of my own body because I am not made of rock). As we see on earth, there are millions of elements. This follows into the category that one things proceeds from its own nature (i.e. trees make trees, cats make cats, worms make worms). A singularity could not produce this. If the world was static at one point, it wouldn’t be anthropic but remain static. This suggest that from the beginning was life.

A singularity could not lose its ability to be infinite, else it was never singular. It would lack what we call fixation, also known as an universal constant.

Ekpyrotic Theory

In short, multi-universes collided and produced our universe. This does not follow the law of singularity of a fourth dimension (Transcendent Cause, suggested by Einstein), nor the notion of the law of physics of the 2nd law of thermodynamics and its sub-law, law of entropy (elaborated on further on in this exhortation).

Bounce Theory

So let us say that Big Bang occurred (how this is feasible I will discuss later in my notes). This is the collision of mass and the fusion of elements. Like a ball that is dropped on the ground, pressure is redirected upon impact and almost jettisons the ball back into the atmosphere until gravity draws it back into the mass (which we call earth, or simply, ground). The Bounce Theory is much like this. As the explosion of the Big Bang occurs, matter is shot outward from the collision that produced the big bang and is brought back together by gravity. But as pieces came back together, they collided, causing friction and smaller big bangs. This is the Bounce Theory that suggests a universe “collapse” and re“expands” into another universe, ad infinitum. This is certainly a refutable notion.

First, the theory of Cause and Effect; effect cannot be greater than the cause. What this entails is that things receive their effect from a first cause. In this case, I will use motion as an example. Imagine three consecutive golf-balls that are three feet apart from another. I take a club and hit the first ball at 20 miles per hour (mph). The ball I first contacted travels initially at 20 mph but gradually slows to 14 mph until it collides with the second (middle) golf-ball. The second ball receives its motion from the force of the collision of the first ball and starts moving at 14 mph and gradually decelerates to 8 mph by the time it comes into contact with the final golf-ball. The last ball receives its motion from the ball that just collided into it, moving now at 8 mph until it loses its velocity (energy) and stops at a complete standstill. It has lost it’s energy from the original cause (me, who hit the first ball) and gradually loses its energy (force, motion, speed) until it comes to a stop. The same example could be said of a ball that is dropped and with each bounce, loses energy and will eventually quit exerting enough force that it stops and no longer bounces. The same concept is applied to Bounce Theory. It cannot bounce and have an infinite amount of collision, nor can it collapse and infinite expand as a “rebound”.

In addition, for matter to collapse it must have negative energy; this produces a vacuum. Mass density and pressure of matter could not become negative, because to do so would mean that the matter would cease to exist (to create a vacuum, its energy entails a strong pressure which is equal to minus its energy density). Also, all vacuum, or suction is is a differential of pressures trying to create equilibrium between two accidents. This follows the theory of Ockham’s Razor (canon of parsimony)- nature keeps things simple. It would be easier for nature to make the vacuum equal with the pressure around is rather than cause the atmosphere outside of the vacuum to be equal with the pressure of the vacuum.

2nd Law of Thermodynamics

This sounds like a tough one, but is actually rather simple. The 2nd law of thermodynamics says that once something is set in motion, it will continue in that motion (much like a mechanism). A great example would be a bottle of soda that is pressurized by carbonation. When a person unscrews the bottle, a gush of gas comes gushing out. This is what we call equilibrium (the pressure from inside the bottle has to be equal with the pressure outside the bottle once it can make contact with the coinciding energy). Easier said is that the 2nd law of thermodynamics is like the analogy of getting toothpaste back into the tub; it only goes one direction. The 2nd law of thermodynamics says that once set in a certain motion, it continues in that motion; this leads to another law called entropy theory.

2nd Law of Thermodynamics includes Entropy Theory

Entropy just means that chaos is always dominant. Take for example me holding a rock and throwing it at a sheet of glass. The rock hits, the glass shatters, and the the pieces scatter in disarray. Entropy would say that this is chaos, it cannot reform itself, because the 2nd law of thermodynamics says that once it is set in motion (in this case, a chaotic motion) it will only continue to move in a chaotic motion. Big Bang is a series of random chaos which should further produce more random chaos. The glass will not articulate its self in such a way that it remains a sheet as the rock as its foundation or support. Instead, the contact of the rock set in motion the disturbance of the glass, which falls to the floor and breaks into further chaos, thus fulfilling the law of entropy (its much like Murphy’s law now thinking about it).

Super-string Theory Refuted

Albert Einstein’s theory that we live in a multi-universe is a bunch of whimsical garble. We are connected by a 10 string theory (11th when the tenth string fission connecting the other strings with a common gravitational force) simply because one common factor unites the supposed universe, thus negating strict multiplicity (embranes represents the other universes; branes for short). Also, if there were another brane, as Einsteins surmises, that assumed existence to every possibility to every action, then our mathematical system would be unable to detect it. Logically ascertained, different dimensions of universes would have every variety of gravitational, magnetic, radioactive, chemical, mass, and energy differences which dictates how our math works. For instance, our weight scale is based off of gravity in addition to mass in addition to energy. In a universe that lacks gravity, mass manipulates and energy changes, therefor rendering our mathematical formulas useless (such as in the Planck era).

Inflation Theory

Some science speculates that we are inside a big bubble, coinciding with other bubbles that hold our universe inside this giant dome of a bubble. The problem with this is that since we are in a fixed amount of space with fixed mass energy [Omega], we would all expand and eventually collide into the neighboring bubble universes.

Heuristic Theory

This theory encompasses the generic idea the unites broad interrelationship of intelligible objects. An example would be a color chart offering the different forms of visuals or a element chart offering the different forms of elements – all united by a common factor. We have taken the intelligence from experience and changed it into the intelligence of ideas, but ideas can precede experience thus showing that there is a source of intelligence that precedes all matter, accidents, and empirical experiences.

Transcendent Cause

This is also known as a Creator. If we look at the big bank and the Planck Era (which is the time allotted to the conception of the big bang), the quantum gravity effects been so significant that mathematics of classical General Relativity would be severely inadequate. As it stands, we currently aren’t aware if our universe is open (constantly being pushed outward) or closed (just expanding, like a balloons surface). This is due to our lack of knowledge of our own mass energy and space called Omega (Ω) Speaking of the initial start of gravity as we know it during the big bang (Planck era), if there were a 2% reduction in force, nuclei with larger baryons (protons and neutrons which make the formation of elements for hydrogen) would cease to exist; no hydrogen means no oxygen or water. If the force was 2% stronger, there would be no hydrogen (only heavier elements could exist) thus promoting the same misanthropic effect.

Science is a semi-reliable source. It is interesting how little we actually know about our own galaxy, let alone the whole universe. Did you know that there are three sorts of datum; matter, dark matter, and dark energy. Dark energy acts in the opposite way that gravity does (accelerates outer expansion). This consists of about 73% of our universe. Matter and natural energy contribute to about 4% of our universe. Dark matter fills the rest of our universe (it cannot absorb light therefor cannot be seen; to be honest, scientist don’t really know what it is). Energy is one of five constants (along with space/time, individuating, large-scale, fine-structured). Energy cannot move slower than the smallest iota of measurable time (Planck era) and thus produces a standard for a universal constant. Energy is manifested in four ways; gravitational, electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear.

Evolution in the Big Bang Theory

Most people attribute the thought of evolution, which compliments the Big Bang Theory, to Charles Darwin. This is like accrediting the discovery of electricity to Edison (who capitalized the discovery) when it was Benjamin Franklin who first gave notice to it (remember the daring kite and key charade during the thunderstorm?). Darwin did not discover genetic mutation (which is the only probable cause of evolving); a Roman Catholic Augustine priest by the name of Gregor Mendel discovered this when he fiddled with a diversity of plants of peas. The Roman Catholic Church is not in contention with the idea that a Intelligent Designer, or Creator, created man via evolution. In fact, we know that world is older than most evangelical fundamentalist grant it (6,000 years).

There are three proofs for the Big Band and Evolution with a Transcendent Cause (Intelligent Creator):

  1. We receive 1% of our light from stars. The remainder is provided by cosmological radiation [blackbody spectrum] and paradox radiation (residual radiation left over from a collapsed and expanded universe). We can tell by how much paradox radiation is left over from the last collapse (about 100 times now- cosmological radiation is always made new when a universe re-expands but paradox radiation carries over) that the earth is roughly 13.7 billion years old. There is about a hundred times more cosmological radiation light than starlight which indicates that the universe has collapsed and re-expanded about a hundred times. This also indicates that the universe had a beginning since science is able to determine how many evolutions matter has completed; else the cosmos would be infinitely bright from an infinite amount of residual paradox radiation illuminations.
  2. The Old Testament in the Bible is a collaboration of spiritual books written before it. We have found documents much older than 6,000 years old which we know is referenced to create our Bible we have nowadays. This is also why we have several stories or little misnomers of facts that seem to change or be told differently in parts of the Bible. The books that were collaborated into our Bible come from earlier religions of the Elohist, YHWH’est, Deuteronomist, and the Priestly Source (laymen terms).
  3. Two stories of creation in Genesis (chapters 1&2) which are different. In addition, Cain, the first son of Adam, is scarred so that other people would know not to kill him. Who else would have been around except his family? And I won’t begin to touch upon the complications of inter-family conjugation.

Did you know that Albert Einstein surmised and promulgated that for our universe to be anthropic (since the laws of nature seem to be governed by the 2nd law of thermodynamics which encapsulates entropy), there has to be a fourth dimension to make our reality of a three dimensional world possible?

So next time someone says “but I’m a person of science”, remind them that science (derived from the Greek word scientia) means “to know”. This includes all knowledge, not just formulas, math, and chemicals, but philosophy, theory (such as music and et cetera), and other non-empirical concepts.

Your’s,

Drew Castel.

Share

2 Responses to “Physics: Scientific God Answering “Scientific” Atheists”

  1. Luminaris says:

    BEAUTIFUL article. The episode of the show “Curiosity”, “Does God exist?”, really gets punched in the mouth, and not only has its teeth knocked out, but jaw fully broken, figuratively speaking. I absolutely love this article, I’m sick of all these atheists thinking they’re smarter than anyone else, and spitting in the face of God, and using disgusting vulgarity and obscenity against His followers. The only way to truly answer the burning question, I suppose, would be to experience death and experience what happens afterwards. Regarding determinism, when you look at your reflection in your mind’s eye / consciousness, is that truly “how you are RIGHT NOW”, or is the “true present” still nothing but a fleeting dream due to the reaction time of the synapses and neurons?

  2. Drew Castel says:

    Mankind is never himself or herself completely in one single moment. This doesn’t mean that we don’t retain who we are.
    We are ever incurring knowledge, grace, virtues, and other facets of life attainable through cognitive experience.
    Only one being is himself, their entire existence, in a moment; this being is God. You and I will always develop. A short example would be to say that if I were to say the word “if”, the first sound of the word, “i” is proceeded by the last half of its self, the “f” sound. Although the same word, the sounds occur at two different points in time for its completion. We would not say that the word “if” does not exist because its first and last sounds occur at two different points in time, but acknowledge that it is a single word, undivided, but fully revealed in the spectrum of time. Mankind, bound in this world of time, which is only the measurement of change, is constantly retaining who he is, developed by past experiences, while acquiring new attributes and developments to his being, whether physical or of the inner person, emotion, intelligence, et cetera. We are not changing from who we are now so much as to say that we are changing, or more accurately stated, developing, much like maturing, into who we are in our entirety. We are who God created us to be, if we so choose to submit ourselves to His divine love and let Him, through our time, develop us and complete us. Jesus Christ was always the Savior, but He also loved us to show that we are born, just as He was, that we grow, and may become bearers of the life giving truth just as He did. THis isn’t to say that Jesus Christ was never the same at any point, but kept His humanity, from birth, embraced all His past, such as studying in the temples at the age of 12, and commissioning Himself to fulfill who He always was. He developed, but never changed, only matured, for He retained who He always was.

    In short, this answer of introspection is “this is who I am right now”. If this were not so, a man, or woman, would constantly change and be forever unrecognizable, much less, coherent, if there every action and being or thought were never connected. If neurons were ever fleeting, invention would be impossible for attention would be hyper deficit. Also, Jesus and the apostles always assure us to introspect, so discern within ourselves. A great verse is, ” anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Mt. 5:28). This is a constant assertion of the persons being whom willfully commits their self in an act of sin. This is not fleeting, it is done with the mind, and it is sustained.

    People should not so much say definitely, this is who I am, besides illustrating the point that the are the truest object of God’s love, but say that this is who I have become. This conveys the truth that our experiences unite and give an overlay of who we are. They are not fleeting. If they are fleeting, a man could never forgive a wrongdoing of the past for his forgiveness would be foreign to any past experience if the past were fleeting.

    Yours,
    Drew Castel

Leave a Response