Stephen Hawking - Do we need God to explain the creation of Universe?
Before I start, let me inform you that this is a conjecture by Stephen Hawking and is absolutely not my view. I will explain my views in a critical analysis of his theory.
Science & religion have never been on good terms, atleast for the most part of it. From Socrates to Copernicus to Galileo Galelei, scientist have been admonished even executed when their views, either correct or otherwise, differed from that of religious men and their teachings.
Long ago, the answer to any unanswered question was always same, God.
Why does it rain? Because God wants it to.
Why does day and night occur? Because God made it that way.
Why do stars shine? Because god makes them shine.
Why do we exist? Because God wanted us to.
Since early times civiliztions have resorted to using god as explanation of anything which they were unable to grasp. For example, the Norse believed lighting was caused by a god named Thor, not because it had any rationale, but because they needed to make sense of something which they deemed incomprehensible.
But as science and scientific understanding developed so did the answers to many such questions.
It rains because water vapour forms clouds.
Day and night occur because the earth rotates.
Stars shine because of nuclear fusion.
Once these questions were answered new questions appeared, why does an apple fall to the ground?
Then we moved futher ahead, why does some metals shine in dark?
Then further, why does there appear to be dark circles in pictures of space?
Then further still, where is all the missing mass?
One by one science unravelled all these questions thus was formed two sets of equations or laws if you will to explain all that is there in the universe and its working, namely General theory of Relativity and Theory of Electromagnetism.
Thus binding the laws of nature and how it can work.
And thus all of the laws of nature was locked down.
Once you accept that the laws of nature are fixed, it doesn't take long to ask what is the role left to play for god?
Many cosmologists, among them <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking"> Dr Stephen Hawking</a>, would have you believe, there is none. At least in how the universe works.
But what about the creation of universe? The biggest question of all of them, How did the universe form?
Almost all of us uninamously accept that the universe was formed by a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang">"Big Bang"</a>. Did God put the bang in the Big Bang?
The question cannot be answered without first understanding what was there before the big bang?
To understand what was there before big bang, we need to know a few other things first.
1. Behaviour of sub-atomic sized particles as dictated by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics">Quantum Mechanics.</a>
I am not going to give a lecture on Quantum Mechanics, rather just present a conclusion. Particles at sub atomic levels are behave erratic, or random is the technical word.
How random? For starters they can suddenly appear at a place for no reason at all, stay, and disappear only to appear somewhere else. And by appear and disappear I mean Star Trek kind of teleportation, they simply vanish and reappear somewhere.
How is this possible? Due to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle">Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle </a> and the fact that position of these particles is never absolute but a probability function.
In fact, there is a possibility that tomorrow you may wake up to realise your not on your bed but on Jupiter (provided you stay alive), it is possible because human body is essentially a collection of atoms, hence it is a collection of a finite number of subatomic particles, since there particles' position is a probability function, there is a probability, however minute, but there is one that all of these particles in your body will suddenly disappear and reappear on Jupiter.
2. Behaviour of time in black holes.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole">Black holes </a> are strange physical entities. They are like hungry beasts of the universe, like terminators whose sole purpose of life is to devour other objects.
What is of our interest is the fact not only mass and or energy falls prey to black holes, but <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation">not even time </a> can escape its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#Event_horizon">clutches.</a> In fact if we threw a clock in a black hole as it reaches it center it will start slowing down and eventually stop.
The physical characteristics of a black hole mimic that of the Big Bang as both have a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#Singularity"> Singularity </a> at its center. A black hole is the literal antonymn of the Big Bang, everything ends in a black hole, even the time.
3. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass"> Negative Matter & Energy</a>
We have heard that something cannot be created out of nothing, but creation of matter after Big Bang somewhat proves thsi notion wrong.
I say somewhat, because after Big Bang, something was created out of nothing, but so was a negative something.
Think of it this way, there was a lot of Mass & Energy released , but so was Negative Mass & energy and these negative and positive sides of mass & energy cancel each other out. So the Sum total of all the mass and energy combined in the universe is nothing.
Now to understand what was before the Big Bang, let understand what and when was during the big bang.
1. The universe is large now but it was small once, infinitesimally small. At such small sizes, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_mechanics">Classical Mechanics</a> break down and Quantum Mechanics is the go to theory to explain the behaviour of particles. As I mentioned earlier, Quantum Mechanics dictates a particle can appear at absolute random, so there is a possibility that the Big Bang was a random even and may not require a God to cause it.
2. Everything that happens after Big Bang follows a definite set of laws and does not leave a role for God to play in functioning of the Universe.
3. Black hole is the opposite end of creation of universe, everything gets crushed into a singularity at its core same as Big Bang. Time ends in the center of black hole, but that also means, because Big Bang is the opposite end of black hole, that time started after Big Bang.
And hence there was nothing before big bang, not time, not matter, not space nothing.
Stephen Hawking hence concluded, since there was nothing before the Big Bang, Big Bang created itself, and the universe since then is following a set of laws which doesn't requrie intervention by God, hence there is no role left to play for God, hence there is no God.
******************************************************************************************************************************
Of course as a man of logic, this left me confused for a while, made me contemplate and think.
So I dug deeper into Dr Hawkings arguments. And here is my observations and what I regard as flaws in his arguments.
1. Inflation after the Big Bang.
The different stages of Big Bang model of universe is as follows
- A Unique Singularity [You might want to read the Holy Quran, 21:30]
- Inflation
- Homogenous gas clouds
- Observable expanding universe
Most of the theoretical models of Big Bang is based on the models explaining the current observable universe and backtracking in time to reach the stage of Big Bang.
The problem is, upto homogenous gas clouds it works well and good, but once we reach inflation, there is a wall (scientists call it exactly that) which basically divides what we see and what we think might have happened.
In other words, between the Big Bang and the observable universe, there is an unexplained gap, in facts scientists like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose">Sir Roger Penrose</a>, who incidently shared the Nobel Prize won with Stephen Hawking, say that inflation might never have happened and provided <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_Cyclic_Cosmology">alternative explanations to what was before Big Bang.</a>
2. Probable occiurece of Big Bang Singularity
It is worth mentionning that Stephen Hawking very conviniently skipped on the fact that his conjecture stating Big Bang could have happened by random chance is, well a probabality.
In other words, there is a chance it may not have happened as a random occurence. Which is as good as saying there is a chance lightnings are probably caused by an upset child's anger. [Read Quantum Conciousness Theory to understand that reference].
3. Conciousness
While we are on Quantum Conciousness, what about human conciousness? There is no single or multiple theory which successfully explains why or how do we have conciousness? Sure machines can think, but as Godel's Theorem states (I am paraphrasing) to prove a set of rules, you need atleast one external rule.
A machine, when provided which that external rule can prove a specific set of rules, but can it think of the external rule? It can't.
In other words, a machine is capable of only computations which are algorithmic in nature and it requires a human mind to create a completely new thought a non-computable thought if you will.
Currently there are no widely accepted theories explaining the capabilties of the human conciousness.
Dr Hawking's definition of God is limited, he conjectures that as long as there is one question which remains unanswered there need for a God, ergo there exists a God.
So here is my question to Dr Hawking.
Surely the universe is governed by a set of laws, but who created these laws?
Dr Hawking never came close to touching this question, in fact no one in cosmological society does. No one questions why a law is what it is?
By his own logic, there is atleast one question which remains unanswered, so there is a need for God and there is no conclusive evidence againsts teh existence of God.
And believing there is a God without complete conclusive evidence is called faith.
- And if thy Lord willed, all who are in the earth would have believed together.[The Holy Quran - 10:99]
But that is not what the Lord wants, he wants us to believe in him based on signs, not his actual physical presence.
As science progresses and answers more and more questions, it will get tougher and tougher for the believers to stand true to their faith.Every now and then, there will come visionaries who will ask questions and make arguments which will test the faith of all.
But as people of faith, it is important to be steadfast and not get carried away by what someone else may be saying.
Science & religion have never been on good terms, atleast for the most part of it. From Socrates to Copernicus to Galileo Galelei, scientist have been admonished even executed when their views, either correct or otherwise, differed from that of religious men and their teachings.
Long ago, the answer to any unanswered question was always same, God.
Why does it rain? Because God wants it to.
Why does day and night occur? Because God made it that way.
Why do stars shine? Because god makes them shine.
Why do we exist? Because God wanted us to.
Since early times civiliztions have resorted to using god as explanation of anything which they were unable to grasp. For example, the Norse believed lighting was caused by a god named Thor, not because it had any rationale, but because they needed to make sense of something which they deemed incomprehensible.
But as science and scientific understanding developed so did the answers to many such questions.
It rains because water vapour forms clouds.
Day and night occur because the earth rotates.
Stars shine because of nuclear fusion.
Once these questions were answered new questions appeared, why does an apple fall to the ground?
Then we moved futher ahead, why does some metals shine in dark?
Then further, why does there appear to be dark circles in pictures of space?
Then further still, where is all the missing mass?
One by one science unravelled all these questions thus was formed two sets of equations or laws if you will to explain all that is there in the universe and its working, namely General theory of Relativity and Theory of Electromagnetism.
Thus binding the laws of nature and how it can work.
And thus all of the laws of nature was locked down.
Once you accept that the laws of nature are fixed, it doesn't take long to ask what is the role left to play for god?
Many cosmologists, among them <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking"> Dr Stephen Hawking</a>, would have you believe, there is none. At least in how the universe works.
But what about the creation of universe? The biggest question of all of them, How did the universe form?
Almost all of us uninamously accept that the universe was formed by a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang">"Big Bang"</a>. Did God put the bang in the Big Bang?
The question cannot be answered without first understanding what was there before the big bang?
To understand what was there before big bang, we need to know a few other things first.
1. Behaviour of sub-atomic sized particles as dictated by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics">Quantum Mechanics.</a>
I am not going to give a lecture on Quantum Mechanics, rather just present a conclusion. Particles at sub atomic levels are behave erratic, or random is the technical word.
How random? For starters they can suddenly appear at a place for no reason at all, stay, and disappear only to appear somewhere else. And by appear and disappear I mean Star Trek kind of teleportation, they simply vanish and reappear somewhere.
How is this possible? Due to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle">Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle </a> and the fact that position of these particles is never absolute but a probability function.
In fact, there is a possibility that tomorrow you may wake up to realise your not on your bed but on Jupiter (provided you stay alive), it is possible because human body is essentially a collection of atoms, hence it is a collection of a finite number of subatomic particles, since there particles' position is a probability function, there is a probability, however minute, but there is one that all of these particles in your body will suddenly disappear and reappear on Jupiter.
2. Behaviour of time in black holes.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole">Black holes </a> are strange physical entities. They are like hungry beasts of the universe, like terminators whose sole purpose of life is to devour other objects.
What is of our interest is the fact not only mass and or energy falls prey to black holes, but <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation">not even time </a> can escape its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#Event_horizon">clutches.</a> In fact if we threw a clock in a black hole as it reaches it center it will start slowing down and eventually stop.
The physical characteristics of a black hole mimic that of the Big Bang as both have a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#Singularity"> Singularity </a> at its center. A black hole is the literal antonymn of the Big Bang, everything ends in a black hole, even the time.
3. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass"> Negative Matter & Energy</a>
We have heard that something cannot be created out of nothing, but creation of matter after Big Bang somewhat proves thsi notion wrong.
I say somewhat, because after Big Bang, something was created out of nothing, but so was a negative something.
Think of it this way, there was a lot of Mass & Energy released , but so was Negative Mass & energy and these negative and positive sides of mass & energy cancel each other out. So the Sum total of all the mass and energy combined in the universe is nothing.
Now to understand what was before the Big Bang, let understand what and when was during the big bang.
1. The universe is large now but it was small once, infinitesimally small. At such small sizes, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_mechanics">Classical Mechanics</a> break down and Quantum Mechanics is the go to theory to explain the behaviour of particles. As I mentioned earlier, Quantum Mechanics dictates a particle can appear at absolute random, so there is a possibility that the Big Bang was a random even and may not require a God to cause it.
2. Everything that happens after Big Bang follows a definite set of laws and does not leave a role for God to play in functioning of the Universe.
3. Black hole is the opposite end of creation of universe, everything gets crushed into a singularity at its core same as Big Bang. Time ends in the center of black hole, but that also means, because Big Bang is the opposite end of black hole, that time started after Big Bang.
And hence there was nothing before big bang, not time, not matter, not space nothing.
Stephen Hawking hence concluded, since there was nothing before the Big Bang, Big Bang created itself, and the universe since then is following a set of laws which doesn't requrie intervention by God, hence there is no role left to play for God, hence there is no God.
******************************************************************************************************************************
Of course as a man of logic, this left me confused for a while, made me contemplate and think.
So I dug deeper into Dr Hawkings arguments. And here is my observations and what I regard as flaws in his arguments.
1. Inflation after the Big Bang.
The different stages of Big Bang model of universe is as follows
- A Unique Singularity [You might want to read the Holy Quran, 21:30]
- Inflation
- Homogenous gas clouds
- Observable expanding universe
Most of the theoretical models of Big Bang is based on the models explaining the current observable universe and backtracking in time to reach the stage of Big Bang.
The problem is, upto homogenous gas clouds it works well and good, but once we reach inflation, there is a wall (scientists call it exactly that) which basically divides what we see and what we think might have happened.
In other words, between the Big Bang and the observable universe, there is an unexplained gap, in facts scientists like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose">Sir Roger Penrose</a>, who incidently shared the Nobel Prize won with Stephen Hawking, say that inflation might never have happened and provided <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_Cyclic_Cosmology">alternative explanations to what was before Big Bang.</a>
2. Probable occiurece of Big Bang Singularity
It is worth mentionning that Stephen Hawking very conviniently skipped on the fact that his conjecture stating Big Bang could have happened by random chance is, well a probabality.
In other words, there is a chance it may not have happened as a random occurence. Which is as good as saying there is a chance lightnings are probably caused by an upset child's anger. [Read Quantum Conciousness Theory to understand that reference].
3. Conciousness
While we are on Quantum Conciousness, what about human conciousness? There is no single or multiple theory which successfully explains why or how do we have conciousness? Sure machines can think, but as Godel's Theorem states (I am paraphrasing) to prove a set of rules, you need atleast one external rule.
A machine, when provided which that external rule can prove a specific set of rules, but can it think of the external rule? It can't.
In other words, a machine is capable of only computations which are algorithmic in nature and it requires a human mind to create a completely new thought a non-computable thought if you will.
Currently there are no widely accepted theories explaining the capabilties of the human conciousness.
Dr Hawking's definition of God is limited, he conjectures that as long as there is one question which remains unanswered there need for a God, ergo there exists a God.
So here is my question to Dr Hawking.
Surely the universe is governed by a set of laws, but who created these laws?
Dr Hawking never came close to touching this question, in fact no one in cosmological society does. No one questions why a law is what it is?
By his own logic, there is atleast one question which remains unanswered, so there is a need for God and there is no conclusive evidence againsts teh existence of God.
And believing there is a God without complete conclusive evidence is called faith.
- And if thy Lord willed, all who are in the earth would have believed together.[The Holy Quran - 10:99]
But that is not what the Lord wants, he wants us to believe in him based on signs, not his actual physical presence.
As science progresses and answers more and more questions, it will get tougher and tougher for the believers to stand true to their faith.Every now and then, there will come visionaries who will ask questions and make arguments which will test the faith of all.
But as people of faith, it is important to be steadfast and not get carried away by what someone else may be saying.
Comments
Post a Comment