God and the science
I am trying to describe God: step 5
There are three important problems for science that we have been struggling with for thousands of years. It is about the problem of the creation of the universe, the phenomenon of the appearance of life in it and the existence of a man in the environment of nature. These three issues come within the scope of the creative work I have discussed, made by the Original Being. I wrote about the origin of the universe before and I will continue to do so in many other chapters. I was taking the fullest voice of the beginning about human life in the chapter entitled "God as the Heavenly Father." The subject of the origins of humanity, that is, the appearance of a man in the universe, appears in all my elaboration.
I believe that I have the right to speak on these topics because I am not on either side of science or religion. I am more likely to be accused that I am trying to reconcile the arguments of both parties. In this respect, I will not argue, because my task is to bring together both areas of life. I watch carefully everything that surrounds me. This leads me to a logical and rational analysis of the state of the universe, in which I go hand in hand with science. At the same time, I am an independent religious researcher of the work made by the Creator.
In the ongoing discussion between the two above-discussed areas of life, there are still negative phenomena regarding the principle of dialogue. First of all, it is still not very present in social life. Individual denominations or churches identify with the so-called will of God, assuming in this way that they represent the truth revealed by Him. This immediately closes the way to further discussion not only with science, but also with other religions. Such "representation" of God guarantees them to remain in their position, but does not lead to solving any problems of humanity, even those they deal with themselves, such as the problem of eliminating evil on Earth. Meanwhile, science does not have to make such assumptions. It can openly deal with everything that is in its field of interest, without any artificial barriers. It can also combine the intellectual efforts of all humanity, stopping only against the barrier of the lack of appropriate research methods and tools. In contrast to science, religion may still be behind this barrier, complementing the aspirations of its rival to learn the whole truth about the universe. In order to avoid conflicts with religion, science should make it clear to it that one must have absolutely free hand in its research and demand that it not interrupt it and do not dig in defensive positions in defense of its dogmas. If God is truly omnipotent and powerful enough, then he does not need to defend Him, for just as He has managed to create the universe, he will be able to confirm His work. It exists objectively, and therefore it is enough that religion will present it and science should examine it.
From this it follows that religion has a clear scope for action in the field of researching the creative work of God wherever science has no access because of the assumptions it has set for itself. This applies above all to such a topic as the first cause of the creation of the universe in terms of causality and purposefulness. However, the very mechanism of this phenomenon may already be a field for joint research for both parties, without having to stay on their previous positions. In the next discussion regarding the emergence of life, religion can confidently display its point of view, because science has not solved this problem so far. It became clear that the main aspects of this issue were beyond its empirical methods. Thus, the beginning of life on Earth is still behind the inaccessible veil, the existence of which we also notice when studying the Big Bang. We are currently admiring the phenomenon of inheritance of life and the effects of the creation of the universe, but we are not able to look behind this "curtain" unavailable to scientists. Religion, however, is slow to proclaim that the Creator operates outside of this "curtain" that separates time-space from the world beyond time and space. Besides, it does not try to prove her claims at all, instead simply saying that it is so and the end. Science is difficult to reconcile, but for now, it cannot give any satisfactory answer in this matter.
The greatest field for cooperation between religion and science is man himself. It was he who created these two areas of life. Thus, he moves freely on both of these research planes. Therefore, neither party to the discussion can be treated with disdain or eliminated in research. After all, the appearance of a man in the natural world is a fascinating phenomenon for both points of view. It just need to find a common denominator for them. It is first of all a man's spirituality, which in the case of faith means our immortal personality, and for science it is a phenomenon of the functioning of the mind in the form of intelligence, will and emotionality. The next area for discussion is the problem of the existence of evil, which has always destroyed the achievements of both areas discussed by me. Here, religion can particularly provide many of the solutions that it has developed. Meanwhile, in the case of science, it can only say that evil exists, at the same time admitting that it is not able to definitively eradicate it. Unfortunately, religion is also struggling with this problem, often failing, although it defines correctly how to remove it. Thus, topics concerning the sense of human existence, the purpose of civilization changes and striving to eliminate evil should be a common axis of action of both these areas of life .
It is worth asking yourself about the assessment of the achievements of science in relation to the described the God's creative work. Let's start with a short definition of the relationship between God and us, using the concepts of physics. Namely, God is the Father who for us from primary energy, or from His Energy, creates matter, and man is His child who uses this matter and often changes it into a concrete energy. Of course, man is not only a consumer of energy and matter, but the above definition clearly explains the role of the Creator in relation to people.
Note that energy and matter belong to those concepts that are difficult to define. They are peculiarities that can only be quantified. They are not in the ordinary meaning of what we perceive as a strictly defined being. We only observe the effects of its existence and operation. I therefore treat the Energy of the First Cause as the beginning, and at the same time as the material or "building substance" of everything in the universe. God in this respect is for every being a base of energy and matter coming from it.
Since the concept of energy is a primary concept, it is only possible to define and measure its specific forms (potential, thermal or electric energy). This leads to the conclusion that energy without an adjective is identical to the original particularity derived from the Creator, which is the basic attribute of his physical side.
At the level of primary energy, so-called dark energy unrelated to any object of the material universe, but existing in cosmic space. This is still probably the "undeveloped building material" available to the expanding universe of the Creator. In this category one can add a certain type of matter which is a pre-prepared "building material", i.e. the so-called dark matter. Although it emerged from the same primary energy from which the elementary particles known to us arose, it is not yet used in a visible way for us, as is the case with all other forms of matter.
In summary, the Creator is still transforming the His Energy into the matter known to us. He does so in accordance with the principles and laws inherent in Himself, and perceived by us as the broadly understood laws of physics. Einstein's equation (E = mc˛) shows how a gigantic portion of energy is needed to create a mass portion called matter. Only an efficient Original Being can fulfill such a task. This, in turn, makes us aware of the enormity of His possibilities in comparison with all of the universe.
God's primary should be, like He, infinite, inexhaustible. Thanks to these properties, a great universe could emerge, which is able to continue to expand. So matter in the universe can still come, and the paradox is that God is not losing His Energy. Classic Newtonian physics cannot help us to verify this, although to some extent we can count on quantum physics. For now, according to the current level of scientific knowledge, God is the only "producer" of matter from energy and on a cosmic scale. Of course, on the scale of quantum physics we also have the same Creator.
From such primary energy was created the elementary particles that can already have their mass, from which atoms are formed, then molecules of chemical compounds and so on. This is the beginning of the role of God as the Creator. Meanwhile, a human being as a consumer has the ability to use products from the Creator, although most often he also adds his creative abilities in the further development and progress. For example, by using the matter and energy that he found on Earth, man is able to transform it into other forms of energy and matter, and thus he himself becomes the builder of new qualities in the universe. One can also come to the conclusion that the creation of new, different structures in nature, new things or beings by the peoples gives God the same joy as if he himself was their author.
I think scientists will explain to us once exactly the entire creative mechanism. This is evidenced by a whole range of scientific discoveries, for example the knowledge of the so-called divine particle, the Higgs boson, as well as different versions of quarks.
Recent discoveries have strengthened the belief of most scientists that the universe was created as a result of the Big Bang. This is not a typical explosion, but a violent transformation of energy into matter. This means that the source energy that has always existed has evolved within a very short time into fundamental elementary particles, such as the already mentioned Higgs boson. At that time, something like the "carousel" of elementary particles was created, which in space began to combine, creating the simplest atoms, that is, hydrogen atoms. Their interaction was the basis for the existence of matter in space. Then came the molecules of chemical compounds that were the material building substance of the material universe. Such reasoning can help scientists understand the origin of the universe from God's Energy, transforming into a primary matter. I can only add that in the event of a Big Bang, something or someone had to start it, that is, actually "ignite" or "spark", which usually leads to the right explosion. It can be added here in a humorous form that its initiation required the "pulling out" of the Great Pin.
What was before the Big Bang is beyond time and space. It is the same with the Creator of the universe. If he created the universe, then he had to do it from behind a peculiar "curtain" that could be in our understanding of the Big Bang, that is, the transition from primary energy to matter. God himself, as well as the state existing before the Big Bang, cannot be identified with the help of our senses operating in the linear flow of time and in the three-dimensional space. From the "human" side we treat this "cosmic beginning" as the border between the world beyond time and space and the physical world. Meanwhile, from the point of view of the Creator, this phenomenon could "look" completely different. This, however, we will not find out.
From an earthly point of view, the rise of the universe may look like creating it out of nothing. The Big Bang also suggests this, since no one knows what his genesis was. Although it could happen, science cannot even ask what was before of it, that is, whether there was "something" or "nothing". This is because it does not have the right tools for it, as it is when attempting to identify God.
It is also worth adding that the Big Bang and the further creation of the universe proceeded according to existing and determinable laws and had a fairly systematic development process. This fact suggests the existence of a super-intelligent source guiding the processes of introducing the laws of astrophysics, Newtonian physics and quantum physics. The theory of accidental tangles of events seems to be unconvincing. I do not agree with the statement that the creation of the universe was a chain of uncontrolled coincidences.
Each explosion triggers the process of spreading its effects initiated by the source of the explosion. Its wave spreads in all directions, often significantly or even irreversibly transforming the surrounding space. Therefore, I agree with the fact that after the Big Bang the universe is constantly expanding. This is also logical in the case of identifying its beginning with the first act of the creative work of God. Systematic, consistent with the laws of physics, the development of the universe, which is still an ongoing process, indicates the intelligent laws and principles behind this progress. The Creator, having initiated His Work, is still active, contributing to the constant expansion of the cosmos. At the same time, nature is constantly expanding. People and their civilization are also developing. One can, therefore, be tempted to build the hypothesis that the Big Bang was the nucleus of the emergence of a constantly developing universe with the full participation of the Creator, who brought this well-developed Vision of the universe into this very early beginning. This Vision fills every smallest elemental particle of matter, every being, creation or essence, acting in the dimension of infinity.
In a perfect world (only the world knows the Creator) humanity had to develop science much more effectively, and also to multiply much faster than in the current civilization. Perhaps its number would it double every few decades. That would give billions of new inhabitants of the universe, who would gradually be able to inhabit the next planets existing in our galaxy. However, here the practical sense of this limited, or rather "earth-centric" vision ends. The human body is very delicate and lives relatively short. There is a technical problem of transporting people to distant places in space, if they wanted to physically find them there. Are the distances counted in millions of light years possible to overcome, even with the greatest achievements of science and technology, with a limited time of human life? Probably not. So there must be another solution. In my opinion, it is necessary to take into account the "divine" conception of the development of the universe, which the Creator has accepted for people. One is the aspect I will discuss below and the other one will be presented in the chapter on the spiritual world.
From the point of view of science, there is always a theoretical chance for the appearance of life somewhere in space. The universe consists of millions of galaxies, such as our Milky Way. There are millions of stars in every galaxy, such as the Sun. Numerous planets can circulate around these stars, just as they do in the Solar System. So we have millions of opportunities for the appearance of a planet similar to Earth. It must be only at the proper distance from the main star, not as close as Mercury or Venus and not too far, such as Mars or Jupiter. This distance is related to the possibility of creating the optimal temperature needed for the presence of liquid water, and thus for the development of life, as it happens on our planet. Of course, there must be an atmosphere around it containing oxygen and no poisonous gases.
The question remains whether these beneficial for the human life of the planet are still waiting to be settled. Or maybe the Creator also initiated civilizations similar to ours on them? It cannot be ruled out, it seems logical. It is difficult to believe that a huge space with such limitless possibilities would wait uninhabited just to someday, in millions of years, to take part of our only, tiny and lost in space civilization. Logically, it would be an unbelievable waste of the space and resources of the universe. In passing, it is worth noting that since the entire universe emerged from the One God, the inhabitants of such planet-like planets should be the same as us.
Currently, science is still correcting our views on the origin of the universe. In competition with religion, science comes out victorious wherever it is possible to physically carry out research and experiments and where religion unnecessarily tries to explain the secrets of the universe with the help of miracles and revelations. Unfortunately, science cannot prove the existence of God, since He is beyond the reach of its instruments. On the other hand, it cannot, for the same reasons, prove that God does not exist. These two areas should get closer to each other over time, but let them both develop in parallel and support each other.
So how did science last support religion?
Namely, it noticed the necessity of the so-called observer.
First, with the appearance of the atopic principle, which suggests an unusual and precise order in the universe, astrophysicists have noticed that only man is able to assess phenomena in a macro scale. In macrophysics, this observer, a man, a citizen of the universe, has to assess the uniqueness of the structures of all things, which, even with the slightest departure from the stability of laws and principles in space, would never exist. It means somehow the necessity of our existence, or the fact that we are indispensable in the universe. It can be understood in this way that the entire universe is for us, and without us it would not be possible to exist. For today, this conclusion is too shocking. However, the anthropic principle is already taken into account, as well as the thesis about the Big Bang, behind which the Creator can become.
Also, a certain need for the presence of an observer appeared in quantum physics in assessing whether the infinitesimal portions of matter or energy still have a corpuscular or wave structure. Translating in a simpler way, it is about whether they are still energy or just matter, or vice versa. This duality or uncertainty arises due to the use of research tools by the observer. Then, with the help of man, the structure of these entities is decided. This suggests the necessity of people who influence not only ordinary physical phenomena, but also participate in the active settlement of how certain micro- and macro-physical phenomena may occur. It may also suggest an answer to the question of why a human came into existence and why there should be a Main Observer of the universe, or its Creator.
In this study, I assumed the existence of God in every respect, perfect, eternal and absolute, that is, independent of nothing, and time or space. In fact, at the present level of human development, another concept of the Creator is no longer valid. Only God that is perfect, eternal, absolute and good at the same time has a meaning. Therefore, one cannot invent someone or something that is more perfect or more eternal from Him. The infinity reaching back is an unlimited state, with no immediate beginning. The same applies to its future and the absence of a definite end. It is a value that absolutely covers all concepts regarding the flow of time and so it should be accepted. Likewise, the matter is the endlessness of the cosmos, which is the visible side of God and which is the threshold for the transition beyond time and space. Both the infinity and the vastness of the universe escape the control of our reason functioning in three-dimensional space and the linear concept of time. Therefore, as part of learning about the Creator and the world beyond time and space, it is worth once again realizing that we cannot find something even more perfect than perfection or something even more infinite than the infinity discussed here.
This analysis is complemented by the chapter:
„God as the Source and the Beginning of All Things”