The Science of Theoretical Physics is seeking a Holy Grail. It's
that single, easily applicable, "theory of everything" that explains how
the universe got here and how it works. Why do we need a single theory?
The E = MC2 theory breaks down in the micro world of sub-atomic
particles. In the 1980s the answer was String Theory. String theories avoid
problems associated with the presence of point-like particles in
quantum physics. String Theory is a set of models of fundamental physics whose
building blocks are one-dimensional extended objects (strings)
rather than the zero-dimensional points. Huh? Don't worry about it, because the
new thought is that string theory is flawed too. Even the
"super strings" are out of vogue. The big wrestle is now between Supergravity
and Supersymetry. More on that some other time.
Einstein said boldly: "God doesn't play dice with the
universe." In quantum mechanics, many events look like they happen by
absolutely random
chance. Einstein believed these events had causes even though the causes were,
at that time, known only to God. This "causal" idea had no chance
of prospering in the face of the theory of Macro-Evolution. Random chance
leading to forward leaps in higher order and improvement are the heart of
evolution as it's taught today.
That's how leading physicists at England's Cambridge
University have started calling the universe a giant casino. The idea is that
the
larger the bet placed the more it might hurt the casino operator, but in reality
most bets are small and the odds of winning are tilted against
the small time gambler. In respect to the universe they are asking us to believe
that, since every other improvement known to us happened through
the random chance of evolution, it's a good bet (pardon the pun) to believe that
the Big Bang itself had no cause. It was a chance happening.
I like these Cambridge guys. They are consistent in the message in which they
ask you to place your faith.
Its only when they seek to be "scientific" in their
support of their faith statement that things go awry. For example, Stephen
Hawking,
in his new book, The Universe in a Nutshell, has some very entertaining
mental gymnastics. He takes us first to the concept of real numbers.
That's when you draw a line. Place zero in the middle and all the way to the
right you put one to infinity. Then on the left you place minus one
and all the way in the other direction. Hawking now adds the mathematical
concept of imaginary numbers. That's where you draw a line up and down on
the zero and add positive and negative numbers there. Mathematicians get very
animated if you say imaginary numbers are only in their heads. They
argue that imaginary numbers enable us to take square roots of negative numbers.
You can't do that if you limit yourself to real numbers. Why us
ordinary folks need the root of a negative number we don't yet know. You even
get complex numbers when you add a real number to an imaginary
number. Not many carpenters are using these!
Back to how the universe began. Stephen suggests we do the
same thing with time that the math guys did with numbers. Let's add "imaginary
time" to our consideration of the universe's past. He admits that these aren't
real seconds, hours and years, but rather "a mathematical
construct." He says we must take a positive view of these theories even when
they explain "effects we've not been able to plot or measure and yet
nevertheless believe in for other reasons." If I hear Hawking right he's saying
that in imaginary time we don't need a cause for the big bang and
thus have a universe arising out of the spin of the cosmic casino wheel.
The Bible says that once you've decided not to glorify God, your thinking
"becomes futile and your foolish heart is darkened." IQ seems to be no
exception!