God vs. Stephen Hawking, a brilliant mind in a broken body
Some news trigger big series of thought. I had this one today and I have decided to write it down without any real purpose. Should you be curious enough to read it, you might as well want to start by the end.
When I was a child, I loved reading books about the story of our universe, the galaxies, the stars, the black holes, etc. My passion was not meant to end in studying physics, unfortunately (or fortunately). However it grounded in my mind a permanent taste for that type of fundamental questions I have had since then. Also I have always had a huge respect for the people that have tried, are trying or intend to figure them out for the humanity. One of them was Stephen Hawking.
Stephen Hawking passed away today. The first time I heard about him, about 10 years ago, I had just landed on a MSN article with a sound title: “A brilliant mind in a broken body”. What a strong contrast ! It teased my curiosity and after reading I was extremely shocked by how unfair life could seem, yes seem to be to people. While it is said everything happens for a reason, it might be better at time to escape from that belief.
As a fan of Hawking and as a believer, one of his numerous opinions on non scientific topics that impressed me the most was his opinion about the existence of God, in which he did not believe at all, which is well known. The interesting part is the rationale behind his opinion.
Stephen Hawking had a scientific approach on God’s existence question, though limited by time
Based on the fact that under the Big Bang theory even time did not exist prior to the Big Bang, Hawking claimed that nothing else could have existed before, be it even a God, since there was no time in which any existence would have been possible. So he concludes on the nonsense of believing from a pure scientific standpoint.
I am no expert, but the rationale seems pretty clear and straightforward. But but but… In any logical reasoning, every assertion ultimately relies on some fundamental assumption or set of assumption. In this particular case, the very nature of time is that assumption. Therefore, it’s good to know that even physicists agree that time is one of the most difficult properties of our universe to understand, which eventually make irrelevant any explanation based on the nature of time as long as we do not fully understand it yet.
Even in the most complex physical model, time is usually considered to be an ontologically basic or primary concept, and not made up of, or dependent on anything else. The so-called arrow of time refers to the one-way direction or asymmetry of time, which leads to the way we instinctively perceive time as moving forwards from the fixed and immutable past, through the present, towards the unknown and unfixed future. This idea has it roots in physics, particularly in the Second Law of Thermodynamics, although other, often related, arrows of time have also been identified. The truth might be different. Ever heard about relativistic time ? Time travel and its paradoxes ? How about quantum time ? You might be interested in checking these topics out right here: http://www.exactlywhatistime.com/physics-of-time/.
Understanding time and characterising God are necessary for a scientific approach on the question
We all have a shared perception of what time is and knowledge of how to measure it. But what is it exactly in essence ? How to define it at a fundamental level ? Why does it flows ? Can it flow slower of faster ? Does it make sense to talk of a speed of time ? Does it has only one dimension - the so-called arrow or time - or many ? Is that dimension finite or infinite ? Do time exist in space, or space exist in time ? What exactly is their relationship in the universe ? While some of these questions might already have scientific answers in some theories, it changes nothing to the intellectual pleasure of just taking time to think about what the real answer could be.
To come back to the topic of the existence of God(s), my personal opinion is that if he exists, he did not create the universe out of a dice game, and therefore the rules he used to do so are exactly the vast amount of knowledge science is scratching centuries after centuries, such that there is eventually no contradiction between science and God’s existence. As we live and die and no one can say and demonstrate what happens next, probably the answer to the question of the nature of time is the key to an acceptable scientific theory about the existence of God(s).
Last thing is that what we can call a God has to be scientifically defined. I mean, would an alien with super powers far beyond human understanding be considered a God ? Is God an abstract model of something, or a physical reality ?
May Stephen Hawking rest in peace.