Stephen Hawking in the beginning of his book, “A Brief History of Time,” relates a story he believes originated with the scientist-philosopher Bertrand Russell, who once fielded an interesting question asked by an elderly woman after finishing a lecture he gave on astronomy:
“He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: “What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise.” The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, “What is the tortoise standing on.” “You’re very clever, young man, very clever,” said the old lady. “But it’s turtles all the way down!”[1]
The woman’s question was actually based on the ancient Hindu myth where the world was once thought to rest on the backs of four elephants, which in turn stand on the shell of a turtle! Bertrand Russell in his book, “Why I am not a Christian,” writes: “It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu’s view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, “How about the tortoise?” the Indian said, “Suppose we change the subject . . .” And who says philosophers don’t have a good sense of humor?
Are today’s physicists arriving at a similar conclusion?
The prospect of discovering of the Higgs-Boson particle, better known as the “God Particle,” by scientists working at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Bern, Switzerland has created much excitement in the news. The elusive Higgs-Boson particle is one of the fundamental building blocks of matter. Give credit to the Nobel Prize winning scientist Leon Lederman, for coming up with a better name than the “Higgs boson.” “God Particle” is certainly pretty enticing to the imagination. I plan to read his 2006 best seller, “The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?” over the few weeks. Besides being smart, Lederman also knows how to sell books.
I find the conversations between scientists and theologians quite exciting. The physics of the this newest discovery are complicated. Besides, I never had aspirations to become a physicist. But from what little I have tried to conceptually glean, I can say that the existence of particles invisibly existing apart from mass is breathtaking. Ordinarily, one might think that items endowed with mass tend to be perceived as more “real,” than things that are bereft of mass, but such an assumption is now scientifically unwarranted. The Higgs boson is regarded as a “fundamental” particle; one of the vital building blocks that make up our universe. Physicists think it is the last missing piece in the leading theory of particle physics which describes how particles and forces interact.
All of this sounds pretty mystical to me; science can be as esoteric as any text of the Kabbalah. Actually, many of the Jewish mystics have candidly referred to God as the “Holy Nothing,” because God is not an object one can physically point to. Both Maimonides and the philosopher Alfred Ayers would probably agree about the “nonsense,” concerning God-because God is beyond our senses. One wonders what will these physicists discover next? Will they someday discover that the God Particle is in itself made up of something even more ethereal and abstract? Has the God Particle always existed? How will this discovery impact the way we look at the universe and at ourselves? Here is another more perplexing question: Are we the first species in the universe to even notice that the God Particle exists? If we are, then what does this say about the nature of human consciousness and its possible uniqueness in the universe? If we are not the only entities in the universe, can some older extraterrestrial race of beings kindly explain, “What the heck is going on?” Maybe one of them can write a book called, “The God Particle for Idiots,” which I would certainly rush to buy despite the title.
On NPR Radio, I found the comments of the atheist scientist to be especially enlightening. He marveled at the intellectual achievement of these men as a triumph for rational thought and not religion. The atheist scientist makes a valid point. I would just ask a simple question, “Is it not amazing that the human mind and the Logos (to borrow the famous term from the pre-Socratic philosopher, Heraclitus) of the universe both communicate (so to speak) through the language of mathematics?” For a theistic person like me, this reality has profound religious implications.
British theologian Keith Ward offers a perspective that is important to our discussion. “The cosmos not only springs from a Supreme Consciousness: it is destined to produce beings that will relate in knowledge and in cooperative action to that Consciousness. . . . The cosmos must be such that it will produce beings of awareness, intention, a sense of transcendence, and the possibility of conscious union with God.”[2]
Ward’s interpretation adds new meaning to the passage, “From my flesh I see God” (Job 19:26). By contemplatively gazing into the inner processes of the human mind, we may come to the novel recognition that we perceive only the outer manifestation and presence of a deeper hidden reality that can be seen in such scientific epiphanies as the God Particle. This commingling of the human and cosmic consciousness (as evidenced through the language of mathematics) illustrates that our minds correspond to a Universal Mind that has made the universe wonderfully comprehensible to our puny brains. Indeed, this innate sharing and purposeful commingling of the human and Divine Consciousness constitute from the religious perspective, one of the greatest miracles of all Creation.
In the words of the prophet, we find a most relevant passage to our discussion about the God Particle, “Lift up your eyes on high and see: Who has created these?” (Isaiah 40:26).[3] When the ancient biblical writers beheld the awe-inspiring complexity of the universe, they probably wondered: Why is there something rather than nothing? Why is there an order manifested in the cosmos? How did it get there when it did not have to be there? Who gave it when it did not have to be given? Why am I even capable of conceptually expressing this immense mystery? More specifically, why do I even exist? Philosopher Martin Heidegger rightly observed that this is the most basic question of philosophy.[4] Although Einstein did not believe in an anthropomorphic deity that is taught by most of the Western religions, he did come to realize that God is an artist of sorts-a God of Mystery-much more grand than the human mind can possibly fathom:
- The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed. It was the experience of mystery–even if mixed with fear—that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, our perceptions of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which only in their most primitive forms are accessible to our minds—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute true religiosity; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man.[5]
Physicist Harold Schilling offers a deeply profound understanding of the term “mystery” that is reminiscent of contemplative silence. By the term mystery, Schilling explains:
- [I]t does not mean an unsolved puzzle or a gap in our knowledge. Rather, the notion of mystery refers to something that is inherently unknowable and inexplicable. No amount of knowledge can ever diminish or eliminate the sense of mystery. On the contrary, our desire to grasp the nature of the cosmic mystery is only intensified as our knowledge of it expands with each scientific discovery. In religious terms, the sense of mystery we experience when gazing at the heavens is the source of all wonder, and is the bedrock of true worship and devotion.”[6]
Perhaps Schilling’s perceptive point is something that both theistic and atheistic minded people can all agree upon. Creation spirituality revolves around the kind of existential question that point toward these ultimate issues and concerns. Indeed, for most people, the beauty of science is probably better conveyed through the imagery of poetry and religion than it is through the discursive idiom of mathematics. Continue Reading
