Re: virus: Does God really exist?
Thu, 22 Aug 96 13:48:13 BST

>> As for "a creation implies a creator," that's
>> tautological but not helpful, because we have no reason other
>> than habit to think of the universe as a "creation."
> Most scientists agree on the "big bang" theory. In such a scenario, the
> universe is a creation of the big bang; thus, the universe must have a
> creator. Because this creator must be outside of the universe, any ideas
> about the nature of god are creations from our minds. It's therefore
> much more interesting to look at the _reasons_ a religion exists than to
> determine if the religion accurately describes god.

Although the "big bang" theory is the most well known, and possibly the most
likely theory about the beginning of the universe, it is by no means definate.
Just as I sposke of telepathy in my last email, it is just a theory, and
we don't know enough to say it actually happened.

Another theory suggests that the universe is cyclic, that is, it has always
existed, and when it (if it) ceases to expand, it will begin to contract, and
will reduce in size, BUT, it will not end in the "big crunch". Instead,
it will reach a minimum size, and then start to expand again, but in the
opposite direction to the last time, due to gravitational acceleration giving
each particle sufficient momentum to continue in a straight line. This is
difficult to explain in words, so I'll try and illustrate:

Particle 1
Particle 2 * Particle 3
Particle 4

* represents the common centre (ie, the place where the big crunch would take


Particle 4
Particle 3 * Particle 2
Particle 1

That probably doesn't make any more sense, but you never know! What's happened
is that all the particles have swapped places, relative to their original
position - this could carry on for all eternity, as within the system no
energy can be lost due to the conservation of energy theory - and as there are
no forces other than gravity involved, no energy can be lost to systems such
as friction or heat.

This then, causes a slight problem with the theory that if there is a creation, there is a creator. As this model of the universe is theoretically infinite
is its time span (which is a subjective concept anyway), then the creator of
such a system would have to be older than infinity, which is not possible.
The concept of infinity is nigh on impossible for the human brain (well mine
anyway) to comprehend, and so this makes discussion more difficult. This refers
back to an email a wrote a little while ago, asserting that it is impossible
to say whether God exists or not, because we don't know enough about his nature.
If we knew how the universe was going to evolve, then it would eliminate one of
the questions that prohibits us from knowing if God really exists. Until that
point, though, we can never know.

In such a system above, the only scope for the existance of God is if he
(apologies to all the ladies, but we don't know what gender God would be, and
"he" is a term that is more commonly used) were external to the universe
within which we live. As has already been discussed, if God is external to the
universe, he can have no direct involvement in it, and thus all religion is
baseless - no matter what you say or do, it will make no difference to the
final outcome, because all contact is impossible. If the universe were created
by the "big bang" though, I think that this creator need not necessarily
be outside the universe, as he was there at the beginning.

In the infinite universe model, God cannot have been there at the begining
as there was none.

One final thought to ponder. If God in omnipotent, then is it possible for
him to create a rock that is so heavy that he cannot lift it?

It's an old one I know, but I havn't been able to think of a satisfactory
answer, and I don't think there really is one, but if you have an idea, then
tell me about it.


Richard Jones
"Be there no man who is pure in the heart, and speaks in prayer by night.
May become the wolf when the wolfsbane blooms, and the winter moon is bright"