Physics Evidence for God Awana March 17, 2013 Allen Hainline
Reasonable Faith UTD www.OriginsDiscussion.info
Slide 2
Can Science Disprove God? Suppose that there were no scientific
evidence for God, would that disprove His existence? No! strong
evidence for God beyond science Philosophical argument (morality,
Leibnizian etc.) Fulfilled prophecies Miracles Religious experience
But some claim science is only source of knowledge
Slide 3
Can All Knowledge Be Scientific? What is wrong with these
claims? Dont believe in anything you cant perceive with your 5
senses If you cant verify something scientifically you cant know it
They are self-refuting! Like saying No English sentence is longer
than 3 words These claims cannot be verified by our senses or
science Science itself assumes logic and mathematics are valid but
these cannot be proven scientifically 3
Slide 4
Are science and Christianity at war? No historians of science
reject warfare metaphor Science birthed out of Christian culture
Science studies only nature Generally assumes nothing supernatural
happens Inability to detect supernatural based primarily on
assumptions Hard in principle to show nothing exists beyond nature
by studying nature Do we expect science to detect God creating now?
No, were in the 7 th day the day of rest Is there tension at some
points? Yes, primarily related to statements in Bible
Slide 5
Points of Conflict between Bible and Science 5 Science
ThenScience NowBible Earth held up by elephants or by the Greek God
Atlas Earth surrounded by empty space in its orbit He hangs the
earth on nothing Job 26:7 Water flows into the ocean only through
rivers and rainfall Springs in the ocean were discovered in the
1970s Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea? Job 38:16 Ocean
floor assumed flatOcean floor contains deep valleys and mountains
Ocean floor contains deep valleys & mountains (2 Sam 22:16,
Jonah 2:6) Sick people must be bledBlood brings oxygen and
nutrients to sustain cells Life of the flesh is in the blood Lev
17:11 Did not understand importance of washing with running water
Washing with running water critical to washing off bacteria When
dealing with disease, wash hands with running water Lev 15:11 Did
not understand need for sanitary practices (e.g. Bubonic plague !)
Critical to minimizing spread of diseases Quarantining, burying
human waste, hyssop as antibacterial agent Lev. 13:45-6; Deut
23:12-13 Air weightlessAir has weightAir has weight (Job
28:25)
Slide 6
Christian View of Origins Even in early 20 th century, many
scientists believed universe was eternal and static Even in early
20 th century, many scientists believed universe was eternal and
static Bible claimed that: Bible claimed that: Universe created out
of nothing (Gen 1:1, Heb 11:3) Even time had a beginning Bible
claims God existed before time began (Titus 1:2, Jude 24) Bible
claims God existed before time began (Titus 1:2, Jude 24) 6
Slide 7
Cosmological Argument for Gods Existence 1.Whatever begins to
exist has a cause 2.The universe began to exist 3.Therefore, the
universe has a cause Science has shown that even space and time had
a beginning Cause must be outside of time, space, matter; extremely
powerful Cause must be outside of time, space, matter; extremely
powerful Can anyone think of a being that fits this description?
7
Slide 8
Consensus Science: Universe had a beginning Vilenkin: "All the
evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning. With the
proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the
possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they
have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning. With the proof now
in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of
a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the
problem of a cosmic beginning. Even time and space cannot be
extended into eternal past Even time and space cannot be extended
into eternal past BVG Theorem Independent of whether or not Big
Bang model is accurate
Slide 9
Fine-Tuning of Universe Our universe and its laws appear to
have a design that both is tailor-made to support us and, if we are
to exist, leaves little room for alteration. Stephen Hawking "The
really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a
knife-edge, and would be total chaos if any of the natural
'constants' were off even slightly. - Dr. Paul Davies, Physicist
ASU
Slide 10
Our Universe is Finely-Tuned Among possible universes, only a
tiny fraction would permit life Finely-Tuned in 3 Aspects Laws
Fundamental constants of laws Initial conditions If anyone claims
not to be surprised by the special features that the universe has,
he is hiding his head in the sand. These special features are
surprising and unlikely. David Deutch (Oxford Physicist, Fellow of
Royal Society)
Slide 11
Fine-Tuning of Gravity If gravity can vary up to strong nuclear
force strength: If stronger by 1 in 10 34, stars burn out too fast
for life If stronger by 1 in 10 36, stars implode If stronger by 1
in 10 40, universe dominated by black holes not stars If weaker by
1 in 10 36, stars lose material to radiation pressure If too weak,
no stars or planets possible It is an unexplained miracle that
gravity is as weak as it is Susskind Multiple finely-tuned
life-permitting criteria make it look even more rigged
Slide 12
1 chance in 10 36 is equivalent to Color one tiny grain of sand
red Mix it in sandpile in Eurasia up to 5 times the height of moon
Randomly select the 1 red grain of sand Comprehending the
Fine-Tuning
Slide 13
Initial Conditions Finely-Tuned Oxford Physicist Roger Penrose
computed probability for our universe to begin in such an ordered
state Fine-tuned to 1 in 10 to power of 10 123 Writing number out
requires more 0s than particles in universe Writing number out
requires more 0s than particles in universe This number tells us
how precise the Creators aim must have been This number tells us
how precise the Creators aim must have been Much more improbable
than 1 monkey typing out all writings in human history in a
particular order Much more improbable than 1 monkey typing out all
writings in human history in a particular order Otherwise universe
dominated by black holes!
Slide 14
Argument for Gods Existence Based on Fine-Tuning 1.Fine-tuning
due to law, chance or design 2.Not Due to Law 3.Not Due to Chance
4.Therefore the fine-tuning is due to design The most plausible
Designer at this fundamental level is God Argument doesnt require
that universe has maximum amount of life
Slide 15
Could Life Originate From Non-Life Apart from a Creator? Most
scientists admit no plausible naturalistic scenario exists A
scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and
natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not
faith has not been written. Hubert Yockey The formation of the
first life is viewed as a chance process that occurred in spite of
minuscule odds such as 1:10 300 and which is accepted only because
we are here. Christian Schwabe Evolutionist Eugene Koonin puts odds
at 1 in 10 1018 No one has an adequate materialistic explanation
for how life arose Dawkins Atheists cannot appeal to biological
evolution for the origin of lifeAtheists cannot appeal to
biological evolution for the origin of life Pre-biological natural
selection is a contradiction in terms Dobzhansky Simplest organism
has at least 400 proteins Odds of finding a single functional
protein by chance is 1 in 10 63 among possible proteins of length
100Odds of finding a single functional protein by chance is 1 in 10
63 among possible proteins of length 100 $1,000,000.00 is offered
to anyone who can provide a plausible theory
http://www.us.net/life/http://www.us.net/life/
Slide 16
Evidence for God from Origin of Life For biological evolution
that is governed primarily by natural selection to take off,
efficient systems for replication and [making proteins] are
required, but even barebones cores of these systems appear to be
products of extensive selection. Eugene KooninFor biological
evolution that is governed primarily by natural selection to take
off, efficient systems for replication and [making proteins] are
required, but even barebones cores of these systems appear to be
products of extensive selection. Eugene Koonin Koonin describes a
dreary vicious circle: what would be the selective force behind the
evolution of [a system making proteins] before there were
functional proteins? And, of course, there could be no proteins
without [it]Koonin describes a dreary vicious circle: what would be
the selective force behind the evolution of [a system making
proteins] before there were functional proteins? And, of course,
there could be no proteins without [it] Estimates chance of natural
processes in our universe producing a self-replicating cell as 1
chance in 10 1018Estimates chance of natural processes in our
universe producing a self-replicating cell as 1 chance in 10
1018
Slide 17
Origin of Life: Evidence for God? A single simple bacteria has
the information content of an Encyclopedia 250 billion fit into a
single teaspoon (information content of 20 stacks of Encyclopedia
copies piled up to the moon) Simplest known organism has at least
400 proteins Ratio of functional to non functional proteins was 10
-63 for one 100 amino acids long (Robert Sauer, MIT) Leading theory
(RNA World) still requires enormous complexity to get first
self-replicating 17
Slide 18
Origin of Life Problems Cant form long chains of the right kind
of molecules All speculation on the origin of life on Earth by
chance cannot survive the first criterion of life: proteins are
left- handed, sugars in DNA and RNA are right-handed. Yockey Right
and left-handed versions of amino acids credit NASA
Slide 19
Current leading theory for the origin of life is compared to a
golfer, who having played a golf ball through an 18-hole course,
then assumed that the ball could also play itself around the course
in his absence. He had demonstrated the possibility of the event;
it was only necessary to presume that some combination of natural
forces (earthquakes, winds, tornadoes and floods, for example)
could produce the same result, given enough time. No physical law
need be broken Robert Shapiro (Origin of Life expert)
Slide 20
Questions
Slide 21
Origin of Free Will and Consciousness Our scientific knowledge
in these areas is more consistent with what is expected if God
exists than if atheism is true Basically science has no clue Some
have argued that these are impossible if naturalism is true Thus
they would have to be merely illusions But an illusion is itself a
conscious state to be explained Suppose a naturalistic explanation
is found Would at best become yet another case of fine-tuning These
properties are extremely rare among possible physics Theyre
unnecessary for life and wouldnt be favored by evolution We expect
God to bestow these on creatures made in His image What purpose
does consciousness serve if there is no free will?
Slide 22
Different interpretations of Gen exist Im not trying here to
argue for a particular interpretation on age but if you become
convinced from science of an old universe this should not be seen
as evidence against the Bible Not a lot of predictions or details
but there are some Bible aims to teach us about God not
science
Slide 23
Lifes Minimum Complexity Of all the problems with the
hypothesis that life started as nude replicating RNA molecules, the
one I find most insurmountable is the one most rarely talked about:
all living things seem to have a minimal complexity below which it
is impossible to go. Stuart Kauffman Life must harness energy, grow
and reproduce All life is cellular: no evidence for other life
forms Even simplest cell more complex than ever envisioned Simplest
organisms: Non-parasitic (~1500 genes), Parasitic (~470 genes) A
minimum set of cell features is irreducibly complex Replication
System Translation System (Manufacture proteins) Cell membrane -
critical to selectively allow in nutrients, protect cell Without
any of these the cell dies
Slide 24
24 Can Science Point to God? What should count as evidence for
God? What should count as evidence for God? Evidence should be
based on knowledge not ignorance Avoids God of the Gaps Avoids God
of the Gaps Shouldnt call it a gap just because science might
change Shouldnt call it a gap just because science might change Its
not a gap if well supported by current science Avoid Naturalism of
the Gaps Minimal details revealed about the supernatural Minimal
details revealed about the supernatural Is it still important? Is
it still important?
Slide 25
Who Made God? Question assumes everything must have a cause
Theists claim only that what begins to exist must be caused Most
philosophers historically have accepted this Atheists such as
Bertrand Russell posited a self-existent universe that did not need
to have been created or explained! Cosmological arguments point by
deduction to something eternally existent that brings about the
first cause An infinite regress of physical causes is impossible in
a finite universe We now know that matter, space and time are not
eternal So the question is like asking Who caused the uncaused
first cause ? A created God is not even a coherent concept 25
Slide 26
Has Science Disproven God? Science is not in business of
proving things Science studies the natural world God, if he exists,
is beyond nature Methodological Naturalism limits science to
searching for natural causes Leads to a blind spot Cannot
distinguish between a research problem and a paradigm problem Does
science intersect with religion at all?
Slide 27
Intersection of Science and Christianity Science could show
problems with certain interpretations of Scripture Our ability to
interpret the Bible and the natural world is imperfect Some
occasional tension is expected If unambiguous clear scientific
error in Bible, at most that would pose a problem for inerrancy At
most science could indicate a lack of evidence for God from the
natural world God could have chosen solely to use philosophical
arguments, historical evidence, religious experience Science doesnt
say anything, scientists do Implications beyond science domain is
highly subjective is Minimal Science Chr.
Slide 28
Genesis may not be teaching a young earth Hebrew word for day
(yom) can also literally mean long time periods Day of Lord
represents long period of time in other verses Hebrews 4 indicates
God still in the seventh day of rest Other verses suggest long time
period I Chronicles 16:15, Deut 7:9, Psa 105:8 refer to 1000
generations Genesis account itself points to this interpretation
Gen 2:4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they
were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven
Many Biblical scholars hold to inerrancy and old ages Norm Geisler,
Lee Strobel, Chip Ingram, John Piper Not just a reaction to modern
scientific theories Interpretation of many early rabbis and church
fathers Philo, Irenaeus, Origen, Basil, Augustine Representing 1 st
through 5 th century 28
Slide 29
Is an Old Earth Biblical? Sailhammer/Piper proposes Gen 1
refers only to setting up Promised Land After v.1 which refers to
the entire creation long before the other verses Sees day as
24-hours but earth and universe are ancient! Sees Garden of Eden as
being in future promised land Many verses suggestive of an old
earth: The ancient mountains crumbled and the age-old hills
collapsed. Hab 3:6 But they deliberately forget that long ago by
Gods word the heavens came into being 2 Peter 3:5a Does this verse
have force if heavens only created a few 24-hour days prior to
people? Word commanded to a thousand generations Psa 105:8b I
Chronicles 16:15 and Deut 7:9 also refer to 1000 generations Not
that I think this necessarily refers literally to 1000 generations
but someone who interprets things in a wooden literal fashion has
to deal with these passages Genealogies not intended to provide
chronology Inconsistencies reveal that gaps exist
intentionally
Slide 30
What about conflict of Evolution? earth brought forth in Gen 1
could be taken to imply a natural process involved Evolution
population level so full evol. Would entail no Adam and Eve Really
only the unguided Darwinian version poses any threat to
Christianity at all A single act of intervention by God to create
Adam and Eve (with a soul) would resolve this Im personally
skeptical of Darwinism but more for scientific than theological
reasons
Slide 31
Who alone stretches out the heavens Job 9:8 And by His
understanding He stretched out the heavens. Jer 10:12, 51:15 The
LORD who stretches out the heavens Zech 12:1 Isaiah 40:22, 42:5,
44:24, 45:12, 48:13, 51:13 Most of these verses use the Qal active
participle form of the Hebrew verb natah Form literally means the
stretcher out of them (the heavens) Implies continual or ongoing
stretching 31 Bible indicates God Stretches out the heavens
Slide 32
Expansion of the Universe Until 20 th century no science or
religious books claimed universe was expanding Except for the Bible
Einstein added a fudge factor to his equations hoping to maintain a
static universe Later called this his greatest blunder Science now
knows the fabric of space is being stretched About 10 years ago
scientists learned that the universe is accelerating in its
expansion Expanding isn't really the best word A more accurate word
for what the universe is doing might be stretching Cornell
University web site 32
Slide 33
What about Conflicts between Science and Naturalism? Origins
Issue ScienceNaturalistic Response UniverseUniverse not eternal
(BVG + 2 nd Law) - Includes time and space Maybe something can come
from nothing after all? (But nothing != Quantum vacuum) Initial
conditions of universe Chances universes initial conditions would
support life (1 in 10 10 123 ) Atheist Sean Carroll: Why would God
have finely-tuned the universe so beyond what is necessary? (To
leave evidence of creation) Fine-tuning of laws and constants
Miniscule changes to each of 4 fundamental forces or certain
particle masses or other constants would result in a lifeless
universe Vast numbers of other universes coupled with widely
varying laws (Zero empirical evidence for either) LifeNo plausible
naturalistic theory occurred in spite of minuscule odds such as
1:10 300 and which is accepted only because we are here. Schwabe
(Circular reasoning) Diversity of Life Microevolution + roughly
increasing levels of complexity in fossil record over time
Evolution is as proven as gravity (To prove naturalistic evolution
one has to show whatever happened was not particularly improbable)
Consciousness and free will No account for originConsciousness and
free will may be illusions; We just need more time (Popper:
promissory materialism: imagined evidence is not evidence!) Note
that Naturalism is falsified unless it accounts for all origins
issues
Slide 34
Atheist Thomas Nagels Honest Appraisal [D]oubts about the
reductionist account of life go against the dominant scientific
consensus, but that consensus faces problems of probability that I
believe are not taken seriously enough, both with respect to the
evolution of life forms through accidental mutation and natural
selection and with respect to the formation from dead matter of
physical systems capable of such evolution. It is no longer
legitimate simply to imagine a sequence of gradually evolving
phenotypes, as if their appearance through mutations in the DNA
were unproblematic -- as Richard Dawkins does for the evolution of
the eye. From recent book Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-
Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False
Slide 35
More Nagel Quotes I believe the defenders of intelligent design
deserve our gratitude for challenging a scientific world view that
owes some of the passion displayed by its adherents precisely to
the fact that it is thought to liberate us from religion. That
worldview is ripe for displacement.... the problems that these [ID
advocates] pose should be taken seriously. They do not deserve the
scorn with which they are commonly met. It is manifestly unfair.
Thomas Nagel in Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian
Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly Wrong
Slide 36
Can Science Detect the Supernatural? Sober, Dawkins, etc. think
yes I dont think it is a good idea to mix science and religion at
all Different disciplines Keep religion (and anti-religion) out of
science classroom and text books Philosophy and other avenues can
and should critique religion and atheism using science
Slide 37
Can Science Detect Design?
Slide 38
Scientists routinely infer design Search for Extra-Terrestrial
Intelligence (signal or noise?) Archaeology (rock or artifact?)
Forensics (murder or accident?) Unwritten rule: evaluation of
design scientific unless only candidate designer seems to be God
Does Design Imply God? Important to include arguments that go
beyond science to make the God vs. E.T. case Would God have done
things that way? Which God? Science too narrow of a discipline to
evaluate Need philosophy and theology