Physics, Not God, Explains the Universe? | The Institute for Creation Research

Physics, Not God, Explains the Universe?

"With the laws of physics, you can get universes," said Alex Filippenko of the University of California, Berkeley, during a panel discussion at the June 23 SETICon 2 science and science fiction conference in Santa Clara, California.1 He argued that the universe could have begun as a result of a random "quantum mechanical fluctuation."1

Filippenko implies that we should not trust in God. "Instead, scientists say, we should trust the laws of physics."1 But many scientists suggest that the laws of physics lead to trust in God, not from it. Which is right?

Physicist Jake Hebert recently showed fatal flaws in this increasingly common "universe from nothing" argument, as described by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss in his 2012 book, A Universe from Nothing. In Hebert's Acts & Facts article, he first explained that the "argument hinges on the claim that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero," an extraordinarily unlikely sum.2 And since nobody but God knows the exact energy content of the entire universe, the claim is entirely unscientific.

Second, and more critically, quantum fluctuations are only known to occur within space that already exists. How would the first universe-generating fluctuation occur without space, and how could that space be there without a universe already in place? It appears that in order to make a universe this way, another universe must already exist. In that case, how did the first universe begin—or the one before that?

Hebert also noted logical problems. For example, the assertion that the universe came from nothing assumes pre-existence of the very laws of physics that can supposedly generate universes. Filippenko began to address this by saying, "The question, then, is, 'Why are there laws of physics?' And you could say, 'Well, that required a divine creator, who created these laws of physics and the spark that led from the laws of physics to these universes, maybe more than one.'"1

But instead of accepting his own argument for a "divine creator," Filippenko objected that one would still need to explain where that creator came from, and where the creator of that creator came from, and so on. This is a thin smokescreen, since the ultimate Creator of the laws of physics and/or the finite universe would of necessity not be finite. Only finite entities like universes or people require causes, because only they have beginnings. A "beginningless" or infinite Creator did not come from anything else since He always was and is.3

Filippenko and like-minded scientists ignore the necessity of pre-existing space for quantum fluctuations to occur, ignore logical problems in obtaining laws of physics from nothing, and ignore the nature of God, all in the name of justifying their faith that the universe could come from nothing. In reality, without an infinite Creator, not only would there be no laws of physics that point sinful people to his existence, but there would be no universe at all.4

References

  1. Wall, M. The Big Bang Didn't Need God to Start Universe, Researchers Say. Space.com. Posted June 24, 2012, accessed June 29, 2012.
  2. Hebert, J. 2012. A Universe from Nothing? Acts & Facts. 41 (7): 11-13.
  3. Such a Creator would be identified as Jesus in Colossians 1; see esp. verses 15-17.
  4. Thomas, B. New Book Says Universe Came from Nothing. ICR News. Posted on icr.org January 20, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.

Image credit: NASA

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on July 11, 2012.

The Latest
NEWS
Remembering Patti Morse
But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from...

CREATION PODCAST
What Happened with Washington's Violent Volcano? | The Creation...
How did a 1980 volcanic eruption change our understanding of geology? What impact did this event have on the age assignments of sediments? Join us for...

NEWS
Fossil Insect Predation Shows No Evidence of Evolution
Some recent science news stories have come out describing fossils of insects feeding on plants supposedly many “millions of years ago.” What...

NEWS
Adaptive Genetic and Epigenetic Changes in Plants
Being sedentary organisms, plants are essentially stuck where they are planted and need to dynamically adapt to the conditions around them to not only...

NEWS
Dr. Tim Clarey Awarded Adjunct Professor of the Year
Congratulations to ICR Research Scientist and geologist Dr. Tim Clarey! He received the Adjunct Professor of the Year award from King’s University,...

NEWS
Mars Rover Records Dramatic Solar Eclipse
NASA’s Mars Perseverance rover has filmed the Martian satellite (or moon) Phobos eclipsing the sun, and this short but impressive video may be viewed...

CREATION PODCAST
Darwin or Design? CET Pt. 2 | The Creation Podcast: Episode 22
How does design provide a better explanation for biological functions and adaptations than natural selection? And how can engineering principles help...

NEWS
Resurrecting “Ancient” Enzymes?
The most abundant protein on Earth is probably an enzyme (biological catalyst) called RuBisCO (or Rubisco) designed by the Creator to function in photosynthesis.1...

NEWS
Inside May-June 2022 Acts & Facts
How can Christians stand up to scientific elitism? What does the plant fossil record in Iceland tell us about the global Flood? Does a new bacterium...

ACTS & FACTS
Creation Kids: Grand Canyon
by Christy Hardy and Susan Windsor* You’re never too young to be a creation scientist! Kids, discover fun facts about God’s creation...