The first time I read “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking, I was grossly offended at his denials of God, yet later I saw, reflections of the word of God in so many places. I was first lent a copy of the book. Later I bought my own copy but what I am pointing out now about sub-atomic particles was one of several sections that were removed in the later edition, presumably to make way for the new ideas on String Theories.
But I also want to acknowledge Stephen Hawking. Whatever his personal struggle to see God in all his research, in my mind Stephen has done more scientifically or mathematically to prove God exists than any scientist in history, though neither he or those that follow his lead, seem to see it themselves. I know there are some excellent scientists who do believe in God and attempt to demonstrate the faults in current science and show a scientific basis for biblical history. Stephen’s work, if not first, has popularised the acceptance of the birth of a Universe in a blaze of light – the Bible page 1 chapter 1 verse 3. Recent research has been forced to acknowledge that man cannot know it all – only an observer outside the universe. He has made it scientifically acceptable to introduce naturally impossible concepts like “inflation” into the Big Bang model so that anyone with eyes to see should accept that a supernatural power was a work. Reading his book I see brilliance and also a humility – ready to acknowledge where he was wrong. I pray to God for his physical health as well as his eyes to be opened to see God not as a remote observer that we cannot know, but as close and interacting with His children.
In the chapter on sub-atomic particles Stephen was talking with awe about sub-sub-atomic particles with their varying properties of spin and symmetry and fractional charge, and then he made this assertion. That if any one of these particles was to change any one of its properties in any way, the whole universe would disintegrate; not a blinding flash of light; not a puff of smoke; just gone.
Later it came to me that scientists and mathematicians create laws or axioms. These are fundamental truths that cannot be derived from simpler truths. In a manner of speaking, “They are this way because that’s the way it is.” Now God says, “It’s this way because I say it’s this way”. (Not a Bible quote just self-evident. Biblically God sustains the universe by the power of His word. Hebrews 1:2-3)
So when God’s purposes with this universe are finished, it is obvious that He only has to say the word and it will simply be gone (Luke 21:33), leaving only His Heaven and the Lake of Fire. So why do I mention this now? I don’t know, maybe I just got off the track. Perhaps you need to understand what Jesus is saving you from and restoring you to. Perhaps you need to know the End as well as the Beginning. Or perhaps it is just a different filter running the same data.
Actually, when you look into it, there is a whole range of cosmic parameters and you find that if anyone is tweaked by ever so little then the universe could not exist. See chapter 5 of “Refuting Compromise” by Jonathon Sarfati.
In another place in “A Brief History of Time”, first edition, the final size of the universe after it collapsed was the size of a tennis ball. He could have said anything – the size of a pin head, a coin, a football, or a football field or even the size of the moon. But how amazing that he comes up with a size that confirms we are made in God’s image and God holds the universe in the palm of His hand.
Stephen’s own wisdom has been frustrated till he has had to conceive of God. He has admitted that man can never create The Grand Unified Theory, but only God. Perhaps to Stephen God is simply an observer outside the universe but I know God as Father and Lord who guides me and speaks to me.
If science was to come up with some radical new theory and none of the ideas fell in line with what the Bible says I know that I will be staying with the Bible. But let’s remind ourselves of the basics. God declares that this universe is bound over to frustration and decay. (Romans 8:20-21, Matthew 6:19 ) What do we see? All suns will eventually burn up their hydrogen and collapse into heavier elements. One way or another, gravity is expected to collapse the whole universe. Pretty much an image of frustration and decay isn’t it? But it’s exactly what Revelation 6:12 describes with the sun going black and stars falling.
So in order to kick start a universe you need a lot of hydrogen or even sub-atomic particles that might later form hydrogen spread out over vast distances. Once you have that it is just the natural collapse under gravity that makes suns etc. So it is pretty hard to find a solution that does not start with radiation, that is, light. The Big Bang theory is the “popular” explanation, but just for fun I thought I would have a try at some other ideas.
So whatever science comes up with as different mechanical details, it seems unable to break away from what God has declared. The really cool thing is that science has pretty much rejected steady state theories of the universe and accepts that there was a start. If there was a start then there was a cause. Anything that could cause the Universe has to be outside the space-time that makes up the universe, and there is no other word for an observer outside the universe except God.
Late update: A new physics picturing our galaxy at the centre of the universe and factoring in time dilation effects as the universe is stretched out, inflationary style, about the centre, is not just solving technical problems but explaining observations that support our galaxy being at the centre of the universe, and offers support for a biblical time scale.
I created this article in in 2008 and now, in August 2015, things have been changing.
I don't make a habit of tracking everything that Stephen Hawking proclaims, but the media seem to push it into your face. For the man’s technical skills I have great respect but now I felt a great sadness over Stephen’s growing bitterness. Despite his ability to see into things unseen, though abstracted physics, he has been unable to see the most obvious thing unseen, God.
I was recently with my uncle, a very generous but stubborn man, when he died. I hope Stephen has someone close who loves him and knows God, to give him some words of life.
I took note that a variety of other ‘theories’ are being offered as to how the universe will end. Heat death is very popular. Some people are suggesting that the universe will continue its expansion indefinitely. Still others want to abandon the idea that there even was a start to the universe and postulate the continuous appearance of matter to feed this universe even though steady state theories have been dumped in the past. Then, still frustrated that they cannot make the maths work in this universe, they postulate multiple universes.
So my previous section about “Will science change its mind?” is worthless. Scientists are continually changing their minds because nothing is working! In this series of articles I have described similarities from the Bible with currently popular science. I did this to challenge some people into considering what God says. But what I see happening is more and more unsupportable theories are being offered up.
Maybe it’s time for a new model of how the universe was created. At the end of my book “Page 1: God’s Timetable”, I described “The COI Universe”. It started in Appendix C4 and was further developed in the Supplements. Perhaps start with the S6: Technical summary.