December 2015


In a thread on DeenPort we were asked for comments on Prof Krauss’ book  A Universe from Nothing in which he claims that according to modern physics the universe could have spontaneously come into existence without any act of creation. My simple response was to ask, how did the laws of physics come into existence?

Mansoor Malik brought to our attention the excellent critique of the book here:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/p hysicist-george-ellis-knocks-physicists-for-knock ing-philosophy-falsification-free-will/

Here I capture some further thoughts about the issue.

The scientist who gives the opinion in the linked article is a Christian, however I believe that most atheist scientists would also strongly agree with the thrust of the article.

When I asked where the laws of physics came from, I wasn’t trying to prove the existence of God, but more to show that Professor Krauss’s opinion that something came out of nothing is not true because there existed something (e.g. physical laws) that provided the necessary infrastructure for the something (our material universe) to come into being. For instance it is a theory in modern physics that particles such as electrons can be spontaneously created “ex nihilo” in a vacuum. However, these particles are not really coming out of nothing (nihilo), as it requires a certain amount of energy for the particle to come into existence. It turns out that a vacuum in space is believed to have an energy density (i.e. it contains energy which can spontaneously convert into matter) and therefore a vacuum in space is not, to my mind, “nothing”. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy). The energy is changed into matter (the electron) as per Einstein’s well known formula E = mc2. Prof Krauss presumably thinks that space (a vacuum) was ‘always there’ and its existence needs no explanation. I consider that a highly naive assumption and strongly disagree. Further, how and why does E = mc2 hold, for example?

Having said the above, there is a stronger argument at the meta level (i.e. stepping back a bit and looking at the problem from the outside). Consider a thought experiment. We simulate a universe similar to our own (in some type of computer for example). Whether that is in fact physically possible is not relevant to the argument. Let us call this simulated universe the Inner universe, and our actual universe the Outer universe. The Inner universe is entirely simulated in all dimensions i.e. all points in Inner space and time are simulated and observable by us so that we can look at any simulated point at any moment in simulated time. According to scientists of Professor Krauss’s ilk, life and even consciousness can evolve in such a universe. Let us therefore say that an entity very similar to Prof Krauss is found to have evolved in the Inner simulated universe. He sees a universe with exactly the same properties as our own. This entity, having a simulated brain very similar to Prof Krauss and observing a universe of the same laws as those of our own universe, makes the statement that his universe came into being entirely ex nihilo and therefore was not the result of an act of creation.

Well, clearly this Prof Krauss in the Inner universe is wrong, as we in the Outer universe created his universe. You see where this argument is going, we too are potentially in an Inner universe, and our Prof Krauss is equally as wrong as the one in our Inner universe. God (ultimately) created our Inner universe. We have absolutely no conception of what lies “outside” our universe and experimentation within our universe tells us nothing about how our universe came into being. We are entirely trapped in this universe and cannot see nor even have the faintest conception of what “exists” other than our universe (except by revelation).

It was noted that in my book A Message For Tuqa, I do not advance a proof for the existence of God.

Yes, in the Science chapter of my book A Message For Tuqa I do not attempt to prove the existence of God, but instead to place and picture science properly in a more accurate world-view, showing the limitations of science and how it is not as absolute as is commonly held. What I also try to explain, albeit very briefly, is how when we take modern science to its limit it claims to elaborate how a consciousness can evolve simply from the fundamental laws of physics, without needing any extra ‘magic’. I hold that this ‘clockwork’ consciousness whose thoughts unfold according to the laws of physics, and therefore has no free will, is unacceptable to me and more importantly, does not match my inner experience.

Given therefore that science does not answer the fundamental questions to which I sought answers, I turned to a recognition of my soul, and the creator of my soul. In the quran and the teachings of the prophet I found a sound compass as to where and how to seek further insight.

Where does faith come from?

Descartes famously said ‘cogito ergo sum’. He meant that the only experience we can be entirely sure of is the experience of being and having a self, because all incoming external sensations might be incorrect. AlGhazali preceded him with a similar insight. In Ghazali’s book almunqidh min aDDalaal (Deliverance From Error) he describes how as a young man he had a crisis of faith, which he kept to himself. He realised how little he could be sure of. He points out how faith, once lost, is like a shattered glass bowl which cannot be repaired but must be re-blown afresh. As he very briefly describes it, God cast a light into his breast and his faith was restored. He went on to respond to the challenge of Greek philosophical thought and wrote the hugely influential book iHyaa’ `uluum iddiin (Revival of the Religious Sciences). Once the naive belief in one’s parent’s religion is lost, we must re-blow a new world-view. There is no longer anyone to tell you what is truth or who can show that his way is clearly and obviously the right path. You must search within yourself, learn what you can of what seems most useful, try to walk the straight path of what you find to be true. You must constantly ask God, as we do in alFaatiHa, “Guide us on the straight path!”.

Advertisements

AlHamdulillaah I’ve finished my book A Message For Tuqa.

When a muslim sets off on the straight path he can be overwhelmed with the amount of information available and be left confused by divergent and sometimes controversial opinions.
Originally written by the author for his daughter, this book helps clear the confusion. It provides guidance on how to approach the huge body of knowledge presented to the muslim, understand why opinions diverge, and helps the seeker to keep focussed on the priorities.