Converging and Convincing Proof of God: The Improbability of it All
in Spitzer's words.
If any one or more of these universal constants were substantially different from the values they are now, the universe would not be as we know it, and would not be able to support life as we know it and, in probable fact, no life at all. It is in comparing the "closed range" of probabilities required for the universe to exist through its initial stages and its unfolding to the point as we know it compared to the "open range" of probabilities of constants outside this "closed range" that yields, to understate it, a highly improbable number.
This highly improbable number is so improbable as to render the probability virtually nil, especially in a universe that is only 13.7 billion years old according to science. This suggests some sort of intelligent, supernatural intervention had to intervene to even out the odds, to wit, God.
Seven instances of the narrow range of constants is discussed by Fr. Spitzer in his book: (1) the improbability of a low-entropy condition, (2) the interrelationship among the gravitational constant, the weak force constant, and the cosmological constant as it relates to the acceleration and possible collapse of the universe, (3) the strong force constant, in particular in relationship to the electromagnetic constant, (4) the relationship between the gravitational and weak force constants and the neutron-proton mass and electron mass, (5) the relation of the gravitational constant to the electromagnetic constant and the ratio of electron to proton mass, (6) the weak force constant and its relationship to the carbon atom, and (7) the resonances of the atomic nuclei. There are, however, many more.
We cannot discuss all of these in this article, but as a sample of the high improbabilities involved, we can look at the first requirement above, that is, the improbability of a low-entropy condition.
Our world is one of low entropy. However, worlds of high entropy can, at least in theory, exist; in other words, they are probable, and, in fact, more probable in theory than low entropy worlds.
The English mathematical physicist, Roger Penrose, has calculated the odds of our low entropy world compared to all the possibilities of a world other than low entropy and has determined that probability to be 1 chance in 10 to the 10 to the 123rd power.
The Penrose number "is so large," Fr. Spitzer observes, "that if we were to write it out in ordinary notation (with every zero being, say, ten point type), it would fill up a large portion of the universe!"
The probability of this happening by chance is, in short, impossible. And this does not include the improbabilities associated with the other six constant relationships identified by scientists.
To give a sense of what we are talking about, the probabilities associated with our universe having come together by chance in the manner that it did, Fr. Spitzer gives this vivid image. The probabilities associated with the universe having been the result of chance "may be likened to a monkey typing out Hamlet (without any recourse to the play) by random tapping on the keys of the typewriter."
It is unlikely that the monkey would even type out "To be, or not to be, that is the question," much less, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Both of those questions are on the mind of cosmologists as well as many other humans, though not monkeys even if a dozen of them plinked away on typewriters for 10 to the 10 to the 123rd power days.
In light of the scientific knowledge of the high improbability of the world as we know it existing, the scientist is forced to believe. He may believe that there is an Intellect, God, which he cannot see to explain the improbability of it all, or he may believe--despite the odds--that what he has before him is an incredible, unrepeatable stroke of utter chance.
It seems that the former is more responsible and reasonable than the latter.
In light of the improbability of it all, a large number of physicists have concluded that there must exist a supernatural designing Intellect, one science cannot "see," but one that is implied by the improbability of it all. Other scientists, seeking perhaps to avoid the God question, postulate that, though this universe may be finite and 13.7 billion years old, there may have been a multiplicity of universes, perhaps trillions upon trillions, each of limited time and of which ours is just but one, and so a multiplicity of universes increases the odds that chance could explain it all. There are other theories the scientists come up with to try to avoid looking at the reality that God must exist.
However, in Spitzer's view, this is atheistic desperation, as "[t]here are serious weaknesses in the multiple universe postulate of the weak anthropic principle." For one, there is no empirical evidence for them. What this means is that "there is considerable room for the evidence of contemporary astrophysics to ground reasonable and responsible belief in a supernatural designing Intellect."
It should be observed that the "proof" in this article has nothing to do with the probabilities of biological life and whether natural evolution is, or is not, a probable explanation for biological life that exists (or whether also, the improbability of biological life as we know it existing is similarly so improbable as to suggest that a God is behind it all).
The "proof" we are dealing in this article addresses only the "stage" upon which biological life "acts," i.e., the cosmos, including the world, existing as a whole, one that could support the biological life we have without regard to how that biological life came to be. It therefore has nothing to do with the Intelligent Design Movement which deals with the biochemical and biological aspects of the question of the existence of life, and not the cosmological aspects of the question of the universe that is not hostile to life.
In light of all this, one is reminded of the famous quote by the American astronomer, physicist, and cosmologist, Robert Jastrow: "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
And beyond the theologians, whose existence, like that of the scientists, is highly improbable, and beyond the mountain, whose existence is also highly improbable, is that Someone who, it turns out is highly probable, and He--Deo gratias--evens out the odds of the improbability of it all.
Thanks to this Someone--Whom we should seek for no other reason than to thank--we are the beneficiaries of this inestimable gift called being!
And if we seek, those with the Faith already know, we shall this Someone find. (Matt. 7:7) Indeed, we shall come to know that this Someone found us first! (Cf. 1 John 4:19) We shall find, even more remarkably, that He pitched a fleshly tent and walked among us, full of grace and truth. And his name was (and is) Jesus. (John 1:14)
-----
Andrew M. Greenwell is an attorney licensed to practice law in Texas, practicing in Corpus Christi, Texas. He is married with three children. He maintains a blog entirely devoted to the natural law called Lex Christianorum. You can contact Andrew at agreenwell@harris-greenwell.com.
- - -
Pope Benedict XVI's Prayer Intentions for January 2013
General Intention: The Faith of Christians. That in this Year of Faith Christians may deepen their knowledge of the mystery of Christ and witness joyfully to the gift of faith in him.
Missionary Intention: Middle Eastern Christians. That the Christian communities of the Middle East, often discriminated against, may receive from the Holy Spirit the strength of fidelity and perseverance.
Keywords: proofs of God, existence of God, improbability, anthropic universe
NEWSLETTERS »
Rate This Article
1 - 6 of 6 Comments
Leave a Comment
More Year of Faith News
- FRIDAY HOMILY: Is It Lawful or Just a Lower Standard?
- THURSDAY HOMILY: Becoming Salty Christians in a World Without Flavor, Rotting from Within
- True and False Spirituality: Beware the Friends of Job or How to Deal With Fair-weather Friends
- WEDNESDAY HOMILY: Finding God Where You Would Rather Not Look
- TUESDAY HOMILY: Holy and Unholy Ambition
- SUNDAY HOMILY: The Happy Priest - Come Holy Spirit
- MONDAY HOMILY: I Do Believe, Help My Unbelief!
- We Need a New Pentecost: Come Holy Spirit, Come With Your Fire!
- Peter and John, Two Pillars and Two Paths
Featured News
- Fr. Paul Schenck: Finding Living Faith on Catechetical Sunday
- The Movie Yellow: Incest as 'Normal' and Cassavates's Slides Into the World of Woes
- The Chicago School Teachers Strike Reveals the Need For School Choice
- The Sexual Barbarians and the Dissolution of Culture
- The Happy Priest Challenges Us to Ask: Who is Jesus to Me?
- Michael Coren on Canadian Public Schools: Teachers, leave those kids alone
- We Cannot Ignore Our Consciences: Cardinal Dolan On Religious Liberty
- In the Face of Danger, Successor of Peter Travels to Lebanon as a Messenger of Peace
- Reflections on the Dignity and Vocation of Women: Who or What?
Most Popular
Pope Francis says atheists can do good and go to heaven too! Read More
There's the problem! Americans are out of touch with scientific consensus on climate change Read More
Culture of Corruption: Why Obama's misuse of Marines is wrong Read More
Bill Donohue, Catholic League, Disclose Fight with the IRS, Demonstrate Courage Read More
Receiving the Eucharist: I Have Decided to Kneel For Jesus Read More
Daily Readings
Reading 1, Sirach 6:5-17
A kindly turn of speech attracts new friends, a courteous ... Read More
Psalm, Psalms 119:12, 16, 18, 27, 34, 35
Blessed are you, Yahweh, teach me your will! Read More
Gospel, Mark 10:1-12
After leaving there, he came into the territory of Judaea and ... Read More
Saint of the Day
St. David I of Scotland
May 24: David, the youngest son of Scotland’s virtuous queen, (Saint) ... Read More
Latest Videos
May 24 - Homily: Care For The Soul First, Then The Body View Video
May 24 - Homily: Pope Francis' Basilica View Video
May 12 - Homily: The Direction of Your Life View Video
Eucharistic Hearts - 2 Pillars #35 View Video
Pope Francis speaks of Christian originality View Video
Marketplace
Who's Who in Heaven: Real Saints for Families in Plain English Read More
Classic handsome suits, beautiful gowns and dresses for both Christening and ... Read More



















"As island demonstrates, the atheists see a ready embracement of evolution as a sign of capitulation rather than strength..."
Say what?!... *rereading what I wrote*... Nope, I didn't say that at all, and I find it utterly amazing that you could read that into what I did write, but let me spell it out in braille for the willfully blind:
I said that your belief in cosmological ID obviously doesn't free you from IDists... regardless of the fact that you accept evolution.
Course, you could have easily gotten that from the text, so I doubt that this will clarify anything for anyone that thinks like you do, but at least they'll get that I don't agree with your assessment of what I wrote.
Look at the events in Genesis and take them out of "religion" for a moment, remembering that the Bible is NOT a scientific treatise OR a history book... look how it goes... (And how long, exactly, is a "day" to the eternal? How long was a "day" before there were an Earth or sky?) "Let there be light," (BANG!!) then the Sun, the Earth, the seas, life in the seas, life in the air and on land, on and on up to Mankind...
Not that far removed from what Darwin (and Sephen Hawking) have suggested, is it? And to go a step further... why can't we simply see that evolution is the WAY God, in His wisdom, has chosen to go about the work of creating?? Does the fact that we've put a scientific name on the incredible, miraculous process by which the various species have come to exist make it less of a miracle? I think not... Man, for all his effort, can DUPLICATE, but not CREATE life, and we certainly cannot make one creature of another. That's the Hand of God, at its artistic best!!
We're really NOT all that far apart, in the end.
As island demonstrates, the atheists see a ready embracement of evolution as a sign of capitulation rather than strength. For a Catholic view on true science and Creation theology, check out the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation.
"It therefore has nothing to do with the Intelligent Design Movement which deals with the biochemical and biological aspects of the question of the existence of life, and not the cosmological aspects of the question of the universe that is not hostile to life."
Wrong, see: Cosmological ID
Nice try, but you can't distance yourselves from the right winged fundies that easily.
Catholics refuse to admit that they are IDists of the third kind, even if they don't question the theory of evolution.
Thank you for this which clearly explains what I have realized for most of my life, at least since shortly after the "Big Bang" was recognized as having happened and that our universe indeed did have a beginning. In the interim, I also read other information about the incredible unlikelihood of the many universal constants being what they are (although never as concisely as laid out as in this article).
A most interesting thing about the "Multiverse" theory upon which Mr. Greenwell touched briefly, is that because of "Inflation" which most modern day cosmologists accept as necessary for our universe to have developed the way it has, we can never "see" all the way back to the big bang (which would be the "edge" of our universe), as there will never be enough time for that information, traveling at the speed of light, to reach us. Hence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to ever be able to "see" the effects that any "other universes" may have on our own universe at its "edge" no matter how powerful a telescope we might build. So what does that mean? It means that to accept the "Multiverse" idea/explanation for the unlikelihood of our universe, one must accept it on FAITH. While some scientists who want to leave God out of any equation do embrace the "Multiverse", I prefer to put my FAITH in what has been revealed to us by Christ and other events such as Fatima, etc.
Blessed be God.
Blessed be His Holy Name.
Blessed be Jesus Christ, true God and true man.
Blessed be the name of Jesus.
Blessed be His Most Sacred Heart.
Blessed be Jesus in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar.
Blessed be the Holy Spirit, the paraclete.
Blessed be the great Mother of God, Mary most holy.
Blessed be her holy and Immaculate Conception.
Blessed be her glorious Assumption.
Blessed be the name of Mary, Virgin and Mother.
Blessed be Saint Joseph, her most chaste spouse.
Blessed be God in His angels and in His Saints.
Very interesting. The kids and I are enjoying this article and discussing it over breakfast. I bet this discussion will last a while as they really like this topic. Thank you!!