Hawking worships man in attempt to prove God doesn’t exist
I’ve read a lot lately about Stephen Hawking. You know…the super genius who was on the Simpsons once? Well, he apparently wrote a new book that, he believes, proves the universe began spontaneously, without the assistance of God. I find scientists like Hawking somewhat fascinating because of how hard they try to prove God doesn’t exist, often to the point of becoming condescending and/or angry.
There’s a piece in today’s Wall Street Journal in which Hawking presumably gives us a taste of his new book, by seeking to prove that the universe was created by physics and not God. It’s an interesting read because the first half of the article describes, in great scientific detail, just how astonishingly perfect the world is. In fact, Hawking concludes that if the earth were different in even the smallest way, we wouldn’t be here.
The emergence of the complex structures capable of supporting intelligent observers seems to be very fragile. The laws of nature form a system that is extremely fine-tuned. What can we make of these coincidences? Luck in the precise form and nature of fundamental physical law is a different kind of luck from the luck we find in environmental factors. It raises the natural question of why it is that way.
Obviously, one argument for “why it is that way” is God. You know, an intelligent Designer. Now, I’m no physicist, but it’s difficult for me to believe anything as perfect as Hawking describes could spontaneously occur (Note: I’m biased). Plus, there’s that problem of something coming from nothing. Per his playbook, Hawking attempts to deal with the problem scientifically:
That is not the answer of modern science. As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.
I find Hawking’s scientific explanation to fail; his “nothing” remains “something.” Hawking argues that the laws of nature, i.e., gravity and quantum physics, got everything moving. This begs the question though: where did the laws of nature come from? Are they infinite? Was gravity created or did it always exist? Hawking doesn’t answer this question (maybe he does in his book). I’m not sure the answer really matters to Hawking though, since the underlying purpose of his piece seems to be the motive of most “science explains all” types: man.
Each universe has many possible histories and many possible states. Only a very few would allow creatures like us to exist. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.
“Lords of creation?” Look, I’m not an anti-science guy. In fact, I enjoy science. But I will continue to believe that there is only one reason why science or math or color television make sense…and a lucky explosion isn’t the answer.