Fg=Gm1m2/d2

If you don't recognize the name I've written it's perfectly understandable. [Actually, the blog program format doesn't permit sub- and superscript in the title.  For the correct formula see the fourth paragraph.] Though it might be clear to the initiated, it has the potential of being confusing to the rest of us. We know it as Gravity, the first and most important of the gods of the religion of Science, but believers are familiar with the formula, which is its sacred spelling.

Science, for those who don't know, is a polytheistic religion with an extensive literature and its own list of deities. Besides Gravity there is Electromagnetism (F_em= k*Q*q/r*r), the Strong Force (this is too complicated so I'll use the familiar names of Science's gods from now on), and the Weak Force, as well as Mathematics, Physics, Cosmos, and many others. But it all started with Gravity.

According to Stephen Hawking, one of the High Priests of the religion, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself 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.” (Interestingly, while Hawking states that Gravity obviates the necessity to have a Creator, he doesn't deny that there is one.) Thank Gravity for Gravity.

That's the first entry in the catechism of Science. Hawking was once asked to explain all of Science while standing on one foot (figuratively – physically it would be a challenge beyond his ability) and he responded “F_g=Gm₁m₂/d². That is the whole of Science, and the rest is commentary. Go and learn it.” (Well maybe I made that up.)

What characterizes a religion? How do you recognize it? According to Oxford, religion is “The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” In this case the superhuman power, which apparently was present before the universe, was Gravity – Science's principal deity. Clearly there are many who observe Science but don't worship Gravity. Whether they are lapsed Scientists or bad Scientists is beyond the scope of this discussion, but if they believe that the universe was created by Gravity they are Scientists.

It is reassuring to know that even if you have some questions about Gravity as the Creator, there are still many gods in which you can believe. Every Scientist has some formulas on which he relies in difficult times. They are surely controlling powers, and their dependability and mightiness are certainties. The formulas, themselves, control our destiny. “It is not necessary to invoke God.”

Those of us who wonder about the origin of the various formulas are simply asking the wrong questions. We are basing our confusion over Science on our own beliefs. But Scientists have their own religion and their own deities – ones in which they trust. Ones in which they believe. Perhaps they would reject the word “believe,” preferring to view their views as representing knowledge rather than belief. But that is typical of religion. Worshipers consider their perspective to represent the Truth. They know that to be the case. No other explanation of the facts is possible and all alternatives are mythology. At least that's what they say.

And their response to the argument that all the conditions for life that exist are virtually impossible statistically is the “anthropic principle” – the science of the gaps. It's really a F_g=Gm₁m₂/d² ex machina.

 

Hawking:  Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself 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.”

The Bible: “In the Beginning, G-d created heaven and earth. The earth was without form and empty.” While gravity is not denied, it is not necessary to invoke it.

It seems to me that the religion of Science is simply substituting one incomprehensible mystery for another but claiming that its view is based on knowledge, not belief. But the idea that “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist” seems to me to be more a matter of belief than knowledge. And if I were a real scientist and based my views on provable facts I would say so.

Real Scientists, however, know that it is not Belief, it is Truth. My bad.

Next episode: “Devolution” – Forward to the past.