In 1988 Stephen Hawking published the bestseller A brief History of Time. In this document, published by Kluwer Academic Publishers (now Springer) a summary and philosophical evaluation is given of Hawkings's work. Especially the proof of the existence of God is discussed in detail.
Physics without foundations in natural phenomenaMahesh Jain
Summary: Till date Theoretical Physics has been built upon description of Fixed Stars by ancient astronomers. However in 1718 it was reported that Fixed Stars have proper motion. This naturally invalidates entire edifice of Theoretical Physics.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor and has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This is the only book which deals with origin of nature and universe from null. Several chapters of the book are devoted to physics.
http://www.sciencengod.com
http://curatio.in
In 1997 Driessen and Suarez edited a book (Springer) on: Mathematical Undecidability, Quentum Nonlocality and the Proof of the Existence of God. Contributors were among others John S. Bell and Paul Davies. This document presents the comments of the editors (introduction, preface and final remarks).
This article aims to present possible strategies for humanity to seek its survival with the end of the Universe in which we live. Research on the fate of our Universe, on the existence or not of multiverse or parallel universes and on the development of the final theory or theory of everything, that is, of the theory of the unified field, are important questions to elucidate in order to point out possible strategies for humanity seeks its survival with the end of the Universe in which we live.
Physics without foundations in natural phenomenaMahesh Jain
Summary: Till date Theoretical Physics has been built upon description of Fixed Stars by ancient astronomers. However in 1718 it was reported that Fixed Stars have proper motion. This naturally invalidates entire edifice of Theoretical Physics.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor and has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This is the only book which deals with origin of nature and universe from null. Several chapters of the book are devoted to physics.
http://www.sciencengod.com
http://curatio.in
In 1997 Driessen and Suarez edited a book (Springer) on: Mathematical Undecidability, Quentum Nonlocality and the Proof of the Existence of God. Contributors were among others John S. Bell and Paul Davies. This document presents the comments of the editors (introduction, preface and final remarks).
This article aims to present possible strategies for humanity to seek its survival with the end of the Universe in which we live. Research on the fate of our Universe, on the existence or not of multiverse or parallel universes and on the development of the final theory or theory of everything, that is, of the theory of the unified field, are important questions to elucidate in order to point out possible strategies for humanity seeks its survival with the end of the Universe in which we live.
The majority of physicists take it for granted that the universe is made up of matter. In turn, matter is
composed of atoms; atoms are made up of particles such as electrons, protons, neutrons, etc. Also, protons
and neutrons are composed of quarks, etc. Furthermore, that everything in nature is governed by the
known laws of physics and chemistry. The author only partially shares this view. He argues that many
phenomena in the universe may depend on rules or factors as yet incorporated by the physical sciences.
The last few years have led him to reflect on the many unsolved physics problems, such as the quest for the
theory of everything (ToE), the arrow of time, the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the fine-tuned
universe, etc. to mention just a few. The author posits that a field carries information, performs various
mathematical and computational operations, and behaves as an intelligent entity embedded with
consciousness.
Estudo publicado que diz que para a vida em tamanha complexidade na terra, o Sol deixaria sua fase estrela e incineraria o planeta terra antes mesmo de qualquer vida pudesse existir, o que provaria que a vida na terra seria mesmo um "milagre".
In Causality Principle as the Framework to Contextualize Time in Modern Physicsinventionjournals
Since the moment Boethius meditated on the nature of time in his fifth book on The Consolation of Philosophy, we have more tools to reflect on the subject. The onset of relativity and quantum physics provides us with the best insight, to date, that guides our reflections on the philosophical debates that attempt to theorize a definition of time. To clearly address the problems related to the theoretical models that account for the nature of time, adjustments to our interpretation of the contextual issues involved in special relativity are in order if we are going to preserve our notion of causal reality. As the construction of string theory emerges as the reigning theory for quantum gravity, a precise picture of causal reality can be accounted for through theories such as Dyson’s Chronological Protection Agency, Hořava’s theory of gravity, and new insight to how simultaneity is interpreted in relativity theory. With this model, the question about time in the philosophical debates can now be clearly defined through the Presentists’ view of the universe. Thus, if we are going to accept the premise of quantum mechanics (QM) and the theory of relativity, we can safely say that string theory (ST) is a reasonable theory of quantum gravity and that its conclusions about time must be taken seriously.
MAPPING PAULI’S CRASHING QUANTUM WAVE: THE LEONG YIJING METHOD AS APPARATUSijrap
This paper introduces a hexagonal-based measurement apparatus. The experiment culminates in a quantum
object production. The experiment testing quantum wave collapse was inaugurated under Covid19
quarantine. Leong Yijing methodology informed the production of the measurement. The apparatus uses
the logic of Chance, applying it to produced social media phenomenology commemorating the 83rd solar
return of Wolfgang Pauli’s prophetic dream. In keeping with the predictive timing within the dream, the
throw of coins outcome was confirmed by the biorhythms of the cosmos: the wave collapse taking place on
the 24th anniversary of the January 23, 1997 Seal of Solomon alignment between Heaven & Earth. This
repetition of cyclic timing reflects the physicist’s vision of the hexagonal structure of the hieros gamos icon
arising from under the wave collapse. This birth of the Third produces an ontology of the quantum object
and an understanding of the autonomy of number as unifying energy and matter.
talk presented at the 22nd International Interdisciplinary Seminar(London and Oxford)
on Quantum Physics, Evolution & Algorithms
Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford 2-1-2020
With his bestselling publication, A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking introduced in 1988 a new genre by connecting modern science with the question of the existence of God. In the posthumous publication Brief Answers to the Big Questions, he continues with his quest for the ultimate truth. The current study presents a philosophical analysis of this search in terms of the classical philosophy of Aristotle and Aquinas. Causality is the central concept employed by Hawking. However, its meaning, in the modern scientific and philosophical literature, is limited to temporal causality in contrast to the view of classical philosophy. Only the latter one accepts causality from outside space and time, with other words, a reality transcending the material world. In a quote presented in the discussion, Hawking defines himself as an atheist. After a careful reading of his writings, however, doubts arise about his unbelief.
For Einstein, simplicity is the main criterion in the theoretical choice when the experiments and observations do not give sufficiently clear indications . Univocity in the theoretical representation of nature should not be confused with a denial of the underdetermination thesis. The principle of univocality played a central role in Einstein's formulation of general relativity. According to Einstein, a constructive theory offers a constructive model for phenomena of interest. A principle theory consists of a set of well-substantiated individual empirical generalizations. He states that this was his methodology in discovering the theory of relativity as the main theory, the other two principles being the principle of relativity and the principle of light.
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17942.50242
THE BOOK TITLE :THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING THE ORIGIN AND FATE OF THE UNIVERSE AUTHER :STEPHEN WILLIAM HAWKING NAME OF THE PUBLICATION :PHEONIX BOOK YEAR OF THE PUBLICATION :2002 BOOK LENGTH :136 PAGES LANGUAGE :ENGLISH...
The theory of everything is a hypothetical physical that would explain all known physical phenomena.
Proceedings of a talk given at the American Translators Association's 53rd conference.
Abstract:
Recently, the news outlets were buzzing with excitement about the possible discovery of a new particle at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The LHC at CERN is not only the world's largest machine and fridge, but also home of the world’s largest international scientific collaborations, with several thousand scientists from over 100 different nations. As such, the underlying science may be of interest to linguists. This paper presents a basic overview over our current knowledge of the universe and aims at explaining the big fuss about the search for the Higgs (also known as the “God particle”) and its possible connection to dark matter. No knowledge of advanced mathematics or physics is required to read this paper. For readers who want to know more, some references and recommendations for further reading are included at the end.
The majority of physicists take it for granted that the universe is made up of matter. In turn, matter is
composed of atoms; atoms are made up of particles such as electrons, protons, neutrons, etc. Also, protons
and neutrons are composed of quarks, etc. Furthermore, that everything in nature is governed by the
known laws of physics and chemistry. The author only partially shares this view. He argues that many
phenomena in the universe may depend on rules or factors as yet incorporated by the physical sciences.
The last few years have led him to reflect on the many unsolved physics problems, such as the quest for the
theory of everything (ToE), the arrow of time, the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the fine-tuned
universe, etc. to mention just a few. The author posits that a field carries information, performs various
mathematical and computational operations, and behaves as an intelligent entity embedded with
consciousness.
Estudo publicado que diz que para a vida em tamanha complexidade na terra, o Sol deixaria sua fase estrela e incineraria o planeta terra antes mesmo de qualquer vida pudesse existir, o que provaria que a vida na terra seria mesmo um "milagre".
In Causality Principle as the Framework to Contextualize Time in Modern Physicsinventionjournals
Since the moment Boethius meditated on the nature of time in his fifth book on The Consolation of Philosophy, we have more tools to reflect on the subject. The onset of relativity and quantum physics provides us with the best insight, to date, that guides our reflections on the philosophical debates that attempt to theorize a definition of time. To clearly address the problems related to the theoretical models that account for the nature of time, adjustments to our interpretation of the contextual issues involved in special relativity are in order if we are going to preserve our notion of causal reality. As the construction of string theory emerges as the reigning theory for quantum gravity, a precise picture of causal reality can be accounted for through theories such as Dyson’s Chronological Protection Agency, Hořava’s theory of gravity, and new insight to how simultaneity is interpreted in relativity theory. With this model, the question about time in the philosophical debates can now be clearly defined through the Presentists’ view of the universe. Thus, if we are going to accept the premise of quantum mechanics (QM) and the theory of relativity, we can safely say that string theory (ST) is a reasonable theory of quantum gravity and that its conclusions about time must be taken seriously.
MAPPING PAULI’S CRASHING QUANTUM WAVE: THE LEONG YIJING METHOD AS APPARATUSijrap
This paper introduces a hexagonal-based measurement apparatus. The experiment culminates in a quantum
object production. The experiment testing quantum wave collapse was inaugurated under Covid19
quarantine. Leong Yijing methodology informed the production of the measurement. The apparatus uses
the logic of Chance, applying it to produced social media phenomenology commemorating the 83rd solar
return of Wolfgang Pauli’s prophetic dream. In keeping with the predictive timing within the dream, the
throw of coins outcome was confirmed by the biorhythms of the cosmos: the wave collapse taking place on
the 24th anniversary of the January 23, 1997 Seal of Solomon alignment between Heaven & Earth. This
repetition of cyclic timing reflects the physicist’s vision of the hexagonal structure of the hieros gamos icon
arising from under the wave collapse. This birth of the Third produces an ontology of the quantum object
and an understanding of the autonomy of number as unifying energy and matter.
talk presented at the 22nd International Interdisciplinary Seminar(London and Oxford)
on Quantum Physics, Evolution & Algorithms
Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford 2-1-2020
With his bestselling publication, A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking introduced in 1988 a new genre by connecting modern science with the question of the existence of God. In the posthumous publication Brief Answers to the Big Questions, he continues with his quest for the ultimate truth. The current study presents a philosophical analysis of this search in terms of the classical philosophy of Aristotle and Aquinas. Causality is the central concept employed by Hawking. However, its meaning, in the modern scientific and philosophical literature, is limited to temporal causality in contrast to the view of classical philosophy. Only the latter one accepts causality from outside space and time, with other words, a reality transcending the material world. In a quote presented in the discussion, Hawking defines himself as an atheist. After a careful reading of his writings, however, doubts arise about his unbelief.
For Einstein, simplicity is the main criterion in the theoretical choice when the experiments and observations do not give sufficiently clear indications . Univocity in the theoretical representation of nature should not be confused with a denial of the underdetermination thesis. The principle of univocality played a central role in Einstein's formulation of general relativity. According to Einstein, a constructive theory offers a constructive model for phenomena of interest. A principle theory consists of a set of well-substantiated individual empirical generalizations. He states that this was his methodology in discovering the theory of relativity as the main theory, the other two principles being the principle of relativity and the principle of light.
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17942.50242
THE BOOK TITLE :THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING THE ORIGIN AND FATE OF THE UNIVERSE AUTHER :STEPHEN WILLIAM HAWKING NAME OF THE PUBLICATION :PHEONIX BOOK YEAR OF THE PUBLICATION :2002 BOOK LENGTH :136 PAGES LANGUAGE :ENGLISH...
The theory of everything is a hypothetical physical that would explain all known physical phenomena.
Proceedings of a talk given at the American Translators Association's 53rd conference.
Abstract:
Recently, the news outlets were buzzing with excitement about the possible discovery of a new particle at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The LHC at CERN is not only the world's largest machine and fridge, but also home of the world’s largest international scientific collaborations, with several thousand scientists from over 100 different nations. As such, the underlying science may be of interest to linguists. This paper presents a basic overview over our current knowledge of the universe and aims at explaining the big fuss about the search for the Higgs (also known as the “God particle”) and its possible connection to dark matter. No knowledge of advanced mathematics or physics is required to read this paper. For readers who want to know more, some references and recommendations for further reading are included at the end.
An analysis of the limitations of rational positivism and modern reductionism with solutions posed by Eastern philosophies and knowledge limits gauged by quantum theory and Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem.
This analysis is supported by contributions from OVium Solutions and International Innovative Institute.
RelativismEpistemic RelativismWe have now presented a philos.docxcarlt4
Relativism
Epistemic Relativism
We have now presented a philosophical argument behind the whole basis of accepted scientific truth.
Let's introduce another philosophical term important in that dabate:
Epistemic Relativism: the position that knowledge is valid only relatively to a specific context, society, culture or individual.
In the following video, Duncan Pritchard, from the University of Edinburgh introduces the concept of Epistemic Relativism. You will learn about the well-known Bellarmine–Galileo controversy about the validity of Ptolemy’s geocentric system vs Copernicus’s heliocentric system, This historical episode is well documented, and it has been the battleground of important discussions about what epistemologists call epistemic relativism, namely the view that norms of reasoning and justification for our knowledge claims seem to be relative.
From "The Little Thinker‘s Blog“
This historical example illustrates the epistemic relativist’s ‘no neutral ground’ argument, and the difficulty of identifying a common ground or a common measure to assess and evaluate knowledge claims in their historical and social context.
** Content from Online Course: Philosophy and the Sciences: Introduction to the Philosophy of Physical Sciences by The University of Edinburgh
https://youtu.be/MYnZgJeOqqg
Popper's Falsification
From inductivism to Popper’s falsification
From: Philosophy and the Science for Everyone by Michela Massimi. ISBN: 9781138785434
Karl Popper
Philosophers of science are interested in understanding the nature of scientific knowledge and its distinctive features. For a very long time, they strove to find what they thought might be the distinctive method of science, the method that would allow scientists to make informed decisions about what counts as a scientific theory.
The importance of demarcating good science from pseudo-science is neither otiose nor a mere philosophical exercise. It is at the very heart of social policy, when decisions are taken at the governmental level about how to spend taxpayers’ money.
Karl Popper (28 July 1902 – 17 September 1994) was, undoubtedly, one of the most influential philosophers of the early twentieth century to have contributed to the debate about demarcating good science from pseudo-science. In this section we very briefly review some of his seminal ideas.
Popper’s battleground was the social sciences. At the beginning of the twentieth century, in the German-speaking world, a lively debate took place between the so-called Naturwissenschaften (the natural sciences, including mathematics, physics, and chemistry) and the Geisteswissenschaften (the human sciences, including psychology and the emergent psychoanalysis), and whether the latter could rise to the status of proper sciences on a par with the natural sciences.
This is the historical context in which Popper began his philosophical reflections in the 1920s. Popper’s reflections were influenced by the Vienna Circle, a group of young int.
The Birth of Modern Science Galileo andDescartes , a lectur.docxmattinsonjanel
The Birth of Modern Science: Galileo and
Descartes , a lecture by Ricardo Nirenberg. Fall
1996, the University at Albany, Project
Renaissance.
UNITY AND DIVERSITY
Last time I left you with a question whose answer I do not know. The question was: why do human
beings search for unity? Not only is the answer unknown, but the question itself risks being badly
misunderstood. What kind of unity am I talking about? The Renaissance, whose name this Project has proudly
donned, was also the time, as you must have read in Ortega's book, when Spain achieved political and religious
unity by expelling Jews and Muslims, people who had lived there in relative peace for many centuries. Hitler
too screamed: "Ein Volk! Ein Reich!" (One nation, one state), and killed the Jews and the Gypsies. We saw in
the Soviet Union, in Bosnia, in Rwanda, and in many other places the search for unity—ethnic, religious,
ideological—as the prelude to, and excuse for, massacre. So you may say, "Who wants unity? What we want is
diversity!" And indeed, if that's the unity I mean, you would be right. But that, of course, is not the unity I
mean. What I really mean by unity and oneness will be clarified only after we talk about the beginnings of
modern science and philosophy and about those two founding figures, Galileo and Descartes.
As a consequence of the horrors of this century, the word and the concept "unity" or "oneness," which
used to have a supreme value for both Western and Eastern thought, have become profoundly unfashionable
among Western intellectuals. But nothing is more interesting than to re-think unfashionable thoughts, to think
them through yet again. In our own country, the rejection of unity was taught by a professor at Harvard, the
influential philosopher William James (1842-1910). He ventured the idea that there exist worlds which are
totally disconnected, meaning that an event in one world cannot influence another world: no cause-effect
relation obtains between those separate worlds. He called this doctrine "pluralism," and gave, as unassailable
example of disconnected worlds, the dreams of two dreamers. He didn't mean it metaphorically, as when
politicians say, "the American dream," or as when Martin Luther King said, "I have a dream": those dreams are
understood to be shared. No, he meant the dreams of two different people who are sleeping. Whether or not two
such worlds are really disconnected, let us discuss Galileo and Descartes, who dealt with unity and
disconnection in their own, and extremely influential, ways.
GALILEO
Galileo Galilei was born in Pisa (modern Italy) in 1564; thus he was of the same generation as Kepler
(about whom we talked in the last lecture). At age eighteen Galileo had to quit his studies at the University of
Pisa because his family couldn't afford the tuition and the university wouldn't give him financial aid; at age
twenty-five, however, he was named professor of mathematics there. The generation of Galileo, to which
Kepler ...
Philosophy of science paper_A Melodrama of Politics, Science and ReligionMahesh Jakhotia
ABSTRACT: The aim of my project is to understand how religious, scientific and political
reasons shaped and inspired the theory of ‘Origin of life and universe’ in a progressive way
and to look it from a philosopher’s point of view. I also want to explore the aspect on what makes a radical idea like Darwin’s evolutionary theory which was different from the existing paradigm to be accepted amongst the scientific community.
New Sciences and Humanities, a PresentationWennie Wu
Modernization” was once conflated with “Westernization”. It was believed that from Science to Humanity, all would be clearly known with western methodologies.
Later discoveries have challenged the fundamentals of that paradigm. We came to realize uncertainty, probability, indeterminism, incompleteness of science and humanity.
The views of scientists such as: Newton, Einstein, Feynman, Prigogine, Hawking, etc., as well as views of politicians, writers, artists, will be discussed. For example:
Prigogine, a Nobel laureate 1977, was inspired by Chinese views of the nature.
Bill Clinton and Tony Blair advocated “the Third way”, which echoes the Mid-way (Centrism) that is a major theme by Confucius.
The works and lives of Lu, Xun, Eileen Chang, Kenneth Pai, Ang Lee, will be briefed to illustrate the environmental impact and transcendence from modernization to this new era of globalization.
Chapter 1 - Our Picture of the UniverseChapter 2 - Space and.docxcravennichole326
Chapter 1 - Our Picture of the Universe
Chapter 2 - Space and Time
Chapter 3 - The Expanding Universe
Chapter 4 - The Uncertainty Principle
Chapter 5 - Elementary Particles and the Forces of Nature
Chapter 6 - Black Holes
Chapter 7 - Black Holes Ain't So Black
Chapter 8 - The Origin and Fate of the Universe
Chapter 9 - The Arrow of Time
Chapter 10 - Wormholes and Time Travel
Chapter 11 - The Unification of Physics
Chapter 12 - Conclusion
Glossary
Acknowledgments & About The Author
FOREWARD
I didn’t write a foreword to the original edition of A Brief History of Time. That was done by Carl Sagan. Instead,
I wrote a short piece titled “Acknowledgments” in which I was advised to thank everyone. Some of the
foundations that had given me support weren’t too pleased to have been mentioned, however, because it led to
a great increase in applications.
I don’t think anyone, my publishers, my agent, or myself, expected the book to do anything like as well as it did.
It was in the London Sunday Times best-seller list for 237 weeks, longer than any other book (apparently, the
Bible and Shakespeare aren’t counted). It has been translated into something like forty languages and has sold
about one copy for every 750 men, women, and children in the world. As Nathan Myhrvold of Microsoft (a
former post-doc of mine) remarked: I have sold more books on physics than Madonna has on sex.
The success of A Brief History indicates that there is widespread interest in the big questions like: Where did
we come from? And why is the universe the way it is?
I have taken the opportunity to update the book and include new theoretical and observational results obtained
since the book was first published (on April Fools’ Day, 1988). I have included a new chapter on wormholes
and time travel. Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity seems to offer the possibility that we could create and
maintain wormholes, little tubes that connect different regions of space-time. If so, we might be able to use
them for rapid travel around the galaxy or travel back in time. Of course, we have not seen anyone from the
A Brief History of Time - Stephen Hawking
file:///C|/WINDOWS/Desktop/blahh/Stephen Hawking - A brief history of time/A Brief History in Time.html (1 of 2) [2/20/2001 3:13:58 AM]
future (or have we?) but I discuss a possible explanation for this.
I also describe the progress that has been made recently in finding “dualities” or correspondences between
apparently different theories of physics. These correspondences are a strong indication that there is a complete
unified theory of physics, but they also suggest that it may not be possible to express this theory in a single
fundamental formulation. Instead, we may have to use different reflections of the underlying theory in different
situations. It might be like our being unable to represent the surface of the earth on a single map and having to
use different maps in different regions. This would be a revolution in our v ...
Beethoven IX about Joy and God
based on the interpretation of Otto Baensch, Aufbau und Sinn des Chorfinales in Beethovens neunter Symphonie, Berlin 1930
(Construction and Meaning of the Final part with Choir in Beethoven IX)
summary of Otto Baensch:
The 9th symphony conducts us from despair (movement 1) to joy (movement 4).
Two different approaches to escape despair are only preliminary and in vain
dedication to exterior appearance and fuss (movement 2)
entering the realm of the sentiments (movement 3)
the only solution: bring order to reality by acting cheerfully
Talk presented on February 24, 2020
at Leidenhoven College in Amsterdam
by Alfred Driessen
Vrije wil, alleen een illusie?
presentatie gehouden op 2 maart 2019 in Conferentieoord Zonnewende
De overtuiging dat vrijheid alleen een illusie is, wordt door velen verdedigd en vindt ook vaak steun bij natuurwetenschappers. In deze presentatie wordt getoond dat het juist is dat er meer nodig is om over vrijheid te kunnen spreken dan alleen een wereld die uitsluitend door natuurwetten wordt bepaald. Het is nodig een geestelijk aspect in de mens te accepteren, de menselijke ziel namelijk, met zelfbewustzijn, verstand en vrije wil. Alleen op deze manier wordt de rijkdom van het menselijk gedrag inzichtelijk.
Evolutie en schlepping
door Alfred Driessen, prof. emeritus natuurkunde
Er zijn weinig onderwerpen in de wetenschap die zo veel losmaken als juist de biologische evolutie. Al sinds de eerste jaren van deze theorie, in de tijd van Darwin tot op de dag van vandaag wordt er een discussie gevoerd tussen voorstanders en tegenstanders, die de evolutieleer als een bedreiging van het geloof in een almachtige God zien. De discussie werd zelfs tot in de rechtszaal voortgezet. Sommigen zetten de situatie op scherp met de slagzin: of wetenschap of geloof, d.w.z. ofwel evolutie of kiezen voor God. Persoonlijk vraag ik mij dan af of het echt zo is. Bestaat er dan een waarheid voor de wetenschap en een andere voor het geloof?
In de presentatie wordt getoond dat in de biologie evolutie geen punt van discussie is. Het lijkt erop dat vanaf de oercel tot de huidige planten- en dierenwereld alles zich ontwikkeld heeft in kleine stappen. De verhitte discussie over ontbrekende stappen, de missing links, is vaak door de feiten achterhaald: deze worden steeds weer gevonden.
Samenvattend kan men zeggen: er bestaat een goed onderbouwde en door feiten ondersteunde biologische theorie, de evolutietheorie. Als men daarna op basis van deze theorie naar diepere oorzaken zoekt en dan in wetenschappelijk-filosofische overwegingen de afwezigheid van natuurlijke oorzaken als toeval bestempelt, verlaat men het gebied van de natuurwetenschappen en zou men beter over evolutionisme kunnen spreken. Het evolutionisme maakt van de natuurwetenschappelijke evolutietheorie een filosofisch wereldbeeld.
In de presentatie wordt ook ingegaan op het ontstaan van het menselijk lichaam, en dat er tot op celniveau verschillende genen voor man en vrouw worden gevonden.
Aan het eind worden enkele citaten gegeven uit de Bijbel. Met de aanvaarding van deze citaten uit de Bijbel en de kennis van de moderne biologie kan men zeggen dat evolutie een zeer elegante vorm van schepping is.
Aan het eind wordt er integraal een essay weergeven over het dubbele gezicht van de evolutie.
Causality from outside Time
Alfred Driessen
Talk presented at the 21th International Interdisciplinary Seminar,
Science and Society: Defining what is human
Netherhall House, London, 5-1-2019
Content
Introduction
Time in Relativity
Time in Quantum Mechanics
Conclusions
Conclusions from this study:
There are causes beyond the realm of science,
- they are not observable by physical or scientific means
- the effects of these causes, however, are observable by physical and scientific means.
Physics is not complete.
Gij zijt Petrus, zo sprak Jezus van Nazareth tot Simon na zijn plechtige belijdenis. De evangelist Matteüs vertelt: Op mijn beurt zeg ik u: "Gij zijt Petrus; en op deze steenrots zal Ik mijn Kerk bouwen en de poorten der hel zullen haar niet overweldigen."
Wat betekent deze belofte? Aan wat denkt een vrome Jood als een rots ter sprake komt? Met enkele citaten uit de Bijbel wordt hierop een antwoord gegeven. Er blijft de vraag hoe deze enthousiaste maar ook vaak zwakke visser Simon een steenrots kan zijn van een onderneming die nu reeds bijna 2000 jaar de aandacht trekt.
In het tweede deel kijken wij wat de Catechismus van de katholiek Kerk zegt over Petrus en zijn opvolgers. Zo vindt men in punt 882: "De paus, bisschop van Rome en opvolger van Petrus, is het blijvend en zichtbaar beginsel en fundament van de eenheid, zowel van de bisschoppen als van de menigte van de gelovigen."
Hiermee zijn niet alle vragen beantwoord in deze tijd van crisis. De heilige Jozefmaria schrijft:
"Zoals er in Christus twee naturen zijn —de menselijke en de goddelijke— zo kunnen wij, analoog daaraan, spreken over een menselijk element en een goddelijk element in de Kerk. De evidentie van dit menselijk deel is voor niemand verborgen. De Kerk bestaat, in deze wereld, uit mensen en voor mensen. En wie mensen zegt, spreekt over vrijheid, over de mogelijkheid grootse dingen of kleingeestige dingen te doen, over heldendaden en struikelpartijen."
En, ondanks alles, blijft de boven genoemde belofte aan Simon altijd van kracht.
zie ook www.bit.ly/paus-en-kerk
het heelal, een ontdekkingsreis,
zie ook YouTube: www.bit.ly/het-heelal
door Alfred Driessen op 17-3-2018
Een heldere winternacht, buiten de drukte van de steden en met de blik naar boven. Sinds duizenden jaren ziet de mens de immense sterrenhemel en wordt stil. Intussen weten wij dat wij een bijna oneindige ruimte inkijken: ieder ster is op zijn beurt een zon zoals de onze, die echter op een enorme afstand staat. In deze voordracht gaan wij op reis naar de meest verre plaatsen die tegelijk een reis terug in de tijd is, miljarden en miljarden jaren. Wat was er in het begin, en hoe kon het tot een begin komen? De wetenschap heeft uiteindelijk geen definitief antwoord. Het oudste boek echter stelt eenvoudig: in het begin schiep God hemel en aarde.
inhoud
inleiding
ons zonnestelsel
onze melkweg
nu begint het pas echt
wat zegt de Bijbel?
In several places of his Physica Aristotle analyzes the famous antimony of Zeno about the competition between Achilles and the Tortoise. He emphasizes that any movement, or more general any change, is actually a continuum, i.e. an unity. It depends on the specific movement or change whether this continuum is potentially divisible in parts. In fact, there could be certain minima of the division. In line with this approach, Quantum Mechanics states that there are minima or quanta of movement (or change), with other words, there are no gradual changes in the world of micro- and nano-structures. This behavior is completely unexpected when starting with the mechanistic approach of classical physics.
Taking another finding of Aristotle, the four aspects of causality including final cause, one gets another ingredient of Quantum Mechanics. Movements and changes are not only influenced by the initial state -describing the present situation- but also by the final state which takes account of the future situation. As an example one may mention Fermi’s golden rule, where the initial and final state symmetrically determine the transition probability.
Bringing these two philosophical concepts of Aristotle together namely quanta of movement and final cause, a new light is shed on fundamental issues in Quantum Mechanics. One may mention the experimental evidence for contextuality, which is considered one of the weird phenomena in Quantum Mechanics. As illustration, some of the examples of experiments with optical microresonators are given.
De waarde van het lijden
Alfred Driessen, presentatie gehouden in Zonnewende op 31 januari 2009
Het mysterie van het lijden begint pas begrijpelijk te worden als wij het lijden en sterven van de Zoon van God beschouwen. Het laatste en definitieve woord daarbij is de verrijzenis op de zondag van Pasen. In deze presentatie wordt getracht aannemelijk te maken dat lijden zin verkrijgt als het uiteindelijke motief liefde is.
De heilige Jozefmaria drukt het als volgt uit: Als de graankorrel niet sterft, blijft hij onvruchtbaar. - Zou jij geen graankorrel willen zijn, en willen sterven door versterving, om volle aren voort te brengen? - Moge Jezus je akker zegenen! De weg nr. 199.
Overview of Presentations in the Field of Philosophy and ScienceAlfred Driessen
Presentations in the field of science and philosophy
Alfred Driessen
2007-2017
This document gives an overview of his presentations with hyperlinks to slideshare, where the presentations can be viewed and the pdf-files can be downloaded.
What makes us human?
Talk presented at the 19th International Interdisciplinary Seminar What differentiates human persons from animals and machines? Netherhall House, London, 2-1-2017
CONTENT
Introduction:
--Frans de Waal: the story of Yeroen, a dram of three chimpansees in Burger’s Zoo, Arnhem
Dealing with information
--acquisition and dealing with information
--abstraction
--life and human timeline
--the molecular clock
Consciousness, free will, technology
--consciousness
--artist view on seeing himself (Escher)
--free will
--technology
The bright principle hypothesis
--timeline of characteristic levels
--there is a singularity at zero
Illustration with a masterpiece of art
--Rembrandt: Titus in a monk’s habit
Aquinas’ Theory of Perception
Talk presented at the 19th International Interdisciplinary Seminar What differentiates human persons from animals and machines? Netherhall House, London, 3-1-2017
CONTENT
Introduction
Hylomorphism: matter and form
Acquisition and dealing with information
Isomorphism of mind and reality
Conclusions
Lisska 2016
distinction between esse naturale and esse intentionale
It is through the sense impression in the faculty that the sense faculty ‘becomes’ the sense object in the external world, but immaterially or intentionally. The same form is exemplified ‘intentionally’ in the faculty and ‘existentionally’ in the object; this is the Aristotelian insight further enhanced by Aquinas. There is an identity of form, one in esse intentionale and the other in esse naturale, indicating the two modes of exemplification utilized. Without this identity of structure rendered possible by the two modes of exemplification, the isomorphism of mind and reality in Aristotelian ontology and philosophy of mind would be impossible.
CONCLUSIONS
Hylomorphism is a powerful approach for understanding the full richness of human intellectual capacity.
The definition of truth of Aquinas becomes evident
truth: adaequatio rei et intellectus
truth is the conformity of the intellect to the things.
The non-material dimension of the human mind is fully acknowledged.
The application of concepts of the metaphysics of Aristotle and Aquinas is a adequate starting point for the study of philosophical issues of modern science.
Chance and purpose: Can a scientist with tools of his science distinguish bet...Alfred Driessen
Can a scientist with tools of his science distinguish between chance and purpose (design)?
In order to solve this question a Gedanken experiment originally conceived by John Bell is considered. In this experiment coins are tossed and the results - head or tail - are displayed as set of characters in an array. Suppose now a magic power turning certain coins once more. Again a random pattern appears. Only by superposing both random patterns, a letter combination EPR appears. Apparently there is purpose in the appearance of EPR, as the magic power is selecting certain coins to be turned once more. The scientist, however, who is looking at the two patterns will not recognize any structure beyond randomness and will describe the appearance of EPR as a pure matter of chance.
There is no physical or scientific equipment to measure purpose. Only a philosophical analysis is able to decide whether there is something real beside the physical level. The result of this analysis yields two alternatives for a non-deterministic world: either there is only chance, or there is also purpose. Both are metaphysical statements. For illustration a few statements of philosophers (Gilson, Thomas Aquinas) as well as scientists (Hawking, de Broglie, Einstein, Nienhuis) are given. In the last part of the talk the role of the final cause, as already introduced by Aristotle, is emphasized. It appears that by restricting reality to pure physical or biological systems, one excludes final aspects of causality. In that case, evolution of the universe and also of life is necessarily blind and directed by chance. With such an approach complexity, order and beauty in nature become inherently irrational and incomprehensible.
This presentation has originally been given at the 2007 seminar of the Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies
held at Netherhall, London on 2-1-2007.
The general topic of this seminar was:
Does God play dice?
Evolution, Randomness and Intelligence in Nature
Het jaar 2016 is door paus Franciscus uitgeroepen tot het heilig Jaar van Barmhartigheid (8 december 2015 - op 20 november 2016).
Paus Franciscus hoopt dat iedere christen zich bezint op de geestelijke en lichamelijke werken van barmhartigheid. Hij wijst er op dat de Heer ons oordeelt naar de mate waarin wij hongerigen gevoed hebben, dorstigen te drinken hebben gegeven, de naakte gekleed hebben, de vreemdeling welkom geheten hebben, zieken genezen hebben, de gevangenen bezocht hebben en de doden begraven hebben.
In het Rijksmuseum Amsterdam hangt een beroemd schilderij van de meester van Alkmaar over de werken van barmhartigheid. In een aantrekkelijke en didactisch verantwoorde manier worden de 7 werken toegelicht. Daarbij staat centraal de rol van Christus die zich identificeert met de behoeftigen aan wie barmhartigheid wordt bewezen.
The Universe as a Computer Game
Introduction
The French mathematician and philosopher Laplace (1790-1799) was intrigued by recent progress in the knowledge of the laws that determine the orbits of the planets within our solar system. With these laws and careful calculations it was possible to predict the movement of the planets for the future and also for the past. In order to clarify the philosophical consequences he performed what later would be called a Gedanken experiment. He introduced a superior spirit with unlimited processing-power and unlimited knowledge of the state of the universe: the ‘demon of Laplace’.
Just by intellectual activity (by a demon) the temporal evolution of the physical reality can be in part or even completely explained. The question now arises whether this is just a happy coincidence or that one could look for an ontological basis. What is the relation between material reality and intellectual activity or properties? And especially, how can the step from intellectual activity to reality be made? How can intellectual activity lead to something so evidently material as our real world? Hawkings expresses in lyric words the latter question: Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?
Metaphysics in a Nutshell
Classic philosophy already was puzzled by the close relation between intellectual activity and material reality. In the beautiful allegory of the cave, Plato related the material world to the invisible world of the ideas. And ideas suppose intellectual activity. Aristotle made a step further in stating that material things being physically one are metaphysically composed by two components: the (philosophical) matter and the form which informs the matter.
Consequences for Physics
This presentation is primarily an intent to apply the philosophy of Aristotle and Aquinas to exploit the relation between intellectual activity and reality. The examples of modern physics are given to demonstrate that without a powerful metaphysics the phenomena remain completely weird or strange.
Conclusions
There is an astonishing relation between reality and intellectual activity.
Computer games creating increasingly complex virtual reality could serve as a paradigm for the above mentioned astonishing relation.
The ontological basis for this relation may be found in the hylemorphism of Aristotle and in the creative power of God in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Within the Creative Computer Game Paradigm many issues in fundamental science become intelligible.
It is worthwhile to consider as a working hypothesis:
Imagine a creative intellect who is creator in the most strict meaning of the word of all reality.
This talk was presented at the International Symposium on "Is evolution the smartest form of creation?" at Pedralbes, Barcelona, 2-1-2016
het huwelijk in de Bijbel
Deze presentatie geeft een resumé van de belangrijkste citaten van de Bijbel over het huwelijk
Inhoud
-Inleiding
-Het huwelijk in het Oude Testament
-Jezus Christus over het huwelijk
-De visie van de h. Paulus
-Conclusies
-- De leer van Christus betreffende het huwelijk is iets nieuws in de geschiedenis van Israel. Want eerder werd de echtscheiding niet alleen getolereerd, maar ook zonder meer geaccepteerd.
-- Om de onbreekbare eenheid van man en vrouw in het huwelijksbond aan te tonen, verwees Christus naar de oorsprong van de schepping. In dat begin schiep God hen als man en vrouw zodat zij een vlees zouden kunnen worden.
Dit is de Nederlandse versie van Biblia y Matrimonio, door
Bernardo Estrada, Prof. Heilige Schrift
en Alfred Driessen
26-8-2015
La versión español se encuentra en: http://www.slideshare.net/CSRsource/biblia-y-matrimonio
What about Adam and Eve
The origin of life and more specifically the origin of man is one of the big questions in science, philosophy and theology that continuously attracts attention of all of us. To know the roots of one’s own existence and related to it one’s destiny is not just an academic question. It is also related to the meaning and the quest for happiness and fulfilment in our existence.
We have the contribution of natural sciences, but also the Judeo-Christian tradition, the Bible, and the teaching of the Catholic Church.
In this presentation an attempt is made harmonize the different contributions in a consistent picture. This is based on the convincement that truth, also in this question, can only be one.
The presentation consists of:
I. Introduction
II. What do we know about Adam &Eve (with emphasis on the first book of the Bible: Genesis)
III. What do we know from science?
In this part extensive use is made of a presentation of Richard Durbin: On the polygenic origin of humanity
IV. What does the Catholic Church tell us?
V. Conclusions
This is the second version, presented at Pedralbes, Barcelona, January 2016.
Het dubbele gezicht van de evolutie
Er zijn weinig onderwerpen in de wetenschap die zo veel losmaken als juist de biologische evolutie. Al sinds de eerste jaren van deze theorie, in de tijd van Darwin tot op de dag van vandaag wordt er een discussie gevoerd tussen voorstanders en tegenstanders, die de evolutieleer als een bedreiging van het geloof in een almachtige God zien. De discussie werd zelfs tot in de rechtszaal voortgezet. Sommigen zetten de situatie op scherp met de slagzin: of wetenschap of geloof, d.w.z. ofwel evolutie of kiezen voor God.
Persoonlijk vraag ik mij dan af of het echt zo is. Ik ken verstandige wetenschappers die evolutie als een van de grote succesvolle wetenschappelijke theorieën zien en anderzijds verstandige gelovigen die een vast geloof hebben in God, de schepper van hemel en aarde. Bestaat er dan een waarheid voor de wetenschap en een andere voor het geloof? Moet ik schizofreen zijn om als wetenschapper in God te kunnen geloven?
Commentaar op de encycliek Spe Salvi van paus Benedictus XVIAlfred Driessen
Op 30-11-2007 schreef Paus Benedictus de encycliek Spe salvi over de christelijke hoop.
1. “SPE SALVI facti sumus” – “In deze hoop zijn wij gered”, zegt Paulus tot de Romeinen en tot ons (Rom. 8, 24).
De “verlossing”, het heil, is er volgens het christelijk geloof niet zonder meer. Verlossing is ons gegeven in de zin dat ons hoop geschonken is, een betrouwbare hoop, van waaruit wij ons heden aankunnen: het heden, ook het moeilijke heden, kan geleefd en aanvaard worden, als het naar een doel leidt en als wij zeker kunnen zijn van dat doel, als dat doel zo groot is dat het de inspanning van de weg rechtvaardigt.
De volgende presentatie is een persoonlijk commentaar op dit belangrijk pauselijk document.
Wat spierballen zijn voor het lichaam dat zijn deugden voor de ziel. Zij maken het makkelijker om goed te handelen. Anderzijds zorgen de goede handelingen ervoor dat men goede gewoontes kweekt, dat wil zeggen deugden. De vier belangrijkste deugden, de kardinale deugden, waren reeds bij de oude Grieken bekend: standvastigheid, voorzichtigheid, rechtvaardigheid en matigheid. Het kost inspanning en moeite om de deugden te verwerven maar het is een inspanning, die net als sport, uiteindelijk blij maakt. Er zijn ook deugden die men niet uit eigen kracht kan verwerven, maar die door God worden gegeven. Het zijn de deugden geloof, hoop en liefde die op God gericht zijn; deze worden de goddelijke deugden genoemd. In de katholieke Kerk worden die personen heilig genoemd die zowel de kardinale als ook de goddelijke deugden op een heldhaftige wijze wisten te beleven. In een zekere zin kan men zeggen: heiligheid is topsport voor de ziel.
1. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 1
Alfred Driessen and Antoine Suarez (eds.)
Mathematical Undecidability, Quantum Nonlocality and the Question of the
Existence of God, Kluwer Academic Publisher (now Springer) 1997
Chapter XIV
The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen
Hawking: A brief history of time
Alfred Driessen
Affiliation (1997): Department of Applied Physics, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
E-mail: (2010) Driessen.Alfred@gmail.com
Abstract
The continuing interest in the book of S. Hawking "A Brief History of Time" makes a
philosophical evaluation of the content highly desirable. As will be shown, the genre of this
work can be identified as a speciality in philosophy, namely the proof of the existence of
God. In this study an attempt is given to unveil the philosophical concepts and steps that
lead to the final conclusions, without discussing in detail the remarkable review of modern
physical theories. In order to clarify these concepts, the classical Aristotelian-Thomistic
proof of the existence of God is presented and compared with Hawking's approach. For his
argumentation he uses a concept of causality, which in contrast to the classical philosophy
neglects completely an ontological dependence and is reduced to only temporal aspects. On
the basis of this temporal causality and modern physical theories and speculations, Hawking
arrives at his conclusions about a very restricted role of a possible creator. It is shown, that
neither from the philosophical nor the scientific view his conclusions about the existence of
God are strictly convincing, a position Hawking himself seems to be aware of.
1. Introduction
In 1988 Stephen Hawking, a mathematician and physicist, published a book1 for the
broader public, which soon after appearance became a best-seller. It was translated in more
than 20 languages and, in parallel, a series of extended interviews were asked and given for
important newspapers and magazines in many countries. Meanwhile more than 7 years have
passed, and several studies have dealt with the physical2 and philosophical3,4,5 aspects
1S.Hawking, A brief history of time, from the big bang to black holes, Bantam Books, New York, 1988.
2M. Sachs, On Hawking‟s “A Brief History of Time” and the Present State of Physics, Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 44(3)
(1993), pp 543-547.
3W.L. Craig, „What Place, then, for a creator?‟: Hawking on God and Creation, Brit. J. Phil. Sci. (1990), pp
473-491.
4R.J. Deltete, Hawking on God and Creation, Zygon 28(4) (1993) pp 485-506.
2. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 2
treated in this book. In the following, a outline of the book and an analysis of the
philosophical elements is given in the light of the metaphysics of Aristotle and Aquinas.
The focus hereby is laid on the aspects relevant to the question of the existence of God.
In a first section a summary of the book will be presented based mainly on quotations of
the book. The selections of the quotations of course are already a kind of comment, but in
addition to this, explicit remarks are given which help to arrive to the conclusions of the
present paper. In the following section the philosophical genre of this book will be
identified: a speciality in the philosophical field, namely the proof of the existence of God.
For comparison the view of the Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophical tradition will shortly
be presented. Finally, in the last section, a discussion will be given, where the mutual
relevance of the ideas of Hawking and the Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy will be
studied.
2. Summary of the book
The introduction by Carl Sagan already gives an important key for the understanding of
the book. He writes6: This is also a book about God.....The word God fills these
pages....Hawking is attempting ....to understand the mind of God....the conclusion of the
effort...: a universe with no edge in space, no beginning or end in time, and nothing for a
Creator to do. One clearly should have in mind, that besides presenting a popularisation of
modern physical pictures about the universe, Hawking is entering the field of philosophy
and eventually theology.
Hawking starts his book with a chapter called: Our picture of the universe. He gives a
short historical description of the different pictures of the universe. About the beginning of
the universe he says7: One argument for such a beginning was the feeling that it
was necessary to have "First Cause" to explain the existence of the universe. He adds then
immediately an explanation: Within the universe, you always explained one event as being
caused by some earlier event. It is remarkable, that in this description of cause the time-
aspect is essential, i.e. he neglects ontological causes, which are essential in the classical
philosophy, and especially in metaphysics. On the basis of his definition of cause as
working only from out the past he comes some two pages later to the first important
conclusion about the role of a creator in a universe with a big bang8: An expanding universe
does not preclude a creator, but it does place limits on when he might have carried out his
job.
5 A. Driessen, The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking “A brief history of time”,
Acta Philosphica, 4, (1995), pp. 83-93.
6ref. 1, p. X.
7ref. 1, p. 7.
8ref. 1, p. 9.
3. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 3
Interesting are his ideas about the fields of science, philosophy (metaphysics) and
religion9: Some people feel that science should be concerned with only the first part (the
laws that tell us how the universe changes with time); they regard the question of the initial
situation as a matter for metaphysics or religion. For him metaphysics and religion seem to
be quite close to each other, and distant to science. Hawking is ending the first chapter with
some remarks about a complete unified theory and concludes10: And our goal is nothing
less than a complete description of the universe we live in. This remark gives rise to an
important question: is a physicist able even with a perfect developed theory to give a
complete description of the universe? What to say about the role of biology, medicine,
sociology or even philosophy? Are they all included in physics?
In chapter 2 about Space and Time a history of science is given from the Greek up to the
work of Penrose and Hawking which showed, that Einstein's general theory of relativity
implied that the universe must have a beginning and, possibly, an end.11 After speaking in
The Expanding Universe about the understanding of the universe from general relativity up
to the state of knowledge in 1970, he points out the necessity of quantum mechanics for a
next step in a deeper understanding. In chapter 4 The Uncertainty Principle he explains
some basic principles of quantum mechanics, especially the uncertainty principle, which he
shows to be essential to avoid that classical general relativity, by predicting points of
infinite density, predicts its downfall.12 He remarks, that with the uncertainty principle a
non-deterministic law in physics has been found. This has consequences also for the role of
God, as scientific determinism ...infringed God's freedom to intervene in the world.13
In Elementary Particles and the Forces of Nature, chapter 5, he describes, starting from
the Greek atomists the way to an overall theory of the four basic forces: gravitational,
electromagnetic, weak nuclear and strong nuclear force. Up to now, there is only a partial
result, the grand unified theory (GUT), including electromagnetic, weak nuclear forces and
strong nuclear forces. Hawking comments14: This title is rather an exaggeration: the
resultant theories are not at all that grand, nor are they fully unified, as they do not include
gravity.
Black Holes and Black Holes ain't so Black is treated in chapter 6 and 7. He first gives
a historical overview, including the work of Penrose and himself, and shows, how general
relativity gives rise to singularities, where the concept of space and time are seriously
altered. A singularity, a concept taken from mathematical theories, denominates a special
point or region in a function, where one has to divide by zero and where the function
consequently is undefined. The functions used in the theory of general relativity can
mathematically be considered as having a singularity, when they are applied to black holes.
Later Hawking will speak about a second similar singularity, when he treats the big bang,
9ref.1, p.11.
10ref. 1, p. 13.
11ref. 1, p. 34.
12ref. 1, p. 61
13ref. 1, p. 53.
14ref. 1, p. 74.
4. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 4
the among physicists in general accepted starting point of the universe. For Hawking the
concept of singularity is central in his reasoning. For within a singularity the known
mathematical description of the physical reality breaks down, i.e. there is neither a
deterministic nor a statistical description of the events of those regions. In this chapter
Hawking is able to demonstrate quite convincingly, that the singularity in the center of a
black hole can be circumvented, when one combines general relativity with the uncertainty
principle. This seems to be the first combination of the two great theories of modern
physics, general relativity and quantum mechanics, resulting in an unexpected and at a first
sight paradoxical conclusion: black holes are not so black, i.e. they may emit energy or
matter in form of radiation. Hawking considers this result as a glimpse of what a fully
unified theory would bring in future. It is important to note that with this new approach,
Hawking manages to get rid of the first class of singularities that are connected to black
holes.
In the following chapter The Origin and Fate of the Universe Hawking tackles the
problem of the second class of singularities, the big bang and eventually the big crunch.
Unlike black holes, which are thought to be superabundant in the universe, the two species
of the second class are unique; the big bang is considered as the starting point of the
universe including time and all physical laws, the big crunch then is the final collapse with
the end of time and the end of all known physical laws. After explaining in short the
physical ideas connected to the big bang and big crunch, Hawking considers the
philosophical implications of the big bang singularity: space-time would have a boundary -
a beginning at the big bang.15 He then makes a statement about the laws of sciences in
accordance with his restricted concept of causality, i.e. only temporary causality: These
laws may have originally been decreed by God, but it appears that he has since left the
universe to evolve according to them and does not now intervene in it.16 As one can see,
only in the beginning, at the big bang singularity, a decisive role for God is possible.
In the next pages the anthropic principle17 is introduced and different models of the
development of the universe are presented. Hawking speculates about these models based
on the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics and ends with what he calls a
proposal 18: space and time could be finite without boundary or singularity19, at least if one
introduces the concept of imaginary time. Within his logic of the reduced concept of
causality this proposal has profound implications for the role of God in the affairs of the
universe.20 These implications, which are the central point of his book, have already been
15ref 1, p. 122.
16ref 1, p122.
17The anthropic principle has been introduced by Hawking and B. Carter, and can be summarized: we see the
universe the way it is because we exist.
18ref 1, p 136.
19 There is a certain similarity with the Gödel universe, where the past and the future is a loop, see K. Gödel,
Collected works, volume II, Publications 1938-1974, edited by S. Feferman et al., Oxford University Press,
New York, 1990, pp. 189-216.
See also: G.C. Chaitin, Number and Randomness, algorithmic information theory - new results on the
foundations of mathematics, this volume, chapter II
20ref. 1 p.140.
5. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 5
presented in the introduction by Sagan, and is worthwhile to quote once again: So long as
the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is
really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither
beginning nor end: it would simple be. What place, then, for a creator?21 Some pages
earlier Hawking already used an expression for the universe, it would just BE22, which
resembles the name of God in the Bible23: Jahwe (I am who is). It should also be noted that
Hawking in the development of his proposal is quite conscious of the speculative character
of his argumentation: all statements, like the one just given, are expressed in terms of
would, could, if, may, etc.
In The Arrow of Time Hawking considers the direction time passes, from past via the
present to the future, this direction he calls the arrow of time. He considers three types of
arrows: the thermodynamic arrow, related to entropy, i.e. the amount of disorder in a
system, the psychological arrow, which relates to the human memory, as we only remember
the past, and the cosmological arrow, which is the direction of time in which the universe is
expanding. In the light of the "no boundary proposal" of the universe and the anthropic
principle he shows the relation between the different arrows. His argumentation needs
further philosophical study, because it is not clear whether the analogy between a computer
memory and the human brain is strong enough to draw conclusions regarding the
psychological arrow.
The Unification of Physics is the last chapter before the conclusion. Already the great
aim of physics has been mentioned, the unification of the four basic forces in one single
theory. But even with a complete unified theory, there are two reasons, why a physicist can't
predict events in general: there is the uncertainty principle, where there is nothing we can
do to get around that24. And there is another more practical inherent difficulty to solve
exactly the equations given by the theory. It is, e.g. not possible to solve exactly the motion
of three bodies in Newton's theory of gravity. Being conscious of these fundamental
restrictions Hawking nevertheless puts an aim quite ambitious for a physicist: our goal is a
complete understanding of the events around us, and of our own existence25
The last chapter Conclusion summarises the way Hawking had led through the exciting
area of modern physics. But now he draws conclusions, which are presented like different
pieces of a mosaic, and which in general go far beyond physics into the realm of philosophy
and eventually theology. About the situation before the theories of gravity and quantum
mechanics are united, he writes: At the big bang and other singularities, all the laws would
have broken down, so God would still have had complete freedom to choose what happened
and how the universe began26. According to Hawking, however, with the new still not
available unified theory and the no boundary proposal the situation would have changed
21ref. 1 p. 140 f.
22ref. 1 p.136
23Ex. 3,15
24ref. 1 p. 168.
25ref. 1 p 169.
26ref. 1. p 173.
6. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 6
largely: If the no boundary proposal is correct, he (God) had no freedom at all to choose
initial conditions27.
After having made these statements, all in a conditional form, Hawking brings new
pieces of thoughts into his mosaic of fundamental ideas regarding the universe, worthwhile
to be quoted: Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and
equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to
describe?28 With this almost lyric sentence Hawking expresses what in the Aristotelian-
Thomistic metaphysics one could describe in terms of causa formalis and causa efficiens.
The causa formalis is necessary, but not sufficient to cause the total effect. Besides this the
causa efficiens is needed, who gives a set of ideas and 'formulas' an implementation in
reality.
In the very same page Hawking invites the philosophers, the people who in contrast to
scientists ask why instead of what the universe is, to keep up with the advance of scientific
theories29. He hopes that after the discovery of a complete theory a new area will come:
Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in
the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the
answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know
the mind of God.30
3. The central question: does God exist?
From the foregoing it may be clear, that although the book is written by a physicist, it
deals with a philosophical subject, a specialised theme of metaphysics, namely the proof of
the existence of God. Obviously the genre of the book is not affected by the positive or
negative answer to the central question: "Does God exist?" Contemplating the two-three
thousand years of history of philosophy from the ancient Greeks up to now, one observes a
continuous interest in this central question. All the tools available to philosophers and
scientists as, e.g. logic, metaphysics, history of philosophy and science itself, have been
applied to clarify as much as possible the different aspects. Hawking as a scientist gives an
important contribution to the scientific part of the question; regarding the philosophical
aspects, he uses only a reduced selection of the knowledge until now obtained. The most
comprehensive discussion of the proofs of the existence of God is probably given in the
work of Aquinas, who resumed the different demonstrations in the famous five via's31. It is
not the place here, to discuss in detail his argumentation, but a summary of the first way32,
27ref. 1, p.174.
28ref.1, p. 174.
29ref. 1, p. 174.
30ref. 1, p 175.
31Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae,I, q.2, a.3.
32For the interested reader an English translation of the first way is given below (from St Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Theologiae, Latin text and English translation, Blackfriars 1964, Eyre&Spottiswoode, London). In
contrast to our quotations in the text, which follow closely the Latin of Aquinas, this translation uses more the
7. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 7
which Aquinas called the first and most obvious way, may give a proof of the strength of
the philosophical argumentation.
3.1. The first way of Thomas Aquinas
In the first way Thomas uses ideas that already can be found with Plato33, Aristotle34 and
Averoes. He starts from the common experience, that it is sure, that in this world some
things move. Then he puts his first thesis: all what moves, is moved by some other. The
proof of it is shortly given by an analysis of movement as being brought from being in
potentia to being in actu, i.e. brought from being potentially in a certain state to being
actually in that state. He comes to the conclusion: It is therefore impossible, that something
in the same aspect and in the same way brings into movement as well is moved or moves
itself. The next step in his argumentation is the thesis: If the mover himself is moving, then
he also has to be moved by some other, which in fact is a logical extension of the first
thesis, and shows that there is a cascade of movers which in turn are moved by other
movers. Aquinas now states, that there can be no infinite chain of movers and moved, as
otherwise there would be no first mover, and consequently nothing, which could start the
movement. His conclusion therefore is, that there must be a first mover, which is not moved
by anything. And he ends his proof with: and this is what everybody understands by God.
About this first via some remarks should be given. Speaking about moving Aquinas
considers all kind of changes, like getting hot, changing of color, change of position etc. In
his second way, a similar proof is given, but then one should read instead of moved: caused
by. It is of extreme importance to note that in the via's moved or caused by is always moved
or caused by per se, i.e. if the mover or cause stops to move or cause, the effect also stops.
With other words, the mover or the cause is acting in the present time. That means that also
the cascade of movers and moved or causes and caused is completely in the present. The
concepts of today's English. The main difference is the translation of moveri, being moved, which is translated
as being in process of change.
The first and most obvious way is based on change (ex parte motus). Some things in the world are certainly in
process of change: this we plainly see. Now anything in process of change is being changed by something
else. This is so because it is characteristic to things in process of change that they do not have the perfection
towards which they move, though able to have it; whereas it is characteristic of something causing change to
have that perfection already. For to cause change is to bring into being what was previously only able to be,
and this can only be done by something that already is: thus fire, which is actually hot, causes wood, which is
able to be hot, to become actually hot, and in this way causes changes in the wood. Now the same thing
cannot at the same time be both actually x and potentially x, though it can be actually x and potentially y: the
actually hot cannot at the same time be potentially hot, though it can be potentially cold. Consequently, a
thing in process of change cannot itself cause that same change; it cannot change itself. Of necessity
therefore anything in process of change is being changed by something else. Moreover, this something else, if
in process of change, is itself being changed by yet another thing; and this last by another. Now we must stop
somewhere, otherwise there will be no first cause of the change, and, as a result, no subsequent causes. For it
is only when acted upon by the first cause that the intermediate causes will produce the change: if the hand
does not move the stick, the stick will not move anything else. Hence one is bound to arrive at some first
cause of change not itself being changed by anything, and this is what everybody understands by God.
33Plato, Phaedrus
34Aristotle, Physica VIII
8. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 8
following example of a cascade or hierarchy of movers, which in a shortened way Aquinas
already has mentioned in the explanation of the first way, may be a good illustration. It is
the case of man, who is moving a ball along a certain trajectory, let say a circle: The ball is
moved by a stick. The stick is moved by a hand. The hand is moved by a set of muscles.
The muscles are moved by neural commands. The neural commands are moved by the
brains. The brains are moved by the will, etc. The exact identification of the different levels
in this cascade of movers may be a point of discussion, but one sees clearly that all movers
are acting simultaneously and are acting per se, i.e. if one of the movers fails, there is no
effect, in this case the ball would not follow the original trajectory.
The proof of Aquinas is quite subtle and looses its strength if one introduces even minor
changes in the different steps. In the foregoing example, one could consider a ball shot by a
soccer player, once the direct contact between shoe and ball is broken, the ball follows a
trajectory that could be the intended one, but also could be drastically changed or even
stopped by other movers or causes, like wind or a keeper's hand. In the case of movers as
presented in this last example Aquinas would never conclude that there must be necessarily
a finite cascade or a first mover.
Aquinas ends his proof with: and this is what everybody understands by God. One has to
realise, that all of his reasoning is still in the field of philosophy and not theology. Only by
starting from the daily experience of the movement of material things and logical thinking,
he arrives at the necessity of something, which is the first mover or, in the second via, the
first cause. Having obtained this result, it seems that he looks around to see, where to find
this first mover. And the results of this exploration: the first mover is just that, what people
in general understand by God. The first mover, a pure philosophical concept, can be
identified with God, the central theme in theology. Notice however that Aquinas is not
evoking Revelation to define God, but only the general understanding of people. In the
Introduction 35 an argument is given which may support the identification of the first mover
with that people understand by God.
3.2. Hawking and the classical proof of the existence of God
It is useful, to compare the different steps, Hawking is making in his attempt to clarify
the question of the existence of God, with the classical proof of the Aristotelian-Thomistic
philosophy, as has been presented just before in a summarised form. Hawking starts by
using a changed concept of causality. We already quoted his explanation of the meaning of
being caused, which for him is exclusively causality in time: Within the universe, you
always explained one event as being caused by some earlier event...36. The exclusive use of
this kind of temporal causality37, Aquinas explicitly excludes for his proof38. It may be clear
35 A. Driessen and A. Suarez, Introduction, this volume.
36ref 1, p. 7.
37 This corresponds also to the Kantian view of causality (see A. Driessen and A. Suarez Introduction, this
volume, and A. Suarez, Nonlocal phenomena, this volume, chapter X).
38L. Elders, De Metafysica van St. Thomas van Aquino in historisch perspectief, II: Filosofische godsleer,
Uitgeverij Tabor, Brugge, 1987, p.150, see also Thomas Aquinas, In liber II Physicorum, lectio 6, n 195.
9. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 9
that with the reduced concept of causality as used by Hawking, the original proof is strongly
weakened.
Applying the temporal concept of causality, Hawking expects an intervention of a
possible creator or God only in the beginning of the universe, as already has been shown by
the quotations in section 2. As long as there is a beginning, which he identifies with the big
bang singularity, there would be a role for a creator. If, however, the physical necessity of a
beginning has been eliminated, the crucial question comes: What place then, for a
creator?39. Hawking therefore comes in his main line of reasoning with the temporal
concept of causality to the conclusion, that there is no logical need to assume the existence
of a creator, as long as one only considers the universe of the physicists, which, as we have
seen before, includes in his view the material world inclusive the human life. Nevertheless,
he himself is convinced, that something is missing in his reasoning. Not only the question
what, but also the question why should be asked: Why does the universe go to all the bother
of existing? This question has not been answered yet, as up to now, most scientists have
been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is
to ask the question why40.
4. Discussion
After having gone through the book of Hawking and presented the proof of the existence
of God in the Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy, one may want to look for the mutual
implications, at least if there are any. Scientists, like philosophers, have their own working
field, and the methods in science are quite different from those in philosophy. There is
however an overlap: in the object, as scientists are dealing with the material reality as being
material and philosophers with the same reality, the material and beyond that also with the
immaterial reality. And of course, always, the person, who is doing science, in other aspects
is thinking as a philosopher, and often also the reverse is valid.
One may therefore say, there is an interaction between science and philosophy, and even
between science and theology. Hawking himself gives an example, when introducing the
Heisenberg uncertainty principle and discussing determinism: The doctrine of scientific
determinism was strongly resisted by many people, who felt that it infringed God's freedom
to intervene in the world, but it remained the standard assumption of science until the early
years of the century.41 If that theory of total determinism in the physical world would have
been proven to be true, then God's intervention in the material world would be bound to
deterministic laws, and regarding human freedom, one could only consider at most pure
internal decisions, which would not affect any physical reality.
If one now considers the main line of argumentation of Hawking, one is at first
confronted with his restricted concept of temporal causality, which we have shown is
39ref. 1, p. 141.
40ref. 1 p. 174.
41ref. 1 p. 53.
10. Driessen: The question of the existence of God in the book of Stephen Hawking: A brief history of time, page 10
contrary to the one used in classical philosophy. Nevertheless, even if one accepts this
concept, his "proof" of non-necessity of a creator is not supported by physical evidence, but
of ideas with a highly speculative character. He starts with theories, like the of relativity and
quantum mechanics, which are shown to be valid by thousands of experimental
verifications and which are accepted by practically all physicist. When discussing big bang,
black holes, etc., there the scientific evidence is much weaker, and the ideas have a more
hypothetical nature. Introducing, however, imaginary time and the no boundary proposal,
Hawking himself is conscious of the speculative nature of his reasoning. One should be
aware, if the scientist Hawking calls his ideas a proposal and admits that is far from being
proven, then a philosopher (say Hawking or any other) may not use this argumentation as a
decisive proof for the existence or non-existence of a creator. And if one reads the remarks
of Hawking in his last chapter (see quotation, ref. 23), he seems to be aware of it.
There is one very interesting question left. The title of the book A brief history of time
promises worthwhile and perhaps new ideas about time. A widely discussed question in
philosophy is, whether the universe is eternal, and - this is not the same question - whether
the universe is created. Science was not able to give an answer. With the introduction of the
big bang hypothesis, based on the work of Penrose and Hawking, many considered this as
the proof, that there was a beginning and therefore a creation. With the no-boundary
proposal Hawking has not proven, that the universe is eternal, simple being. What he has
shown, is that for a scientist at the top of the knowledge about the universe, the older
standard big bang hypothesis is not necessarily true, and that the idea of a universe without
beginning can not be rejected on purely scientific reasons. It is therefore still a matter of
discussion. Coming back to Aquinas, one finds the problem of creation of the universe in
time or creation from eternity42. His conclusion is, that it is possible to demonstrate the
ontological dependence of the universe from God, but not the beginning in time. Only
additional information, as is given in theology by revelation, could give an answer43. For
Aquinas evidently the answer to this question is not relevant for the demonstration of his 5
via's. This has an enormous impact on the philosophical value of the input of science as has
been delivered by Hawking. The main line of his reasoning does not affect the
philosophical proof of the existence or non-existence of a creator, at least in the philosophy
of Aquinas. What then is the value? Not a small one, one may say, namely bringing people
to think and stimulate them to ask why.
42for a discussion, see, e.g. L.J. Elders, De natuurfilosofie van Sint Thomas van Aquino, Uitgeverij Tabor,
Brugge, 1990, p. 138 ff.
43 In the Jewish-Christian tradition this information is found in Gen. 1.1: In the beginning.....