Search This Blog

Sunday, January 27, 2013

The "God" Particle -What difference does it make? It reveals the worldview! Solving the "Origins" problem part three,

Does the very brief observation of the "God Particle" aka Higgs boson in a supercollider in Europe help prove a Big Bang?   Does it prove that there is a God?   Is it the Atheist or the Christian who should  celebrate the announcement?

Recently the Higgs boson was detected by scientists utilizing the Large Hadron Collider.  The European Organization for Nuclear Research, known as CERN, disclosed that their experiments found this boson, often referred to as the "God particle" after The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question? was published in 1993.

Wikipedia image

While Lederman and Teresi helped give the Higgs boson a nickname, it was Peter Higgs who, in 1964, postulated the idea of a particle that was (at the time) undetectable, but would be the last piece of the particle physics puzzle and the probable answer to the questions, "what holds everything together?" and "where do these subatomic particles acquire their mass?"   These questions are questions about the world we can observe today.  However, many laymen and scientists mistakenly perceive the brief existence of said boson in the LHC collider as proof of the Big Bang.

A brief look at recent comments and my answers concerning the clash of the Christian versus Atheist worldviews and then an overview on what the observation of the Higgs boson means to you and me:

"Is there or is there not a Creator God?"   

Anonymous commenters in black, when they quote me it will be in blue.   I will use my normal font color for the answers to comments and the rest of my assertions otherwise.

Anonymous said...

"If you check the math of Big Bang equations (prepare for a headache), you'll find that only around 4% of the equation is actually observed, while 96% of it is supposed (hoped for) but absolutely bereft of any kind of proof"

That puts the Big Bang Theory 4% ahead of belief in God. Or if you want to look at it another way, 100%."

Blogger radar said...

Naturalists are not even in good shape if the equation was 100%, because they still would have no explanation for where the "singularity" came from and how it came to explode AND how the results of the explosion were directed to form the elements and the four basic forces and the innumerable laws of physics which can be described and sometimes predicted with math.

I say a Supernatural God creating the Universe is logical and isn't missing 96% of the evidence. Every scientific statement of the Bible holds true. God was not required to tell us how He created nor is it likely we could understand the explanation. But Christians have a First Cause and naturalists do not.

Anonymous said...

The two postulations , ie that a god existed before the universe, and that the universe exploded from nothing, are both mutualy possible and mutualy exclusive, the god (if we ignore the question of its own origin)obviously exploded, and in its anhialation , created everything. simples , and gets round the atheist / theist thing. by making both sides right, one before and one after the big bang.As an atheist myself, and understanding that i can never know what happened before the big bang, im willing to let this one ride, god may of created everything, but he wiped himself out in doing so, probably was suicidaly bored with the lack of deity type totty.


Anonymous said...
Answer me this question: If a person was not indoctrinated from birth with Christian stories, what would their world view be? The answer is that they would know nothing of any of those stories, and they would come to their own conclusions about the world based on the facts that they could see. Through this method they would learn more about the world around them, slowly gaining more knowledge over time in a never ending procession called learning. This, my friend, is how something comes from nothing.
Blogger radar said...

Both of these comments are so incoherent that it is hard to respond. Christianity does NOT assert that God exploded, but rather that He created ex nihilo (from nothing). A Supernatural God created time and space and matter and energy and all the physical laws, yes. He also created the Solar System and the Earth and all the life found there. 

Christians believe that the natural was created by the Supernatural. 

Naturalists believe that something came from nothing. 

The concept of learning in a human being has no bearing on the question of the origin of all things, unless of course you believe that you ARE the Universe and everything is simply a mirage you have created for your own amusement?


These comments illustrate that the general public is quite ignorant on subjects such as the Higgs boson and what the apparent observation of said particle in the Large Hadron Collider actually means.   The comments also suggest that there is a segment of society who are deliberately ignorant, which is what we commonly call being stupid.   For the sake of argument I will assume that you, the reader, are either informed or ignorant and will not address my remarks to those who are intentionally stupid.   

Steve Cornell's blog, WisdomForLife, addressed the subject nicely.   I will include some quotes from his blogpost, but if you go read the post you will be able to see his opinion of the discovery.  My excerpt does not necessarily represent the viewpoint of the entire post.:

"Some time ago, William Lane Craig wrote about this moment. 
“Scientists hope to be able to discover the Higgs boson, a particle thought to be responsible for the field that imparts mass to various sub-atomic particles. The Higgs boson is frequently called “the God Particle,” not because it has any theological significance but because, like God, it is everywhere but is mysteriously hidden.”
“In layman’s terms,” another source noted, “different subatomic particles are responsible for giving matter different properties. One of the most mysterious and important properties is mass. Some particles, like protons and neutrons, have mass. Others, like photons, do not. The Higgs boson, or “God particle,” is believed to be the particle which gives mass to matter. The “God particle” nickname grew out of the long, drawn-out struggles of physicists to find this elusive piece of the cosmic puzzle” (from Got Questions).
At least 7 primary accomplishments are being associated with this discovery.
  1. It would help answer basic questions about the universe 
  2. It would reveal the origin of Mass
  3. It would confirm the standard model for the universe
  4. It would explain the electroweak force
  5. It would make supersymmetry a viable theory
  6. It would justify the Large Hadron Collider (built for approximately $10 billion by the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)). The U.S. had a chance to build a supercollider in Texas, but Congress cut off federal funding.
  7. It would open a new direction for scientific research.
Scientists think that the discovery will substantiate that something could be permeating the universe that gives substance to all things. It will tell us why we’re here and why any of what we see exists" 

Let's look at these last statements carefully, not going to be concerned about the numbering system, but I will take them one at a time.  

  1. It would help answer basic questions about the universe 
Yes, in that it is an observation of the last unobserved particle in the "particle zoo" of particle far as we know.    Remember that science is less proving things to be true and more about disproving things or eliminating possibilities and placing a label of "fact" on the latest opinion of scientists...until that fact is cast aside for another idea.   This is perhaps the most disappointing and unscientific aspect of Darwinism, because the evidence has always supported Creation over Naturalism.   Darwinists have completely ignored settled laws of science to propagandize us all with the idea of organisms evolving from non-life.   Belief in a Big Bang rather than a Big God is our primary focus today, however.  

  1. It would reveal the origin of Mass
Not precisely.   It helps scientists explain mass that is in existence today but does nothing to reveal where it or anything else came from originally.

  1. It would confirm the standard model for the universe
To confirm the standard model of particle physics, yes.  A standard model for the Universe is relatively (pardon the pun) commonly taught in Physics classes these days, but it is far, far, FAR from being the GUT (Grand Unified Theory) that would give Naturalists an explanation for the formation of the Universe.   

  1. It would explain the electroweak force
It reveals the likely source of the electroweak force.  To explain that force would require an explanation for the very existence of the boson itself.  Science has been able to identify a source for the strong, weak and electroweak forces, which is in no way an explanation for why they work or where they come from...and science is completely unable to identify the source of gravitional force.   It is one thing to equate mass with gravity, it is quite another to explain "why does mass exert a gravitational pull?"  To know that gravity works and to be able to predict what force it will exert is a far cry from understanding the source of that force!

  1. It would make supersymmetry a viable theory
The observation of the Higgs boson doesn't either support or destroy the concept of supersymmetry.   It would be predicted to exist by all particle physicists because it was predicted to exist mathematically.   It can be observed today under the right set of circumstances but it underlies all of existence in an unobserved state.  
The LHC was able to produce a brief appearance of the Higgs boson here in observed time and observed space by human actions.  It cannot act as a time machine to transport us back to the beginning.

  1. It would justify the Large Hadron Collider (built for approximately $10 billion by the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)). The U.S. had a chance to build a supercollider in Texas, but Congress cut off federal funding.
If you have to be certain to prove the existence of subatomic particles like the Higgs boson by observation,  then I suppose so...Science has an LHC so if Europeans are paying for it, so much the better for Americans, we pay for too many extraneous things as it is!

  1. It would open a new direction for scientific research.
That is highly unlikely.   The vast majority of secular scientists in this field believe in a supersymmetry scenario and will simply continue to postulate and pontificate along those lines.   Observing the Higgs Boson allows those who will believe in that concept to keep believing it.   It certainly doesn't PROVE supersymmetry, it doesn't disprove it, it simply allows it to be considered as a possibility by those who want it to be true.

Scientists think that the discovery will substantiate that something could be permeating the universe that gives substance to all things. It will tell us why we’re here and why any of what we see exists" 

Some scientists may jump to conclusions, but the Higgs boson absolutely does NOT tell us WHY we are here nor does it explain WHY any of what we see exists!!!   The Bible has long asserted that there is indeed a force permeating the Universe that gives substance to all things  - Hebrews 1:1-4, which will be displayed a bit farther down.   First, lets be clear about the differences between the two basic worldviews, and I will call upon WisdomForLife again:


A choice between two worldviews

Worldview 1
If there is no personal Creator, our existence is most certainly a cosmic accident. We exist by chance, not by design or purpose. We exist in a deterministic universe governed by raw natural selection. And, if this is an accurate accounting for our existence, several facts follow:
1. Notions of ultimate meaning are based on wishful thinking and irrational fantasy. Discussions about such notions are themselves unexpected. We should not expect people to look for meanings beyond survival in this life.
2. There is no ultimate morality; no right or wrong; no transcendent morality. On this version of reality, morals are simply matters of personal or societal opinion. The so-called problem of evil cannot be addressed and cannot (on rational grounds) really be called a problem. We should not expect people to pursue such things.  
3. Death is both the irreversible cessation of organismic functioning and the irreversible loss of personhood. There is no hope of anything outside of this life. We should not expect people to seek the transcendent or eternal.
Problem: Humans everywhere throughout all of history know (intuitively) and live in a way contrary to this version of life. 
Worldview 2
If, on the other hand, there is a Creator, a personal God who made us male and female in His own image, then at least three truths follow:
1. Life has value, meaning and dignity beyond the limitation of human opinion. We should expect to see people seeking value and meaning.
2. Personal identity, human freedom and responsibility become genuine markers of our existence. We have been endowed by our Creator with these qualities. We should expect to see people pursue these realities. 
3. The transcendent (which we intuitively recognize) elevates us out of the despair of human relativism and the limitations of human inquiry. We should expect to see people reach toward the transcendent and eternal.
Steve Cornell

Science recognizes four primary forces of physics - Strong, Weak, Electromagnetic and Gravitation.   God claimed to uphold all things long before LHC and bosons, so I believe that God is the force underlying and sustaining all forces we can observe.

Hebrews 1:1-4

English Standard Version (ESV)

The Supremacy of God's Son

"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets,  but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.  He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his powerAfter making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,  having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs."

In the world today, too many American Christians are suffering from a malady I call "Worldview Creep."   The previously mentioned Dr. William Lane Craig (a well-known Christian author, editor and college research professor) has just published an article in the Christian Research Journal entitled, "The God Particle."   It is not available online.   But he is one of those who have caught the "Creep."    The next two quotes below from the last issue of CRJ, Volume 35, Number 6, 2012 of the Christian Research Journal.

Craig rightly points out that "...the theist enjoys a considerable advantage over the naturalist in explaining the uncanny success of mathematics.   For the theist has a ready explanation for a applicability of mathematics to the physical world.   God has created it according to a certain blueprint that He had in His mind.  The world exhibits the mathematical structure it does because God has decided to create it according to the abstract model in his mind."    Well said! 

Meanwhile, Physicist Michio Kaku was gushing:  "Realize that the Higgs boson takes us to the instant of creation itself and we can run the videotape before the big bang; we can talk about the universe before the creation of the universe itself.   If our universe is a soap bubble of some sort and it is expanding, there could be other soap bubbles out there, other universes."

Ouch!  The definition of the Universe:  universe [ˈjuːnɪˌvɜːs]
1. (Astronomy) Astronomy the aggregate of all existing matter, energy, and space
2. human beings collectively
3. a province or sphere of thought or activity
4. (Mathematics & Measurements / Statistics) Statistics another word for population [7]
[from French univers, from Latin ūniversum the whole world, from ūniversus all together, from uni- + vertere to turn]
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

How can you have multiple aggregates of all existing matter, energy and space?   How can Kaku pretend to be transported to the beginning of creation, or even BEFORE the creation by observing matter NOW in our world of observable time and space?   Then he switches to "soap bubbles?"   
Michio Kaku sounds a bit like a guy who finds a penny on the ground and expects that there is a million dollars therefore sitting on his doorstep.  

It is interesting that Kaku uses the word, "creation" just as Hawking uses the word, "design" and in both cases they are borrowing terminology from God without applying it properly.   This is not uncommon among naturalistic materialists, who use terms and verbs to give the audience a concept in their minds that does not truly reflect the evidence being presented.


But here comes the Creep.   Lane spends multiple paragraphs explaining the concept of the Big Bang and makes it clear that he believes that such a thing happened and that God was the Cause of said explosion. 

With each successive failure of alternative cosmogonic theories, the Standard Model has been corroborated. It can be confidently said that no cosmogonic model has been as repeatedly verified in its predictions and as corroborated by attempts at its falsification, or as concordant with empirical discoveries and as philosophically coherent, as the Standard Big Bang Model.
Source: Article - The Ultimate Question of Origins: God and the Beginning of the Universe (source = Old Earth Creationist site Reasons To Believe
It is disappointing to see Worldview Creep snagging men like Lane and enticing Hank Hanegraff and William Dembski alike.   Having carefully written an article that confirms two importation points, he falls down in the end.  The two main points he makes supporting a God-created world in reacting to the Higgs boson story:

  1. Detection of the God Particle is not equivalent to discovering a replacement for God.
  2. Detection of the God Particle does not take science to the point of creation.
So Lane makes good points for Creation by God and then kowtows to secularists and asserts that God used the Big Bang to create.   In so doing, he accepts the opinions of men like Hawking and Kaku and Alan Guth and other such scientists while ignoring the plain words of God in Genesis and Exodus when He asserts that He created in six days.   He ignores the fact that Jesus Christ affirmed the accurate historicity of the Old Testament and in fact Jesus Christ was the One who (Genesis 2:7) formed man out of the ground and breathed life into Adam's nostrils.   We are not told how God created all things, but we are told how He formed and brought to life in a very personal manner the bearers of God's image - man.   

If you intend to have a Christian worldview that is consistent and based on the Word of God,  be sure you keep the Bible as your authority above that of the temporary opinions of fallible mankind!

Genesis 1:1 - Exodus 20:1 & Exodus 20:11-John 1:1-14

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." 

"And God spoke all these words, saying,..."

"...For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day." 

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was in the beginning with God.  All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.  In him was life,[a] and the life was the light of men.  The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.  He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him.  He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.  He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him.  He came to his own,[b] and his own people[c] did not receive him.  But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,  who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

  And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."


highboy said...

Good post radar.

"That puts the Big Bang Theory 4% ahead of belief in God."

Even if that were relevant it cracks me up atheists cling to scientific theories so adamantly that they admit are 96% unproven. Science doesn't deal in absolutes, but odds, so by main stream science's own process, the Big Bang Theory is next to impossible if its only 4% proven.

Yet according to science the odds of the human enzyme coming together at random chance is 10^40000, more than the number of atoms in the known universe. Its as close to astronomical and scientific impossibility you can get.

Leticia said...

Excellent post, Radar. You were spot-on. Keep up the good work, and I know it is time consuming so I tip my hat to you! Or in my case, bonnet. :)

No matter how much atheists, agnostics, naturalists, or whatever...

I believe what the bible says, God is our Creator.

radar said...

Thanks, Tim and Leticia! I don't get many people who like my posts making comments, so it is encouraging to get the pat on the back.

Atheists don't seem to comprehend that it was Bible-believers who took the time to establish "science" because they expected a rational Universe which was, in part, designed for man to utilize. Sigh. You can lead a horse to water...