DOES GOD REALLY EXIST?
A Scientist’s View of Creation
By: Dr. Jerry Jacobson, PhD
Stephan Hawking, world-renowned physicist, recently concluded, “There is no God, because nothing existed before the Big Bang.”
Logic or emotion?
St. Thomas Aquinas borrowing a cogent argument from Aristotle and St. Augustine, maintained that God must have existed as a first cause because every effect requires a cause. And this must have been true of the entire universe.
Logic or emotion?
Einstein said, from a finite perspective, “ Time may be merely an illusion, even if a stubborn one.”
Before than, now and after than, represents quite a stubborn illusion, because we know nothing else from experience.
Logic or emotion?
There had to be a first cause, a precipitating event of Nature, to create what we know to be real. We may always logically presume that something came before this, and something will persist after this.
Even as we reflect upon the boundary condition of our universe, as Einstein queried, “Should one postulate boundary conditions? Einstein answers, “ The postulation of boundary conditions is indispensible.”
We may always ask, “ What is outside or beyond that which we experience?” Science is a search for truth, a rational progression of thought towards the infinite, that which is, by definition, unknowable.
Yet, one believes he may know God. Logic or emotion, reason or faith?
How do we explain this dichotomous enigmatic situation?
The Question Of Unification
Let us turn to Einstein who said, in response to quantum theory, “God does not play dice with men.” What did he mean? Months before his death in 1955, Einstein wrote a second appendix for his final book, “The Meaning of Relativity.” The final paragraph states, “ From the quantum phenomena it appears to follow with certainty that a finite system of finite energy can be completely described by a finite set of numbers (quantum numbers). This does not seem to be in accordance with a continuum theory, and must lead to an attempt to find a purely algebraic theory for the description of reality. But nobody knows how to obtain the basis of such a theory.” Essentially, what Einstein was calling for was a simpler idea, having the fewest number of axioms or propositions, which could relate to the greatest diversity of applications. But modern science ostensibly has lost its way, entrenched in complexity. How then can we view, as Einstein sought, the simple expression of reality, through the algebraic unification of matter and space, from which all has appeared? As St. Paul marveled, nineteen hundred years ago, “The world was created by the word of God. So that what is seen was made of things which do not appear.”
The questions throughout conscious history have essentially remained the same; while the answers have simply taken on new metaphors, syntax and noumena.
The nomenclature of modern science refers to electromagnetic field as matter, ordinary things like; people, a tree or rock, and stars. While, gravitational field refers to space, that which separates the things of common reference. Thus, we still have only two realities to deal with, matter and space.
The Possible Answer
Recent university-based scientific studies have revealed that matter and space communicate through magnetic resonance. Einstein spent the last quarter century of his life searching for a simple theory to unify electromagnetism and gravity, or matter and space as they may also be called. Indeed, extremely low intensity magnetic fields, found naturally in the human body, and predicted by the unified field equation known as Jacobson Resonance, have been shown to exert profound effects on living systems. Jacobson Resonance says that there is no such thing as empty space. All space is filled (even a perfect vacuum) with an infinite sea of extra dimensional energy that may be physically undetectable.
The link between matter and space is a gravity wave, predicted in 1916 by Einstein; and these extremely weak magnetic signals (billions of times weaker than MRI) produce gravity waves (invisible matter filling space) on microscopic (quantum) levels. These magnetic forces represent quantum gravity. It is obvious that there is no such thing as absolute emptiness (as commonly conceived), if all things, everywhere, are incessantly affected by gravity, which has to be something. After thinking about what leads to the idea that an infinite number of things are never directly seen, heard or felt, one realizes that there has to be a universal order, that is, everything must be arranged this way. Since there are an infinite number of things apparently avoiding ostensible touching, such an order could not happen by chance, but by design. And, the purpose of life must be to serve the Creator’s intention, by holding the integrity of life sacrosanct. Reason or emotion?
What appears reasonable is that Hawking’s conclusion concerning nothingness preexisting Creation refers to emotion, because there is no such thing as nothing. It has been revealed by science that the space that divides everything we see, hear and feel, is filled with energy. While, energy and mass are interconvertible, (as taught by Einstein) we know that the essence of all reality rests in the primordial, infinitely small monads (conceived by the German 17th century philosopher, Gottfried Leibniz). Monads are the tiniest things imaginable, self-contained but mirroring all else in the universe. Hawking himself predicted the existence of baby universes, or extremely small black holes that flicker into and out of existence through singularities; wormholes connecting dimensions of ordinary and extra-ordinary matter. Virtual particles pop into existence from nowhere, last for milliseconds and then disappear into nothingness. Matter can appear from nowhere, and disappear then completely undetectable, just like the universe.
Reason or emotion?
There is no such thing as ‘nowhere, or nothing ness.’ Plato said, “The true lover of knowledge is always striving after being. He will not rest at those multitudinous phenomena whose existence is appearance only.”
Hegel declared, “Pure Being and Nothing are the same.” There exists an undergirding reality that unites matter and space, in that matter and space are representations of that fundamental reality forming the essence of all things; all things spring from the same fundamental source, or essence.
Whereas, what we see are merely ephemeral manifestations, incessantly changing to maintain the integrity of the infinite totality. And, the infinitesimal and infinitely large lie beyond man’s reach, each mystery leading inexorably to the next. Anselem’s argument of design, (or purposiveness,) refers man to his ultimate objective- to follow his reason, incited by transcendent emotion, guiding all in faith towards the ultimate; always to reach towards the infinite extensions of actuality, with love for the intrinsic wonder bestowed by God to the most precious aspect of consciousness- the soul, or essence of Creation itself.
Einstein or Newton?
Einstein founded a theory of this universe, based in what we see. Newton founded a theory of Nature based in what we may conceive. How did Newton interpret the riddle of a falling apple? The principle of gravitation, he believed, applies not only to the earth but also to the vast extensions of infinity. From planet to planet, star-to-star, galaxy-to-galaxy, throughout the infinite terrain of space and time, the mutual interaction of mass-to-mass maintains the incredible order of time and space under the watchful eye of the infinite, the Eternal. Newton said, “The fact that the universe is so beautifully designed in accordance with such harmonious laws must presuppose the existence of a Divine Wisdom, the hand of the Divine Creator.”
We have maintained that absolute space as nothingness does not exist. But, what shall we think of Newton’s concept of absolute space and time, when Einstein maintained the relativity of space and time? Einstein considered the elements of a finite universe to be relative- relative to man.
How could man know anything but the finite and approximate when he is finite?
Einstein did not include God’s watchful eye in his theories and equations of Relativity. Newton did. To Newton, absolute space was conceived as infinite, perfectly uniform, featureless and immovable, relative to man the finite. Space was, in effect, the substrate in which bodies moved about. Absolute space could not be seen or measured in any way. Rene Descartes, considered the Father of modern philosophy, said that there is no space devoid of field, that is, there is no such thing as nothingness- only that which is unknowable and immeasurable. Newton also believed in an absolute time, while in Einstein’s universe time is relative- relative to man’s finite capacity for measurement and perception. Newton said, “Absolute time, mathematical time, or true time, of itself, and from its own nature, flows equably without regard to anything external (man’s relative and apparent time.)
While, relative time, or common time, is some sensible measure of duration by the means of motion, which is commonly seen instead of true time.”
Einstein or Newton? Finitude or expanded consciousness of the infinite?
Indeed, according to Newton, the Infinite sees and knows all. Man’s universe is but a small part of what must be real.
For Newton, absolute time flowed inexorably onward, measurable only by the infinite, while relative time was but an approximate, finite measure of man’s limited view of reality. What is outside of Einstein’s bounded universe? The multiverse is measureless. And, what is smaller than the particles known to man? It is the monad, the smallest particle, windowless and featureless to man. Under the microscope, all atoms look the same. The infinitesimally small reflection of everything immeasurable and unknowable is the essence filling the nothingness, lighting the path to the knowable.
Newton said, “God is eternal and infinite, omnipotent and omniscient; that is his duration reaches from infinity to infinity. He endures forever and is everything present; and by existing always and everywhere, he constitutes duration and space.. In him all things are contained and moved; bodies find no resistance from the omnipresence of God. “
Man cannot determine the position of any object relative to absolute space, because absolute space is perfectly uniform, and identical to him everywhere. There is no way for man to determine the origin of absolute space. Man depends on broken symmetries for perception. Thus, man cannot know the center of the universe or the origin of the Big bang. We can know only relative positions of bodies by reference to other bodies, as Einstein admitted.
Newton or Einstein, infinity or finitude?
In the final analysis, wisdom teaches, “The wise man is trusting of God and the intrinsic value of all creations; whereas, arrogance is trusting of man and skeptical of God, in the relativity of value.
Freedom, one learns is not derived from the outside, but from the core essence of our consciousness, the very source of all creation, the individual’s light of mind and soul.
Reason or emotion?
“Reason For Life” by Dr. Jerry Jacobson, Abbott Press, (2012). For all who wonder about the source of life’s miraculous journey. Jacobson Resonance is explored and applied. (See www.drjerryjacobson.com for more information)
“The Universe and Dr. Einstein” by Lincoln Barnett, A Bantam Book/ published in association with William Morrow (1974). The clearest, most readable book on Einstein’s theories ever published, with foreword by Albert Einstein
“The Meaning of Relativity by Albert Einstein, Princeton University Press, 5TH Edition (1956). This version contains, “The Relativistic Theory of the Non-Symmetric Field”, Einstein’s final scientific paper… For anyone seeking to thoroughly understand the meaning of Einstein’s theories, this book offers the original lectures, equations, and explanation, first hand.
“The Nature of Physics” by Peter J Brancazio, Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc., New York, (1975)
A historical, philosophical approach to physics. The major areas of physics- mechanics, light and electromagnetism, relativity, quantum theory and atomic and nuclear physics are conveyed. Development of each topic is along historical lines, and this is truly a unique book.
“Detection of the Brain’s Electrical Activity with a Superconducting Magnetometer”
by David Cohen, Science, 175:664 (1971)
“A Look at the possible Mechanism and Potential of Magnetotherapy” by Dr. Jerry Jacobson, Journal of Theoretical Biology 148: 97-119, Academic Press (1991)
“A Hypothetical Mathematical Construct Explaining the Mechanism of Biological Amplification in an Experimental Model Utilizing picoTesla Electromagnetic Fields”
by A. Saxena, J. I Jacobson, W. S Yamanashi, BJ Scherlag and BB Saxena, Medical Hypothesis, 60 (6),
821-839, Elsevier Science Ltd. (2003)
(With explanation and derivation of Jacobson Resonance)