I remain mindful of the words of one of the great
religious philosophers Thomas Aquinas who said ‘All the efforts of the human mind cannot exhaust the
essence of a single fly'.
His quote is a salutary reminder of our limitations
and the need for humility. His likable philosophical style always argues the for’s
and againsts before listing his numerous conclusions. He cautions making bold
statements based purely on religious texts. Instead, he recommends relevant and
or scientific knowledge to be studied beforehand to avoid making a fool of
oneself.
Aquinas’ philosophy coincided with the emergence of
modern day science when all philosophy was based upon science.
Interestingly enough it is only in more recent times
once the volume of scientific knowledge expanded exponentially that we chose to
separate the two.
My intention in this essay is to take a stroll through the mysterious realm of space-time
to ponder its impact, if any, on traditional religious philosophy. The journey begins
with the discovery of the incredible speed of light, I then examine its
influence in the special theory of relativity and conclude with the quantum
mystery. Along the way I will talk about how such provisional discoveries have shaped
our views and/or influenced beliefs.
The speed of light and the special
theory of relativity.
Danish astronomer Ole Rømer
(1) in 1675 was the first to posit the incredible speed of light from
observation of the moons of Jupiter.
Remarkably he did manage to
come up with a speed of 225,000 km/s per second, against the actual speed of
300,000 km/s.
But it was Faraday
(2) who discovered the influence of magnetic fields on polarized light in 1846.
Later the Michelson-Morley
(3) experiments of 1887, stumbled on the amazing counter intuitive discovery that
light
always travels at the same
speed, regardless of where the measurement is taken. This applies only of
course when light travels through a vacuum as if it were to encounter any resistance
such as when moving from air to glass, the speed of course would change according
to the new medium's index of refraction. Hence you can have the “bending” of light as is the case in understanding
how lenses work.
But in 1905, Einstein
(and also the French mathematician Henri Poincaré, both reached the same
conclusion: Einstein
also realized ‘that Maxwell’s equations led to an apparent paradox or inconsistency
in the laws of physics, because it suggested that if one could catch up to a
beam of light
one would see a stationary electromagnetic wave, which is an impossibility. Einstein
hypothesized, therefore, that the speed of light actually plays the
role of infinite speed in our universe, and that in fact nothing can ever travel faster
than light
(and certainly that nothing in the universe could ever travel at
anything like infinite speed). It should be noted that Einstein
did not actually PROVE the constancy of the speed of light in all frames of
reference. Rather, it is an axiom (an underlying assumption) from which he
derived the rest of his theory. The axiom can be experimentally verified, but
it is not proven in any theoretic sense.’
This constant in relation to the speed of light
and the principle of relativity (mechanical laws of physics are the same for
every inertial observer)
are the two principal planks to the Special Theory of Relativity. When Einstein combined
the principle of
relativity with the constant speed of light,
it became clear to him the speed of light was also independent
of the speed of the observer (as well as of the speed of the source of the light), and that everyone in
the universe,
no matter how fast they were moving, would always measure the speed of light
at exactly the same 300,000 km/s.
By way of a down to earth example we are
all familiar with the concept of a game of table tennis noting it takes the
same time for the ball to pass over the net when playing a game in a fast
moving train as it does if the game was played on the platform. However for an
observer located on the station looking into the fast moving train this is not
the case since the trains speed plus the speed of the ball will equal the total
speed of the ball as far he is concerned. So you can see the actual speed of
the ball is the same for both scenarios,
just as it is for all observers, but the important point is it is
relative to motion. On the other hand light for any observer anywhere will
always only be seen as the same absolute speed of light.
Hence we can understand all the laws of
science are the same to all observers regardless of their location in space
after allowing for gravitational effects. Just to reiterate Einstein’ discovery
paved the way for this conclusion (which however will be challenged later on) that
our observations are relative to our motion and we can only think of time in
the context of space-time.
After discovering the special theory of
relativity Einstein incorporated the gravitational field effects which cause
warping within his general theory of relativity.
A
brief excursion into the slippery concept of time differences.
The obvious conclusion following on from the theory of special relativity is
that any movement through space reduces our time in space to the point
theoretically once you have reached the absolute speed of light, time becomes
frozen.
This idea of course in reality is quite
farcical since any object travelling through space at that speed would develop
such an unimaginative amount of mass as it would approach the equivalent of all
matter already present in the entire universe.
However there is a relative difference
for all of us depending on our motion through space but the miniscule
differences on planet earth can effectively be ignored and we can feel
comfortable with our outdated Newtonian view of time. We can have no doubt
however as to the soundness of the theory since it is has been independently
verified by extremely accurate atomic clocks stationed on board aircraft. Spend
your entire life flying in planes and you will be younger than your comparable
walker but the differences are so small that on your death bed the flyer would
scarcely have the additional time to think about even saying a few ‘Hail
Mary’s’.
However in the vast distances of space the effects can be calculated to show
huge disparities.
Imagine one in a spacecraft in the future when we have discovered a way to
travel at close to the speed of light to find some remarkable consequences.
Since our motion at close to the speed of light this drastically reduces our
time in space for any prolonged space journey requiring us to wind forward our
clocks hundreds of thousands of years on reentry into planet earth.
But our stay at home earthlings have long since perished as those who welcome
us home are thousands of generations later than those present when we left.
That is because time has not slowed for them as it has for the space travelers
whilst the biological aging is no different for either group. In attempting to
explain the outcomes using simple numbers consider the following:
Spacecraft intrepid travelers take up a most of space time with
motion so that time is only a tiny fraction of (.1) with motion at 99.9. The
opposite effect applies to the stay at home earthlings whose time makes up 99.8
plus motion at a tiny slither (.2)
These are simply arbitrary numbers I
have chosen to help illustrate my point.
At
this point can we draw any religious philosophical conclusions?
Since the universe is subject to unique
laws which unfolded miraculously in exact sequences to allow life to form one
can posit that we are the product of a creation in an evolving mystery which I
think can only leave us in state of wonderment.
For me there is abundant evidence around us everywhere to indicate that all
life and nature itself is simply miraculous. By virtue of the laws of science
we might also posit we live in the most probable of many possible universes
which leads us to reasonably suggest within those predestined routes there only
exists causality for freedom of thought or actions or choice. That causality I
see as an evolved creation gift which gives us the sense of freedom or free
will within the determinism arising from constraints of those (but only big
picture if you will) predetermined laws.
Although we can measure time we cannot say what it is and can only better understand
time by combining time with space for the absolute concept of space-time.
But even this concept may turn out to be
fatally flawed since it only works in the application of large scale physics. However
if we accept the idea for the moment then for a creator GOD both past present
and future becomes irrelevant. That is to accept the proposition we remain
trapped within what seems to be to us our enclosed universe.
And so it does seem necessary for our
existence time does always indicate an arrow always moving forward except for
possibilities inherent in extreme warping effects of gravity.
But so far we have only barely scratched
the surface to already reveal our rather tenuous grip on reality and our brief
sojourn into space -time.
Understanding classical physics through the time application of
the quantum.
So far we have viewed the universe
through the time prism of classical physics (a jaunt confined to seeing only
big pictures) which confidently predict planetary movements and space travel to
the extent we can have confidence in these evidence based outcomes. But if we
attempt to understand classical physics on the micro scale the picture becomes
blurred and all our well tested notions seem to be turned on their head as if a
dark cloak was thrown over the picture we are attempting to view. At the outset
the applications of the quantum (the subatomic level of particles present in
the universe) you begin to question the veracity of previously adopted universal
laws. Indeed the general theory of relativity barely clings on to its integrity
when you begin to contemplate the bizarre behaviors of the smallest of those
fragile tiny particles known within our universe and what ultimately comprises
that remarkable you or me. Einstein’s explanation for quantum mechanics (the
probabilities and uncertainties of sub atomic particles known as quantum laws)
where particles split into respective waves or particles to mimic behaviors as
if they were still one, regardless of their distances apart, was to say those
correlations were due to the underlying properties already present prior to and
after disentanglement. In other words these 'spin characteristics' were
integral to the separated particle and its wave function before and after they
became separated.
Once again Einstein’s elegant theory seemed plausible enough but other
physicists were doubtful. The matter was settled once and for all when Einstein
and other brilliant physicists that followed him were all proven to be wrong
half a century later. There is now overwhelming evidence for this so called
quantum entanglement. (See Brian Greene –
'The Fabric of the Cosmos – Space, time, and the texture of reality').
The
search in modernity continues.
So the quest continues as I attempt to meander
along on our space jaunt to now ask an intriguing question: can quantum theory
underpin the idea of the mind and our consciousness to posit an afterlife?
There seems to be at least some
anecdotal evidence to support the dualists (Cartesian mind – brain dualism) in that
it is plausible for there to be a non-material or “none locally” (a soul if you
will) identity to the brain itself. What we can deduce is a pair of separated electrons
each of opposite spin and from the same source retain their entangled state until
such time as one is observed. What happens
is they exhibit retaining knowledge of one to the other instantly on
observation regardless of the immense distance they may be apart. This
invalidates Einstein’s theory that nothing can exceed the speed of light.
This has led to an explosion of ideas to
what seems to be an intractable mystery. There are many axioms such as the
proposition that if you believe knowledge is reality (which can’t be proven or
disproven) it could be we simply do not have sufficient knowledge about the
particles since that knowledge is hidden from us. Others posit information may
be stored in another dimension upon which we are not privy.
Dualists (those embrace the idea of a
spirt separate to the mind) point to the possibility this provides food for thought
for the existence of some form of a soul not subject to the laws of the
universe.
The Hammeroff/Penrose school (4) of thought
posit quantum information exists at every point in space – time. Bits are entangled throughout the universe, just
as they form part of the human brain. Suffice to say we do not know what space is
really made up of other than what we can theoretically calculate and observe,
being what was necessary for our existence.
So at the most fundamental level we still
do not have concrete evidence or experience about the reality that underpins
the universe. Even the time distortions in our imaginary spacecraft in the
future when we have discovered a way to travel at close to the speed of light may
not yield the remarkable consequences predicted. In that sense we can return
finally to a religious philosophical view and conclude that hardnosed
materialistic evidence based science is now leading us to the view our ultimate
reality remains a mystery that cannot be explained by science, which may well
always be the case. So that trust which is so important in our relationships
with others, but so often can be misplaced, is also analogous to the universe,
since human experience is not always a good barometer in understanding her rich
fabric, bearing in mind ‘ All the efforts of the human mind cannot exhaust the
essence of a single fly.’
So that all we can do is to have trust
in the human spirit and for those who have a religious leaning, an ultimate
trust - we need not fear our mortality for in death it seems plausible we
return home from whence we came. References
(4)http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/sites/default/files/1998%20Hameroff%20Quantum%20Computation%20in%20Brain%20Microtubules%20The%20Penrose%20Hameroff%20Orch%20OR%20model%20of%20consciousness%20-%20Royal%20Society_