Converging and Convincing Proof of God: The Improbability of it All

By Andrew M. Greenwell, Esq.
12/13/2012
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

This probability of the existence of a world capable of sustaining biological life is so improbable as to render the probability virtually nil, especially in a universe that is only 13.7 billion years old according to science. This suggests some sort of intelligent, supernatural intervention had to intervene to even out the odds, to wit, God.

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) - As we discussed in our last article in this series, modern scientists generally acknowledge that, based upon empirical evidence and the principles of astrophysics, the age of the observable universe is 13.7 billion years old. Whether it is or not most of us (including me) do not have the means to know, but let's grant the scientists the premises. This presents modern scientists with a quandary that did no confront those scientists who operated under a regime of Newtonian physics.

It was Newton's view that the universe had existed for an infinite amount of time, and that it encompassed an infinite amount of space and infinite amount of interacting content. Now that scientists have empirical evidence that the universe is not infinite, but rather limited in historical time, one of the most significant arguments that science had against creation has suffered a serious blow.

The issue has to do with the improbability of it all. For everything to have fit together to result in life as we know it is highly improbable. An event that is highly improbable becomes possible, perhaps even likely, if the time during which the improbable act might occur is infinite.

If I have one chance in a million to win the lottery on any given day, it is very unlikely that I will win if I only play a day. However, if I have a one chance in a million to win the lottery on any given day, and I have the chance to play for one hundred million days, it becomes probable that I will win at least once during the span of those hundred million days.

For the same reason, belief that the universe existed for an infinite time allowed for the most highly improbable events to be argued as possible, even probable.

The Big Bang theory--which limited the age of the universe to 13.7 billion years--changed the probability of it all.

To be sure, there is still a long time for highly improbable events to occur. According to Robert J. Spitzer, S.J., given the 13.7 billion years, the total possibilities for interaction of mass energy expressed in minimum units of mass and time is 10 to the 120th power. This, of course, is a huge number, one even unimaginable to us, but it is far, far less than the infinity that Newton and until recently the majority of other scientists thought we had to play the probability game.

Now, the odds against a low-energy universe emerging from the Big Bang (the kind of universe we enjoy, i.e., an anthropic universe) is, according to the Penrose number, 10 to the 10 to the 123rd power.

Compared to the Penrose number, the number 10 to the 120th power is an infinitesimally small number, which means that there is an extreme improbability of our sort of universe arising out of mere chance. In short, it appears that maybe something, or perhaps even Someone, in the famous words of the British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle, has "has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology," and indeed all of existence. There is, it would appear, Mind and Act behind it all.

This is not the proper venue to go over the specifics involved in calculating probabilities. For those interested in the more technical aspects of this, Robert J. Spitzer, S.J.'s book New Proofs for the Existence of God published by Eerdman's is recommended. Briefly, it has to do with an assembly of the improbabilities of a whole lot of improbable requirements that had to be in place for our universe to be the kind of universe that it is.

In those equations that physicists use to describe the physical world, there are what we call universal constants. These are fixed constants based upon the kind of world that we live in, and these fixed constants (which are dimensionless or dimensioned numbers) are what determine the interrelationship between space, time, and energy.

Some examples of these universal constants include the "Planck minimums" of space and time, the speed of light, the gravitational attraction constant, the weak force coupling constant, the strong force coupling constant, and a whole slew of others (Spitzer identifies 20 such universal constants of space and time, energy, individuation, and large-scale and fine-structure constants, though there are more than that).

If these constants fall outside of a very narrow range, what Spitzer says is a "closed range," there would be no universe as we know it. However, the range of possible values that these fixed constants could be is quite a broad, almost infinitely variable range, an "open range," ...

1 | 2 Next Page

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 6 of 6 Comments

island
5 months ago
"As island demonstrates, the atheists see a ready embracement of evolution as a sign of capitulation rather than strength..."

Say what?!... *rereading what I wrote*... Nope, I didn't say that at all, and I find it utterly amazing that you could read that into what I did write, but let me spell it out in braille for the willfully blind:

I said that your belief in cosmological ID obviously doesn't free you from IDists... regardless of the fact that you accept evolution.

Course, you could have easily gotten that from the text, so I doubt that this will clarify anything for anyone that thinks like you do, but at least they'll get that I don't agree with your assessment of what I wrote.
KarlVDH
5 months ago
Look at the events in Genesis and take them out of "religion" for a moment, remembering that the Bible is NOT a scientific treatise OR a history book... look how it goes... (And how long, exactly, is a "day" to the eternal? How long was a "day" before there were an Earth or sky?) "Let there be light," (BANG!!) then the Sun, the Earth, the seas, life in the seas, life in the air and on land, on and on up to Mankind...
Not that far removed from what Darwin (and Sephen Hawking) have suggested, is it? And to go a step further... why can't we simply see that evolution is the WAY God, in His wisdom, has chosen to go about the work of creating?? Does the fact that we've put a scientific name on the incredible, miraculous process by which the various species have come to exist make it less of a miracle? I think not... Man, for all his effort, can DUPLICATE, but not CREATE life, and we certainly cannot make one creature of another. That's the Hand of God, at its artistic best!!
We're really NOT all that far apart, in the end.
DarthJ
5 months ago
As island demonstrates, the atheists see a ready embracement of evolution as a sign of capitulation rather than strength. For a Catholic view on true science and Creation theology, check out the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation.
island
5 months ago
"It therefore has nothing to do with the Intelligent Design Movement which deals with the biochemical and biological aspects of the question of the existence of life, and not the cosmological aspects of the question of the universe that is not hostile to life."

Wrong, see: Cosmological ID

Nice try, but you can't distance yourselves from the right winged fundies that easily.

Catholics refuse to admit that they are IDists of the third kind, even if they don't question the theory of evolution.
Jim3031
5 months ago
Thank you for this which clearly explains what I have realized for most of my life, at least since shortly after the "Big Bang" was recognized as having happened and that our universe indeed did have a beginning. In the interim, I also read other information about the incredible unlikelihood of the many universal constants being what they are (although never as concisely as laid out as in this article).

A most interesting thing about the "Multiverse" theory upon which Mr. Greenwell touched briefly, is that because of "Inflation" which most modern day cosmologists accept as necessary for our universe to have developed the way it has, we can never "see" all the way back to the big bang (which would be the "edge" of our universe), as there will never be enough time for that information, traveling at the speed of light, to reach us. Hence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to ever be able to "see" the effects that any "other universes" may have on our own universe at its "edge" no matter how powerful a telescope we might build. So what does that mean? It means that to accept the "Multiverse" idea/explanation for the unlikelihood of our universe, one must accept it on FAITH. While some scientists who want to leave God out of any equation do embrace the "Multiverse", I prefer to put my FAITH in what has been revealed to us by Christ and other events such as Fatima, etc.

Blessed be God.
Blessed be His Holy Name.
Blessed be Jesus Christ, true God and true man.
Blessed be the name of Jesus.
Blessed be His Most Sacred Heart.
Blessed be Jesus in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar.
Blessed be the Holy Spirit, the paraclete.
Blessed be the great Mother of God, Mary most holy.
Blessed be her holy and Immaculate Conception.
Blessed be her glorious Assumption.
Blessed be the name of Mary, Virgin and Mother.
Blessed be Saint Joseph, her most chaste spouse.
Blessed be God in His angels and in His Saints.
Michelle
5 months ago
Very interesting. The kids and I are enjoying this article and discussing it over breakfast. I bet this discussion will last a while as they really like this topic. Thank you!!

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment