Let’s chat about… Godless Universe: A Physicist Searches for Meaning in Nature

In an article appearing in Scientific American on May 10th. 2016, written by Clara Moskowitz entitled, “Godless Universe: A Physicist Searches for Meaning in Nature“, Moskowitz talks about Sean Carroll’s new book, “The Big Picture: On the Origin of Life, Meaning, and the Universe Itself”. In this book, Physicist Sean Carroll lays out his case to show how science has no place (or need) to accommodate for the notion of God.  The first sentence in the article reads, “It is time to face reality, California Institute of Technology theoretical physicist Sean Carroll says: There is just no such thing as God”.  Carroll goes on to coin the term “poetic naturalism” which represents the idea that “science can be used to discover meaning and morality.”

I disagree very strongly with Carroll’s proposal.  Didn’t Carroll ever watch the movie I Robot? Science represents algorithms, data, charts, graphs, data, and their numerical calculations.  In I Robot, a robot saves the hero (played by Will Smith) instead of saving an 11 year old child because the odds were slightly more in favor for Smith being successfully saved.  The problem with the “poetic naturalism” approach is that it does not take into account the human soul.  Each soul is special and each soul sees morality from a different perspective.  As an medical doctor (not a physicist), I see these different perspectives all the time and I also see that sometimes there is no definitive answer. Each person will need to follow his or her own heart using their own moral compass. When you put moral decisions into a “poetic naturalism” algorithm, you lose your independent humanity to those who created the algorithm of “the moral collective mind”.  In essence, you would no longer have a right to your independent soul in making your own moral decisions as you would be scorned or punished if you deviate from the “standards of morals” instituted by the collective.

But there is another aspect of this article to consider…   Who decided with absolute certainty that physics does not provide for God?  Many would say God “Always was, Always is, and Always will be.” God is all around us and is within us. God gave rise to us and everything else in the universe.  Yet because God cannot be directly “seen” with our own eyes, or observed by other means, or even revealed in any experiment, we just have to have “faith” and believe in the existence of God.  For this belief, physicists mock and scorn the faithful.

Carroll has made the mistake of leaving the realm of physics to become a philosopher without learning Gordon’s Theory of Everything.

Gordon’s Theory of Everything shows that before the Big Bang, all the energy of the universe always had existed as E0 energy which is proportional to c^0 in the form of a two dimensional planar universe.  The Big Bang represents this E0 energy undergoing a vacuum decay phenomenon as it finds a hidden dimension and reorganizes into a three dimensional spacetime. During this time, some of this E0 energy made the jump to E1 energy (light, EM radiation) and E2 energy (particles containing mass).  All the particles “in” spacetime are composed of E1 and E2 energy and this is all the energy physicists can “see”.

Gordon’s Theory of Everything tells us that E0 energy “Always was, Always is, and Always will be”.  E0 energy is the energy of spacetime that is all around us and within us.  E0 energy gave rise to us and everything else “in” spacetime.  Yet we can never directly “see” E0 energy with our eyes or our instruments, or directly reveal E0 energy in any experiment.  Physicists will just have to have “faith” and believe in the existence of E0 energy.  That is why I call the entity (not particle) that creates the spacetime energy medium, “The GOD Entity”, where GOD is an acronym for the Gordon Omnipresent Dot.

How ironic it is, that if physicists want to know the theory of everything, they will have to accept the GOD Entity on faith!   It kind of makes me feel all warm and fuzzy all over.