Friday, August 12, 2011

A Scientific Argument for a Supreme Being

In reading the article “Existence: Why is the universe just right for us?” in New Scientist (20 July 2011), I was somewhat dismayed at the tone and dismissal of God as a viable hypothesis.  In fact, the very article dismissing God as “needed” was the very article in which the strongest scientific argument for a supreme being existing.

If, as theorized, there are an infinite number of universes, each with its own physics, then inevitably a being (or beings) able to both perceive across those universes (omniscience) and able to manipulate those universes (omnipotence) is inevitable.  In an infinite number of tries with an infinite variation in physics, anything is possible.

Would such a being leave their signature in the ice of a glacier in Norway?  Not likely.  Rather we would be hard pressed to perceive this being with our limited abilities.  That said, there are ways to tell that there is manipulation happening.  The handiwork of this being would be present when random events are altered in some way.  A potential example of this may very well be the “Goldilocks paradox” also discussed in this article.  As either the elements or the physics that produce them are manipulated, precise conditions are produced.

It is possible that, like with the above being, in an infinite number of tries with an infinite variation in physics, our universe would be created randomly.  We would only be here were that event to happen, thus we would only be here to ask the question were it to happen.

That said, the Supreme Being discussed above would fundamentally alter the multiverse by its very existence.  By having a force that can manipulate the multiverse in whatever way it chooses, by definition at that moment the random element goes away, and we are now looking at a multiverse that has been changed by either active changes or passively allowing things to continue as they are.  Either way, no event throughout the multiverse could truly be considered random as even random events are being ‘allowed” by this being.

Thus, if the multiverse hypothesis proves to be valid, it at a minimum suggests the presence of a Supreme Being, and perhaps even demands it.