BELOW THE INFINITE

AND FURTHER BELOW …

We think of infinite as being towards the larger end of the sizing scale: big, bigger, bigger still, even more bigger, even more bigger yet etc etc on to never-ending. But does the converse hold true? Can we have infinitely small? (WARNING: Don’t go there. Like in Ancient nautical charts… ‘Beyond here be monsters‘.)

Now another thought—taken from my library book (“Wonders of the Universe” by Prof Brian Cox) which is a summation of four recent documentary shows by the BBC on the universe. I think the quote purports to be the current word of science and who would we mere mortals be to argue? I tend to, though … plough on:

BIG BANG in the Great Scheme

That ‘far smaller than an atom’ thing has been given names ranging from Primordial Atom (PA) to Singularity.

The scientists are clever: having created an infinitely dense infinitely small PA floating all by itself in the middle of a non-existent nothing, they then blow it up to create the universe. According to the good book (BBC) the Bang happened almost 14 billion years ago, creating a universe which is now about 45 billion light years across. (Oops … something seems not quite right there …)

Anyway, if it were me had to explain it all I’d have taken the Occam’s razor approach and gone for simplicity. Somehow God is tidier, and infinitely neater, than their blasted Primordial Atom. Either way it’s a giant leap of faith but the evidence is on a par.

The same old questions questions linger—

  • Out of what exactly, in a vast empty nothingness, did God create Himself before there was a beginning? Then having created Himself, out of what did He create Creation? Or did a bigger better Goddier God create Him?
  • Or—how long did the timeless Primordial Atom seethe and fester before deciding to go POP and liberate those “thousands of trillions of suns” to go forth and multiply in the heavens?
  •  And—what could possibly have changed inside that timeless Primordial Atom/Singularity/cosmic Egg/Thing … given that any form of change is a function of time?
  •  And—if it did change enough to make it Big Bang the universe into existence—what took it so long?

MY POINT IS THAT both science and religions require the same amount of faith, based effectively on similar ‘evidences’ (which too often are dogmatic statements by the initiated). I suggest that for ‘evidence’ we should insert Supposition, as in “The Flavour Of The Day” — seeing that yesterday’s science is always today’s Barrel Of Laughs (as will be today’s science tomorrow—but none of them will ever admit that).

My case here is the Big Bang. The terms ‘Big Bang’ and ‘God, the Creator’ are identical and interchangeable—it takes the same kind of religious faith to believe in either, and once believing, so dismiss the other out of hand. Some lucky souls can believe in both at the same time—I salute them.

In the meantime that damned Infinity Box is still priced waaaaay too high, I don’t have the infinite wealth to match my infinite curiosity and desires; perhaps I can create one in my workshop, but my skill with electricity would guarantee a Big Bang of my own.

.

KISMET

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s