Day One: God is Really, Really BIG

In the last post, we had come to two conclusions about this God's nature: whatever else He may be, He's real and humans need Him to progress in their own development. Again, we're still just now at the foot of the mountain; all we've come to is an Idea of God, based on the nature human beings alone. It's a good place to start, but we're about to take the next step; and the next one is kind of scary.

Infinity; isn't it magnificent? We can star-gaze for ages at the complexity of the cosmos; the vast array of constellations, galaxies, and the possibilities of even other universes or alternate realities. Exploring dimensions alone will make your head spin if you take it farther than your own imagination can cope with, and there's still so many endless trains of thought no human alive or dead has even thought of yet. So what was big enough to get all of that started?

In our scientific universe, we know that gravity and energy have a strong role in the creation of the universe. The physical components indicate that it would take a massive explosion containing energies beyond our comprehension to carry enough force to get us where we are today. The general theory is that all the makings of matter, life, and all the energies to form it were once packed into the smallest physical form it could possibly get to: an atom. Science also tells us that if we cut an atom in half, we get an energy release that causes a nuclear explosion; this is apparently what somehow happened to this creation-atom that caused the Big Bang. It is here that we run into our first scientific obstacle: the laws of energy and motion.

Think back to physics class: remember that saying our teachers taught us? "Objects at rest stay at rest and objects in motion stay in motion until acted on by an outside force"; that was Isaac Newton's first law of gravity. Just think: all that mass, crammed into one tiny, little atom, held together by a gravitational force surpassing the biggest black holes we know; what force of energy could possibly release it?

See the problem yet?

Here's another hint: think about energy itself. Energy is technically mass that is moving beyond the speed of light; E = mc squared, remember? Potential energy is energy that is contained within something; like energy that could be released. Kinetic energy is active; it's the moving energy that's actually in motion generating some form of power. Energy can never be created nor destroyed, and comes in a variety of forms: thermodynamic energy, electric energy, etc. And that's just the kiddie version of the explanation; the way energy works is way more complicated, which is why there is one huge, gaping hole in this whole theory: the atom could not have released its energies or matter without the help of an outside force.

This could indicate a couple of possibilities: either there exists an outside force that has access to our physical reality, or the physical universe could be in a sort of eternal loop, where physical matter stretches through space to the farthest point it can get, then gets pulled slowly back in by gravity until it reaches the same point it began: a tightly packed atom, which then explodes outward again from the compression of energies. This second theory seems highly plausible; after all, the physical universe as we understand it is slowly expanding. But this does not do well to explain the nature of human consciousness; specifically, the human moral law.

Natural evolution we see every day; it's always adapting, moving around, and changing to keep up with its environment. But what once-in-a-never opportunity gave it a chance to exist? Regardless of however adequate or inadequate conditions were anywhere to support it, life cannot spontaneously materialize from nothing; even the idea that energies evolved into more concentrated forms and somehow latched onto matter for stabilization is a bit of a reach. Even so, it's not hard to figure how evolution could have built up life in a stable environment, even getting as far as the animal kingdom. At humans, however, we hit a ceiling: the moral standard. On the whole, the idea of survival predominating growing life's primary needs makes sense; so does the idea of adapting to best corroborate that instinct. But what standard declared the continuation of life not only a necessity, but a desirable "good"?

This concept of things being "good" or "bad" is almost a sideways aspect within nature. On the one hand, we have the idea that it's "bad" to kill things without reason, one justifiable reason being survival. However, this moral standard, whether invented by humans or not, is contradicted by humans every day, often in the most obscene ways. The "Murphy's Law" of ideas might run that if any evil can be thought of, at this point in time, it's probably been done over thousands of times by now. But what code is it that has now been violated? And if there was no moral code originally, who or what was the first conscious being to invent one? The fact of the matter is that a "moral" code of any kind is completely alien to the physical universe; that which is considered by humans as "good" and "bad" are actually both found in the exact same aspects of natural evolution, and are only ever seriously contemplated in the human mind. There can only be one logical explanation: this ultimate moral code, to whatever lengths it originally extended to, must have been introduced by something outside of nature; something "bigger" than nature. The only beings we know to have it are humans, who are all flawed, as is our judgement of what that moral code actually looks like; therefore, it must have come from either higher up the evolutionary scale or outside of it altogether.

It's only by the thought of something outside the natural; something super-natural; that things make logical sense. If it is possible, the supposed "laws" of nature could only be overridden or discarded by a force outside of nature; if it's not, it would not be possible for nature to have a law in the first place. Natural forces like gravity and energy can essentially be classified as a kind of "unbreakable" law; they would only be able to be overridden or contradicted by a force bigger than or outside of them. Humans are obviously not that force because we are also bound by those laws, but we seem to have the idea that they could be broken by a bigger force, should a bigger one exist. If it were wholly impossible to our conscious for them to be broken at all, we would not be capable of imagining that they could in the first place; kind of like how we can imagine unicorns, but usually only after we know what a horse is and what animals with real horns are like. So if ideas in the subjective reality of our conscious can only be thought of because they have some real objectivity of some kind, would it be possible to think of a supernatural conscious being both bigger than and controlling infinity... that's real?

Based on the ordinary laws of nature, it's the only possible thing that could trigger the existence of our universe.

And that is a terrifying thought.

#God #speculations #size